The name's Bond

[John G]

Hi John,

IF Lawende didn't see Kate then there is ample time for these things to have taken place with some more care. There were 3 exits in Mitre Square, whereas Bucks Row was a short street open at both ends. Mitre was dark, yes, but when comparing Polly and Kate its clear that Kates killer chose to take her from the street into the dark, Pollys killer wasn't thinking of his safety or salvation. He needed to do what he did so bad that he acted in a venue that ultimately didn't offer him enough private time with the victim to accomplish all he had intended. That's why a backyard on Hanbury was chosen next.

If that killers actions evolve based on his failures, then why wouldn't he learn from his successes too? His success with Annie showed him that with the proper venue he had time to act swiftly but also skillfully. Does this same killer then put himself in a precarious position, with more avenues to watch and an almost complete absence of light? Can we say that the actions taken in Mitre Square were required to obtain a kidney..or a partial uterus?

Hi Michael,

It seems to me that Hanbury Street was a particularly risky venue. Not only was Chapman possibly killed in broad daylight- at a time when many locals were leaving, or preparing to leave, for work -but the killer risked getting himself boxed-in if disturbed, with the only options being to either scale fences, force his way through an overcrowded residential accommodation, or confront his interrupter.

Contrastingly, Mitre Square's multiple exists/entrances might have increased the chances of being disturbed, but it also had the advantage of providing the killer with multiple escape routes. Moreover, the darkness would have helped cloak his activities, a logic that also applies to Dutfield's Yard.

Regarding organ removal, of course we cannot know that the killer intended to target specific organs at any murder scene, that is simple speculation.

[Wickerman]

Unforeseen departure would make sense if he was disturbed Jon, but there is no evidence in the Mitre Sq murder that indicates any actions were incomplete. An example of an incomplete action might be the partial denuding of Marys legs, but in that case its likely because he had no idea what he was doing rather than he was interrupted. And this killer traced a cut line around her navel, took time to take a section of apron, to cut the nose, to cut the colon...seems like he had enough time to do what he wanted.

Hi Michael.
I'm not specifically talking about an interruption as has been suggested with Stride, but if the 2-3 minutes mentioned by Morris was in fact a little longer he may have opened that door ajar just as the mutilations began. Giving us the reason for a hurried mutilation, the killer not choosing to leave a second attack that night incomplete?
(Assuming Stride was also by the same hand of course).

[Michael W Richards]

George Morris, the night-watchman, said he opened his door only 2-3 minutes before Watkins showed up. This only being an estimate, the possibility exists it was a bit longer, and that the killer was disturbed by Morris opening his door. Whether this caused him to hurry, or make an unforeseen departure, is rarely considered.

Unforeseen departure would make sense if he was disturbed Jon, but there is no evidence in the Mitre Sq murder that indicates any actions were incomplete. An example of an incomplete action might be the partial denuding of Marys legs, but in that case its likely because he had no idea what he was doing rather than he was interrupted. And this killer traced a cut line around her navel, took time to take a section of apron, to cut the nose, to cut the colon...seems like he had enough time to do what he wanted.

[Wickerman]

Hi John,

IF Lawende didn't see Kate then there is ample time for these things to have taken place with some more care.

George Morris, the night-watchman, said he opened his door only 2-3 minutes before Watkins showed up. This only being an estimate, the possibility exists it was a bit longer, and that the killer was disturbed by Morris opening his door. Whether this caused him to hurry, or make an unforeseen departure, is rarely considered.

[Michael W Richards]

Perhaps. But might a lack of care be explained by the poor lighting conditions and time pressure that he was undoubtedly under, i.e. as a consequence of the regular police beats? Not to mention the fact that he might have just encountered Lawende et al. In Fact, you yourself pointed out in Post 153, "Polly's was a stressful location"; In this regard, I can't see that Mitre Square would be any less "stressful", and possibly a great deal more so.

Hi John,

IF Lawende didn't see Kate then there is ample time for these things to have taken place with some more care. There were 3 exits in Mitre Square, whereas Bucks Row was a short street open at both ends. Mitre was dark, yes, but when comparing Polly and Kate its clear that Kates killer chose to take her from the street into the dark, Pollys killer wasn't thinking of his safety or salvation. He needed to do what he did so bad that he acted in a venue that ultimately didn't offer him enough private time with the victim to accomplish all he had intended. That's why a backyard on Hanbury was chosen next.

If that killers actions evolve based on his failures, then why wouldn't he learn from his successes too? His success with Annie showed him that with the proper venue he had time to act swiftly but also skillfully. Does this same killer then put himself in a precarious position, with more avenues to watch and an almost complete absence of light? Can we say that the actions taken in Mitre Square were required to obtain a kidney..or a partial uterus?

[John G]

I think the fact the killer in Mitre Square severed the colon and loosed some feces indicates that at the very least he wasn't as careful as he had been. Plus a partial uterus.

