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:
Doctors and Coroners: Baxter's influence on Ripper lore - by Joshua Rogan 36 minutes ago.
Hutchinson, George: Possible reason for Hutch coming forward - by caz 48 minutes ago.
Doctors and Coroners: Baxter's influence on Ripper lore - by Jon Guy 51 minutes ago.
Non-Fiction: Elizabeth Stride and Jack the Ripper: The Life and Death of the Reputed Third Victim. - by The Station Cat 2 hours ago.
Scene of the Crimes: Tabbard Street East? - by The Station Cat 2 hours ago.
Doctors and Coroners: Baxter's influence on Ripper lore - by Sam Flynn 4 hours ago.

Most Popular Threads:
Doctors and Coroners: Baxter's influence on Ripper lore - (15 posts)
General Suspect Discussion: Kosminski/Kaminsky - please debunk - (9 posts)
Shades of Whitechapel: Caught!? Long Island Serial Killer suspect - (5 posts)
Kosminski, Aaron: My theory on Kosminski - (4 posts)
Non-Fiction: Elizabeth Stride and Jack the Ripper: The Life and Death of the Reputed Third Victim. - (3 posts)
Levy, Jacob: Jacob Levy - (2 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 > Victims > Mary Ann Nichols

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #271  
Old 07-18-2017, 02:29 PM
David Orsam David Orsam is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 7,017
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wickerman View Post
Doesn't this message fall in line with what I am suggesting?
I would say no for two reasons. Firstly, because, by your account, Dr Bond could have written his report on Friday (and should have done given the pressure for it to be completed). Secondly, because it says that his report couldn't be written until the "medical officers" had completed their enquiry. I'm suggesting that this is why Dr Bond went to the post-mortem at the mortuary rather than idle curiosity or "professional interest".
__________________
Orsam Books
www.orsam.co.uk
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #272  
Old 07-18-2017, 02:33 PM
Wickerman Wickerman is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 8,888
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Orsam View Post
But you understand that I am suggesting that the notes under the heading of "Postmortem Examination" might be a summary of Bond's notes (or Hebbert's notes if you prefer) of the Saturday post-mortem, right?
I do, but as the first three pages clearly assign his observations to the 9th, then your attempt to assign the later four pages to another day requires something more than an idea.
__________________
Regards, Jon S.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #273  
Old 07-18-2017, 02:42 PM
Wickerman Wickerman is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 8,888
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Orsam View Post
Well let's recap the discussion.

When I pointed out that Bond's notes were split into two - an in-situ examination and a post-mortem examination - you told me that this was perfectly normal and I should look at Dr Phillips' report in the McKenzie case.
I stand by that.

Quote:
But the Phillips report in the McKenzie case is broken down into an in-situ examination and a post-mortem examination in the mortuary.
This again is normal, its what we expect in the vast majority of cases.

Quote:
When I asked you why this was not the case for the Kelly murder you suddenly changed your mind and told me that the Kelly murder was not normal so it will all be different!
That is not a change of mind.
You were suggesting the Kelly case should be conducted 'normally', that your assumption is based upon a normal procedure.
I was saying the circumstances were not normal in that case. Meaning, Dr Bond's 'post mortem' is not the official post mortem, so the circumstances are quite different.
The normal procedure applies to Phillips, not Bond.

Quote:
My point is that the fact that the notes of Bond's post-mortem examination start on a new page is consistent with it being a different examination conducted at a different time and place.
But it is also consistent with a change in subject, from visual examination to post mortem.
__________________
Regards, Jon S.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #274  
Old 07-18-2017, 02:45 PM
David Orsam David Orsam is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 7,017
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wickerman View Post
I do, but as the first three pages clearly assign his observations to the 9th, then your attempt to assign the later four pages to another day requires something more than an idea.
It's not just an "idea" though. Post-mortem examinations were normally carried out in mortuaries when one was available in a district, were they not?

So that's primarily what makes me think that normal procedure would have applied in this case.

And, as I've also asked, would Dr Bond really have analysed the contents of the stomach (which has nothing to do with mutilations by the way) in Kelly's room rather than at the mortuary?
__________________
Orsam Books
www.orsam.co.uk
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #275  
Old 07-18-2017, 02:47 PM
David Orsam David Orsam is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 7,017
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wickerman View Post
Meaning, Dr Bond's 'post mortem' is not the official post mortem, so the circumstances are quite different.
Was it a post-mortem examination or not?

And what are you saying. That Dr Bond analysed the stomach contents on Friday and Dr Phillips carried out the same analysis on Saturday?

