Lusk Letter sent to George Lusk of the vigilante committee

[Abby Normal]

Hi Abby

I guess that makes sense, he may have made a mental note to avoid certain areas. He must have been super organised and must have known Whitechapel like the back of his hand.



As you mentioned in your post about a medical student not risking getting caught nicking organs, I just thought I would add a possible explanation if the ripper was a 'student' of medicine.

Hi natasha
I totally agree with you that the ripper was probably very organized and knew whitechapel in and out.

If the ripper was a student of medicine, stealing a kidney would be a moot point because the ripper already had the one he removed from eddowes. Or am I still missing something?

[Natasha]

Hi natasha
I totally agree with you that the ripper was probably very organized and knew whitechapel in and out.

If the ripper was a student of medicine, stealing a kidney would be a moot point because the ripper already had the one he removed from eddowes. Or am I still missing something?

Hi Abby

I'm not suggesting that a student would nick organs from the morgue. I'm suggesting that because it would be risky nicking from morgues a way of obtaining them would be from victims
If this 'student' (possible ripper) was interested in the medical field, maybe he wasn't working in any medical industry, hadn't been to an established school of medicine and maybe was trying to teach himself.

The more I write about the medical student/ripper theory the more it sounds like crap to me

[Abby Normal]

Hi Abby

I'm not suggesting that a student would nick organs from the morgue. I'm suggesting that because it would be risky nicking from morgues a way of obtaining them would be from victims
If this 'student' (possible ripper) was interested in the medical field, maybe he wasn't working in any medical industry, hadn't been to an established school of medicine and maybe was trying to teach himself.

The more I write about the medical student/ripper theory the more it sounds like crap to me

Ok got it now.
But I think it would be a tad more risky stealing organs from live victims than from dead ones don't you think? : )

Anyway your idea(which I finally got) is kind of like a variation of the Burke and hare theory, except that instead of harvesting organs to sell, a "student" is harvesting them to learn. Either way, in terms of motivation, I don't think so because why then all the extraneous cuts to the face, breasts etc. Medical student or not, I still Beleive the motivation was more along the lines of those of other serial killers, mainly a pleasure with killing and mutilating.

However, in general I don't think that a medical student ripper theory is too crappy. Police at the time were trying to track several down, I Beleive that the ripper must have had some medical/anatomical knowledge, and Beleive it or not there is a new poster here who is a Dr and has just recently written a book along these very same lines.

[Natasha]

Ok got it now.
But I think it would be a tad more risky stealing organs from live victims than from dead ones don't you think? : )

Anyway your idea(which I finally got) is kind of like a variation of the Burke and hare theory, except that instead of harvesting organs to sell, a "student" is harvesting them to learn. Either way, in terms of motivation, I don't think so because why then all the extraneous cuts to the face, breasts etc. Medical student or not, I still Beleive the motivation was more along the lines of those of other serial killers, mainly a pleasure with killing and mutilating.

However, in general I don't think that a medical student ripper theory is too crappy. Police at the time were trying to track several down, I Beleive that the ripper must have had some medical/anatomical knowledge, and Beleive it or not there is a new poster here who is a Dr and has just recently written a book along these very same lines.

Hi Abby

Yes, the Burke & hare thing has made me think about certain aspects of ripper case

I do think the ripper had medical knowledge to some extent.

The motivation behind the killings I agree with. It has occurred to me that the killer may have been on some kind of power trip. I was asking in another thread weather the killer had stabbed at the windpipe first and because Eddowes eyelids were cut, it occurred to me that the ripper may have prolonged the victims suffering. Could it be possible that the killer made sure the victims were partially alive whilst cutting open the victims?

[RockySullivan]

I agree with Abby that the ripper ate the kidney like he claimed. I assume it would be not well known at all that post-mortem mutilators are more likely to be cannibals than other serial killers....but the writer of the lusk letter if it was a hoax would be a lucky guess. Was there any talk of cannibalism in the press reports before the letter? Was the rumor on the street that the ripper was taking organs to eat them? Or did the letter spark this idea? I still think it's the most likely scenario for why the ripper took the organs...I do think he ate them.