Perhaps. But might a lack of care be explained by the poor lighting conditions and time pressure that he was undoubtedly under, i.e. as a consequence of the regular police beats? Not to mention the fact that he might have just encountered Lawende et al. In Fact, you yourself pointed out in Post 153, "Polly's was a stressful location"; In this regard, I can't see that Mitre Square would be any less "stressful", and possibly a great deal more so.

[SuspectZero]

I think the fact the killer in Mitre Square severed the colon and loosed some feces indicates that at the very least he wasn't as careful as he had been. Plus a partial uterus.

Yes, which is probably why he had to wipe his hands with the apron.

[GUT]

Absolutely Observer

Whose next to be suspected of being the Ripper, Monroe?

Well if you check Pierre's latest BS it was a copper???

[GUT]

Who knows John? Abberline, Barnaby, Burgho?

Regards

Observer

Burgho has long worried me, and I heard that later they had him put down???

[Observer]

Who knows John? Abberline, Barnaby, Burgho?

Regards

Observer

[John Wheat]

What? He changed his mind regarding the Mylett case, and you're wondering whether this is evidence of a personality disorder. Absurd. This "Bond as the Ripper" is just another wind up, it's ridiculous. This by the way is my last view on the matter.

Absolutely Observer

Whose next to be suspected of being the Ripper, Monroe?

[Observer]

The only time I've spotted Bond agreeing with anyone is in the Mylett case,and he changed his mind shortly afterwards and took a contrary view.I wonder if it is evidence of a personality disorder.

What? He changed his mind regarding the Mylett case, and you're wondering whether this is evidence of a personality disorder. Absurd. This "Bond as the Ripper" is just another wind up, it's ridiculous. This by the way is my last view on the matter.

[elmore 77]

In 1873 Bond was appointed Assistant Surgeon at the Westminster Hospital and was put in charge of outpatients which meant he was 'debarred from gaining a purely surgical experience'(obituary).He is said to have been disinterested in Mr Macnamara being appointed above him.But he may have hidden his bitter disappointment about being overlooked.The torsos began in the same year.
Regarding his health,he is thought to have had a stricture which may have been caused by gonorrhea .He is reported to have had prostate cancer,but I read somewhere about 'strange tumours'.I couldn't help thinking of Albert Fish.
Just before he died he said he felt 'something wrong with his head'

[elmore 77]

Dr. Bond has a track record of not seeing what his peers see.

The only time I've spotted Bond agreeing with anyone is in the Mylett case,and he changed his mind shortly afterwards and took a contrary view.I wonder if it is evidence of a personality disorder.
In Kelly's case the killer may have had a more personal motive or grudge against her,but whatever the reason I think he had one eye on the photo opportunity,same with Kate

[John G]

For myself, I am not sure modern surgeons can accurately interpret the sometimes vague descriptions of the mutilations captured in writing by the court recorders, or the press at the inquests.
If we still had the original autopsy reports from all the murders, then perhaps modern surgeons would have a clearer idea, but that is not the case. Dr. Bond's post-mortem notes hardly qualify as anything more than a brief summary of his observations.

For those reason's I am more inclined to go with the conclusions of the doctors who did see and did quantify those mutilations at the time.

Which brings me to Dr. Bond, yes he did read the autopsy notes of the murders previous to Kelly, yet right at the outset he makes a claim that is more the result of emotion than medical expertise.
He writes: "All five murders were no doubt committed by the same hand...". A conclusion he cannot possibly arrive at from reading autopsy notes alone.

Also, why Bond would think no more than three hours could have elapsed between the murders and discovery of the bodies of Nichols, Chapman & Eddowes, is a mystery.
Both Llewellyn and Brown suggested "not more than half an hour", for their respective victims, Nichols & Eddowes.
Only Dr. Phillips showed reservations over Chapman's hour of death, a time window of approx. two hours or so.

Then Dr. Bond concludes that in all the cases there was no evidence of struggling, yet Dr. Phillips had made specific mention of evidence of strangulation, as reported in the Lancet:
"There could be little doubt that he first strangled of suffocated his victim, for not only were no cries heard, but the face, lips and hands were livid as in asphyxia,..". In addition to that Phillips recorded that her fingernails were turgid, as would be the case when fingers are used in self defense.
Bond himself took note of cuts to the hands & arms of Kelly, which he must have been aware are an indication of defensive wounds.

So given the contrary nature of Dr. Bonds conclusion above, I have to wonder just how much reliance we can place on his further conclusions about there being a lack of medical skill or knowledge in the method of mutilations.

Dr. Bond has a track record of not seeing what his peers see.

Hello Jon,

Yes, I would have to agree. Dr Biggs was clearly of the opinion that the killer was not a medical man and, commenting on the inquest testimony of the doctors in the Eddowes case, he opined , "there is actually very little detail of use in the text, " and "much of the description is vague and potentially ambiguous."(Marriott, 2015). Of course, of the C5 victims Dr Bond was only involved in the autopsy of Kelly so, as regards the other victims, he was presumably reliant on the same vague reports as modern medical experts.