They duplicated each other's work then?
__________________
Orsam Books
www.orsam.co.uk
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #276  
Old 07-18-2017, 02:55 PM
David Orsam David Orsam is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 7,017
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wickerman View Post
That is not a change of mind.
In which case, why did you refer me to Dr Phillips' report of the McKenzie case in the first place?

You did refer me to it and as soon as I started to draw comparisons with Phillips' report in the Kelly case you told me the McKenzie case was "normal" but the Kelly case was not, so I couldn't do it!
__________________
Orsam Books
www.orsam.co.uk
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #277  
Old 07-18-2017, 03:02 PM
Wickerman Wickerman is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 8,888
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Orsam View Post
Well of course you are wrong. I am also "blending" from inquest testimony and Dr Bond's notes and, indeed, all the available evidence.

As for press articles, well they don't all support you Jon.

Take the Morning Advertiser of 10 November (which you previously quoted):

"Dr. Phillips, the divisional surgeon of police, soon arrived, and was followed by Dr. Bond, of Westminster, divisional surgeon of the A division, Dr. J. R. Gabe, of Mecklenburgh-square, and two or three other surgeons. They made a preliminary examination of the body..."

That is EXACTLY what I am saying occurred.
Fair enough, but that only raises the question of defining what they meant by "Preliminary Examination".
Are you aware that this was an agency story, and the same story appeared in the Daily News of the same date, yet the Daily News, in a later paragraph report:
"The Central News states, ........... A post mortem examination was held by the medical authorities summoned by the police, and the surgeons did not quit their work until every organ had been accounted for, and placed as closely as possible in its natural position."
http://www.casebook.org/press_report...l?printer=true

So the Morning Advertiser did not publish the whole story.
__________________
Regards, Jon S.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #278  
Old 07-18-2017, 03:11 PM
David Orsam David Orsam is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 7,017
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wickerman View Post
Fair enough, but that only raises the question of defining what they meant by "Preliminary Examination".
Are you aware that this was an agency story, and the same story appeared in the Daily News of the same date, yet the Daily News, in a later paragraph report:
"The Central News states, ........... A post mortem examination was held by the medical authorities summoned by the police, and the surgeons did not quit their work until every organ had been accounted for, and placed as closely as possible in its natural position."
http://www.casebook.org/press_report...l?printer=true

So the Morning Advertiser did not publish the whole story.
It's not a case of the Morning Advertiser not publishing the whole story. It's a case of the Daily News using a press agency report that the Morning Advertiser did not.

We just go back to the use of language here Jon. As we both know, every examination after death is carried out "post mortem" so the Central News could easily have been referring to the examination which is also referred to in the first three pages of Dr Bond's notes.

And did I not say earlier that what I think the doctors were mainly doing in the room during Friday afternoon was precisely what the Central News report says they were doing, namely accounting for every organ? And this corresponds to what is on page 2 of Dr Bond's notes, namely the paragraph beginning "The viscera were found..."

So all you've really done is supported my version of events.
__________________
Orsam Books
www.orsam.co.uk
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #279  
Old 07-18-2017, 06:18 PM
Wickerman Wickerman is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 8,888
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Orsam View Post
Well, I wonder, did Dr Bond really examine the abdominal cavity and the stomach attached to the intestines while in Mary Kelly's room. It seems like something a medical examiner would only do in a mortuary doesn't it?
Normally, the abdominal cavity is opened by the medical examiner, but again, this case if different, the cavity was already open to view. Plus the fact mention is made of the remains of the stomach, which seems to indicate the stomach had been wounded and the contents spilled out. So again, he is examining the wounds as he is in the rest of his P.M. notes.
__________________
Regards, Jon S.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #280  
Old 07-18-2017, 06:23 PM
Wickerman Wickerman is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 8,888
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Orsam View Post
I would say no for two reasons. Firstly, because, by your account, Dr Bond could have written his report on Friday (and should have done given the pressure for it to be completed). Secondly, because it says that his report couldn't be written until the "medical officers" had completed their enquiry. I'm suggesting that this is why Dr Bond went to the post-mortem at the mortuary rather than idle curiosity or "professional interest".
He may have written his undated notes on Friday, but he has not written his report to which they will be attached. This report he intends? to write after the Coroners P.M. on Saturday.
I'm viewing Bonds presence at this post-mortem (I believe Dr Brown was there too), more as an observer than a participant.
__________________
Regards, Jon S.
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 05:56 AM.


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