Mary Jane Violence

[packers stem]

You don't need a Haynes manual to strip down a car. Not if it's never going to drive again.

I would ....
wouldn't know where to begin
especially in darkness

[DJA]

I've seen this mentioned before, in different threads. However, I do not find this a convincing argument for surgical knowledge or skill. When you cut something which has different degrees of resistance, the knife will follow the path of least resistance. Meaning even rank amateurs would have cut around the umbilicus, as a matter of ease.

It is about sewing up,not cutting.

Never used a scalpel,have you!

[mpriestnall]

I've seen this mentioned before, in different threads. However, I do not find this a convincing argument for surgical knowledge or skill. When you cut something which has different degrees of resistance, the knife will follow the path of least resistance. Meaning even rank amateurs would have cut around the umbilicus, as a matter of ease.

If Jack cut around the umbilicus to the right consistently multiple times and not around to the left, the less chance the direction of the cut was incidental and therefore the stronger the argument for surgical knowledge or skill.

[Karl]

Hi Cogidubnus

This is an interesting point and I don't think anyone has ever commented on it before. When medical students, pathologists or surgeons open an abdomen using a midline incision they always skirt round the umbilicus to the right. Even if they are naturally left handed it is always to the right. The reason that the umbilicus is avoided is that it is a very tough and fibrous structure. When it comes to sewing up at the end of the operation or autopsy it is very difficult to stitch through the umbilical tissues. Of course Jack wasn't going to sew up afterwards but it seems to have been embedded somewhere in his psyche.

I remember once assisting a surgeon who decided to go round the umbilicus to the left just for the Hell of it. There was a shocked silence in the theatre and the scrub nurse nearly walked out. It is regarded as terribly bad form and bad luck to deviate round it to the left. As far as I know that holds true the world over. So where had he learned to do that?

Incidentally, as far as I know, butchers never bother, they go right down the midline since they are not going to be sewing up afterwards.

Prosector

(Dr Wynne Weston Davies,a senior surgeon).

I've seen this mentioned before, in different threads. However, I do not find this a convincing argument for surgical knowledge or skill. When you cut something which has different degrees of resistance, the knife will follow the path of least resistance. Meaning even rank amateurs would have cut around the umbilicus, as a matter of ease.

[Michael W Richards]

And in Chapmans case, removing the uterus and cutting the bladder open. Letīs remember that too, least we want to be called cherrypicking. Furthermore, the killer did not remove Eddowes uterus, he removed part of it: "The womb was cut through horizontally, leaving a stump of three quarters of an inch."

Before we make a call of superior skill and anatomical/surgical insights, it is important that we have the whole picture.

Since it was determined that the killer of Annie cut specifically in order to obtain the specific organ taken completely, (as per Phillips), the complete uterus was the goal..any part of the the bladder wasn't. There is no indication or opinion on the wounds of Kate that her killer specifically sought either the kidney or the partial uterus. Why these things are done are vastly more relevant than what was done. Anyone, anyone, can cut up or into flesh, cut out organs, slice up thighs, slash faces, cut noses,...all the wounds that are seen throughout the so-called "series". Why they do so is the only important question. How skillfully they accomplish their goals in another.

[Joshua Rogan]

I'm just stripping my engine down to change the clutch .It's dark but I can do it .... I read a Hayes manual once .

End of

You don't need a Haynes manual to strip down a car. Not if it's never going to drive again.

[packers stem]

Fish, however, DID. And I never said Sutcliffe acted on the waxworks, I said he was fascinated by them. And they DID show with exactitude where the organs were situated. And that was what my post was about - how we have an explanation at hand for how the victorians may have known the positions of the various organs inside the female body. Therefore, there never was any mystery about how the killer could have been aware of this. It is an invention, entirely. End of.

I'm just stripping my engine down to change the clutch .It's dark but I can do it .... I read a Hayes manual once .

End of

[Fisherman]

Fish, however, DID. And I never said Sutcliffe acted on the waxworks, I said he was fascinated by them. And they DID show with exactitude where the organs were situated. And that was what my post was about - how we have an explanation at hand for how the victorians may have known the positions of the various organs inside the female body. Therefore, there never was any mystery about how the killer could have been aware of this. It is an invention, entirely. End of.

