The Jack the Ripper Mystery is Finally Solved — Scientifically

[Mike J. G.]

The alternative to the killer having any dissection skills is that those skills were possessed by someone after the event, which is basically what Trevor is proposing. I don't tend to believe the killer was a mad doctor either, but I entertain Prosector's opinion that he was a medical student. I also suspect that he was a student who became obsessed with dissection, but am not convinced that he was responsible for all of the ripper murders. JMO.

I don't necessarily discount that the killer had experience in cutting up bodies, I just don't feel confident stating the manner in which he gained that experience. I think he was interested in innards, like Dahmer was. He could have been a knackerer, a butcher, a mortician's apprentice, etc.

It's the medical knowledge angle I'm mostly opposed to, simply because we just don't know. It'd be great if we did.

[GBinOz]

I'm from the Pool of Livers. Ironically round the corner from Sir Jim.

I guess you're talking about Liverpool, but who is "Sir Jim"?

[GBinOz]

You'll have to explain this one, GB. I'm aware that Trevor is of the opinion that the killer didn't remove any organs, I don't tend to believe that.

But I don't tend to believe the killer was a mad doctor, either.

The alternative to the killer having any dissection skills is that those skills were possessed by someone after the event, which is basically what Trevor is proposing. I don't tend to believe the killer was a mad doctor either, but I entertain Prosector's opinion that he was a medical student. I also suspect that he was a student who became obsessed with dissection, but am not convinced that he was responsible for all of the ripper murders. JMO.

[Mike J. G.]

Mate??? Do you come from the land down under?

I'm from the Pool of Livers. Ironically round the corner from Sir Jim.

[Mike J. G.]

If you throw in the time factor you will be standing on the doorstep of Trevor's theory.

You'll have to explain this one, GB. I'm aware that Trevor is of the opinion that the killer didn't remove any organs, I don't tend to believe that.

But I don't tend to believe the killer was a mad doctor, either.

[GBinOz]

If penning edgy poetry while intoxicated was indicative of a murderer then I'm afraid we're all buggered, mate

Mate??? Do you come from the land down under?

[Mike J. G.]

Phillips and Brown are the ones to be listening to rather than Bond (read up on the latter's history). I refer only to his autopsy report, not his opinion.

GB, the trouble is that there's no established fact regarding the killer's abilities, medically trained or not. All we have is the musings of the medicos of the day, and our interpretations of those musings.

If it could be categorically proven that MJ's killer had confirmed medical knowledge, then that would undoubtedly be a revelation in the world of the Ripper.

[GBinOz]

As it stands, I'm not sure I'd be confident discounting anyone on the grounds of not having medical knowledge.

If you throw in the time factor you will be standing on the doorstep of Trevor's theory.

[Mike J. G.]

George will have to defend that position, Mike, as I think it is a valid point.

What I will say is that I've long been under the impression that the medicos were a little too eager to distance their own profession from the murders. Rightly or wrongly, at least some of them were insulted by the suggestion--as if it was a reflection on the medical community as a whole. In some ways, it was understandable because many years earlier the medical community had suffered a black eye during the Burk and Hare scandal.

Meanwhile, most of the medicos were fine with suggesting the killer was a trained butcher with anatomical knowledge, etc.---but a medical man? Heaven forbid!

Such is human nature, I suppose. What is interesting (to me) is that despite Bonds doubts', the police were very much investigating suspects with medical or alleged medical training, including insane medical students, Ostrog, Druitt ('said to be a doctor'), Kozminski (supposedly worked in a hospital in Poland), etc. So perhaps Bonds' opinion wasn't as widely accepted as is sometimes supposed.

Just my two cents.

I don't necessarily disagree, RJ. This is why I'm not sure why it's being suggested that the killer had to have medical knowledge, because the jury is honestly out on that. It's not a proven fact, and if it were, we could happily discount a lot of suspects from the list.

As it stands, I'm not sure I'd be confident discounting anyone on the grounds of not having medical knowledge.

[GBinOz]

George will have to defend that position, Mike, as I think it is a valid point.

What I will say is that I've long been under the impression that the medicos were a little too eager to distance their own profession from the murders. Rightly or wrongly, at least some of them were insulted by the suggestion--as if it was a reflection on the medical community as a whole. In some ways, it was understandable because many years earlier the medical community had suffered a black eye during the Burk and Hare scandal.

Meanwhile, most of the medicos were fine with suggesting the killer was a trained butcher with anatomical knowledge, etc.---but a medical man? Heaven forbid!

Such is human nature, I suppose. What is interesting (to me) is that despite Bonds doubts', the police were very much investigating suspects with medical or alleged medical training, including insane medical students, Ostrog, