Same motive = same killer

[Sam Flynn]

Sam Flynn: But did he examine any of the bodies personally? The answer seems to be a straightforward "no".

... and, as I predicted, there we are! It "seems" to be a no, but we can´t be sure, can we?

Oh, come on! We know who were directly involved in the examination of the Ripper victims (canonical and otherwise), and we know the names of the medics involved in the torso murders, but Tait doesn't turn up once - indeed, today is the first I'd ever heard of him. It seems that Tait was an interested amateur who followed the case, as did many others. A qualified amateur, certainly, but not qualified in the sense that he had hands-on experience of examining ANY of the victims' wounds, never mind all of them.

[Joshua Rogan]

When was this, Joshua? After the Eddowes murder?

That's right, Christer, brought up at the inquest. This is from the Daily News 5th Oct;
"Dr. Brown added that for the purpose of practically testing the time required for what had been done to this unfortunate woman, an expert practitioner had actually performed the operation, and found that it took three minutes and a half."

[Trevor Marriott]

[B]He also believed it was a woman who dunnit,

This just proves how it is unsafe to rely on the opinions of Victorian doctors. How on earth anyone expert or otherwise can suggest that the gender of the dismember can be determined by the cuts

Of course if you believe him, then you shouldn't discount that the victim/s died as a result of a back street failed medical procedure performed by a woman, and the need to then hide the identity of that victim, and what had happened by dismembering the body and disposing of the parts at different times and at different locations

You should stick with reality, and not rely on fantasy

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Trevor Marriott]

That's right, Christer, brought up at the inquest. This is from the Daily News 5th Oct;
"Dr. Brown added that for the purpose of practically testing the time required for what had been done to this unfortunate woman, an expert practitioner had actually performed the operation, and found that it took three minutes and a half."

and how long on top of that would it have taken to remove the left kidney another 3 minutes ?

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Joshua Rogan]

and how long on top of that would it have taken to remove the left kidney another 3 minutes ?

Dr Brown again " I should think the whole thing could have been done in five minutes."

[Sam Flynn]

We know who were directly involved in the examination of the Ripper victims (canonical and otherwise), and we know the names of the medics involved in the torso murders, but Tait doesn't turn up once

Further to this, it seems that Tait was employed at the Women's Hospital founded by Arthur Chamberlain in Sparkhill, Birmingham, until 1893. So it's certain that he never got to examine all the victims of the WM/torso series, and almost certain that he never saw one of them personally. It's also highly unlikely, therefore, that Gordon Brown consulted him about the removal of wombs; a move which would have been unnecessary in any case, given the high number of world-leading teaching hospitals, and experts, that were available to him in London.

[Fisherman]

Oh, come on! We know who were directly involved in the examination of the Ripper victims (canonical and otherwise), and we know the names of the medics involved in the torso murders, but Tait doesn't turn up once - indeed, today is the first I'd ever heard of him. It seems that Tait was an interested amateur who followed the case, as did many others. A qualified amateur, certainly, but not qualified in the sense that he had hands-on experience of examining ANY of the victims' wounds, never mind all of them.

Gareth, you are not the person who should say "Oh, come on!". I am.

I have no problems saying that I do not believe that Lawson Tait was present at any of the examinations. But then again I know that it is NOT a clear matter who were in every instance. And so it cannot be a closed deal, I´m afraid.

[Fisherman]

That's right, Christer, brought up at the inquest. This is from the Daily News 5th Oct;
"Dr. Brown added that for the purpose of practically testing the time required for what had been done to this unfortunate woman, an expert practitioner had actually performed the operation, and found that it took three minutes and a half."

Thanks for that, Joshua. It could well be that it was Tait.

[Fisherman]

Trevor Marriott: This just proves how it is unsafe to rely on the opinions of Victorian doctors. How on earth anyone expert or otherwise can suggest that the gender of the dismember can be determined by the cuts

The suggestion Tait made was not based in any way on his medical experience, Trevor.

