Casebook: Jack the Ripper - Main
   

Introduction
Victims
Suspects
Witnesses
Ripper Letters
Police Officials
Official Documents
Press Reports
Victorian London
Message Boards
Ripper Media
Authors
Dissertations
Timelines
Games & Diversions
Photo Archive
Ripper Wiki
Casebook Examiner
Ripper Podcast
About the Casebook

Most Recent Posts:
General Suspect Discussion: Was Ernest Dowson Jack the Ripper? - by ChrisGeorge 2 hours ago.
Shades of Whitechapel: Centenaries - whole and half - by Mayerling 5 hours ago.
General Suspect Discussion: Was Ernest Dowson Jack the Ripper? - by Richard Patterson 5 hours ago.
General Suspect Discussion: Was Ernest Dowson Jack the Ripper? - by Pcdunn 6 hours ago.
Shades of Whitechapel: Centenaries - whole and half - by GUT 6 hours ago.
Thompson, Francis: Francis Thompson. The Perfect Suspect. - by Abby Normal 6 hours ago.

Most Popular Threads:
Maybrick, James: Acquiring A Victorian Diary - (26 posts)
General Discussion: Collaboration on Mitre Square and GSG? - (11 posts)
Tumblety, Francis: Tumblety - Hermaphrodite. - (10 posts)
General Suspect Discussion: Was Ernest Dowson Jack the Ripper? - (9 posts)
Witnesses: Why doubt a soldier murdered Tabram? - (7 posts)
Mary Jane Kelly: A theory about some injuries! - (5 posts)

Wiki Updates:
Robert Sagar
Edit: Chris
May 9, 2015, 12:32 am
Online newspaper archives
Edit: Chris
Nov 26, 2014, 10:25 am
Joseph Lawende
Edit: Chris
Mar 9, 2014, 10:12 am
Miscellaneous research resources
Edit: Chris
Feb 13, 2014, 9:28 am
Charles Cross
Edit: John Bennett
Sep 4, 2013, 8:20 pm

Most Recent Blogs:
Mike Covell: A DECADE IN THE MAKING.
February 19, 2016, 11:12 am.
Chris George: RipperCon in Baltimore, April 8-10, 2016
February 10, 2016, 2:55 pm.
Mike Covell: Hull Prison Visit
October 10, 2015, 8:04 am.
Mike Covell: NEW ADVENTURES IN RESEARCH
August 9, 2015, 3:10 am.
Mike Covell: UPDDATES FOR THE PAST 11 MONTHS
November 14, 2014, 10:02 am.
Mike Covell: Mike’s Book Releases
March 17, 2014, 3:18 am.

Go Back   Casebook Forums > Ripper Discussions > Letters and Communications > General Letters or Communications

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #111  
Old 07-14-2017, 01:02 PM
Harry D Harry D is offline
Superintendent
 
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 2,006
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Abby Normal View Post
Thanks fish and bingo.
I think some people here get too caught up in taking the other side of anything deemed somewhat controversial that points to the killer.Regardless of the evidence.
Abby, you questioned how easy it would be for hoaxers to obtain a human kidney. My response is that they needn't have to, because of the anatomical similarities between a human & pig kidney and the limitations in medical science at the time. Yes, the examining doctors opined that the half-kidney belonged to a human, but they could not know that for a fact, let alone identify its owner's gender.

Either way, it doesn't prove anything about the authenticity of the 'From Hell' letter.
__________________
Hail to the king, baby!
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #112  
Old 07-14-2017, 01:27 PM
Abby Normal Abby Normal is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 5,293
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Harry D View Post
Abby, you questioned how easy it would be for hoaxers to obtain a human kidney. My response is that they needn't have to, because of the anatomical similarities between a human & pig kidney and the limitations in medical science at the time. Yes, the examining doctors opined that the half-kidney belonged to a human, but they could not know that for a fact, let alone identify its owner's gender.

Either way, it doesn't prove anything about the authenticity of the 'From Hell' letter.
hi Harry
the examining doctor said it was human. Ill go with that. and yes it does add authenticity to the letter, obviously.

If he had concluded it wasn't human, then I would say the letter was probably a hoax.
__________________
"Is all that we see or seem
but a dream within a dream?"

-Edgar Allan Poe


"...the man and the peaked cap he is said to have worn
quite tallies with the descriptions I got of him."

-Frederick G. Abberline
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #113  
Old 07-14-2017, 01:29 PM
Harry D Harry D is offline
Superintendent
 
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 2,006
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Abby Normal View Post
hi Harry
the examining doctor said it was human. Ill go with that. and yes it does add authenticity to the letter, obviously.

If he had concluded it wasn't human, then I would say the letter was probably a hoax.
And if it was human, does that mean it was genuine?
__________________
Hail to the king, baby!
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #114  
Old 07-14-2017, 01:44 PM
Fisherman Fisherman is online now
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 15,786
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Harry D View Post
Abby, you questioned how easy it would be for hoaxers to obtain a human kidney. My response is that they needn't have to, because of the anatomical similarities between a human & pig kidney and the limitations in medical science at the time. Yes, the examining doctors opined that the half-kidney belonged to a human, but they could not know that for a fact, let alone identify its owner's gender.

Either way, it doesn't prove anything about the authenticity of the 'From Hell' letter.
Actually, those who examined the kidney COULD and WOULD know for a fact that it was human. It was morphologically establishable, and not only that - it was EASILY establishable too, as per the article written by experts in the field I posted formerly.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #115  
Old 07-14-2017, 01:45 PM
Fisherman Fisherman is online now
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 15,786
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Harry D View Post
And if it was human, does that mean it was genuine?
Why do you ask?
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #116  
Old 07-14-2017, 01:58 PM
Abby Normal Abby Normal is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 5,293
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Harry D View Post
And if it was human, does that mean it was genuine?
not neccesarily of course
__________________
"Is all that we see or seem
but a dream within a dream?"

-Edgar Allan Poe


"...the man and the peaked cap he is said to have worn
quite tallies with the descriptions I got of him."

-Frederick G. Abberline
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #117  
Old 07-15-2017, 02:22 PM
Bridewell Bridewell is offline
Assistant Commissioner
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Bottesford, Leicestershire
Posts: 3,619
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fisherman View Post
Actually, those who examined the kidney COULD and WOULD know for a fact that it was human. It was morphologically establishable, and not only that - it was EASILY establishable too, as per the article written by experts in the field I posted formerly.
I agree. My recollection is that the length of renal artery attached to the kidney was consistent with the length missing from the body, thus suggesting (though not proving) that it was what remained of the Eddowes kidney. I don't see any reason to conclude that it was anything other than a human kidney, even if not hers.
__________________
Regards, Bridewell.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 11:53 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.