The from hell letter

[ghoulstonstreet]

Does the kidney still exist in evidence files? Thanks

And neither murders suggest similar possible motives for the killer as seen by them both in the first 2 Canonicals. In FACT, it is possible that both Polly and Annie were killed for their uteri, as suggested by the men in question, and that Kate and Mary were not killed so the killer could obtain a kidney, a partial uterus and a heart.

If you have some evidence that the kidney was indeed a pigs, and that Polly and Annie could not have been killed for such a motive, and that Kate was killed so her killer could get her kidney and partial uterus and Mary was taken apart so her killer could take her heart....then as I said, that would be news to me and Id be delighted to see that evidence.

As it stands, I support the comments made by both physicians in only the first 2 Canonical cases, for one, because as I see it they are clearly virtually identical murder/mutilations with only the extraction and removal of said organ separating them to any great degree, and the second is because they were men who had been medically trained to make such determinations in police matters, they had risen to the respective tops of their fields while doing so, and I am not aware of any data that puts into question the matter of their professionalism or acumen.

Best regards

[Sam Flynn]

I simply refer to the historical data which as I said doesnt to my knowledge include a single medical opinion that suggests the kidney section was a pig's

The point I'm making is that it's quite probable that Openshaw could not have known the difference between a pig and a human kidney, especially when it wasn't an intact specimen. So, it doesn't matter what the "historical" opinion was - because "historical" knowledge hadn't advanced to a point where one should expect Openshaw to have been 100% accurate in his "diagnosis". (Aside from which, the whole story about the "human female kidney" has been fogged by Major Smith's unreliable memoirs.)

If you feel that some negative speculation about their skills or abilities supersedes their recorded opinions, that would be an opinion I dont share.

It's not "negative speculation" at all - it's common sense. To fail to acknowledge as much is equivalent to insisting that we should only take Nostradamus' opinion when discussing the cause of the Black Plague in medieval France. Now, Nosty was highly qualified in his day, but knowledge has moved on since his time - we should therefore temper our opinions of his opinions accordingly, and we should treat what he went on record as saying in a similar vein.

The same considerations apply to the field of 19th vs 20th/21st Century comparative anatomy when applied to human vs pig kidneys - or dogs' and calves' kidneys for that matter. Ditto, also, in terms of our knowledge of murderers, serial or otherwise, their psychology, and the techniques used to catch them (or not, as the case may be).

and the recorded comments made by the physicians who examined the women.

... IN THE FIRST TWO CASES ONLY. Their comments are NOT RECORDED in subsequent murders, because they weren't officially attached to the investigations and/or the records have not survived, and/or they weren't interviewed at the time. Neither Bagster nor Baxter are on record as ruling out Eddowes and Kelly from the "canon", and that's a SIMPLE FACT.

I simply refer to the historical data which as I said doesnt to my knowledge include a single medical opinion that suggests the kidney section was a pig's, and the recorded comments made by the physicians who examined the women.

If you feel that some negative speculation about their skills or abilities supersedes their recorded opinions, that would be an opinion I dont share.

Best regards

[Sam Flynn]

Do you have information that says one person who saw the section concluded it was a pig's....that would be something I wasnt aware of.

One thing you should be aware of - and you should, because I've mentioned it often enough - is that the detailed comparative anatomical differences between pig and human kidneys was not particularly well-researched until sometime in the early 20th century.

And anatomical knowledge being deduced by medical experts

Medical experts aren't infallible in perpetuity - would you accept the opinion of a Dark Age shaman over a Medieval leech doctor? Of course you wouldn't.

I would think its time to stop portraying the cops as Keystone and the medical men as incompetent.

It's high time you realised that neither were infallible, and that neither were blessed with the knowledge that the subsequent 121 years have brought to light. It's also high time you realised that other authorities (medical or legal) at the time had rather different opinions from our favourite dynamic duo, Bagster and Baxter.

Where was it established - i.e. to the extent that it would satisfy a modern forensic scientist - that it was not a pig's kidney as opposed to a human's? As I've been pointing out, it remains probable that Openshaw might not have been able the difference at that time.
They were covering every angle, if not clutching at straws, Mike.

Do you have information that says one person who saw the section concluded it was a pig's....that would be something I wasnt aware of.

And anatomical knowledge being deduced by medical experts within the Canonical Group victims dictated the search for people with those attributes....I would think its time to stop portraying the cops as Keystone and the medical men as incompetent.

Best regards

[Sam Flynn]

Yes, Sam does suggest that anyone could have sent a pigs kidney section and achieved the same results likely, and anyone had the partial address of Lusk via the papers...if a hoax...then why isnt it a pigs kidney?

