The name's Bond

[John G]

Referring back to Trevor Marriott's experts, in respect of Chapman, Philip Harrison, a mortuary services manager who assisted Dr Ian Calder, referred to the removal of the pelvic organs, i.e. uterus, parts of the bladder and upper portion of the vagina. He observed, "It is a very difficult and skilled undertaking to remove these organs carefully even by today's methods, especially as the comment is that they were cleanly cut and the cut missed the rectum." (Marriott, 2013).

[Ben]

Interesting info, Gareth, for which many thanks.

With reference to Elmore's recent post and the much-discussed lower cut to Chapman's pelvic organs, it occurs to me that the rationale used to exclude a "slash and grab artist" from consideration - on the grounds that an unskilled "operator" wouldn't (?) have cut so far down the vaginal "vault" - doesn't really hold water, at least not as far as I've been able to ascertain from a spot of net-sleuthing. Firstly, the lower portion of this "vault" is narrower, making it a more obvious and logical place to cut than higher up near the cervix, where the width is greater; and secondly, the supposedly "obvious place" for a person without to skill to cut (between the uterus and the vagina) was covered in three layers of muscle, and certainly no narrower than the ripper's chosen location for the cut.

In summary, it appears that the most "obvious" place for an unskilled killer to make the lower cut just happened the where the actual killer actually made his. This, coupled with the utterly botched and unskillful cut at the top, enabled the killer to remove the uterus.

[John G]

In case he wasn't, here's a textbook entry that might have helped him:

The Complete Examination (Virchow Technique)

[The] internal examination begins with a Y-shaped incision to the chest. This extends from the upper left chest region near the shoulder and angles downward toward the tip of the sternum. A similar incision is made on the right side. These two incisions intersect at the xyphoid [sic.] process located at the end of the sternum. From there, the incision extends downwards in the midline of the body to the pelvic region (symphysis pubis), curving slightly [my emphasis] around the umbilicus... These three folds of skin and subcutaneous adipose tissue are dissected from the underlying musculoskeletal structure, exposing the chest plate and the internal abdominal organs... Rib cutters are used to free and remove the ribs and sternum [my emphasis] to expose the heart, lungs, liver and stomach. The internal organs are usually examined in the following order: heart, lungs, liver, pancreas, spleen, kidneys...

Heart

The first internal organ examined is the heart, which is located beneath the chest plate (sternum) and enclosed by a thin membrane called the pericardium… The pericardial space is examined by making a small incision into the pericardium to determine the amount of fluid within the space. Then the pericardium is opened, exposing the heart… The heart is examined in situ [and is] then removed by cutting the aorta, superior and inferior vena cava, and pulmonary arteries and veins, then weighed.

(From Steven A. Koehler & Peggy A. Brown, Forensic Epidemiology, 2009, p43)

There's nothing there about removing the heart, chimney-sweep style, by burrowing through the diaphragm via the abdomen. On the contrary, the thoracic organs (heart and lungs) are exposed by removing the ribs and sternum, and the heart detached from its matrix of major veins and arteries, after the pericardium is cut... presumably from "in front", rather than from below. This is because the Virchow method, as described, gives access to the organs of the chest by first removing the front of the ribcage. Makes sense, really. The alternative would be like trying to replace a spark-plug by reaching into the engine through the glove compartment.

(Interesting, also, that this description of the Virchow technique mentions the abdominal incision curving slightly around the umbilicus... so not the rather pronounced "tongue of skin" seen in the Eddowes murder, then?)

Hi Sam,

Thanks for this. Based upon this definition, it looks as though the Virchow method was possibly not used to remove the heart. Moreover, it would seem strange that the perpetrator would use a sophisticated technique for removing the heart when some of Kelly's other organs may well have been simply plucked out.

[Sam Flynn]

I wonder if Dr Bond, who of course believed that the killer didn't even posses the technical knowledge of a butcher or horse slaughterer, was conversant with the Virchow method.

