Dr Bond and his "CANON".

[Ben]

Surely his opinions are more accurate if he had made his own examination

Unless they're wrong.

Phillips examined the corpse and filed a detail report, the contents of which didn't gel very well with his ultimate conclusion...in Bond's considered opinion. In other words, Bond accepted the contents of the report, but couldn't understand how it could have led to Phillips conclusion that the killer had medical knowledge. If Phillips saw something else that pointed towards medical knowledge but didn't tell anyone about it, he obviously filed a crap report, but I don't buy that for a second.

You did disagree with Phillips. You believed that Chapman and Eddowes were killed by the same man, or don't you subscribe to that view anymore?

[jc007]

JC007,

Bond would have viewed the SOC and autopsy reports, position of body, cuts etc. He stated notes in his report.

Monty

If Phillips was so "wrong" why would Bond want to make any opinion based on a report that was filled with supposed inaccuracies? it doesn't make sense.

[jc007]

Unless they're wrong.
You did disagree with Phillips. You believed that Chapman and Eddowes were killed by the same man, or don't you subscribe to that view anymore?

Ben, i said i don't know, when i was younger i thought the killers victims where the 5 and only the 5 as i have gotten older and learnt more about the case, i think its possible there were more or even there were less, there is nothing to conclude either way. sure there are some similarites with certain victims but its not conclusive, so i don't really subscribe to any theory.

[Monty]

JC007,

Philips was wrong about what?

position of the injuries?

Monty

[Natalie Severn]

Hi All,
Although I tend to disagree with those who say that Dr Bond didnt need to see the murder victims in the flesh to decide whether or not there was any skill involved I still reckon it would have been an advantage in these cases.If only to be able to see 'with your own eyes", the way the throat was cut,how the victims may have been subdued and the mutilations performed.Indeed only very recently the Suffolk murders threw up a difficulty because we were told doctors could not at first decide upon exactly what had caused the women"s death and particularly whether and how they had been "subdued".
So if doctors in 2007 could not for a long time decide cause of death then I doubt that any of those in 1888 were infallible actually,particularly if they hadnt even seen the bodies of the victims.We will just have to disagree with each other over that I guess.
Regarding the term "canon".Most of us understand it simply to mean the five victims I have already named and referred to by Dr Bond in his report compiled for Anderson in November 1888.Its not at all important who actually first used the "word" canon itself,but rather what "concept" of the Whitechapel Murders and consequently the Whitechapel murderer or Jack the Ripper, was being advanced when separating these five women from the ten or eleven women murdered in Whitechapel between 1888 and 1891.
I do not dispute that Dr Bond was a qualified medical man,well able to challenge the opinions of other doctors if need be.What I actually dispute is his "impartiality" in the situations in which he found himself ie as a Whitehall Police Surgeon, called upon by the Assistant Commissioner of Police who Robert Anderson who was already forming a view of the killer, based on nothing more than a hunch from what can be gathered.He was already advancing his view of a murderer who was a "Low class Polish Jew living among his people who are known to protect their own from gentile justice".
I find that particular statement quite prejudicial and outrageous-even for 1888.So did a whole lot of other people,including important police officials like the City Police Chief.

[Ben]

If Phillips was so "wrong" why would Bond want to make any opinion based on a report that was filled with supposed inaccuracies?

There was nothing wrong with the report, and I'm sure Bond didn't think there was anything wrong with it either. He simply disagreed with the conclusions Phillips arrived at from the report. Please understand the distinction. And yes, I know you said you "don't know", but I asked you what you "thought", and you "thought" Eddowes and Chapman were killed by the same man. I agree, but it's at odds with Phillips.

He was already advancing his view of a murderer who was a "Low class Polish Jew living among his people who are known to protect their own from gentile justice".

No he wasn't, Nats. Simple as. No, he wasn't.

[Natalie Severn]

[QUOTE=Ben;9386]There was nothing wrong with the report, and I'm sure Bond didn't think there was anything wrong with it either. He simply disagreed with the conclusions Phillips arrived at from the report. Please understand the distinction. And yes, I know you said you "don't know", but I asked you what you "thought", and you "thought" Eddowes and Chapman were killed by the same man. I agree, but it's at odds with Phillips.

Later Ben, I will find the sources and post them that show Anderson started to believe in the Low Class Polish Jew who lived among his people etc etc as early as mid October 1888.I cant do that athe moment but I wont forget....


With regards to the Eddowes and Chapman distiction: I believe it is of crucial importance that Phillips believed they had been killed by different people.
After the Alice MacKenzie murder, Dr Phillips is reported never to have been certain that only one man was responsible for the murders.
Best
Natalie

[Sam Flynn]

Someone define "Police Surgeon" - obviously someone with both medical knowledge and law enforcement knowledge, but would they have received training needed to determine whether wounds were inflicted by the same hand?

