Eddowes' gut cut

[Sam Flynn]

Quite. Can we say that "the left lobe of the liver was slit through by a vertical cut" is the same wound as "the slit on the under surface of the liver"?

It could well be, Joshua, but it's hard to be certain. It is interesting that the word "slit" occurs in the description of both, not that "slit" is a technical term, you understand (I'm not going to fall into the "flap trap" ). I would suggest, however, that the cuts on the under-surface of the liver are unlikely to have been byproducts of the main longitudinal cut to the abdomen.

[Wickerman]

Quite. Can we say that "the left lobe of the liver was slit through by a vertical cut" is the same wound as "the slit on the under surface of the liver"?

We can see here how close the left kidney is the the left portion (lobe) of the liver.
Perhaps the liver was slit by the knife at he removed the kidney?




This pic identifies the left lobe.

[Trevor Marriott]

We can see here how close the left kidney is the the left portion (lobe) of the liver.
Perhaps the liver was slit by the knife at he removed the kidney?




This pic identifies the left lobe.

But the same medical observations would apply if they were removed in haste at the mortuary, and may I remind you and everyone else, that no one can say for certain that the killer removed the organs. As stated this old accepted theory is based on nothing more than inferences, which I fully accept that people are able to draw from those inferences, but they should also consider what there is to negate these inferences.

There is more to suggest the killer did not remove them, than there is to suggest he did.

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Joshua Rogan]

It could well be, Joshua, but it's hard to be certain. It is interesting that the word "slit" occurs in the description of both, not that "slit" is a technical term, you understand (I'm not going to fall into the "flap trap" ). I would suggest, however, that the cuts on the under-surface of the liver are unlikely to have been byproducts of the main longitudinal cut to the abdomen.

I'm not so sure about that last bit, Sam. Brown says;
"Behind this the liver was stabbed as if by the point of a sharp instrument. Below this was another incision into the liver of about 2 1/2 inches and below this the left lobe of the liver was slit through by a vertical cut"

To me, this sounds like he is describing three stabs in a line, the last of which only clips the bottom of the left lobe, leaving the slit. Possibly caused by the deepest plunges of thr knife as it was used in a sawing motion to get the cut started. But it does depend on what he meant by "below" and" vertical".
Thr second mention of the liver injuries I take to be from after the organ was removed as part of the autopsy, so further wounds could be seen;

"there was a cut from the upper part of the slit on the under surface of the liver to the left side, and another cut at right angles to this which were about 1 1/2" deep and 2 1/2" long"

Given that the left lobe is triangular this last cut at right angles must have gone up (toward the head), so (when viewed from the right side of the body where the killer worked from) forming almost a Z....should we be looking for Zorro the Ripper?

[Joshua Rogan]

We can see here how close the left kidney is the the left portion (lobe) of the liver.
Perhaps the liver was slit by the knife at he removed the kidney?

Thanks for that Jon. Brown does say that the kidney was "carefully taken out and removed" but even so, cutting the renal artery and ureter with a six inch blade might well account for the horizontal cut in the liver mentioned in my previous post.

[Sam Flynn]

I'm not so sure about that last bit, Sam. Brown says;
"Behind this the liver was stabbed as if by the point of a sharp instrument. Below this was another incision into the liver of about 2 1/2 inches and below this the left lobe of the liver was slit through by a vertical cut"

That only applies to one of the wounds to the liver, Josh. The two other wounds ("below this... below this") could have been the product of something other than the initial abdominal puncture wound under the xiphoid.

[Wickerman]

Thanks for that Jon. Brown does say that the kidney was "carefully taken out and removed" but even so, cutting the renal artery and ureter with a six inch blade might well account for the horizontal cut in the liver mentioned in my previous post.

Hi Joshua.
Given the number of injured organs mentioned by Brown, I wonder if he meant that no bits of that kidney remained in the body. Meaning at least he was careful removing that organ?

Notice though, Brown does say the peritonial lining was cut on the left side, and the kidney removed.
This appears to suggest the killer made a slit in the stomach lining specifically to access the kidney.

Contra to some who have suggested that he rummaged around in the dark and just grabbed what ever he laid his hands on.

The intentional slit in the peritonial lining seems to indicate he targetted that organ specifically. I hadn't noticed that before.