In case he wasn't, here's a textbook entry that might have helped him:

The Complete Examination (Virchow Technique)

[The] internal examination begins with a Y-shaped incision to the chest. This extends from the upper left chest region near the shoulder and angles downward toward the tip of the sternum. A similar incision is made on the right side. These two incisions intersect at the xyphoid [sic.] process located at the end of the sternum. From there, the incision extends downwards in the midline of the body to the pelvic region (symphysis pubis), curving slightly [my emphasis] around the umbilicus... These three folds of skin and subcutaneous adipose tissue are dissected from the underlying musculoskeletal structure, exposing the chest plate and the internal abdominal organs... Rib cutters are used to free and remove the ribs and sternum [my emphasis] to expose the heart, lungs, liver and stomach. The internal organs are usually examined in the following order: heart, lungs, liver, pancreas, spleen, kidneys...

Heart

The first internal organ examined is the heart, which is located beneath the chest plate (sternum) and enclosed by a thin membrane called the pericardium… The pericardial space is examined by making a small incision into the pericardium to determine the amount of fluid within the space. Then the pericardium is opened, exposing the heart… The heart is examined in situ [and is] then removed by cutting the aorta, superior and inferior vena cava, and pulmonary arteries and veins, then weighed.

(From Steven A. Koehler & Peggy A. Brown, Forensic Epidemiology, 2009, p43)

There's nothing there about removing the heart, chimney-sweep style, by burrowing through the diaphragm via the abdomen. On the contrary, the thoracic organs (heart and lungs) are exposed by removing the ribs and sternum, and the heart detached from its matrix of major veins and arteries, after the pericardium is cut... presumably from "in front", rather than from below. This is because the Virchow method, as described, gives access to the organs of the chest by first removing the front of the ribcage. Makes sense, really. The alternative would be like trying to replace a spark-plug by reaching into the engine through the glove compartment.

(Interesting, also, that this description of the Virchow technique mentions the abdominal incision curving slightly around the umbilicus... so not the rather pronounced "tongue of skin" seen in the Eddowes murder, then?)

[John G]

Hello Jon,

Merry Xmas to you.

Richard got this information from Steve Jessup who researched it and put it out on a face book page first.
(See edited post..above)

Whether his suspect trained under Virchow I cannot say. .but ignoring that fact, and taking into account the debris otherwise made of the body of the poor woman, this method of heart removal DOES require surgical skill..and most certainly surgical knowledge.

The intracardiac surgery required is a very subtle one. It goes against the rest of the cuts etc on the body..I willingly concede.


Phil

Hello Phil,

Merry Christmas to you too. Thanks for the information, that's very useful. I wonder if Dr Bond, who of course believed that the killer didn't even posses the technical knowledge of a butcher or horse slaughterer, was conversant with the Virchow method.

[Sam Flynn]

Whether his suspect trained under Virchow I cannot say... this method of heart removal DOES require surgical skill..and most certainly surgical knowledge.

No doubt many of us will encounter the dreaded "blister-packs" surrounding our gifts this Christmas, and will improvise various methods to get the toys out. This neither presupposes any special technique (let's call it the "Blistov" method) for removing blister-packs nor, in fact, any advance knowledge that a given toy will be encased in a plastic shell. We'll all succeed in breaking in, nevertheless - even if it means we make an almighty mess out of the rest of the packaging in the process

[Phil Carter]

Richard Patterson has argued that Kelly's heart was removed using the Virchow method, the removal of the heart via the pericardium. He also points out that his suspect, Francis Thompson, had been taught this new and rare method.

However, overall it does seem that Kelly's murderer exhibited very little skill, as was clearly the opinion of both Dr Bond and Dr Phillips.

Hello Jon,

Merry Xmas to you.

Richard got this information from Steve Jessup who researched it and put it out on a face book page first.
(See edited post..above)

Whether his suspect trained under Virchow I cannot say. .but ignoring that fact, and taking into account the debris otherwise made of the body of the poor woman, this method of heart removal DOES require surgical skill..and most certainly surgical knowledge.

The intracardiac surgery required is a very subtle one. It goes against the rest of the cuts etc on the body..I willingly concede.


Phil

[John G]

I will mention in passing that the "surgical methodology" of removal of the heart from below the ribs, leaving other items close to or surrounding the heart intact, was a very fresh idea...in surgical terms.

Now..at least until that time. .as far as I am aware, but could be mistaken, no murder committed on a human had this procedure been used.

One can..If that be the case, perhaps include this limited knowledge whilst weighing up the pros and cons of anatomical knowledge.

