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

[Pcdunn]

This physician?

Sounds like Henry Gawen Sutton, perhaps?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_Gawen_Sutton

Also found a biographical entry on him at the site for the Royal College of Physicians, London Hospital at http://munksroll.rcplondon.ac.uk/Biography/Details/4302

Seems to have been fairly renowned in his lifetime. Very interesting.

[Pcdunn]

But as to whether or not the general populace had such anatomical knowledge (as I presented it); you truly didn't address.

Hello, Future MD,

I asked a similar question some time ago on another thread. Anatomy would not have been a general subject of study in schools yet, and only medical students would have had access to teachers (and demonstrations of dissections). Anatomy textbooks would have been available in libraries (very tattered and dirty persons were barred from entering them, as the poet Francis Thompson discovered), but poor people might not have been able to purchase them.

That said, people with agricultural experience of farm animals, butchers, hunters, and soldiers would have had varying knowledge of internal organs. Many of these types of people could be found in the city, of course. But overall, knowledge of the inner workings of human beings were reserved for doctors, surgeons, midwives, military medics, and so forth.
Hope this helps!

[drstrange169]

>>That is often misunderstood. Paul pulled the dress FURTHER down - but it was already down beyond the genital area when Lechmere arrived. Or so he claimed, at least.<<


The actual facts,

"Her clothes were raised almost up to her stomach."

Robert Paul's testimony Times 18th Sept. 1888

[RockySullivan]

>>That is often misunderstood. Paul pulled the dress FURTHER down - but it was already down beyond the genital area when Lechmere arrived. Or so he claimed, at least.<<


The actual facts,

"Her clothes were raised almost up to her stomach."

Robert Paul's testimony Times 18th Sept. 1888

Thanks Doc

[SirJohnFalstaff]

A two part question, following some exposition

I've seen the postmortem photos, the crime scene sketches and body sketches. I've read the reports. As someone who works in healthcare, I'm constantly flabbergasted that some people thought (others, still do) that the Ripper possessed anything near surgical skill.

I always have a problem with comparison with surgeons and surgical ability.

I think the question asked to surgeon should be:" you need that kidney, it's dark and you have 14 minutes, the woman is already dead. Could you do it?"

[Michael W Richards]

There are only 2 Canonical murders where the medical experts generally agreed on the level of skill and anatomical knowledge that was exhibited. In fact they sought out information on possible suspects at Teaching Hospitals and Medical Institutions as a result of that prognosis.

They were Mary Ann and Annie. Annie the most obvious example of those skill sets.

The problem from that point on is that one victim has a single wound that tells us nothing about those attributes, and the remaining 2 were killed by someone without "the skills of a butcher".

I doubt that the knowledge and skill was suddenly lost over the 2 1/2 months these murders took place.

[Rosella]

^ They could if Jack's physical or mental capacities had deteriorated in some way during that period of time.

[RockySullivan]

Reading over the Chapman inquest, there are frequent references to "post mortem"

coroner: The body has not been dissected, but the injuries have been made by some one who had considerable anatomical skill and knowledge. There are no meaningless cuts. It was done by one who knew where to find what he wanted, what difficulties he would have to contend against, and how he should use his knife, so as to abstract the organ without injury to it. No unskilled person could have known where to find it, or have recognised it when it was found. For instance, no mere slaughterer of animals could have carried out these operations. It must have been some one accustomed to the post-mortem room. The conclusion that the desire was to possess the missing part seems overwhelming

Philips: Would it have been such an instrument as a medical man uses for post-mortem examinations? - The ordinary post-mortem case perhaps does not contain such a weapon.

Now it's interesting how Robert Mann was dscribed as unreliable due to his "fits" as the nichols inquest. It seems the killer had to be someone like Mann. But I think I've read Mann was ruled out because he lived in a workhouse where he couldn't get out at night? Still I think there is a very good chance the killer worked or had worked for a mortuary. The police seemed aware of this angle, so did they check out everyone connected to a mortuary in whitechapel? Are there any mortuary workers who could be a person of interest. What about the "special instrument"? What is this blade and who would have it..it seems very specific

[DJA]

Philips: Would it have been such an instrument as a medical man uses for post-mortem examinations? - The ordinary post-mortem case perhaps does not contain such a weapon.

What is this blade and who would have it..it seems very specific

Might be variations on that evidence.

Infers a Catlin or Liston,neither of which would be expected in a post mortem case.

Would seem Phillips is being a bit coy.

[SirJohnFalstaff]

There are only 2 Canonical murders where the medical experts generally agreed on the level of skill and anatomical knowledge that was exhibited. In fact they sought out information on possible suspects at Teaching Hospitals and Medical Institutions as a result of that prognosis.

They were Mary Ann and Annie. Annie the most obvious example of those skill sets.

The problem from that point on is that one victim has a single wound that tells us nothing about those attributes, and the remaining 2 were killed by someone without "the skills of a butcher".

I doubt that the knowledge and skill was suddenly lost over the 2 1/2 months these murders took place.

Eddowes was cut when it was completely dark, Chapman was cut after sunrise.
That could explain it, couldn't it?

[Abby Normal]

There are three details of significant importance, as highlited by Prosector (Surgeon), I summarize below:

1 - Where a section of colon was removed and the sigmoid flexure was invaginated into the rectum.

Our surgeon explained that this is precisely what surgeons & pathologists do when they have to remove the descending colon. Which is done to stop faeces from oozing back into the abdominal cavity.

2 - The careful removal of a kidney, located at the rear of the body and enveloped within a fatty membrane is something that comes with experience.

Removing the descending colon in order to access this organ is not the kind of procedure that comes to someone who has no medical training.

3 - In any normal procedure for accessing the abdominal cavity by using a midline incision the normal practice is to skirt the cut around the umbilicus (belly button) but to the right.

This is standard practice for a surgeon when he is expected to sew up the patient after the operation or autopsy. The umbilicus is too tough to sew up so it is avoided and always to the right.
This is what we see done by the killer.

Conclusion, whoever killed and mutilated those women was no stranger to the medical profession.

Totally agree with this

[Abby Normal]

Whoever killed Eddowes, maybe, but why were such "professional" features not present in the other murders? At the very least, there was nary a midline abdominal incision in sight until Mitre Square, and none thereafter.

didn't the killer cut around t navel of Nichols?

[elmore 77]

Dr.Brown commented on the medical knowledge required to remove the kidney.It was Bond who thought the perp had no medical skill,commenting on Kelly.Prosector reckons there is skill involved in the way the throats are cut among other things and that the man had (at least )witnessed the opening of bodies previously.
Is it Ressler who thought Jack had a job that allowed him legitimate access to bodies?I tend to agree with that but he may have just paid to watch at the hospital

[RockySullivan]

Elmore I think your right, the murderer is someone who spent time with dead bodies, but then you look at where the murders took place...on the street, someone who feels comfortable on the street, comfortable enough to remove parts quickly in low light, now remember, whitechapel didn't have a mortuary. I don't think this the surgeon to the queen or a well renowned doctor, i can't seem someone like that being comfortable in a dirty backyard or in the gutter essentially. Is there any type of mortuary worker who removes organs?

[elmore 77]

Hi Rocky,it's possible he worked in an abattoir but the doctors don't seem to think so,.I don't know what his job was,and I'm probably wrong but it makes sense to me that he enjoyed what he was doing and could have put a lot of effort into getting a job with dead people/animals