[Abby Normal]

Hi Abby

Yes, the Burke & hare thing has made me think about certain aspects of ripper case

I do think the ripper had medical knowledge to some extent.

The motivation behind the killings I agree with. It has occurred to me that the killer may have been on some kind of power trip. I was asking in another thread weather the killer had stabbed at the windpipe first and because Eddowes eyelids were cut, it occurred to me that the ripper may have prolonged the victims suffering. Could it be possible that the killer made sure the victims were partially alive whilst cutting open the victims?

Hi Natasha
I doubt it. Everything we know suggest he killed the as quickly and silently as possible. He was a post mortem mutilator not a sadist/torturer.
Also, if he was torturing them, keeping them alive etc., it greatly increased the liklihood of them fighting back, screaming out etc., and as far as we know, no one ever heard a struggle. Schwartz did with stride and a man but I Beleive that was an out of the ordinary attack by the ripper who lost his cool with stride because she would not go with him into an alley, not an attempt to torture.

[Abby Normal]

I agree with Abby that the ripper ate the kidney like he claimed. I assume it would be not well known at all that post-mortem mutilators are more likely to be cannibals than other serial killers....but the writer of the lusk letter if it was a hoax would be a lucky guess. Was there any talk of cannibalism in the press reports before the letter? Was the rumor on the street that the ripper was taking organs to eat them? Or did the letter spark this idea? I still think it's the most likely scenario for why the ripper took the organs...I do think he ate them.

Hi rocky
Thanks. And those are great questions that I don't know.

Does any of our intrepid researchers know if there was anything in the press that the ripper was a cannibal prior to the from hell letter?

[Paddy]

Whitechapel Vigilance Committee.

Has anybody got a list of the names of the Vigilance Comittee?
I was just wondering what proportion were Jewish?
Was it ever discovered what spirit the kidney was preserved in?

Thanks
Pat

[Natasha]

Hi Natasha
I doubt it. Everything we know suggest he killed the as quickly and silently as possible. He was a post mortem mutilator not a sadist/torturer.
Also, if he was torturing them, keeping them alive etc., it greatly increased the liklihood of them fighting back, screaming out etc., and as far as we know, no one ever heard a struggle. Schwartz did with stride and a man but I Beleive that was an out of the ordinary attack by the ripper who lost his cool with stride because she would not go with him into an alley, not an attempt to torture.

Hi Abby

I only mentioned it coz Nicols was believed to have been still breathing and of course Eddowes eyelids being cut

Time would have been something the ripper would have been mindful of, but having said that he does seem like a brazen risk taker

[Hunter]

It would have been normal for a kidney already used for examination purposes to be split longitudinally as well as having been placed in spirits (ethanol.)

Hi hunter
Thanks! But wasn't it preserved in spirits of wine? And not the usual medical preservative?

Was it ever discovered what spirit the kidney was preserved in?
Thanks
Pat

Hi Abby, Pat,

This is another aspect of this case where there seems to be some misconception, in part because of this statement regarding the kidney in a November 6 HO report by Chief Inspector Swanson:

...it is the kidney of a human adult, not charged with fluid, as it would have been in the case of a body handed over for the purposes of dissection to an hospital, but rather as it would be in a case where it was taken from a body not so destined...

What Swanson was referring to was the practice of injecting whole cadavers with formalin to preserve them for anatomical examinations at medical schools and institutions - basically embalming the body to inhibit decomposition.

Formaldehyde ( a gas) was discovered just prior to the American Civil War by the Russian scientist, Alexander Butlerov. He noticed the distinct odor while attempting the synthesis of methylene glycol. Formalin is a mixture of formaldehyde, water and a little methanol (wood alcohol) to keep it from polymerizing. It was cheaper than "spirits of wine" but, as Prosector noted on another thread, had a strong odor. It also had the effect of firming up tissues so they could be more easily sliced for slide samples in laboratories.

"Spirits of wine," as it was called, is nothing more than ethanol, distilled from the fermented juice of fruits or grain. Its been around for centuries. We know it in its more palatable forms, such as brandy, vodka, whisky...etc. This is just the pure distilled product before it is diluted, enhanced with flavors or stored and aged in barrels for eventual consumption. And it didn't necessarily have to be distilled from actual wine. Any fermented juice or 'mash" would do. The end product was still ethyl alcohol, as opposed to methyl alcohol (wood alcohol), which is more volatile and poisonous.