This method of removal of the heart has a name..and I believe was from the 1870's. The name escapes me at the moment but I THINK it was a German surgeon who came up with the idea. I believe. .but could be wrong..that Bond studied under this man. Please make allowances for a faulty memory.

I will try and ferret out the reference.



Phil

Richard Patterson has argued that Kelly's heart was removed using the Virchow method, the removal of the heart via the pericardium. He also points out that his suspect, Francis Thompson, had been taught this new and rare method.

However, overall it does seem that Kelly's murderer exhibited very little skill, as was clearly the opinion of both Dr Bond and Dr Phillips.

[Phil Carter]

The technique of removal of the heart by severing the major blood vessels by piercing the pericardium, ad Bond describes, is the Virchow technique. The pericardium..according to Bond, was still in situe.
This technique was relatively new in 1888.
Bond states that the pericardium was incised..And therefore in place.
If this methodology was used..And it seems to follow the avenue of Virchow, then the murderer or whoever removed the heart was a skilled man.

I thank Steve Jessup for this information, who..as far as I am aware, was the first to state it publically.

Rudolph Carl Virchow was born in 1821, in Germany.



Phil

[Phil Carter]

I will mention in passing that the "surgical methodology" of removal of the heart from below the ribs, leaving other items close to or surrounding the heart intact, was a very fresh idea...in surgical terms.

Now..at least until that time. .as far as I am aware, but could be mistaken, no murder committed on a human had this procedure been used.

One can..If that be the case, perhaps include this limited knowledge whilst weighing up the pros and cons of anatomical knowledge.

This method of removal of the heart has a name..and I believe was from the 1870's. The name escapes me at the moment but I THINK it was a German surgeon who came up with the idea. I believe. .but could be wrong..that Bond studied under this man. Please make allowances for a faulty memory.

I will try and ferret out the reference.



Phil

[Sam Flynn]

The problem Sam is, your source.

There's no problem, Jon. There are indications of architectural skill in the shack - in the clear sense that certain basic principles of construction must have been adhered to if the shack were to remain standing, which it clearly does. (There would be no "indications of architectural skill" in evidence if a novice were given a pile of planks and told to get on with it.) However, it's still a god-awful mess by any objective standard, and you can bet your boots that the guy who built it was about as far removed from Nicholas Hawksmoor as Kelly's killer was from Sir William Gull.

[Wickerman]

The problem Sam is, your source.

While "indications" concerning anatomy came from a surgeon, your "indications" of architecture, did not come from an architect.

[John G]

A guide for the perplexed:

[ATTACH]17362[/ATTACH]

Yes, I think I understand your point Sam! To be fair, Dr Phillips didn't seem to think that Kelly's murderer displayed any anatomical skill. Asked by the coroner, at the Pinchin Street Torso inquest, if there was any similarity between the cutting off of the legs in that case and the one severed from the woman in Dorset Street, he replied: " The savagery shown by the mutilated remains in the Dorset-Street case far exceeded that shown in this case. The mutilations in the Dorset-Street case were most wanton, whereas in this case it strikes me that they were made for the purpose of disposing of the body. " (the emphasis is mine.)

[Sam Flynn]

A guide for the perplexed:

[Wickerman]

Regarding surgical skill it's not widely pointed out in this forum that a part of the stomach was above the left shoulder possibly sliced off as the killer disemboweled Annie Champan. This to me another example of a killer simply hacking away at the victim.

Hi Obs.

And yet, it is well to remember Phillips's words of caution in response to the Coroner:
[Coroner] - Was any anatomical knowledge displayed?
[Phillips] - I think there was; there were indications of it. I think the anatomical knowledge was only less displayed or indicated by being hindered in consequence of haste.
(my emphasis)

This is quite in keeping with Dr. Brown over the Eddowes mutilations, and Dr. Sequeira, to a lesser extent ("of any great anatomical skill", means, just like Phillps had previously said, there were indications of it).

I'm suspicious that Phillips was reluctant to offer his opinion in a public forum, at the inquest. That he saw the mutilations of Chapman as something beyond haphazard slashing, but was not comfortable in putting his feelings into words due to the implication of what he might be required to say.

There was a camaraderie among surgeons in the medical profession.