The subject of Jack's "anatomical knowledge"

[DaveMc]

Knowledgable but almost impossible to carry out having regard to lighting, slippery organs wet with blood. also the danger of cutting himself fumbling around with a long sharp knife in a small area in almost total darkness.

Sorry folks but i have to repeat again "it just didnt happen "!

Organ thieves, working in two different mortuaries in two different parts of the London Metropolitan Area is among the least supportable claims.

Arguments against the official reports have a habit of relying on pure conjecture.

I could never agree to such things.

There is an assumption of lighting and how much is needed for an experienced person. Working by feel alone is within the scope for somebody who knows what they're feeling for.

[Trevor Marriott]

Organ thieves, working in two different mortuaries in two different parts of the London Metropolitan Area is among the least supportable claims.

Arguments against the official reports have a habit of relying on pure conjecture.

I could never agree to such things.

There is an assumption of lighting and how much is needed for an experienced person. Working by feel alone is within the scope for somebody who knows what they're feeling for.

The Anatomy Act allowed bona fide persons to take organs and bodies freely from morturies and workhouse mortuaries for research.

The way the uterus was removed from chapman suggests it was removed for research.

Someone posted on here that almost any organ could be obtained from any of these locations by 10am every morning.

The bodies of Eddowes and Chapman were left at the mortuaries for some 12 hours before post mortems were carried out, need i say anymore

[The Good Michael]

Organ thieves, working in two different mortuaries in two different parts of the London Metropolitan Area is among the least supportable claims.

Arguments against the official reports have a habit of relying on pure conjecture.

I could never agree to such things.

There is an assumption of lighting and how much is needed for an experienced person. Working by feel alone is within the scope for somebody who knows what they're feeling for.

Dave,

You are referring to organ thieves who would know what they are looking for? Is that correct?

Working by feel for those who just might want to take absolutely any organish thing, is a distinct possibility.

Cheers,

Mike

[Natalie Severn]

I have begun to think that organ theft may have played a part in these murders.
Anybody who had been trained in surgery could have done them.Two men,both with surgical knowledge and acting together to make some extra money could have been responsible.They could have been involved in selling the organs on to an overseas representative.

[Jeff Leahy]

The debate about Jack's anatomical knowledge is quite a controversial one. Opinions were differing at the time as we know. I think that the attempt of identicaton of the Ripper rests quite a lot on whether he had anatomical knowledge or not because of the fact that if he did, it rules out a lot of the suggested suspects.

Just following through the thread. And was somewhat surprised by this Statement?

Because which of the leading suspects does NOT having medical knowledge eliminate? Maybrick and Sickert perhaps.

But most of the leading suspects: Cutbush, Druit, Kosminski, Chapman, Tumbelty all have some possible medical connection.

At least when using the phrase Anatomical knowledge.

Personally I don't believe that the Ripper required much more than grouping in the dark and pulling and cutting entrails. But I can't see that any of the leading suspects are eliminated either way in such a debate.

Would you like to name one?

Pirate

[DaveMc]

Dave,

You are referring to organ thieves who would know what they are looking for? Is that correct?

Working by feel for those who just might want to take absolutely any organish thing, is a distinct possibility.

Cheers,

Mike

Hi Mike,
The organ thieves are not my theory. I can only surmise different states.
Intent or opportunity?
But it's so far fetched I'm not inclined to put much time into it.

I'm not an expert on kidneys, but all I can find is that it's less likely to expose it by chance. The liver and spleen are easier to get to.
The cuts show some measure of meaningful removal.
It tend to think it's not a "grab bag" act.

I don't really want to be pinned with any one thing but I'm favoring that it's the act of a butcher employed at a slaughter house.

We humans are skilled with repetitive acts.
When is the last time you had to look at every single button to open your shirt or look to open a pant zipper?
It's all by feel.

Somebody who opens 100's of pigs per day would have a quick and knowledgeable skill.
A pig butcher would be in familiar territory.
While still not attempting to further it, killing pigs all day would cover the psychological "requirements" of cruelty to animals and menial work some other posters have mentioned.