[Joshua Rogan]

That only applies to one of the wounds to the liver, Josh. The two other wounds ("below this... below this") could have been the product of something other than the initial abdominal puncture wound under the xiphoid.

Yes, possibly. I'm just trying to make sense of Brown's words. Do you have an alternative theory?

[Joshua Rogan]

Hi Joshua.
Given the number of injured organs mentioned by Brown, I wonder if he meant that no bits of that kidney remained in the body. Meaning at least he was careful removing that organ?

Notice though, Brown does say the peritonial lining was cut on the left side, and the kidney removed.
This appears to suggest the killer made a slit in the stomach lining specifically to access the kidney.

Contra to some who have suggested that he rummaged around in the dark and just grabbed what ever he laid his hands on.

The intentional slit in the peritonial lining seems to indicate he targetted that organ specifically. I hadn't noticed that before.

I think that's the way that a butcher, hunter or smallholder would remove a kidney when butchering an animal - make a small slit in the membrane, then slide your fingers into this and run them alomg the kidney and it essentially just pops out. Then just pull the kidney up and slice through the artery etc.

Which does seem to indicate that he knew what he was doing. Unless the cut to the peritoneum was collateral damage from other cuts, such as the colon. But most likely you're right.

[Fisherman]

I think that's the way that a butcher, hunter or smallholder would remove a kidney when butchering an animal - make a small slit in the membrane, then slide your fingers into this and run them alomg the kidney and it essentially just pops out. Then just pull the kidney up and slice through the artery etc.

Which does seem to indicate that he knew what he was doing. Unless the cut to the peritoneum was collateral damage from other cuts, such as the colon. But most likely you're right.

Bu if this was what happened, then why are not the medicos of the time very clear in establishing that there can be little doubt that the killer wilfully targetted and extracted the kidney? Even if the cut to the peritoneal lining was collateral damage, it would seem that the kidney would need to be reached for by the fingers before it "popped out"?
Surely, such a process would be well known to the medicos if it was common practice with butchers and hunters?

[Sam Flynn]

"Surely, such a process would be well known to the medicos if it was common practice with butchers and hunters?"

Not necessarily, Fish. How many London doctors would have been familiar with the practices of hunters, or butchers for that matter? Not many, I bet.

[Fisherman]

"Surely, such a process would be well known to the medicos if it was common practice with butchers and hunters?"

Not necessarily, Fish. How many London doctors would have been familiar with the practices of hunters, or butchers for that matter? Not many, I bet.

That may be true - but it should have been obvious to them which way the kidney took out of the body, and there would have been press people and police alike who had access to the information about it. Somebody should have known.
Then again, we are in all probability dealing with a time that was innocent, if you like - or ignorant. The business with the abdominal walls should have had alarm bells ringing, but it apparently never did.

Maybe we should not expect too much from their side.

[Sam Flynn]

That may be true - but it should have been obvious to them which way the kidney took out of the body

How many actually saw the cut - and, of those, how many would have been acquainted with the techniques of butchers or hunters? (Bear in mind that butchers and slaughtermen were already under scrutiny anyway, and that there can't have been that many hunts going on in London since the times of George the Fourth )

[Fisherman]

How many actually saw the cut - and, of those, how many would have been acquainted with the techniques of butchers or hunters? (Bear in mind that butchers and slaughtermen were already under scrutiny anyway, and that there can't have been that many hunts going on in London since the times of George the Fourth )

Well, there can be no telling how many saw the cut, but they would not have been many. But since we do know that hunters and butchers were looked into as reasonable suspects, one would have thought that their practices would have been scrutinized too.
If the technique employed to take out the kidney looked like Joshua suggests, then it would be very odd if it was not recognized by the ones handling the Ripper case that far into the proceedings.

[Joshua Rogan]

I didn't mean to suggest that the killer was definitely a huntsman or whatever. Just that the details of the kidney extraction are not incompatible. They're pretty scant really - one cut, carefully removed. That could fit a variety of removal techniques. The abdominal opening looks very amateurish though.

Wasn't it around the time of the Pinchin St torso that someone suggested that London butchers had a recognisable style? The police and/or doctors didn't make mention of that. Or didn't see any similarity.
I don't think Bond saw Eddowes, but I believe he did hunt deer in the country so would most likely be familiar with gralloching - quickly removing the entrails before the meat spoils.