The from hell letter

[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.

[perrymason]

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]

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.

[perrymason]

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]

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.

[perrymason]

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

[ghoulstonstreet]

Does the kidney still exist in evidence files? Thanks

[Sam Flynn]

And neither murders suggest similar possible motives for the killer as seen by them both in the first 2 Canonicals.

Utter nonsense. Eddowes and Kelly had their uteri removed, and organs were taken away by their killer - THAT'S MORE THAN CAN BE SAID FOR POLLY NICHOLS.

In FACT, it is possible that both Polly and Annie were killed for their uteri, as suggested by the men in question

... it's a FACT that neither of the men in question were asked, or volunteered, to pronounce on the "canonicity" of Eddowes and Kelly.

How many times do you have to be told this before it sinks in?

If you have some evidence that the kidney was indeed a pigs

The point is, we don't have any evidence that it WAS a human kidney - because it's quite probable that Openshaw WAS NOT EQUIPPED TO TELL THE DIFFERENCE. Indeed, he would have been ill-equipped to pronounce it a pig's kidney, as well. The reason for this, as I've pointed out UMPTEEN TIMES is that the comparative microscopic anatomy of human versus pig (or canine or bovine) kidneys WAS NOT WELL-RESEARCHED UNTIL the 20th Century... DECADES AFTER Openshaw made his examination.

How many times to you have to be told THAT before it sinks in?

[Cap'n Jack]

Keep your wig on, Michael... Sam's only chosen a pig because he knows they can fly.

[ghoulstonstreet]

Already Examined 1888?

Keep your wig on, Michael... Sam's only chosen a pig because he knows they can fly.

Hi Folks, My but we can get upset can't we over a pig's (?) kidney? I just read Sugden's book and there is a line stating that the very first thing the authorities did was to try to identify the kidney as some animal's. I believe it's stated there that the length of the kidney (it was sliced in half lengthwise) was good for a human but didn't figure for an animal's. Have you already gone over this ground? Thanks

[perrymason]

What Sam seems to believe is that 121 years ago was the stone age of Medicine and they couldnt tell anything about a crime through the forensics available to them.

Which is of course, nonsense.

The advent of the alliance of Science and Medicine, rather than Medicine and Religion, allowed for the last 150 years of medical practice to be a virtual boom time for Medical advancements. Ive heard it said that the medical advancements made in the last 100 years are more dramatic than what was accomplished in the 2000 years of practice up until that time....illustrating that in historical terms, we are accustomed to seeing far less progress per hundred year increment. Had the last 121 years been as the years before them, without a boom of innovation and study, we would not be far beyond what they were capable of then.

The men in charge of making medical evaluations did say on record at the Inquest that they thought the killer in C1 and C2 had the same ultimate goal but that the first victims poor venue prohibited the completion. Since all that really separates the 2 attacks is the extraction of a uterus...that seems reasonable.

No-one claimed similar things about later victims in comparison for one simple, vital reason....there was no evidence that was seen that might lead any expert to that conclusion.

We have on record senior medical men that venture a motive for the murders of Polly and Annie, and no such data for any other Canonical....leading to what I said before, there is evidence that suggests that the motives for those 2 murders was not the same as the rest of the Canonical Group.

I suppose the next thing Ill see is that killers change their reason for killing often....something Id get a chuckle from seeing explained.

Best regards

[jason_c]

Does the kidney still exist in evidence files? Thanks

If only.

Eddowes' Kidney was destroyed as late as the 1950's. I believe this was the remainder of the kidney left in her body rather than the one sent to Lusk.

[Sam Flynn]

Hi Folks, My but we can get upset can't we over a pig's (?) kidney?

I think it's rather a case about getting upset about somewhat different matters, GS. It will pass... it always does

[perrymason]

Suffice to say that if this package was a hoax it can only have come from the area medical students, practitioners, undertakers or from an organ thief. Since many feel the last possibility is slim in that so enlightened age, I suggest youre stuck with people in the medical field with some anatomical knowledge and access to said organ. If a hoax.

Or Jack, of course. Unless he also studies medicine............

Best regards

[Garry Wroe]

The problem, though, Mike, is that the available information relating to the Lusk kidney emerged from what could hardly be described as impeccable sources. In the heat of the present debate, it seems to me that Sam’s original point has been largely misunderstood. He isn’t stating categorically that the kidney came from a pig; merely that, during the Ripper’s operational timeframe, medical science lacked the ability to discriminate between a human and porcine kidney. Given this deficiency, there remains the possibility that the kidney was wrongly defined as human. To my mind, this is an intriguing proposition, to say nothing of a solid piece of research that ought to be accorded due respect.

Ultimately, however, the mystery surrounding the Lusk kidney is unlikely to be resolved to universal satisfaction. Hence, it is the psychology of the concomitant letter that I find most fascinating, particularly the disinclination of its author to ape the idiomatic peculiarities of the Dear Boss letter. Although others clearly disagree, it doesn’t, to my way of thinking, bear the attributes of a hoax. But, as I’ve already said, this isn’t a view to which some would readily subscribe.

Best wishes.

Garry Wroe.