Poll: Organs/body parts removed or not?

[El White Chap]

How about a great big "Told you so" should the poll result in your favour? It's a pointless poll. You would have been better served if you had merely asked the question regarding organ removal.

I disagree here, it's not about my favour. It's about the words of the doctors/coroners at the time being not only questioned but discarded in such a nonsensical manner.

Looking at your exchanges with Mr Marriot on the subject, I'd say it was a vendetta, and before anyone cites the kettle and pot idiom with regard to my good self, I can only hold my hands up. Yes I'm as vindictive as you are when it comes to posting in this forum, and it's took your recent exchanges with Mr Marriot to make me realise how futile it is. No more for me though No way Hose! I think. We'll see.

It's no vendetta, that's way too strong a word. We might have had heated discussions/disagreements on certain topics but isn't that why we're all here?

By the way do you really think I could influence other posters not to vote in a poll here in Casebook Land?

&

...I'd urge other poster's not to vote either.

No sure and not really interested tbh, but by saying the above you are clearly making some kind of effort to influence others. Naturally, it's completely your call to do so.

[El White Chap]

I still see you can't answer my question from yesterday but look now for moral support to back up your moronic ramblings

I've been gracious enough to discuss your question but you still haven't been so kind to answer my question Trev.

Where is there ANY evidence that no organs/body parts were removed from either Annie, Kate or Mary?

We're all waiting for your 'evidence', try not to be all day about it...

[Observer]

double post

[Observer]

I disagree here, it's not about my favour. It's about the words of the doctors/coroners at the time being not only questioned but discarded in such a nonsensical manner.

It's no vendetta, that's way too strong a word. We might have had heated discussions/disagreements on certain topics but isn't that why we're all here?

Come on, you know as well as I that virtually every poster contributing to this Forum believe that the organs were removed and taken away by the murderer. The poll is about you proving a single poster, Mr Marriot, wrong. It's far too one-sided, pointless in fact.

[Trevor Marriott]

I've been gracious enough to discuss your question but you still haven't been so kind to answer my question Trev.

Where is there ANY evidence that no organs/body parts were removed from either Annie, Kate or Mary?

We're all waiting for your 'evidence', try not to be all day about it...

I think you need to take a step back. I do not dispute that organs were removed from the victims

My take on this is as it has always been that the killer did not and could not have removed the organs from the victims at the crime scene for the reasons given. You dispute this which you are entitled to do.

However my question to you was to ask you to explain as far as Eddowes is concerned how he managed to accomplish all of that in such a short time given all the problems he would have encountered which you clearly believe he did.

So please explain and stop keep quoting the doctors because none of them were able to say that the organs were removed by the killer. They simply found the organs missing at post mortem stage some 12 hours later and an inference drawn which many in later years have sought to heavily rely on

[lynn cates]

language

Hello Gareth. Thanks.

Logically impeccable but connotatively suspect?

Cheers.
LC

[Trevor Marriott]

Come on, you know as well as I that virtually every poster contributing to this Forum believe that the organs were removed and taken away by the murderer. The poll is about you proving a single poster, Mr Marriot, wrong. It's far too one-sided, pointless in fact.

Why does everyone believe that simply because so many on here and the other site have immersed themselves in this mystery for so many years that they have become blinkered and oblivious to anything else out side the box.

And not everyone believes that I can tell you

[lynn cates]

vote

Hello Trevor. Your first paragraph was my basic prompt to ask about phrasing. Given your views, i assumed that, on a certain reading, you would vote "yes" as well.

Cheers.
LC

[El White Chap]

Come on, you know as well as I that virtually every poster contributing to this Forum believe that the organs were removed and taken away by the murderer. The poll is about you proving a single poster, Mr Marriot, wrong. It's far too one-sided, pointless in fact.

Don't assume, it makes an ass out of u and me.

Once again and regardless of your beliefs about my motivation, this poll is about gauging the opinions of posters here on this topic of removal and trophies. You've stated you don't approve and why, fine.

Ask yourself this though, is this poll really so pointless if there are indeed individuals who subscribe to the wild theory that the organs weren't taken despite the records we have?

Actually, I think it's very relevant.

[El White Chap]

I think you need to take a step back. I do not dispute that organs were removed from the victims

With all due respect, I don't think it's me that needs to "take a step back" Trev.

My take on this is as it has always been that the killer did not and could not have removed the organs from the victims at the crime scene for the reasons given. You dispute this which you are entitled to do.

Your take is more than clear and your theories more than rightfully scrutinised.

However my question to you was to ask you to explain as far as Eddowes is concerned how he managed to accomplish all of that in such a short time given all the problems he would have encountered which you clearly believe he did.

Seems pretty straightforward really. Working with haste, a sharp knife and an Modus operandi in the darkness of Mitre square.

So please explain and stop keep quoting the doctors because none of them were able to say that the organs were removed by the killer. They simply found the organs missing at post mortem stage some 12 hours later and an inference drawn which many in later years have sought to heavily rely on

Now you're suggesting that the organs went "missing" following the time window between transport of the bodies from crime scene to post mortem.

Conspiracy theories with no factual evidence to be based upon?

[Trevor Marriott]

With all due respect, I don't think it's me that needs to "take a step back" Trev.



Your take is more than clear and your theories more than rightfully scrutinised.



Seems pretty straightforward really. Working with haste, a sharp knife and an Modus operandi in the darkness of Mitre square.



Now you're suggesting that the organs went "missing" following the time window between transport of the bodies from crime scene to post mortem.

Conspiracy theories with no factual evidence to be based upon?

If you are going to criticize and ridicule at least get the facts right to which you are questioning

[El White Chap]

If you are going to criticize and ridicule at least get the facts right to which you are questioning

Care to point out which "facts" you're referring to?

[El White Chap]

When faced with the definitive facts these theories just don't stand up

[moonbegger]

Hello all , I think that everyone agrees , including Trevor , that organs were removed from at least four of the C5 .. But the question Trevor puts forward is , was the missing organs removed at the mortuary prior to PM ? which may have actually been a less confusing poll question .

Yes .. organs were taken from at least 4/5

No .. I don't think organs were removed for resale purposes by morticians at the mortuary ( But they could have been , I don't see it as an impossibility )

My problem with that , is the ramifications and retributions that would be handed down to a poorly paid mortuary assistant , if he got caught , especially in the light of such a high profile case .. but I am open to persuasion !

cheers , moonbegger

[Observer]

Why does everyone believe that simply because so many on here and the other site have immersed themselves in this mystery for so many years that they have become blinkered and oblivious to anything else out side the box.

And not everyone believes that I can tell you

I'm sure you are not alone in your belief that someone other than the killer removed and took away the organs Mr Marriot. As I said the vast majority of members of this forum believe the reverse, which is why I pointed out it's a pointless exercise to conduct a poll. I personally believe there is enough evidence (when we consider other serial mutilators) for the Whitechapel murderer to have been a trophy taker, and that he took those organs for self gratification.

Regards

Observer