Spirits of wine had been used to preserve organic specimens since at least the 1600's and was still used to preserve individual specimens in the 1880's. Darwin preserved his specimens in this. Hospitals and medical institutions had plenty and it could readily be purchased at pharmacies and liquor establishments - still can, except pharmaceutical grade ethanol has acetone added so it will make you sick if you decide to drink it.

In other words, nothing definitive can be determined as to who sent the kidney piece by the fact that it was immersed in plain old alcohol, except it didn't come out of a cadaver injected with formalin. The statement to the press by Dr. Brown suggesting that it was apparently put in the solution while fresh - before decomposition had started - and that it had been so immersed for about a week, says more than anything - at least to me - if Brown actually was able to determine this.

[Abby Normal]

Hi Abby, Pat,

This is another aspect of this case where there seems to be some misconception, in part because of this statement regarding the kidney in a November 6 HO report by Chief Inspector Swanson:

...it is the kidney of a human adult, not charged with fluid, as it would have been in the case of a body handed over for the purposes of dissection to an hospital, but rather as it would be in a case where it was taken from a body not so destined...

What Swanson was referring to was the practice of injecting whole cadavers with formalin to preserve them for anatomical examinations at medical schools and institutions - basically embalming the body to inhibit decomposition.

Formaldehyde ( a gas) was discovered just prior to the American Civil War by the Russian scientist, Alexander Butlerov. He noticed the distinct odor while attempting the synthesis of methylene glycol. Formalin is a mixture of formaldehyde, water and a little methanol (wood alcohol) to keep it from polymerizing. It was cheaper than "spirits of wine" but, as Prosector noted on another thread, had a strong odor. It also had the effect of firming up tissues so they could be more easily sliced for slide samples in laboratories.

"Spirits of wine," as it was called, is nothing more than ethanol, distilled from the fermented juice of fruits or grain. Its been around for centuries. We know it in its more palatable forms, such as brandy, vodka, whisky...etc. This is just the pure distilled product before it is diluted, enhanced with flavors or stored and aged in barrels for eventual consumption. And it didn't necessarily have to be distilled from actual wine. Any fermented juice or 'mash" would do. The end product was still ethyl alcohol, as opposed to methyl alcohol (wood alcohol), which is more volatile and poisonous.

Spirits of wine had been used to preserve organic specimens since at least the 1600's and was still used to preserve individual specimens in the 1880's. Darwin preserved his specimens in this. Hospitals and medical institutions had plenty and it could readily be purchased at pharmacies and liquor establishments - still can, except pharmaceutical grade ethanol has acetone added so it will make you sick if you decide to drink it.

In other words, nothing definitive can be determined as to who sent the kidney piece by the fact that it was immersed in plain old alcohol, except it didn't come out of a cadaver injected with formalin. The statement to the press by Dr. Brown suggesting that it was apparently put in the solution while fresh - before decomposition had started - and that it had been so immersed for about a week, says more than anything - at least to me - if Brown actually was able to determine this.

Thanks hunter!
Appreciate it. I did not know that sprits of wine was used by medical institutions at the time for preserving. I assumed the writer of the letter was implying he preserved it in plain old drinking alcohol of some form.

[moonbegger]

Does the fact " The Times ( sept 7th ) mentioned " Letters from Hell" lend weight to the possibility that the Author was a reader of the Times newspaper ?

cheers

moonbegger

[Tom_Wescott]

Does the fact " The Times ( sept 7th ) mentioned " Letters from Hell" lend weight to the possibility that the Author was a reader of the Times newspaper ?

cheers

moonbegger

I still have a copy of that book.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[RockySullivan]

What vigilance committe was LE grand connected to? Is there any connection between LE grand & lusk?

[Rosella]

Charles Le Grand acted conjointly with the Whitechapel Vigilance Committee and, with Batchelor, oversaw their nightly patrols. Lusk was the President and Chairman of the WVC, of course.