The kidney removal of Catherine Eddowes.

[Patrick Differ]

We are talking 1888 here, surely the organs would have just been ripped out when the animal was slaughtered and hung upside I dont think it would take a great deal of skill to do that

In the UK, kosher butchers (also known as shochets) do not require a specific license to slaughter animals for kosher consumption.

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

Not true Trevor. There was a Board of Shechita that consisted of the 5 Kosher Butchers on Butchers Row and overseen by Rabbi Adler. They took this very seriously in 1888.

[Doctored Whatsit]

The problem with the continuing suggestion that JtR was a shochet is, I believe, that the knife they traditionally used had a flat straight tip. The standard British butcher/slaughterer used a sticking knife, 6 to 8 inches long, and pointed. This is the weapon described by police surgeons as being expertly wielded by the ripper.

[Patrick Differ]

The problem with the continuing suggestion that JtR was a shochet is, I believe, that the knife they traditionally used had a flat straight tip. The standard British butcher/slaughterer used a sticking knife, 6 to 8 inches long, and pointed. This is the weapon described by police surgeons as being expertly wielded by the ripper.

Hi Doc..the shochet could do all of it as they taught all of it. The flat knife or chalaf would not have been used and i agree on the sticking knife. The shochet taught other butchers how and why they needed to keep their tools constantly sharp. It was an integral part of the profession and kosher process.
My suggestion is that this butcher was not a shochet but still a kosher butcher.

That said a Shochet has never surfaced in 136 years. The only Kosher Butcher that has so far surfaced is Jacob Levy. He got progressively more psychotic starting in 1886 and upon his release in 1887 was living in humiliation. By 1890 he was readmitted.

Was Levy the Ripper or was it someone like him living in the same area? Are those records still in existence or sitting in an asylum somewhere? Who knows.

[Doctored Whatsit]

Hi Doc..the shochet could do all of it as they taught all of it. The flat knife or chalaf would not have been used and i agree on the sticking knife. The shochet taught other butchers how and why they needed to keep their tools constantly sharp. It was an integral part of the profession and kosher process.
My suggestion is that this butcher was not a shochet but still a kosher butcher.

That said a Shochet has never surfaced in 136 years. The only Kosher Butcher that has so far surfaced is Jacob Levy. He got progressively more psychotic starting in 1886 and upon his release in 1887 was living in humiliation. By 1890 he was readmitted.

Was Levy the Ripper or was it someone like him living in the same area? Are those records still in existence or sitting in an asylum somewhere? Who knows.

If you agree on the use of a sticking knife, why is it still a kosher butcher that is your suspect? If it was a sticking knife, and I believe that was the police surgeons' opinion, all we have is the suggestion that JtR was an experienced butcher/slaughterer.

[Trevor Marriott]

It was simply an opinion with no evidence to support that opinion. They had to say something to explain away the missing organs; they could hardly go public with the fact that the organs could have been taken while the bodies were left for long periods of time before the post-mortems. The public would have been up in arms

and one question I keep asking, which posters seem not to want to answer, is if it was the same killer for Eddowes and Chapman, why do we see clear anatomical skill being used to remove the uterus and its appendages from Chapman and less anatomical skill shown in the removal of the organs from Eddowes?

The bodies were taken to 2 different mortuaries, and a modern-day gynaecologist has gone over the post-mortem reports and has indicated that two different methods of extraction were used in the removal of the uteri from both victims.

And why, if the killer was organ collecting, why take another uterus from Eddowes when he had a perfect specimen from Chapman?

This butcher theory is a dead duck in my opinion.

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Herlock Sholmes]

It was simply an opinion with no evidence to support that opinion. They had to say something to explain away the missing organs; they could hardly go public with the fact that the organs could have been taken while the bodies were left for long periods of time before the post-mortems. The public would have been up in arms

and one question I keep asking, which posters seem not to want to answer, is if it was the same killer for Eddowes and Chapman, why do we see clear anatomical skill being used to remove the uterus and its appendages from Chapman and less anatomical skill shown in the removal of the organs from Eddowes?

The bodies were taken to 2 different mortuaries, and a modern-day gynaecologist has gone over the post-mortem reports and has indicated that two different methods of extraction were used in the removal of the uteri from both victims.

And why, if the killer was organ collecting, why take another uterus from Eddowes when he had a perfect specimen from Chapman?

This butcher theory is a dead duck in my opinion.

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

And I’ve asked you for the evidence you claimed to have seen of ‘organ thieves’ stealing body parts from mortuaries. Professor Hurren, who you are fond of quoting, only talks about ‘body dealers’ in the article that you refer to. I have found no evidence for the existence of people stealing organs from mortuaries. If you can’t provide the evidence that you claimed to have then everyone on here can only draw one conclusion. That there was no such thing. There may have been such a thing but no one can or should accept the existence of something without a smidgeon of evidence or simply on the word of someone that has a theory to prop up.

[Herlock Sholmes]

This butcher theory is a dead duck in my opinion.

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

I’ll give you one bit of credit Trevor. You have the hide of a rhinoceros. No matter how many times your theories are disproven and exposed you always do the same thing. You disappear for a time then return and hope that everyone will forget how badly your theory has been mauled.

If anyone stole organs (as opposed to taking whole bodies - as per Professor Hurren) their procedure would have had to have been (and I do mean had to have been) to remove them after a Post Mortem. I’ll explain the obvious yet again - a body comes in of a man who might have been poisoned - ‘organ thieves’ do their thing - PM doctors arrive and pull back the sheet “why has this man got an opened abdomen?” “Looks like those pesky ‘organ thieves’ have been at it again.”

So why would our ‘organ thieves’ taken the humongous risk on these two occasions of removing organs when two doctors had examined the body in Mitre Square and three doctors had examined the body at the mortuary. It would have been impossible for our organ thieves to have known what those doctors had or hadn’t seen. What I mean by that is that they couldn’t possibly have had even the minutest level of confidence that the doctors hadn’t spotted Eddowes uterus in place. So for an organ to have been found missing when it was there earlier would have exposed the ‘organ thieves’ and closed off their profitable sideline at Golden Lane Mortuary. And probably led to the arrest of a dodgy mortuary attendant who would then, to reduce his own punishment, have exposed the ‘organ thieves’ to the police.

And all that they would have had to have done to avoid this huge, dangerous and expensive risk would have been to have waited until after the PM. Try making sense Trevor.

Everyone on here can see this obvious point. You wriggle and turn a blind eye. Under the carpet it goes.

Your theory is a non-starter. It’s why you can’t find a single person to step up and say that they totally agree with you.

[Herlock Sholmes]

And why, if the killer was organ collecting, why take another uterus from Eddowes when he had a perfect specimen from Chapman?

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

As I’ve mentioned before…but you ignore the point….why do you assume to know a motive simply to be able to make a point? What if he was ‘collecting?’ Have you abandoned your usual word choice ‘harvesting?’