What did Doctors mean by anatomical knowledge?

[Geddy2112]

This adds more weight to my theory that the organs were not removed by the killer but removed at the mortuary before the post mortem was carried out.

"First They Ignore You, Then They Laugh At You, Then They Fight You, Then You Win"

Mahatma Gandhi

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

Indeed, great to see you back posting.

Sorry I thought it was 'Defeat is fine..' - Mahatma Gandhi's chiropodist.

[Patrick Differ]

GB thank you for the posts by Prospector. Very thought provoking indeed. After reading all the threads combined with the post mortem narratives and supposed timing of the kills it's difficult to imagine a Surgeon making many of the cuts on these victims as described in the time of 5 to 10 minutes. I would think that from " habit" and knowledge there would have been some better precision. On the other hand it was in darkness with Nichols and Eddowes clearly murdered on a Police beat so that risk may have been a factor.
Nichols, Chapman and Eddowes showed an increase in mutilation over time. Kelly appears to be the final canvas.
Was Kelly the final goal? If so it shows planning and some level of organization. I think JtR was an organized killer and not a random opportunist. The bodies reveal otherwise.
This shows intelligence combined with some level of skill.
Could a surgeon and a butcher both remove organs from a human? A surgeon certainly. A butcher, a quote from one of the Doctors who himself was a surgeon stated, " I think someone used to cutting up animals could have done this??
It's not unusual for serial killers to start by cutting up animals and getting desensitized to killing. Eddowes body was not autopsied until almost 12 hours later. Did a mortuary assistant remove the kidney and send it to Lusk? It's impossible to know. JtR definately had some skill to open the abdomen, extract intestines and remove the Uterus. The kills also had slit throats and possible suffocation. The latter done first which means the killer had knowledge of bleeding out the victim to minimize blood splatter on themselves. Who would know that? A surgeon certainly. A butcher would also know by practice.
I Think JtR was one of those professions and not some crazed transient .

[GBinOz]

This adds more weight to my theory that the organs were not removed by the killer but removed at the mortuary before the post mortem was carried out.

"First They Ignore You, Then They Laugh At You, Then They Fight You, Then You Win"

Mahatma Gandhi

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

Hi Trevor,

Good to see you back.

Cheers, George

[Trevor Marriott]

Hi Patrick,

Who ever inflicted these injuries was not conducting an autopsy. They were about opening women's bodies and extracting organs. It should, however, be noted that the main cut to Eddowes abdomen employed the standard medical procedure of incising around the navel.

Cheers, George

This adds more weight to my theory that the organs were not removed by the killer but removed at the mortuary before the post mortem was carried out.

"First They Ignore You, Then They Laugh At You, Then They Fight You, Then You Win"

Mahatma Gandhi

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[GBinOz]

Hi Patrick,

There used to be a member here that went by the name of Prosector. He was actually a teaching surgeon, as the name suggests, and you may be interested in a thread that he started here:

https://forum.casebook.org/forum/ripper-discussions/motive-method-and-madness/7907-did-he-have-anatomical-knowledge

It is unfortunate that he no longer participates, possibly as a result of the number of adverse comments by posters with little to no medical knowledge .

The thread is worth a read, particularly the earlier posts.

Cheers, George

[GBinOz]

I would add finally that the direction of these cuts were observed and do not fit the classic autopsy " Y" incision procedure.

Hi Patrick,

Who ever inflicted these injuries was not conducting an autopsy. They were about opening women's bodies and extracting organs. It should, however, be noted that the main cut to Eddowes abdomen employed the standard medical procedure of incising around the navel.

Cheers, George

[Patrick Differ]

As a newcomer to Casebook but not JtR research it's nice to see that this cause is so alive.
I think JtR besides being educated in anatomy (possibly not just human or only human) clearly knew his way around a knife. What I struggle with is the post mortem records and their descriptions of capability and weapons as that applies to professions. I think this narrows the field if I understand this correctly. One of the standard roles for these Doctors was to establish cause of death and then perform an autopsy. It becomes clear that they understood the range of knives from clasp knife to dagger to those found in a surgical kit. Whitechapel had almost daily knife attacks so it's more normal for these Doctors than not IMO to have a thorough understand it. Two statements that stand out to me were, " I don't believe a standard surgical kit has such a knife", and " I believe someone used to cutting up animals could have done this", are observations from trained surgeons towards the actual victims. Chapman and Eddowes show more controlled stealth than rage along with Speed. I would add finally that the direction of these cuts were observed and do not fit the classic autopsy " Y" incision procedure.
I would add Jacob Levy to this list along with Thompson and likely someone yet to be defined?

[Holmes' Idiot Brother]

The Chapman and Eddowes murders are very similar in method and core result. In both cases the target appeared to be the Uterus. In Eddowes case there was also the removal ( at some point) of her left kidney. Also in the Eddowes case it appears that her entire sequence was done within a 5 to 10 minute window. If we are to believe Mitre Square was canvassed every 15 minutes it makes the Eddowes murder even more perplexing.
Surgeons during this time were not performing organ removal eventhough there were attempts being made but in all cases sepsis and infection made this impossible. Surgeons could perform amputations but as one Doctor observed, it was not likely that the knife used was part of a Surgeons kit. That said however a Liston knife is certainly a possibility. The only argument against it might be the width of the blade.
THe kidney removal may or may not have been by the killer since Eddowes was left untouched until an autopsy was done almost 12 hours later.
Some anatomical knowledge refers to the removal of the Uterus ( possible primary target) and Eddowes left kidney.
The left kidney that sits behind other organs which might illicit the Doctors response regarding a higher level of experience.
There are 2 ways to look at the kidney removal. One is the killer had knowledge and some skill to locate and remove it. Eventhough Doctors thought it would take 30 minutes which sounds like the autopsy procedure.
THe second would be that the killer felt his way to his next target and removed it. This was dangerous considering the sharpness of the blade and in relative darkness. But then we are talking about a killer quite deranged. It apparently was actually how it would still have had to be done. With feel in total darkness.
So does this tell us that the Killer indeed had some anatomical knowledge? I think it has to considering that the Uterus and Kidney were removed. The killer had the following:
Some ability to remove organs
Some level of knowledge regarding human anatomy
Experience with using very sharp knives
Comfort working in darkness ( was this practiced?)
Knowledge of the Streets and police movements
A local as the Eddowes murder shows

