Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Why Bond?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Originally posted by Simon Wood View Post
    Hi David,

    As usual, you have completely missed the point.

    You have now become tiresome and are now on "ignore."

    Have a nice day.

    Regards,

    Simon
    In the words of the immortal Monty Python: "RUNAWAY!"
    "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

    Comment


    • #32
      Hi Abby Normal,

      Not sure if you're a girl or a boy, but I'm sure it doesn't make any difference.

      In the words of the immortal Monty Python: "This parrot is no more! He has ceased to be! 'E's expired and gone to meet 'is maker! 'E's a stiff! Bereft of life, 'e rests in peace! If you hadn't nailed 'im to the perch 'e'd be pushing up the daisies! 'Is metabolic processes are now 'istory! 'E's off the twig! 'E's kicked the bucket, 'e's shuffled off 'is mortal coil, run down the curtain and joined the bleedin' choir invisible!! THIS IS AN EX-PARROT!"

      Regards,

      Simon
      Never believe anything until it has been officially denied.

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by Simon Wood View Post
        Hi Abby Normal,

        Not sure if you're a girl or a boy, but I'm sure it doesn't make any difference.

        In the words of the immortal Monty Python: "This parrot is no more! He has ceased to be! 'E's expired and gone to meet 'is maker! 'E's a stiff! Bereft of life, 'e rests in peace! If you hadn't nailed 'im to the perch 'e'd be pushing up the daisies! 'Is metabolic processes are now 'istory! 'E's off the twig! 'E's kicked the bucket, 'e's shuffled off 'is mortal coil, run down the curtain and joined the bleedin' choir invisible!! THIS IS AN EX-PARROT!"

        Regards,

        Simon
        Simon Says:

        Not sure if you're a girl or a boy, but I'm sure it doesn't make any difference.
        No. It dosnt!

        In the words of the immortal Monty Python: "This parrot is no more! He has ceased to be! 'E's expired and gone to meet 'is maker! 'E's a stiff! Bereft of life, 'e rests in peace! If you hadn't nailed 'im to the perch 'e'd be pushing up the daisies! 'Is metabolic processes are now 'istory! 'E's off the twig! 'E's kicked the bucket, 'e's shuffled off 'is mortal coil, run down the curtain and joined the bleedin' choir invisible!! THIS IS AN EX-PARROT!"
        Now THATS funny! thanks for posting simon!
        "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

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by Simon Wood View Post
          Hi Abby Normal,

          Not sure if you're a girl or a boy, but I'm sure it doesn't make any difference.

          In the words of the immortal Monty Python: "This parrot is no more! He has ceased to be! 'E's expired and gone to meet 'is maker! 'E's a stiff! Bereft of life, 'e rests in peace! If you hadn't nailed 'im to the perch 'e'd be pushing up the daisies! 'Is metabolic processes are now 'istory! 'E's off the twig! 'E's kicked the bucket, 'e's shuffled off 'is mortal coil, run down the curtain and joined the bleedin' choir invisible!! THIS IS AN EX-PARROT!"

          Regards,

          Simon
          Not sure if you're a girl or a boy,
          Now I cant get that song out of my head!
          "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

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by David Orsam View Post
            I suggest it would not have been helpful for Bond to have been provided with the evidence at the inquest of the previous doctors in any form (or even their reports). That would have potentially muddied his thinking.
            But what was the point of his profiling of the victims' mutilations if he wasn't provided with all, or most, of the information recorded by the doctors involved in the post-mortem examinations? He said he reviewed "notes", but we don't know what detail they consisted of, or what specifically they were.

            Unless you're referring exclusively to the Kelly inquest.

            Comment


            • #36
              Hi Scott,

              Anderson got the answer he wanted.

              Hope you're well.

              Regards,

              Simon
              Never believe anything until it has been officially denied.

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by Scott Nelson View Post
                But what was the point of his profiling of the victims' mutilations if he wasn't provided with all, or most, of the information recorded by the doctors involved in the post-mortem examinations? He said he reviewed "notes", but we don't know what detail they consisted of, or what specifically they were.
                I'm saying that he was provided with all of the information recorded by the doctors involved in the post-mortem examination.

                It is surely reasonable to suppose that "the notes" he reviewed were the notes of the post-mortem examinations of the previous four murder victims, i.e. notes similar to those he produced himself in respect of the Kelly post-mortem.

                That being so, what more did he require? The inquest evidence and reports were designed for laymen and would not have assisted him in his expert role. All he required was the underlying data in respect of the mutilations and I am saying that this is what he must have been provided with.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Ignore and Ingorance

                  As Simon has decided not to respond to the issues in my post but to adopt a Pierre-style head in the sand "I can't hear you or see you" approach to any criticism of his book, it might be useful for those who haven't read "Deconstructing Jack" if I explain the issue, especially as he claims that I have "completely missed the point" without explaining what that point is.

                  What Simon does not like about Bond's report of 10 November is that it concluded that all of the murders were by the same individual.

