Skill or no Skill, that is the question

[Doctored Whatsit]

In 1891, the widow Maria Forsdike was working as a horse flesh dealer, not a knacker. Horse flesh dealers received boiled meat from the knackers, already separated from bones and organs. They then cut up the meat (likely with some fat a gristle), placed the meat on wooden skewers, and sold it.

This required less anatomical skill than carving up a holiday turkey.

Agreed. She was never a horse slaughterer, and I may be wrong, but I don't think there is good evidence that she was even involved in dealing horse flesh in 1888.

[Fiver]

I personally believe it to be quite a coincidence that Nichols was slain only yards away from a Horse Slaughterer, when the main witness who was found in close proximity to the body; Charles Lechmere, had a personal connection to the trade...his mother was a Horse Slaughterer by trade, or more specifically a Horse Flesh Dealer. What's even more odd is that the Pinchin Street torso discovered under the railway arch in September 1889 was only yards away from where she lived.

In 1891, the widow Maria Forsdike was working as a horse flesh dealer, not a knacker. Horse flesh dealers received boiled meat from the knackers, already separated from bones and organs. They then cut up the meat (likely with some fat a gristle), placed the meat on wooden skewers, and sold it.

This required less anatomical skill than carving up a holiday turkey.

[Fiver]

It's not just the skill factor the killer would have to have possessed in removing the organs, he would have to have had sufficient medical knowledge to know how to locate the organs within the abdomen.

The assumption that killer was looking for specific organs is part of the assessments made by the doctors. Arguing against those assessments are organs that were stabbed or cut in two, instead of neatly removed.

[Trevor Marriott]

Here are the opinions of the medical types.

Dr Llewellyn - “some rough anatomical knowledge”

Coroner Baxter - "considerable anatomical skill and knowledge”

Dr Phillips - "seemed to indicate great anatomical knowledge.”

Dr Sequeira - "not possessed of any great anatomical skill"

Dr Brown - “a great deal of knowledge”

Dr Saunders did not think the killer showed anatomical skill.

Dr Bond - "no scientific nor anatomical knowledge" IIRC, Thomas Bond read the reports in the victims, he did not examine the bodies.

So the assessments of skill are:
None - Bond, Saunders
Some - Lllewellyn, Sequeira
A lot - Baxter, Brown, Phillips

So who knows?

It's not just the skill factor the killer would have to have possessed in removing the organs, he would have to have had sufficient medical knowledge to know how to locate the organs within the abdomen.

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Fiver]

Here are the opinions of the medical types.

Dr Llewellyn - “some rough anatomical knowledge”

Coroner Baxter - "considerable anatomical skill and knowledge”

Dr Phillips - "seemed to indicate great anatomical knowledge.”

Dr Sequeira - "not possessed of any great anatomical skill"

Dr Brown - “a great deal of knowledge”

Dr Saunders did not think the killer showed anatomical skill.

Dr Bond - "no scientific nor anatomical knowledge" IIRC, Thomas Bond read the reports in the victims, he did not examine the bodies.

So the assessments of skill are:
None - Bond, Saunders
Some - Lllewellyn, Sequeira
A lot - Baxter, Brown, Phillips

So who knows?

[The Rookie Detective]

And the connection between slaughtered horses and Mary Nichols, is what, if you don't mind me asking?

In other words, it's not necessarily Nichols that has a connection to the place she was murdered, especially if we assume it's somewhere the killer would need to have felt relatively safe to commit the crime.

It could be said that's the reason why MJK stands out; because we have to look from her perspective seeing as it was her dwelling place.

[The Rookie Detective]

And the connection between slaughtered horses and Mary Nichols, is what, if you don't mind me asking?

Ah, that's my point exactly...

To really look at this from another angle, I am trying to ascertain the connection that a key witness and potential suspect has in relation to the murder location because he's the one taking the risk...

If we try not to look from the victim's perspective for once and build the picture from another angle, it will shed more light on the picture.

If we take the same approach with other individual witnesses or suspects that we know had a physical connection with at least one of the victims, then that would also help build the picture.

For example, we know that Barnett, McCarthy, Bowyer, Lechmere, Paul, Hutchinson etc... are confirmed as either being witnesses or to have known one of the victims, then that will help build the case.

We need to put others like Sickhart, Ostrog, Kosminski etc...to the back of the list, although unpopular to do so, we have to start with the witnesses or suspects that we know had some link to the murders.

[Wickerman]

And the connection between slaughtered horses and Mary Nichols, is what, if you don't mind me asking?

[The Rookie Detective]

Hello, Rookie Detective.

Don't mind them.

I think you have an excellent point. And I hadn't thought about Nichols being killed by the slaughter yard before!

Some medical experts of the era said the murderer had medical skill, while others thought a butcher could easily remove the organs. What was the truth?

Thank you for your viewpoint and I appreciate that you didn't dismiss my query.

I personally believe it to be quite a coincidence that Nichols was slain only yards away from a Horse Slaughterer, when the main witness who was found in close proximity to the body; Charles Lechmere, had a personal connection to the trade...his mother was a Horse Slaughterer by trade, or more specifically a Horse Flesh Dealer. What's even more odd is that the Pinchin Street torso discovered under the railway arch in September 1889 was only yards away from where she lived.

Now I'm by no means implying that Lechmere was JTR, merely that it's a coincidence that he found Nichols just yards from a place that slaughtered horses for human consumption and his own mother was in the trade, which may have been an interestingly lucrative trade if one were to slaughter prostitutes instead of horses.

Just a random hypothesis and not in any way a theory.

[Scott Nelson]

Human anatomical knowledge -- yes, but very limited.

Skill using knife -- wasn't afraid to make cuts and remove what he found.

[Pcdunn]

Hello, Rookie Detective.

Don't mind them.

I think you have an excellent point. And I hadn't thought about Nichols being killed by the slaughter yard before!

Some medical experts of the era said the murderer had medical skill, while others thought a butcher could easily remove the organs. What was the truth?

I think the experts were hobbled by their preconceptions (a thing most Victorians of that age were) about class and human nature.

An educated man wouldn't do such a barbaric thing, they thought, so they decided to blame an immigrant, a working-class thug, a seaman, a horse slaughtered or butcher.

The frustrating thing is we need to rely on the opinions of the medicos, and they do not always agree.

[DJA]

[NotBlamedForNothing]

There isn't one on Henry Gawen Sutton ...... yet!

Although, it is on its way!...

[DJA]

There isn't one on Henry Gawen Sutton ...... yet!

[Scott Nelson]

Thoughts, theories and onslaught please?

Again, look at some of the archived threads on this subject. They're numerous.