The subject of Jack's "anatomical knowledge"

[Toofew]

With reciprocal respect, Billy, it simply isn't the case that the intestines would be cut in half (?) if an amateur was responsible for opening the abdominal cavity. Even when dealing with a rabbit, it is incredibly easy for an amateur to pierce the skin and flesh without severing the intestines, and we humans are made of tougher stuff that that. It's rather a moot point here, in any case, since we know they suffered injury and evisceration in the case of Eddowes. Nothing remotely indicative of anatomical knowledge beyond that of a layman as far as the intestines go.

All the best,
Ben

Ben, I'll have to respectfully disagree with you on that point (sorry for the lousy simile) but as I have been the knife holder while skinning a rabbit, there is a great deal of loose skin.

My contentionn was basically started out as Trevor's "recoil" theory was wishful thinking but, having thought about the margin of error while cutting the abdominal wall I wondered.

It's not enough to put out a special edition, only my thoughts/opinion.

Sheesh, if we keep on respectfully disagreeing, we might add a touch of civility to the forum!

Best of wishes,

Billy

[Hunter]

hi Billy,

Glad to see someone with rural experience. Maybe we can convince some skeptics that large mammals' internal organs and humans' are located in the same general areas.
You do have to be careful not to cut the intestines when opening up the abdominal cavity.

[Ben]

With reciprocal respect, Billy, it simply isn't the case that the intestines would be cut in half (?) if an amateur was responsible for opening the abdominal cavity. Even when dealing with a rabbit, it is incredibly easy for an amateur to pierce the skin and flesh without severing the intestines, and we humans are made of tougher stuff that that. It's rather a moot point here, in any case, since we know they suffered injury and evisceration in the case of Eddowes. Nothing remotely indicative of anatomical knowledge beyond that of a layman as far as the intestines go.

All the best,
Ben

[Toofew]

<snip>

Hi Billy - No, I don't think there has ever been any suggestion that an absence of cuts to the intestines is indicative of medical knowledge. There's certainly nothing remotely difficult about piercing the flesh of the abdomen without injury to the "insides".



I can assure you that this isn't the case at all.

All the best,
Ben

No Ben. With all respects, unless you have done it, cutting shallow enough to cut the wall without cutting the intestines is not that easy. I am going back to my youth mind you but I do remember my uncles (who had killed and prepared hundreds of hogs in their lifetimes) be extremely careful with the knife. Granted they were doing it for food but still...

Be good,

Billy

[DVV]

Mon ami (which exhausts my knowledge of French),

Were the intestines cut at the ends or in half? The reason I'm asking is if the Ripper was truly uninformed about anatomy, the intestines would be cut in half...sorry, this is a graphic (verbally) image but stick the knife in hilt deep and pulll upward.

Good night as you should be six or seven hours ahead of me....

Billy

Merci Billy!

...cut at the ends.

Amitiés,
David

[Ben]

Is this what you are calling "old hat" Ben?

No, Norma.

I have no trouble accepting that some modern commentators may be critical of Bond, but this view of him as the errant doctor of the bunch is in danger of mutating into a ripperological factoid, and I feel a few crucial realities should be addressed to prevent that from happening. For example, the idea that Dr. Bond's view of the Mylett case constituted the controversial minority does not stand up to scrutiny. As Debs and Rob have pointed out, one of the pro-murder doctors involved in the Mylett case made claims that could be proven false, which simply isn't true of Bond.

Was it a case of not wanting to argue with such a high flying and persuasive policeman or was it more to do with actually having been won over to a different point of view by the police argument and believing that view to be correct ?

I think it was more a case of Bond being "won over" by the weight of medical evidence.

From what I remember of the medical reports, no one mentioned that the intestines were cut. My thoughts are that the killer had some kind of experience for that fact alone

Hi Billy - No, I don't think there has ever been any suggestion that an absence of cuts to the intestines is indicative of medical knowledge. There's certainly nothing remotely difficult about piercing the flesh of the abdomen without injury to the "insides".