                  Simon has recently become obsessed with the notion that there were a number of different killers prowling around Whitechapel in the autumn of 1888 including a Special Branch assassin (apparently). For Bond to have reached the conclusion that a single person who one might call 'Jack the Ripper' committed the murders, it follows in Simon's mind that he must have been part of some form of dastardly conspiracy (with Robert Anderson) to support the existence of this fictional serial killer.

                  The argument doesn't make any sense bearing in mind that Dr Bond's report was a confidential one for the police and Home Office but the fatal flaw is that Simon has assumed that Bond was provided with the opinions of the other doctors who contradicted each other as to the amount of surgical skill and anatomical knowledge possessed by the killer. Thus, he thinks that Bond could not have come to any conclusion other than that the five murders he was considering were carried out by different people.

                  But my point is that Bond would not have been provided with the opinions of the other doctors, only the notes of their post-mortem examinations which was all he needed to enable him to form his own expert opinion. The whole point was for him, as an expert looking at all the murders as whole, to be able to come to an independent conclusion to enable the authorities to know what they were dealing with. It is not surprising, therefore, that he disagrees with some of the other doctors as to the amount of surgical skill and anatomical knowledge possessed by the murderer.

                  One can, of course, argue that Bond was wrong in his conclusion but it is foolish to argue that his conclusion was perverse and one he was not entitled to make or that he was in any way manipulated into coming to that conclusion by Anderson. To the extent that this is argued by Simon, it is clearly based on a misunderstanding of what Bond was doing and what information about the previous murders he had seen.

                  I would however agree with Simon that Anderson was "provided with the opinion he wanted". He wanted the independent expert opinion of Dr Bond and that is what he got.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    I have always doubted Bond's report being genuine. This find just confirms it. There are alot of holes and loss of information regarding Kelly, even the missing list of possessions, which I think is slightly suspicious. I read somewhere that Brown's autopsy report could have being slightly more informative. There was a snippet in a news paper referring to Brown's report, I wonder if anyone has details about that.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by David Orsam View Post

                      It is surely reasonable to suppose that "the notes" he reviewed were the notes of the post-mortem examinations of the previous four murder victims, i.e. notes similar to those he produced himself in respect of the Kelly post-mortem.
                      The "Great unwashed" are required to use the term "Autopsy" or "Post-mortem" reports so we all know what we are talking about. Whereas, the in-house terminology between surgeons, physicians, and those familiar with the operating room for those same observations is simply, "notes".


                      Originally posted by David Orsam View Post
                      ...But my point is that Bond would not have been provided with the opinions of the other doctors, only the notes of their post-mortem examinations which was all he needed to enable him to form his own expert opinion. The whole point was for him, as an expert looking at all the murders as whole, to be able to come to an independent conclusion to enable the authorities to know what they were dealing with. It is not surprising, therefore, that he disagrees with some of the other doctors as to the amount of surgical skill and anatomical knowledge possessed by the murderer.
                      Absolutely correct, professionals like Bond, Phillips, McKellar, etc. do not use the opinions of their peers, the autopsy "notes" ARE their opinions.
                      There is no need to give an opinion of an opinion.
                      Regards, Jon S.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Maybe the misconception is that there were "reports" as opposed to "notes" to begin with.
                        Best Wishes,
                        Hunter
                        ____________________________________________

                        When evidence is not to be had, theories abound. Even the most plausible of them do not carry conviction- London Times Nov. 10.1888

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Dr Bond was certainly a controversial figure. For instance, in the Rose Mylett case he disagreed with the opinion of five other doctors, including Dr Phillips, in concluding that it was not a case of wilful murder.

                          However, I personally believe that all of the doctors involved in the "Whitechapel Murders" were seriously out of their depth, and it's disconcerting to say the least that opinions, as to the skill, and likely occupation of JtR, ranged from Dr Bond's view of no skilled at all-not even that of a common horse slaughterer, to Dr Phillips' medical expert!

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Originally posted by John G View Post
                            Dr Bond was certainly a controversial figure. For instance, in the Rose Mylett case he disagreed with the opinion of five other doctors, including Dr Phillips, in concluding that it was not a case of wilful murder.

                            However, I personally believe that all of the doctors involved in the "Whitechapel Murders" were seriously out of their depth, and it's disconcerting to say the least that opinions, as to the skill, and likely occupation of JtR, ranged from Dr Bond's view of no skilled at all-not even that of a common horse slaughterer, to Dr Phillips' medical expert!
                            I agree with what your saying John however wasn't it a case of medical practices not being advanced enough rather than a fault of the doctors involved in the "Whitechapel Murders"?

                            Cheers John

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Originally posted by John Wheat View Post
                              I agree with what your saying John however wasn't it a case of medical practices not being advanced enough rather than a fault of the doctors involved in the "Whitechapel Murders"?

                              Cheers John
                              Yes, and of course, none of the doctors involved were forensic experts. And how many had, say, extensive surgical experience? Moreover, even for modern forensics there are limitations, especially as regards determining time of death. In fact, it's now realised that there are so many variables that the UK's Forensic Science Regulator states, in its official guidance, that pathologists shouldn't even attempt to estimate the post mortem interval (the main difficulty seems to be a woeful lack of research, for instance, regarding rigor mortis, there have been no longitudinal study on a large random sample).

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X