Bond, Hebbert and methodology

[Scott Nelson]

Conducting the inquest in a different district with a different coroner may have had something to do with it.

[David Orsam]

thank you for point that out, I am sure its a mistake we all make, I try and call it "his post mortem report" but I am sure if you go back over all the posts in the last 48hrs there will be many times when I have not said that.

Yes, Steve, I'm sure I've done it myself but only because it's the only document we have and, in the absence of the actual report by Dr Phillips, we all naturally tend to refer to it as the post-mortem report (and no doubt it was very similar to what Dr Phillips actually said). But I think that's what has deceived Stephen Ryan. I watched his You Tube video and he speaks very confidently about there being a missing page or pages due to the report not being signed and dated but doesn't seem to consider at all the possibility that it wasn't a report and, obviously, if it wasn't a report then there is no mystery about why it isn't signed.

[David Orsam]

So what was the purpose of Bonds effort? Why did he see to it that these notes were taken down? Was it on account of Andersons wish?
Any ideas?

Yes I think Bond was sent to Whitechapel as an 'expert' on the instructions of Anderson to report directly to him, having already been instructed to provide an opinion about the murders. You might have seen that I have started a new thread in respect of the background to Bond's involvement.

[Kattrup]

What I've never understood is why everyone, including Stephan Ryan, refers to Dr Bond's "report" as if it was a formal post-mortem report. This supposed report is clearly headed "Notes of examination of body...." and is written on what appears to be some form of index card (or cut down paper) rather than proper paper that one would normally expect a report to be written on.

Now, I'm quite sure I've called it a "report" myself but only in the loosest possible sense. I've never believed it to be a formal post-mortem report. That would surely have been prepared by Dr Phillips.

If Bond's notes did not comprise a formal report then that would surely explain why it was not signed and dated etc. which would in turn suggest that no pages are, in fact, missing.

Thank you for pointint that out. I thought it was the report, and therefore accepted Ryan's position that pages could be missing.

"Proper historical analysis" has been applied for a century and more, and to little avail. I am convinced that if the case could be solved using this tool, it would have been made long ago.

Personally, I am of the opinion that more headway has been made utilising sound historical methods.
This is why Sugden's book is such a landmark study, for instance.

[Trevor Marriott]

Yes, Steve, I'm sure I've done it myself but only because it's the only document we have and, in the absence of the actual report by Dr Phillips, we all naturally tend to refer to it as the post-mortem report (and no doubt it was very similar to what Dr Phillips actually said). But I think that's what has deceived Stephen Ryan. I watched his You Tube video and he speaks very confidently about there being a missing page or pages due to the report not being signed and dated but doesn't seem to consider at all the possibility that it wasn't a report and, obviously, if it wasn't a report then there is no mystery about why it isn't signed.

And therefore Bond prepared his report on the Kelly murder from notes taken down by Hebbert. Notes which may, or may not have been returned to Hebbert thereafter.

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[David Orsam]

And therefore Bond prepared his report on the Kelly murder from notes taken down by Hebbert. Notes which may, or may not have been returned to Hebbert thereafter.

What "report on the Kelly murder" are you referring to Trevor?

Have you understood the point I was making?

[Trevor Marriott]

What "report on the Kelly murder" are you referring to Trevor?

Have you understood the point I was making?

Yes my apologies I was getting confused with his report to Anderson.

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Trevor Marriott]

What "report on the Kelly murder" are you referring to Trevor?

Have you understood the point I was making?

It should be noted that Hebbert was not present when the post mortem was carried out the following morning. Nor did he accompany the police or other medicos back to Millers Court later that day.

So that puts the cat among the pigeons does it not?

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Debra A]

It should be noted that Hebbert was not present when the post mortem was carried out the following morning. Nor did he accompany the police or other medicos back to Millers Court later that day.

So that puts the cat among the pigeons does it not?

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

There are several news reports that say he was, Trevor, we've discussed them before. It was said to have been conducted on the Sat morning following the murder, at the Shoreditch mortuary. Have you found something official that shows that he definitely wasn't there?

[Trevor Marriott]

There are several news reports that say he was, Trevor, we've discussed them before. It was said to have been conducted on the Sat morning following the murder, at the Shoreditch mortuary. Have you found something official that shows that he definitely wasn't there?

Have you found something official to say he was there ?

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Debra A]

Have you found something official to say he was there ?

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

The papers reported he was and without an official record to say he wasn't, what would you be basing your assertion on?

[Trevor Marriott]

The papers reported he was and without an official record to say he wasn't, what would you be basing your assertion on?

I dont have the source to hand but what it tells me is that present on the sat morning at the post mortem were Phillips, Bond and Brown.

Later that day Phillips in company with the coroner went back to Millers Court.

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Fisherman]

Personally, I am of the opinion that more headway has been made utilising sound historical methods.
This is why Sugden's book is such a landmark study, for instance.

I am not saying that utilising sound historical methods (which are the unsound ones...?) has not resulted in anything.
I am saying that when people start imposing their thinking on everybody and raising demands that everybody should work according to what they personally think are sound historical methods, then I´m off the train.

You do what you do best and see where it takes you, and I will do what I do best and see where it takes me.

[Debra A]

I dont have the source to hand but what it tells me is that present on the sat morning at the post mortem were Phillips, Bond and Brown.

Later that day Phillips in company with the coroner went back to Millers Court.

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

I gave you those names when you didn't believe there was a post mortem at Shoreditch mortuary on Saturday 10th November 1888. I don't think Hebbert was mentioned in the papers come to think of it, apologies for my faulty memory, but I do know where this conversation is going to go now.

[Fisherman]

I gave you those names when you didn't believe there was a post mortem at Shoreditch mortuary on Saturday 10th November 1888. I don't think Hebbert was mentioned in the papers come to think of it, apologies for my faulty memory, but I do know where this conversation is going to go now.

Be a bit charitable, Debra - at least he´s reached the insight that he was wrong on that post mortem. Bit by bit, day by day...