The big problem for me with that theory is that the police were apparently looking for a doctor.
I hate arguing with the police.

[The Good Michael]

The butcher thing is not farfetched. I don't think one needs skill to just take an organ, especially if a person had absolutely any experience with killing and butchering an animal, and I think in those days, most men did. My father could do it as could all my uncles, but they only did it a few times in their lives. I just imagine that people then di many things none of do.

I do think being a butcher may inure one to such things when it comes to other animals (people?), though I have no first hand experience... that I'm willing to discuss.

Cheers,

Mike

[DVV]

"I may be a butcher
I may be a Yid
But I'm not a doctor
Nor a mortuary attendant..."

Amitiés,
David

[DirectorDave]

Trevor’s theories rarely stand up to scrutiny.....his theories include "The apron dropped in goulston street was a make-shift sanitary pad" or "a dog found the body first and ran away with the organ".

I get the impression Trevor is so desperate to bring something to the table that he will be coming out with crackpot theory after crackpot theory until doomsday.

His theory that the organs were removed in the mortuary for commercial reasons is just the latest in a long line of.......stab's in the dark.

[tji]

Hi


The Anatomy Act allowed bona fide persons to take organs and bodies freely from morturies and workhouse mortuaries for research.

If this was the case why all the secrecy?
If these particular body parts had been taken legally then why did no-one have any info on this, why didn't anyone step forward and admit they had taken them. Surely if it was bona fide they had nothing to hide?

It's not as if there wasn't enough news coverage on the fact they were missing.

Tj

[Trevor Marriott]

Trevor’s theories rarely stand up to scrutiny.....his theories include "The apron dropped in goulston street was a make-shift sanitary pad" or "a dog found the body first and ran away with the organ".

I get the impression Trevor is so desperate to bring something to the table that he will be coming out with crackpot theory after crackpot theory until doomsday.

His theory that the organs were removed in the mortuary for commercial reasons is just the latest in a long line of.......stab's in the dark.

I would say medical research not commercial reasons, there is a big difference

As to your suggestion of secrecy I would suggest that perhaps there was none. I cannot say what the proceedure were for taking body parts. Obvioulsy the bona fide people were known to mortuary staff and were perhaps just pointed in the direction of bodies which had come in overnight. i would have imagined that the bona fide people were at the mortuary on a daily basis.

At least the theory has some credibilty and i have backed it up with evidence from modern day medical experts, so its not just a stab in the dark.

There is no corroboration to the theory that the killer removed the organs at the crime scene. The first time the organs were found to be missing was at the post mortem 12 hours after the bodies had been left there. So you cannot dismiss my theory. The biggest mistake made was the doctors who attended the Eddowes crime scene. They did not examine the body in greater detail had they done so then they would have seen if any organs had been removed. This is a major mistake by them as they were aware that Chapman was missing her uterus,it would only have taken a few moments--perhaps they didnt because they didnt have proper lighting !!!!!

Now all you people who keep beleiving that the killer took the organs come forward with any evidence in support of that. You are all entitled to your opinions but opinions wont solve the case. We have seen to much of opinions with regards to Abberline,Monro, Anderson, Macnaghten amd their suspects which many choose to accept at being the truth.

As to the apron piece i have challenge people to come forward with evidence to corroborate the various theories which have been suggested. Again all we get is opinions. All we know is that it was cut/torn from the orginal. Again i have used medical experts to cast a doubt about the various theories and have photographs in support of that. Therre is no more i can do and in my eyes when you are able to negate a theory there has to be others which must be looked at and considered and not scorned.

i would suggest reading pages 388-408 of "The Evil Within" statements from Forensic pathologist/Consulatant Gynecologist/Eviscrator/Master Butcher may make you change your views

[DirectorDave]

"Now all you people who keep beleiving that the killer took the organs come forward with any evidence in support of that. You are all entitled to your opinions but opinions wont solve the case. We have seen to much of opinions with regards to Abberline,Monro, Anderson, Macnaghten amd their suspects which many choose to accept at being the truth"

Mary Kelly.

