Ripper Facts

[Busy Beaver]

I am now wondering if the murderer did have some sort of medical and or anatomical knowledge ie knew the basics and used the ripping technique to make out he didn't know what he was doing, to throw everyone off.

The only way to comprehend what the Ripper did is to get a shop mannequin and try it out. Plastic may not get a good result- do they make latex ones?

[Trevor Marriott]

What would a top quality surgeon of today have to say about the way the Ripper worked? surly there is someone who can provide a non-biased opinion based on what the doctors of 1888 wrote.

It matters not if the suggestion is that the killer in Mitre Square was a skilled surgeon, butcher, baker, or candlestick maker. It is the time factor that is important did the killer have enough time to do all that he is purported to have done, by that we mean to walk into the square, kill. mutilate, remove organs, rifle her pockets, and cut a piece from her apron. Could all this have been done in less than 5 minutes?

Clearly Dr Brown had concerns that's why he asked his expert to carry out a test, and it took him 3 minutes just to remove the uterus, and with that he also managed to damage the bladder, something which was not seen in the post mortem of Eddowes. Add onto that the time to remove a kidney which is even more difficult to remove and to carry out all the rest and that would take more than 5 minutes.

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Batman]

What would a top quality surgeon of today have to say about the way the Ripper worked? surly there is someone who can provide a non-biased opinion based on what the doctors of 1888 wrote.

There is. An editor of a ripper magazine is a surgeon and he appeared in a documentary. He says there are two things that could suggest medical knowledge. The first is that Eddowes kidney was severed at the renal artery and the second is that Mary Kelly's heart was detached by severing through the upper ribs and then pulled out from under her ribcage. He would expect someone without medical knowledge to try and do it all from under the ribs and not through them.

Critics say the kidneys were also sliced in unusual places and other organs also and with Kelly, he was experimenting.

[Busy Beaver]

What would a top quality surgeon of today have to say about the way the Ripper worked? surly there is someone who can provide a non-biased opinion based on what the doctors of 1888 wrote.

[Sam Flynn]

Sam

I would disagree a surgeon has to first learn from a text book

Nothing to disagree about, Trevor. I'm not saying that the killer himself couldn't have learned from a text book, not that I see it as essential.

[Trevor Marriott]

Medical knowledge and surgical skill/experience are different things.

Sam

I would disagree a surgeon has to first learn from a text book, and then continues his learning with ongoing practical experience which, in the early stages is still part of the learning process before, he becomes independent of the learning process.

Anyone can read a medical book, but to then be able to perform removals of organs without making a pigs ear of matters is a different kettle of fish. Especially in almost total darkness. But of course the killer didn't do that in any event did he?

[packers stem]

I appreciate that few theorists accept the killer had any medical knowledge. In many cases those same theorists had already formed a theory about the case before they were aware of the medical arguments. So, they choose to ignore them.

Quite Jon
People come into it with prevonvieved ideas .
Rather than adapting their beliefs to the facts they will take on board only what they wish in order to promote their candidate ...... and that includes any random , local miscreant who's extremely unlikely to be skilled surgically .
The experienced surgeons we should be taking note of are Phillips and Brown .
Both pointed out the skill , inadvertently in Browns case , where he tells us that the membrane had been cut (not ripped or pulled ) and the kidney "carefully removed" ..... this was no 'slash and grab"

Opponents point to Brown's words at the end saying a butcher could have done as much yet I would argue that neither doctor would want to be the one who would say definitely that the cuts were made by someone skilled for two reasons .

1 Professional pride
2 Not wanting the responsibility for leading the hunt for the killer in one direction .Clearly had Brown said it was the work of a surgeon then the press would have been full of it and the entire investigation would have followed down that route .

I would also argue that Brown had no experience of a butcher's knowledge or how one would remove a kidney so was in no position to make the comparison

[Sam Flynn]

Medical knowledge and surgical skill/experience are different things.

[Wickerman]

I appreciate that few theorists accept the killer had any medical knowledge. In many cases those same theorists had already formed a theory about the case before they were aware of the medical arguments. So, they choose to ignore them.

[Batman]

I now do not think JtR had much of a clue about the human body.

https://forum.casebook.org/showthread.php?t=10998

I doubt Nichols was his first based on what we know about these kinds of lust murderers.

So I include Tabram and probably Smith. I think he learned by experimenting.

JtR stabbed Smith in the vagina and was very bloody.

JtR stabbed Tabram all over first and she died from blood loss. He only made one stab at her private parts after she had bled out.

JtR nearly severed Nichols neck and exsanguinated her. He made a few punctures, followed by three to four deeper incisions on her lower abdomen and then he made a jagged cut deeply into her womb. I think he was testing to see how much blood would come out after exsanguination. He didn't remove anything but knew now that he could.

JtR exsanguinated Chapman with a slice to the neck and then disemboweled her and was able to take away internal organs without much blood on him from his experiment with Nichols.

JtR while waiting for Eddowes to exsanguinate from her severed neck, knifed up her face and then proceeded to harvest organs like Chapman when she was bled dry. He knew how long it would take and had time to attack her face, waiting.

JtR repeated the process with Kelly and this time had a bed to absorb lots of blood.

In this model, JtR has no medical awareness, is learning by himself and escalating as he does.

[Craig H]

Hi Jon
A good summary of Prosector's case.
I don't have medical expertise, but his - and your - arguments that JtR had some surgical expertise and experience was compelling.
I think the later comments by the medical experts that suggest the lack of medical expertise may have been to protect their profession. The earlier talk seemed to strongly centre on it must have been someone one medical.
Rgds

Craig

In an earlier discussion I suggested there had been indications of medical knowledge by the killer.
I base this view on some specifics provided by Prosector (Weston-Davies?), summarized below.

[Wickerman]

...
Pretty clear that Phillips felt it was the work of an expert .
...

Yes, various press reports offer the same conclusions, that Phillips recognised the work of a practiced hand, only less obvious "in consequence of haste".
There was an identifiable reluctance among the medical community following the Chapman case to acknowledge a degree of experience in these murders (I think "expert" is over doing it).

[Wickerman]

Not according to reports of Phillips' testimony in the papers, which show that at least three flaps of flesh were cut from Chapman's abdomen, primarily on the right hand side. There was no single, longitudinal cut in Chapman's case.

When Phillips describes what was removed, he is describing something that happened after a 'first cut'.
Phillips does not provide the same detail as Dr Brown did at the Eddowes inquest.
What was the nature of the cut which preceded the removal of portions of the abdomen?

[packers stem]

That's possibly because of what Bagster Phillips, Wynne Baxter and The Lancet said about Annie's murder, which was somewhat overblown. The doctors who examined Eddowes were less inclined to attribute surgical skill to the killer; which may be significant, given that Eddowes' eviscerations were more extensive than any that had gone before.

Why do you feel the Lancet piece was overblown ?
Pretty clear that Phillips felt it was the work of an expert .
The dissenting voices you talk about were Sequeira , a newly qualified GP with little or no surgical experience and Saunders who I've mentioned at length recently , the one who was at pains to deny that Eddowes had brights disease ... and yet we know he was wrong about that

[packers stem]

Not according to reports of Phillips' testimony in the papers, which show that at least three flaps of flesh were cut from Chapman's abdomen, primarily on the right hand side. There was no single, longitudinal cut in Chapman's case.

Can't see that in the inquest reports .
Care to reproduce it Sam ?