Surgical expertise, anatomical knowledge. So on and so forth..

[elmore 77]

If I was JTR and I was a doctor and Phillips had said what he did I would probably try to hide my skill.They say I'm a doctor now ,ha ha.

[Sam Flynn]

Not if they didn't want to get caught.

Whatever. We're obviously never going to agree on this.

[Abby Normal]

What happened to Eddowes was not surgery, Abby; it was not even butchery. If anything, a surgically-trained person, or a butcher, might easily have taken longer.

Not if they didn't want to get caught.

[Sam Flynn]

Thanks Sam
But I disagree. I think it obviously would. How could it be otherwise?

What happened to Eddowes was not surgery, Abby; it was not even butchery. If anything, a surgically-trained person, or a butcher, might easily have taken longer.

[Jeff Leahy]

I think one hint to support your idea Abby exists with the perception by Phillips that Annies wounds generally showed the killers intention of acquiring what he eventually did. I agree that there are signs when a skill..or a sound technique if you will...are present. Liz Strides wounds do not suggest or deny the skill sets being present...there simply isn't enough done to her to properly assess. Its only clear that she was not mutilated, nor in the process of being prepared to be mutilated. And that her throat was cut once, when both preceding Canonicals and subsequent Canonicals were cut twice and deeply. What I disagree with is that there were signs of these kinds of skill sets visible in the wounds on Kate, or Mary. Kates killer could have been a butcher, Marys not even that, but Annies killer had some experience doing what he did with some precision.

Yeah, but he was probably working in daylight if Cadoshe's testimony is accurate...

Yours Jeff

[Michael W Richards]

Thanks Sam
But I disagree. I think it obviously would. How could it be otherwise? If you have the surgical experience and know how and know what your after then of course it could help you get what you want quicker.

I think without the medical experience the corpses would have been much more haphazardly mutilated and organs extracted clumsily, if at all.

I also, can see why doctors at the time would want to distance themselves and their profession from the killer, but still some thought there was medical skill involved and today removed from it, most doctors think there was.

I do concede that their is the possibility that someone with experience cutting up animals might have done it, but just barely.

I think one hint to support your idea Abby exists with the perception by Phillips that Annies wounds generally showed the killers intention of acquiring what he eventually did. I agree that there are signs when a skill..or a sound technique if you will...are present. Liz Strides wounds do not suggest or deny the skill sets being present...there simply isn't enough done to her to properly assess. Its only clear that she was not mutilated, nor in the process of being prepared to be mutilated. And that her throat was cut once, when both preceding Canonicals and subsequent Canonicals were cut twice and deeply. What I disagree with is that there were signs of these kinds of skill sets visible in the wounds on Kate, or Mary. Kates killer could have been a butcher, Marys not even that, but Annies killer had some experience doing what he did with some precision.

[Abby Normal]

Surgical experience wouldn't have helped him to get that carnage done any quicker, Abby.

Thanks Sam
But I disagree. I think it obviously would. How could it be otherwise? If you have the surgical experience and know how and know what your after then of course it could help you get what you want quicker.

I think without the medical experience the corpses would have been much more haphazardly mutilated and organs extracted clumsily, if at all.

I also, can see why doctors at the time would want to distance themselves and their profession from the killer, but still some thought there was medical skill involved and today removed from it, most doctors think there was.

I do concede that their is the possibility that someone with experience cutting up animals might have done it, but just barely.

[Sam Flynn]

especially if he had medical and or surgical experience.no?

Surgical experience wouldn't have helped him to get that carnage done any quicker, Abby.

[Michael W Richards]

Only 5 Minutes with Kate suggests that he was not thrown off by releasing the contents of her colon when he sectioned it....or that the nicks on her face were collateral damage rather than placed purposefully, that the section of apron he decided to take was something that wasn't representative of his having other concerns at the time than just mutilating...it assumes that tracing around a navel didnt take extra time.....too many extra elements for me to assume that he was at full speed.

Lawende...1:35 outside the square...Watkins discovery...1:44 in the square. That's 8 minutes for the walk to the spot, all that was done to her, and the walk clear of being seen by either Watkins or Harvey. Hmm. I believe Kate being in the square dying at 1:35 makes more sense.

[Abby Normal]

It's not particularly quickfire, Dave. As I said, it's surprising what can be done in 5 minutes - unpleasant though it may be, just put yourself in the Ripper's shoes. Eddowes? Five minutes more than enough. Kelly? Half an hour, fine - although that's not to say he might have lingered a little longer with a roof over his head.

especially if he had medical and or surgical experience.no?