[packers stem]

Just watched a you tube video on replacing the clutch on my car ..... off I go

I'm well aware of the waxworks ,they were facially extremely lifelike... very much as the pall mall Gazette reporter commented as the jury inspected the 'body' before the Kelly inquest.

though anatomically they couldn't replicate..... more jigsaw

Maybe Bowyer viewed one, he also discovered a dead body

Oh ,and Sutcliffe failed to put this incredible knowledge he'd gained into action ,wonder why ....

[Fisherman]

Every tom ,dick and harry apparently
I do sometimes wonder whether people are interested in investigating anything at all or just convincing others that the seemingly impossible was possible because the 'pet suspect' falls by the wayside otherwise

Please explain to me how "every Tom, Dick and Harry" who visited a display of an Anatomical Venus would NOT know afterwards where the kidneys were positioned inside the body! And once you are done explaining that, maybe you could also explain why any suspect would fall by the wayside on account of a perceived lack of anatomical insights on your behalf that is in total conflict with the existing reality.

After clearing that out of the way, we can hopefully get back to a rational discussion.

If tyou take a alook at this link:

https://www.researchgate.net/figure/..._fig3_50863459

... you will find an Anatomical Venus by the foremost wax sculptor of his time, Clemente Susini. And you will be able to see how the victorian visitors to the wax museums - including Tom, Dick and Harry - were shown how the kidneys were placed inside the body. These exhibitions were hugely popular and attracted hoards of visitors. In later years, we have names of people who have visited wax exhibitions and become very fascinated with them. Two such names are Albert Fish and Peter Sutcliffe.

If you want a little history alongside the exploits I recommend, the link:

https://www.theguardian.com/artandde...benstein-books

...is helpful.

[Fisherman]

But he did allegedly also remove the kidney, which is the hardest organ in the body to locate, and then apparently removed with some precision in almost total darkness in the time it would have taken a medical expert in female anatomy, absolutely amazing for 1888, I wonder how many would have possessed such knowledge, skill and expertise to have done that ?

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

If anything, it is NOT "absolutely amazing for 1888", Trevor. Becasue if we were to try and find an era when people in general would know where the kidneys were positioned inside the human body, it would be this exact period of time. As I have already pointed out, there were wax museums that put Anatomical Venuses on display, and where pedagogical shows were showing people the exact locatiopn of the organs inside the body. The repicated organs were pointed out, named and lifted out of the body, so that the spectators - mainly consisting of members of the working class - could learn where to look for them.

Once you know where they are, you can easily find them and cut them out, should you be so inclined.

To boot, we all know that it was alwyas regarded as odd that the kideny was taken out from the front, whereas it is usually removed from the back. But guess what? In the displays of Anatomical Venuses, the kidneys - and all other organs - were always taken out from the front.

So instead of saying "absolutely amazing for 1888", we should perhaps say "if it was likely to happen at any time, the late 1800:s would probably be that time".

[packers stem]

But he did allegedly also remove the kidney, which is the hardest organ in the body to locate, and then apparently removed with some precision in almost total darkness in the time it would have taken a medical expert in female anatomy, absolutely amazing for 1888, I wonder how many would have possessed such knowledge, skill and expertise to have done that ?

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

Every tom ,dick and harry apparently
I do sometimes wonder whether people are interested in investigating anything at all or just convincing others that the seemingly impossible was possible because the 'pet suspect' falls by the wayside otherwise

[Trevor Marriott]

And in Chapmans case, removing the uterus and cutting the bladder open. Letīs remember that too, least we want to be called cherrypicking. Furthermore, the killer did not remove Eddowes uterus, he removed part of it: "The womb was cut through horizontally, leaving a stump of three quarters of an inch."

Before we make a call of superior skill and anatomical/surgical insights, it is important that we have the whole picture.

But he did allegedly also remove the kidney, which is the hardest organ in the body to locate, and then apparently removed with some precision in almost total darkness in the time it would have taken a medical expert in female anatomy, absolutely amazing for 1888, I wonder how many would have possessed such knowledge, skill and expertise to have done that ?

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[JadenCollins]

oh god here we go again with the it wasn't mary Kelly nonsense.

Well, maybe it wasn’t really her.

[packers stem]

Why, as Prosector observed, would a murder worry about being able to sew up the stomach? If this "navel-wiggle" was ingrained in the killer's nature, why didn't he employ it in the other evisceration murders? Was it a true circumvention of the navel, or a byproduct of joining together two cuts that weren't particluarly well-aligned?

When I google "incision around the navel", by far the greatest number of hits are about umbilical hernia repair and tummy-tucks. When did this procedure become standard, whether as a surgical procedure or for autopsies?

Instinct