Where was it established - i.e. to the extent that it would satisfy a modern forensic scientist - that it was not a pig's kidney as opposed to a human's? As I've been pointing out, it remains probable that Openshaw might not have been able the difference at that time.

Why were police investigating medical students for the crimes themselves?

They were covering every angle, if not clutching at straws, Mike.

Yes, Sam does suggest that anyone could have sent a pigs kidney section and achieved the same results likely, and anyone had the partial address of Lusk via the papers...if a hoax...then why isnt it a pigs kidney? And how would a hoaxer get a human kidney if not within the medical field or in undertaking? Why were police investigating medical students for the crimes themselves? 3 in particular.

The fact is that a catalyst for a hoax would be to play a practical joke on the specific person it was addressed to, or as a joke on the community at large, ...I think if a hoax, in this case it points towards someone hoaxing Lusk specifically...or, it wasnt a hoax.

Best regards

[DVV]

Hi Sam,

excellent... It settles the context.
I suspect sometimes that the real purpose was to "offer" something to the public, in the middle of a deadly boring October...

Amitiés,
David

[Sam Flynn]

For this, and other reasons, I believe someone who knew Lusk`s address was having a laugh.

... which could have been just about anyone in Britain who could read, as many of the newspapers, including the "nationals", had recently published Lusk's address. Furthermore Lusk had received considerable coverage in all the major local and national newspapers for some time, as the following survey illustrates:

[Jon Guy]

When one remembers that Lusk’s men also committed themselves to local intelligence gathering, and posted a reward for the killer’s capture, it isn’t difficult to see how an angry and frustrated Whitechapel Murderer might have come to view George Lusk as a major threat – an adversary deserving of some special attention.

Hi Garry

If the killer saw the Vigilance committee as a threat you`d think the kidney would have been sent to their much publicised meeting place, The Crown, on the Mile End Road.

For this, and other reasons, I believe someone who knew Lusk`s address was having a laugh.

[Sam Flynn]

Hi Michael...
Yes, that's why I didn't want to go there But a med student et cetera would perhaps know the similarities, and it wouldn't be the first time one of 'em had had a bit of a joke at someone else's expense

The point is that anyone could have sent a piece of pig's kidney and gotten away with it - without it ever occurring to them that the similarity/dissimilarity could be an issue. Think of the fake "mermaids" made of animal parts that turned up in various exhibitions or collections of curiosities during the Victorian era, or the Piltdown Man - did the people who knocked those up necessarily have to know much about comparative anatomy? Did Elsie Wright and Frances Griffiths need an intimate knowledge of photographic technology in order to chance their arm at the "Cottingley Fairies" hoax, or did they just "wing it" (so to speak)? Some very intelligent people were taken in by such things, but that's no great shame if their - and the hoaxers' - knowledge at that time didn't equip them to realise the potential pitfalls in what they were dealing with.

The possibility of a jolly jape by a medical student is certainly intriguing. But then, the From hell author disregarded the precedent set by the Dear Boss letter and made no mention of the supposed double event or Jack the Ripper. Neither did he refer to Lusk as 'boss' or resort to the mocking 'ha ha'. In other words, this communication is of interest for what it didn't say rather than what it did.

All the best.

Garry Wroe.

I would agree with that evaluation Gary, and for me, its one reason why this is one of the only communications I feel has some substance to it,...the narrow scope of available sources for fresh organs leaves us with a hoax by someone in the medical field or studying to be, an undertaker, or essentially an organ thief. That last category would include Jack I would think,... but in his case, it wouldnt be a hoax.

Now, if its med students, then one would have to wonder if the risk of being thrown out of school and arrested is validated by the widespread knowledge of their hoax.....meaning, does it seem that they would certainly gain some delight by sending this to a private citizen who might have thrown the whole thing out....in fact, Lusk ignores the package for almost 2 full days.

Seems a very risky thing to do for a joke if only one person might get the punch line, so to speak.

Dear Boss......addressed to Central News......From Hell, partially home addressed to a virtual nobody.

Best regards Gary

[Garry Wroe]

The possibility of a jolly jape by a medical student is certainly intriguing. But then, the From hell author disregarded the precedent set by the Dear Boss letter and made no mention of the supposed double event or Jack the Ripper. Neither did he refer to Lusk as 'boss' or resort to the mocking 'ha ha'. In other words, this communication is of interest for what it didn't say rather than what it did.

All the best.

Garry Wroe.

[claire]

Hi Michael...
Yes, that's why I didn't want to go there But a med student et cetera would perhaps know the similarities, and it wouldn't be the first time one of 'em had had a bit of a joke at someone else's expense