"As to the apron piece i have challenge people to come forward with evidence to corroborate the various theories which have been suggested. Again all we get is opinions. All we know is that it was cut/torn from the orginal. Again i have used medical experts to cast a doubt about the various theories and have photographs in support of that. Therre is no more i can do and in my eyes when you are able to negate a theory there has to be others which must be looked at and considered and not scorned."

Ally's responce's on Rippercast.

Your theory's trevor seem to depend on people proving you wrong rather than you providing a reasoned argument as to why you are right.

[Trevor Marriott]

"Now all you people who keep beleiving that the killer took the organs come forward with any evidence in support of that. You are all entitled to your opinions but opinions wont solve the case. We have seen to much of opinions with regards to Abberline,Monro, Anderson, Macnaghten amd their suspects which many choose to accept at being the truth"

Mary Kelly.

"As to the apron piece i have challenge people to come forward with evidence to corroborate the various theories which have been suggested. Again all we get is opinions. All we know is that it was cut/torn from the orginal. Again i have used medical experts to cast a doubt about the various theories and have photographs in support of that. Therre is no more i can do and in my eyes when you are able to negate a theory there has to be others which must be looked at and considered and not scorned."

Ally's responce's on Rippercast.

Your theory's trevor seem to depend on people proving you wrong rather than you providing a reasoned argument as to why you are right.

Well I dont think anyone has been able to prove me totally wrong so far

Its your opinion like i said opinions are not worth the paper they are wriiten on unless there is corroboration.

In the case of Kelly firstly there is a doubt about her being a Ripper victim, secondly it is not conclusive that the heart was taken away. It was missing from the pericardium. There was never any mention made of it at the inquest.

[DirectorDave]

"Thats your opinion like i said opinions are not worth the paper they are wriiten on unless there is corroboration"

That is very true Trevor....but look at your answers on this thread....you are hardly stating your response’s as a matter of opinion....more you are right and when will everyone realise it.

I have dozens of wacked-out theories on Jack the Ripper, but I would never put them forward as "case closed" as you do.

I'm not surprised you dodged the dagger on Ally's responses on your apron theory.....it seems that if you had offered the theory to any female she could have set you straight on how daft it is.

Speculation is fine Trevor.....but a speculator must have the ability to admit when they are wrong.

But all the above is just my opinion.

[Phil Carter]

...We have seen too much of opinions with regards to Abberline, Monro, Anderson, Macnaghten and their suspects which many choose to accept at being the truth.

and further....

.....when you are able to negate a theory there has to be others which must be looked at and considered and not scorned.

Hello all,

Although Trevor is aware that I am not in total agreement with his theory, the two quotes above are, in my honest opinion, completely correct.
Again, the basis for trying to expand the boudaries of how we look at this case must depend on the ability to see that all suspects named by the 4 mentioned above have been thoroughly investigated over 122 years, and not a shred of FACTUAL proof has been produced.
I remind all that had it not been for Phil Sugden's excellent research about Ostrog, that man (Ostrog) would still have been seriously considered because he happened to be mentioned by MacNaughten.
The fact that Ostrog is now dismissed, shows that MacNaughten's patricular theory connected to Ostrog and the gang as open to doubt, because of reliability.

When one is OVER that rather elementary boundary, then, and only then, can one accept that other possibilities exist.

Whether Trevor is right or not, that isn't the point. Think about it this way. Before Dan Farson's book and theory was seriously dissected by subsequent research, there were many who believed every word. Same for Stephen Knight. Same for Leonard Matters..HIS theory ruled the roost for ages.

No, I personally don't think Trevor's theory is correct, but will stand by the statement that this case is suffering from refusal to broaden horizons. And as such, it has become stuck in a nice, safe, convenient groove. It is high time things were indeed looked at from a different angle.

best wishes

Phil