The kidney and Uterus had no monetary value of any significance. Nor did they have any medical value. This killer appeared to be playing on the fears of the community and Empire as much as some self gratification. While he was likely blaming Prostitutes , as he targeted street walker central at Dorset, Flower & Dean and Thrawl Streets, he was also seeking Attention!

Attention seekers are typically those with a level of insecurity and narcissism. The feeling of never measuring up and constantly seeking approval. This killer, in my view, had some significant failure in their life. He was not just mutilating these unfortunates. They were low hanging fruit.

Removing the Uterus on women where reproduction was likely no longer possible for Chapman and Eddowes points to something personal. Contracting syphilis was certainly that. Repercussions were certainly that. But removing a kidney in complete darkness with organs sitting in front of it? What was that supposed to prove?

Excellent points, and I do believe the killer had some degree of anatomical knowledge. If the organs were removed much later at the mortuary, then other options must be considered. But let's say the organs were not harvested by morgue attendants; it would mean the Ripper managed to find a way around the layer of fat called the peritoneal lining (which shields the kidney from the front) without damaging any other part of the viscera.....in near dark, and presumably under tight time constraints (I have my doubts as to that, but I addressed that elsewhere). If so, then he definitely knew his way around the postmortem room, at least.

[GBinOz]

I find it astonishing that someone in near complete darkness managed quite quickly to remove a woman's kidney 'through the front' without damaging other organs.
For me the killer must have had some 'skills.'

Hi Geddy,

I share your astonishment. In the case of Kelly, Bond said that the pericardium was open from below and the heart was absent. There has been much debate as to whether he meant that the heart was absent from the body or from the room, but I believe he was saying that the heart had been surgically removed from the sheath (the pericardium) in which it had been contained. This is no slash and grab, and I struggle to believe that many of the named suspects possessed this surgical skill. Amongst the exceptions may be Thompson and Chapman. The alternative is Trevor's much maligned (IMO unfairly) theory that the skilled surgical techniques were conducted after the bodies arrived at the morgues, which might explain the slight difference in skill levels.

If the skilled injuries are separated from the frenzied injuries, the unskilled named suspects can return for consideration. In either case, I suspect that the perpetrator was someone other than the named suspects. JMO.

Cheers, George

[Geddy2112]

I find it astonishing that someone in near complete darkness managed quite quickly to remove a woman's kidney 'through the front' without damaging other organs. I believe my father's cousin was one of the early 'through the front' kidney transplants in the 1970s which is some 90 years later and with obvious better lighting conditions. For me the killer must have had some 'skills.'

[Patrick Differ]

The Chapman and Eddowes murders are very similar in method and core result. In both cases the target appeared to be the Uterus. In Eddowes case there was also the removal ( at some point) of her left kidney. Also in the Eddowes case it appears that her entire sequence was done within a 5 to 10 minute window. If we are to believe Mitre Square was canvassed every 15 minutes it makes the Eddowes murder even more perplexing.
Surgeons during this time were not performing organ removal eventhough there were attempts being made but in all cases sepsis and infection made this impossible. Surgeons could perform amputations but as one Doctor observed, it was not likely that the knife used was part of a Surgeons kit. That said however a Liston knife is certainly a possibility. The only argument against it might be the width of the blade.
THe kidney removal may or may not have been by the killer since Eddowes was left untouched until an autopsy was done almost 12 hours later.
Some anatomical knowledge refers to the removal of the Uterus ( possible primary target) and Eddowes left kidney.
The left kidney that sits behind other organs which might illicit the Doctors response regarding a higher level of experience.
There are 2 ways to look at the kidney removal. One is the killer had knowledge and some skill to locate and remove it. Eventhough Doctors thought it would take 30 minutes which sounds like the autopsy procedure.
THe second would be that the killer felt his way to his next target and removed it. This was dangerous considering the sharpness of the blade and in relative darkness. But then we are talking about a killer quite deranged. It apparently was actually how it would still have had to be done. With feel in total darkness.
So does this tell us that the Killer indeed had some anatomical knowledge? I think it has to considering that the Uterus and Kidney were removed. The killer had the following:
Some ability to remove organs
Some level of knowledge regarding human anatomy
Experience with using very sharp knives
Comfort working in darkness ( was this practiced?)
Knowledge of the Streets and police movements
A local as the Eddowes murder shows

The kidney and Uterus had no monetary value of any significance. Nor did they have any medical value. This killer appeared to be playing on the fears of the community and Empire as much as some self gratification. While he was likely blaming Prostitutes , as he targeted street walker central at Dorset, Flower & Dean and Thrawl Streets, he was also seeking Attention!

Attention seekers are typically those with a level of insecurity and narcissism. The feeling of never measuring up and constantly seeking approval. This killer, in my view, had some significant failure in their life. He was not just mutilating these unfortunates. They were low hanging fruit.

Removing the Uterus on women where reproduction was likely no longer possible for Chapman and Eddowes points to something personal. Contracting syphilis was certainly that. Repercussions were certainly that. But removing a kidney in complete darkness with organs sitting in front of it? What was that supposed to prove?