Same motive = same killer

[Sam Flynn]

I know that the article Debs just posted doesn't refer to Tait, but it reminds me of one thing I'd previously noticed: Why do the reports of Tait's musings mostly - solely? - appear in provincial and/or American newspapers?

[Debra A]

I know that the article Debs just posted doesn't refer to Tait, but it reminds me of one thing I'd previously noticed: Why do the reports of Tait's musings mostly - solely? - appear in provincial and/or American newspapers?

I don't think they do, Gareth. Lawson's interview, circulated by the Central News Agency, was conducted by a Pall Mall Gazette reporter.

Are we certain Tait is linking all the Whitechapel murders with Battersea and Chelsea, or just the Pinchin Street(classed as Whitechapel), Battersea and Chelsea torso cases?

This seems to be some sort of answer to a suggestion in the US press mainly, that a London surgeon was responsible for the murders (torsos?) and his work had been recognised.

Wasn't Forbes Winslow also accusing a surgeon around Sept 1889? {perhaps he is also in and amongst this somewhere?

[Abby Normal]

I don't think they do, Gareth. Lawson's interview, circulated by the Central News Agency, was conducted by a Pall Mall Gazette reporter.

Are we certain Tait is linking all the Whitechapel murders with Battersea and Chelsea, or just the Pinchin Street(classed as Whitechapel), Battersea and Chelsea torso cases?

This seems to be some sort of answer to a suggestion in the US press mainly, that a London surgeon was responsible for the murders (torsos?) and his work had been recognised.

Wasn't Forbes Winslow also accusing a surgeon around Sept 1889? {perhaps he is also in and amongst this somewhere?

Hi again Sam and Debs
Interesting stuff.

But Tait didn't live in London did he?

[Debra A]

Thanks for posting!!
Was Lawson Tait the Torsoripper!?! ; )

I found the reference I was thinking of earlier in connection with Tait and the Ripper. It was some correspondence in defence of a particular treatment or surgery (gynaecological) and a Dr Sutton writing in a medical journal that the only people who didn't approve of this new type of treatment was Lawson Tait and Jack the Ripper. I'm guessing the discussion was over a new treatment versus old style removal of the uterus..

Anyway. I still think Tait was disputing the Sept 89 rumours that the torso killer was a skilled London surgeon, either with tongue in cheek or brazenly bull$hitting.
I have mentioned before that I wondered if Hebbert wrote about the skills of a a butcher, slaughterer or hunter was because he was deliberately pointing things away from his own profession. Not because he saw anything showing a skill at surgery, but just to direct away from anyone who might claim that.

[Debra A]

Hi again Sam and Debs
Interesting stuff.

But Tait didn't live in London did he?

I'm not with you, Abby.

[Sam Flynn]

But Tait didn't live in London did he?

Perhaps Tait was on a visit to London, or maybe the Pall Mall Gazette reporter met him in Birmingham? As a noted women's surgeon, they might have actively sought his opinion.

[Abby Normal]

I'm not with you, Abby.

The article says "well known London surgeon". If Tait didn't live in London, then its probably not him correct?

or have I got things messed up?

[Sam Flynn]

I have mentioned before that I wondered if Hebbert wrote about the skills of a a butcher, slaughterer or hunter was because he was deliberately pointing things away from his own profession.

I've had the same thought. Hebbert and Tait wouldn't have been the first to do so, either. Not that they'd have been wrong in denying a surgeon's involvement, but there might be a hint of wounded professional pride behind their statements.

[Sam Flynn]

The article says "well known London surgeon". If Tait didn't live in London, then its probably not him correct?

or have I got things messed up?

I think the newspaper messed it up.

[Debra A]

The article says "well known London surgeon". If Tait didn't live in London, then its probably not him correct?

or have I got things messed up?

I'm not suggesting they were seriously talking about Tait, Abbey Otherwise, hopefully he would have been carted off and certified! If Lawson had a bit of a reputation gynaecology-wise for ripping women open and cutting out their lady bits, as alluded to in the comparison of him to the ripper in that respect, that I mentioned earlier, then the US piece may have been someone aiming a shot at him or gynaecology practices and abdominal surgery on women in general. Or it was someone like Winslow spouting off again and Tait didn't like his profession brought in to the mix and was defending himself and colleagues in a general way.

[Joshua Rogan]

Wasn't Forbes Winslow also accusing a surgeon around Sept 1889? {perhaps he is also in and amongst this somewhere?

I'm not sure Forbes Winslow said he was a surgeon (though he was thought to have been a medical stident), but after the Pinchin St torso was found he did apparently give an interview saying he definitely knew who Jack was and was making plans to aprehend him. In subsequent interviews he backpedalled somewhat and said that it was only a theory. Perhaps if Tait was interviewed again he would have similarly backtracked?

[Debra A]

I think the newspaper messed it up.

Sam and Abby-Just to clarify. The US newspaper accounts of Sept 17th thereabouts, reporting on the Pinchin Street torso mention that the work of an eminent 'London surgeon' had been recognised in the murders. No source for the comment is given but it is given in connection with Pinchin Street and that surgeon isn't named for obvious reasons.

I am suggesting that Lawson Tait came back with the 'London butcher' theory as a rebuttal to the anonymous London surgeon story. Either as a joke or just because he could and the papers would listen, or to defend his profession or maybe the rumour about the London surgeon was true and he was part of the conspiracy to keep it quiet (that one's a joke!)
Whatever, those two stories coming out on the same date and referring to the recognised style of a London Butcher and the recognised style of a London surgeon just have to be connected in some way in terms of the motive for the stories surfacing?

...unless the US press totally got the wrong end of teh stick and wrote 'eminent London surgeon instead of a London butcher...nah, that doesn't seem to work.

[Abby Normal]

I'm not suggesting they were seriously talking about Tait, Abbey Otherwise, hopefully he would have been carted off and certified! If Lawson had a bit of a reputation gynaecology-wise for ripping women open and cutting out their lady bits, as alluded to in the comparison of him to the ripper in that respect, that I mentioned earlier, then the US piece may have been someone aiming a shot at him or gynaecology practices and abdominal surgery on women in general. Or it was someone like Winslow spouting off again and Tait didn't like his profession brought in to the mix and was defending himself and colleagues in a general way.

OK thanks-got it. Thanks for explaining.

I thought you and or the article was saying that this well respected London surgeon whos work resembled the ripper was referring to Tait.

but yes I agree In general, and ive said this many times before...I can see doctors wanting to distance there profession from the ripper so they downplay his surgical skill.

ironically though in the article you posted its a doctor accusing another doctor, "the well known London surgeon" of doing similar work!

[Debra A]

I'm not sure Forbes Winslow said he was a surgeon (though he was thought to have been a medical stident), but after the Pinchin St torso was found he did apparently give an interview saying he definitely knew who Jack was and was making plans to aprehend him. In subsequent interviews he backpedalled somewhat and said that it was only a theory. Perhaps if Tait was interviewed again he would have similarly backtracked?

Thanks JR. I have a feeling he may be on the sidelines somewhere in this story. He's never far away is he?!

[Debra A]

ironically though in the article you posted its a doctor accusing another doctor, "the well known London surgeon" of doing similar work!

Well, it's supposed to be a several people who have noticed the match but one doctor reporting it, so yes, that's true, if the story is true of course. Although there was no official source. Defending your profession against baseless accusations is different to covering for someone who you know was a murderer.