[Fisherman]

Further to this, it seems that Tait was employed at the Women's Hospital founded by Arthur Chamberlain in Sparkhill, Birmingham, until 1893. So it's certain that he never got to examine all the victims of the WM/torso series, and almost certain that he never saw one of them personally. It's also highly unlikely, therefore, that Gordon Brown consulted him about the removal of wombs; a move which would have been unnecessary in any case, given the high number of world-leading teaching hospitals, and experts, that were available to him in London.

"Almost certain."

"Highly unlikely."

Have you ever heard of people travelling? Or was Tait chained to the wall in Birmingham? Could it be that he out of interest for the case saw to it that he got involved to some extent?

As for how Brown consulted an "expert practitioner", I fail to see that Brown must have knocked on that practitioners door. There were telephones and telegrams, you know. And Tait was THE foremost expert.

That´s how highly unlikely it was that he was consulted. If you wish, we can go on about it all day long and we will not get the answer anyway. I suggest that we settle for a verdict of how it is possible that Tait was the expert, but one of many possibilities only. How´s that? Or shall we go on?

[Sam Flynn]

The suggestion Tait made was not based in any way on his medical experience, Trevor.

But it does indicate that he was merely speculating, as is his assertion that the killer was "a lunatic" and that the crimes were "motiveless". I'd suggest that his belief that London butchers' techniques would have been distinct from those of Scottish or Irish butchers is utterly fanciful as well.

So, whilst interesting, and a novelty to me, Tait's observations in the Ogden Standard Examiner - a provincial Utah newspaper, apparently - are little more than a curiosity. They are certainly nowhere near definitive or authoritative in terms of giving us any objective insights into the specific nature or consistency of the inflicted wounds, the skills of those who inflicted them, nor how many killers were involved.

[Sam Flynn]

Dr Brown again " I should think the whole thing could have been done in five minutes."

Borne out by the respected modern-day forensic pathologist, Dr Iain West, who said of the Eddowes murder that it could have taken around four minutes.

[Fisherman]

Sam Flynn: But it does indicate that he was merely speculating, as is his assertion that the killer was "a lunatic" and that the crimes were "motiveless". I'd suggest that his belief that London butchers' techniques would have been distinct from those of Scottish or Irish butchers is utterly fanciful as well.

Of course he was speculating about the killer perhaps being a woman- he never made any secret of that! As for the killer being a lunatic, I have already said that in a sense, anybody who does that the Ripper did must be mad, albeit not necessarily visibly so.
There are many occupations where things are done differently depending on where you come from. You have no idea whatsoever if it was "utterly fancyfull" in this case. Serious medicos are normally not utterly fancyfull at all. People who speculate that a torso having it´s arms intact will be due to how the dismemberer may not have the knowledge required to do so, while all the time we know that the legs of that same torso have been neatly disarticulated, are what I refer to as fancyfull people. Not normally responsible medicos.

So, whilst interesting, and a novelty to me, Tait's observations in the Ogden Standard Examiner - a provincial Utah newspaper, apparently - are little more than a curiosity. They are certainly nowhere near definitive or authoritative in terms of giving us any objective insights into the specific nature or consistency of the inflicted wounds, nor of the skills of those who inflicted them.

Hey, maybe the paper was lying? How else could they have an article with Tait commenting when he worked in Birmingham?

Definitive? No. Did I say it was?

Authoritative? Tait WAS an authority on matters surgical, I´m afraid.

Lawson Taits view belongs to the overall picture. It must be weighed in. The specific weigh can be argued over (and is already), but it belongs nevertheless.

[Fisherman]

Borne out by the respected modern-day forensic pathologist, Dr Iain West, who said of the Eddowes murder that it could have taken around four minutes.

Was he there? Did he see the victims and the exact work of the knife?

What goes around comes around. Of course there are differences, but we need to be a bit fair at times.

[Sam Flynn]

If he didn't actually examine the wounds, I don't give a damn HOW qualified he was.