The reason I'm asking is if the Ripper was truly uninformed about anatomy, the intestines would be cut in half

I can assure you that this isn't the case at all.

All the best,
Ben

[Toofew]

Hi Toofew,

there were 2 feet of intestines cut, and placed between her arm and her body.
As the sketch shows, btw.

Amitiés,
David

Mon ami (which exhausts my knowledge of French),

Were the intestines cut at the ends or in half? The reason I'm asking is if the Ripper was truly uninformed about anatomy, the intestines would be cut in half...sorry, this is a graphic (verbally) image but stick the knife in hilt deep and pulll upward.

Good night as you should be six or seven hours ahead of me....

Billy

[DVV]

Hi Toofew,

there were 2 feet of intestines cut, and placed between her arm and her body.
As the sketch shows, btw.

Amitiés,
David

[Toofew]

Is Foster's drawing a hoax?

2 feet of intestines don't cut themselves and pop out to land between Kate's left arm and body.

Hunter, don't forget the Jack in the Box syndrome

Best of wishes.

Billy

[Toofew]

Regarding medical / anatomical knowledge....based upon my limited knowledge of anatomy, the abdominal wall is a then muscle layer. From what I remember of the medical reports, no one mentioned that the intestines were cut. My thoughts are that the killer had some kind of experience for that fact alone; whether butcher, hunter (I've see family & friends clean hogs, squirrels & rabbits), or someone with medical knowledge. Granted, that doesn't narrow the field one whit but...

Be good,

Billy

[Hunter]

Is Foster's drawing a hoax?

2 feet of intestines don't cut themselves and pop out to land between Kate's left arm and body.

[Toofew]

Wherever the intestines finished up or how they got there still doesnt prove the killer removed the organs at the scene.

And it isnt clear exactly how much of the intestines were oustide the abdominal cavity. Dont forget one of he wounds went up as far as the breast bone. Thats near to the shoulder area if you want to split hairs !!

Read the postings i made earlier in this thread regarding the chapman murder.

Trevor, the theory that the organs were removed at a different location is interesting. However, propping that theory up with intestines "recoiling" as you have several times stated on this forum doesn't hold water. Dodging that fact by saying that the cut was up to the sternum still doesn't obliterate gravity, i.e., they may extend beyond the abdominal wall but I don't see any way they ended up at the shoulder of the victim unless decomposition gases played a major role such as a drowning victim.

Best,

Billy

[Trevor Marriott]

Trevor, doesn't the above put paid to your theory of how the intestines ended up on or above the shoulders of Chapman & Eddowes? While there may some slight recoil affect if the skin is cut, surely the intestines don't pop out like a Jack in the Box.

Best,

Billy

Wherever the intestines finished up or how they got there still doesnt prove the killer removed the organs at the scene.

And it isnt clear exactly how much of the intestines were oustide the abdominal cavity. Dont forget one of he wounds went up as far as the breast bone. Thats near to the shoulder area if you want to split hairs !!

Read the postings i made earlier in this thread regarding the chapman murder.

[Natalie Severn]

Thanks Claire,it makes sense that.I thought the wound would have been more likely to fade at first but when I read about William Randall"s finding I wondered if such marks may actually become more pronounced for some time after death.
Best
Norma

[claire]

Just a tiny note regarding the darker bruise observed on the neck (face?) than was reported, and I'm quite sure this is fairly common knowledge, but might be worth bearing in mind...it would have been possible for the bruise to have darkened postmortem (such contusions can continue to darken for around 18 hours postmortem, and sometimes longer in women, obese individuals, or those suffering alcoholism [cf. di Maio and di Maio, Forensic Pathology--Google it if you must but please be warned that some of the pictures are disturbing]). Hence, without any real fault on his part, Bond may not have observed the depth of the contusion (given tests [or lack of same] available at the time). It is also possible that the mortuary assistant observed pm lividity, of course.

Just thoughts...sorry to intrude