Dr George Bagster Phillips

[ArmchairsLeuth]

Apologies if this has been asked before, I searched but couldn't find anything.

What if JtR was Dr Bagster Phillips himself?

Watching a documentary right now and it's mentioning that Dr BP's conclusions may have misdirected the police investigation, such as the time of Annie Chapman's death. JtR was thought by some (most?) to have been a doctor, so could it be possible that details were fudged by him on purpose?

I don't know, obviously. I'm just throwing this out as a discussion point. If conversations about this already exist please point me in the right direction as I'd love to do a bit of deeper research here.

[Hunter]

...
What if JtR was Dr Bagster Phillips himself?

Watching a documentary right now and it's mentioning that Dr BP's conclusions may have misdirected the police investigation, such as the time of Annie Chapman's death. JtR was thought by some (most?) to have been a doctor, so could it be possible that details were fudged by him on purpose?

Short answer...no.

[ArmchairsLeuth]

Ok, thanks any more info as to why it couldn't be him?

[John G]

No. Dr Llewellyn's more credible. But he isn't very credible either.

[Hunter]

Ok, thanks any more info as to why it couldn't be him?

He was at his home at 2 Spital Sq. when notified of Stride's murder less than 45 minutes before and was on the way in a cab or at the scene of that murder when Catherine Eddowes was slaughtered in Mitre Square. I'm sure I could come up with more once the effects of the workday subside a little bit.

I will add this - and this is not a slight because I watch documentaries too - but be careful of any information that is not from a primary source. There is usually an agenda involved.

[c.d.]

Ok, thanks any more info as to why it couldn't be him?

It certainly could have been him or any of the doctors that gave an opinion just as it could have been Abberline or anybody at Scotland Yard. It also could have been any of the witnesses or any of the morticians that handled the bodies. It also could have been (fill in the blank). Not being smart ass or condescending but there needs to be evidence to support an accusation not just the possibility that that individual could have been Jack.

c.d.

[Michael W Richards]

Apologies if this has been asked before, I searched but couldn't find anything.

What if JtR was Dr Bagster Phillips himself?

Watching a documentary right now and it's mentioning that Dr BP's conclusions may have misdirected the police investigation, such as the time of Annie Chapman's death. JtR was thought by some (most?) to have been a doctor, so could it be possible that details were fudged by him on purpose?

I don't know, obviously. I'm just throwing this out as a discussion point. If conversations about this already exist please point me in the right direction as I'd love to do a bit of deeper research here.

One thing I can see immediately is that this would be a case of a doctor suggesting someone with skills he may possess himself. I dont see that as being practical. Now had he suggested someone devoid of any skill or knowledge this idea might be worth exploring further.

[DJA]

Apologies if this has been asked before, I searched but couldn't find anything.

What if JtR was Dr Bagster Phillips himself?

Watching a documentary right now and it's mentioning that Dr BP's conclusions may have misdirected the police investigation, such as the time of Annie Chapman's death. JtR was thought by some (most?) to have been a doctor, so could it be possible that details were fudged by him on purpose?

I don't know, obviously. I'm just throwing this out as a discussion point. If conversations about this already exist please point me in the right direction as I'd love to do a bit of deeper research here.

Reckon Jack the Ripper was a peer of his who passed by his house in Spital Square on his way to work and back most days.
Being quite cagey at Chapman's inquest.

[Coroner] Was the instrument used at the throat the same as that used at the abdomen? - Very probably. It must have been a very sharp knife, probably with a thin, narrow blade, and at least six to eight inches in length, and perhaps longer.
[Coroner] Is it possible that any instrument used by a military man, such as a bayonet, would have done it? - No; it would not be a bayonet.
[Coroner] Would it have been such an instrument as a medical man uses for post-mortem examinations? - The ordinary post-mortem case perhaps does not contain such a weapon.
[Coroner] Would any instrument that slaughterers employ have caused the injuries? - Yes; well ground down.
[Coroner] Would the knife of a cobbler or of any person in the leather trades have done? - I think the knife used in those trades would not be long enough in the blade.
[Coroner] Was there any anatomical knowledge displayed? - I think there was. There were indications of it. My own impression is that that anatomical knowledge was only less displayed or indicated in consequence of haste. The person evidently was hindered from making a more complete dissection in consequence of the haste.
[Coroner] Was the whole of the body there? - No; the absent portions being from the abdomen.
[Coroner] Are those portions such as would require anatomical knowledge to extract? - I think the mode in which they were extracted did show some anatomical knowledge.

Phillips was involved in the pardon for an accomplice,almost certainly the sailor George Hutchinson.

Reckon Phillips had a very good idea what was really going on.

[ArmchairsLeuth]

Cool! Thanks for the replies, kind people.

Hunter, I agree completely. Documentaries do indeed tend to have agendas. I guess something about the way that particular bit of info was presented just hit me and I thought I'd call on the collective wisdom here.

True enough, c.d., it could have been anyone connected to the case I guess. Bowen too, actually, is the other one I wondered about but bizarrely forgot his name when it came to writing the post. I'm still a believer in the 'he had to have some kind of medical or anatomical knowledge' camp. For now, anyway. My thoughts on the case seem to change every time I look into it. This is the ultimate rabbit-hole case!

DJA, good grief. I'd never run across the coroner inquest reports before. Even that snippet you posted is fascinating in and of itself, mostly for what he DOESN'T say. I need to research the coroner reports. There went my plans for the next fortnight

[DJA]

http://www.casebook.org/official_documents/inquests/index.html

[ArmchairsLeuth]

Excellent, thank you!