[Hunter]

Simply accomplishing the tasks isn't the only barometer here Hunter, we have evidence in the case of Annie Chapman that not only was the organ skillfully excised and complete, but everything that was done to the abdomen was to facilitate that action.

We have the opinion of one physician who -- despite his experience -- was seeing something remarkably unprecedented. Phillips was a logical man looking for a logical motive, thus, the initial belief that the uterus was the target and the other mutilations were a ruse to cover that objective. As we have seen subsequently, when there were two or more medicos involved there was hardly a consensus on several factors.

There's good evidence that Phillips himself re-evaluated his earlier opinion after the Kelly murder. Her abdominal flaps had been removed similar to Chapman's (which was part of the reason he thought he had seen some knowledge in her case) but the rest of the carnage indicated that his assessment of the Chapman murder may have been incorrect.

After the close of the Chapman inquest, Phillips avoided the press, but in 1910, his former assistant, Percey Clark, gave a telling interview to the ELO. He claimed that the earlier assumption of medical skill was incorrect. I do believe he was reflecting the opinion of the man whose practice he took over after Phillips' death.

The only reason why I believe many Ripperologists haven't considered this is they either aren't aware if it or it's Inconvienient for their pet theories.

If you think the mutilations could be done that swiftly, then I suppose you have an alternate theory about why Liz Stride wasn't mutilated...

I'm only reiterating what was noted at the time that Stride's killer was very swift and effective compared to, for instance, the clumsy way Sarah Brown was killed. I have no theory why Stride wasn't mutilated if her killer was the same as that of the others. Ironically, people on both sides of the fence on this make the mistake that a killer can be predictable when many, many cases where the murderer is known have proven otherwise.

Your other points have been addressed many times before and right now time is short for me to elaborate farther.

[Hunter]

Hello Bridewell,
5 minutes or so isn't particularly incredible IMHO - indeed, it's surprising what can be done in that time. One certainly wouldn't need as much as 10 minutes to do what was done to Eddowes.

Yes, indeed. It's almost like everyone's imagining this in slow motion.

[Jeff Leahy]

St. Botolphs down on Aldgate was like Hooker Central. I believe that locally it was known as the prostitutes church. Men and unfortunates coming and going, rain or shine is a real possibility.
The want of food and drink does not dissipate because it is raining.

St Botolph's was often referred to as the "Church of Prostitutes" in the late Victorian period. The church is sited on an island surrounded by roadways and it was usual in these times to be suspicious of women standing on street corners. They were easy targets for the police, and to escape arrest the prostitutes would parade around the island,
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St_Botolph's_Aldgate

Hi Jon

Yes I totally agree. And the fact that Eddows was arrested in Aldgate High street a few hours earlier suggests this was her patch. While doing research on the Hammersmith Nude murders it became clear that these women were often territorial... returning to the same locations and using the same places for business.

The High street seems an obvious pick-up place...and its possible that all the victims (Accept Stride) were on the high street when they met Jack the Ripper....the distances to their place of business being remarkably similar, infact only Tabram had a shorter walk...

I attach a recent picture demonstrating just how close St Botoph's is to Aldgate station. A couple were seen leaving Aldgate station by a watchman shortly before Eddows was murdered, there would not have been trains running at that time of night...

The man returned alone via Mitre Street...

This person fits the man with a cap for a peak description. So I suggest that the couple seen by the night watchman and Lawende were all one and the same.... As was the man seen in Whitchurch lane....who could be BSM man given Schwartz only had a rear view....

The question is did this man continue back down whitechapel High street towards the docks as suggested by Trevor (A man of sailor appearance)

Or did he turn left into Goulston Street, walk down Goulston Street and stop in a doorway to wipe his hands and drop the piece of apron?

Yours Jeff

[Trevor Marriott]

It just astounds me how many ripperologists are willing to jump through the most improbable 'holes' to join pieces of a theory...

Surely the very simple and most logical explanation that the killer simply cut the apron to wipe his hands or rap the missing kidney.....then paused in the doorway to wipe his hands of any blood or feces, is the most logical explanation?

This is after all the conclusion most of the investigating officers came too at the time?

Yours Jeff

If she wasn't wearing an apron the the killer could not have cut or tore it.

I would be interested to see where the police in 1888 believed that the killer cut or tore the apron for any of the reasons you state

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[RockySullivan]

Has anyone read Trow's book on Mann? How is it? Any interesting info?