I believe not, Brenda. I'm happy to be corrected, but police surgeons appear to have had no more specialist training than a hospital surgeon would have received. Indeed, many police surgeons seem to have had their own day-to-day medical practices, but because they were affiliated to police divisions they were called in to advise when their services were required. It's important to note that such occasions weren't invariably due to a murder, and police surgeons were commonly required to investigate cases of beatings, child abuse, starvation, neglect and so forth.

Whilst these men were doubtless well-trained in medicine, they didn't hold "forensic pathology" degrees, and we'd have to wait quite some time after 1888 before such specialisms would emerge. That doesn't mean that their opinions should be summarily disregarded in any way - these were intelligent men, and trained doctors after all.

[Sam Flynn]

By way of light entertainment...

...here's Phillips's "canon"

[Natalie Severn]

Gosh Sam,Isnt that Robert Anderson firing off Dr Bond with his the Polish Jew theory in October 1888?

Ben,
Robert Anderson was instructed to return to his office by Home Secretary Matthews after the Double Event and he returned from Paris on 4th October 1888. Of his return he writes

During my absence abroad [ ie Sept/Oct 1888 ] the Police had made a house -to -house search for him[Sept /Oct 1888] investigating the case of every man in the district whose circumstances were such that he could go and come and get rid of blood- stains in secret.

"and the conclusion we came to [ when discussing these findings some time in the Autumn of 1888 surely?] was that he and his people were low class Jews ,for it is a remarkable fact that people of that class in the East End will not give up one of their number to Gentile Justice."
And the result proved that our diagnosis was right on every point."........



Its clear enough to me Ben that this is what Anderson had decided after having discussions with other Police about their house-to-house searches in Sept/Oct.1888.
So by the time 1888 was out Robert Anderson had developed his theory about a low class Jew being the murderer.

Best

Natalie

[Graham]

Hey, Sam!

Your illustration reminds of the time the Human Cannonball left the circus, and the ringmaster wondered if he'd ever find another man of the same calibre...

(Groan..)

Graham

[Sam Flynn]

Your illustration reminds of the time the Human Cannonball left the circus, and the ringmaster wondered if he'd ever find another man of the same calibre...

...perhaps you should have kept your powder dry

[Doctor X]

That joke bombed. . . .

--J.D.

[Ben]

Its clear enough to me Ben that this is what Anderson had decided after having discussions with other Police about their house-to-house searches in Sept/Oct.1888.

Well no, not really Nats.

It's all to easy to arrive at a perceived conclusion and say "Aha! Told ya! I thought so all along", and Anderson may have been dong just that. I can think of a better explanation, though: just because the house-to-house searches were taking place in Sept/Oct 1888, doesn't mean that the Polish Jew conclusion was reached at that time. Anderson's remark would seem incredibly odd unless he was referring to a specific person such as Kosminski. It seems far more likely that he concluded that the killer was Kosminski (rather than Mr. Generic Jew), and then claimed that the results bore out his Kosminski-related suspicions.

Ben

[Mitch Rowe]

Modern autopsy reports are far far more accurate than anything Ive seen relating to the Whitechapel Murders. Any Homicide Detective will tell you he/she would much rather attend an autopsy rather than read the report. The reason is simple..You cant ask a report a question. You need to be able to observe/ask questions/form your own conclusions.
I dont remember where Phillips said this but I think it was during Rose Mylets inquest. Or Alice Mc Kenzie.
What he basically said was that although it was obvious the Murders were connected in some manner. In his professional opinion he saw no medical evidence to connect them. If any of you require the quote I will find it.

I never seen the quote where Phillips disregards Eddowes as a victim but suspect he was giving his opinion in a purely medical manner. If I had to give such an opinion I would do the same. However as an Ameteur Invesigator I have very little doubt Eddowes was a JTR victim.

Always remember that these Doctors/Policemen were only Men and were stating their personal or professional opinions.

If I believe I am absolutely sure that Chapman/MJK were killed by the same hand then all I can do is state what I believe to be fact. And give my reasons. However, I am not an eyewitness! You must decide. Some will be right..Others wrong..But it is still progress towards finding the MONSTER..

Of the C5 I personally believe they were all killed of the same hand. But if I were to separate them as two groups killed by two different persons my first choice based on medical and other evidence it would be like this....

Nichols/Stride/Eddowes: JTR(Unknown Subject).

Chapman/MJK: Leather Apron(Not Pizer! Though it could be. Im just using a familiar name).

Soo....I can see that conclusion is pretty whacky. But that is how I would apply myself to the question of two killers. I can only conclude that all 5 were at least done by the same hand.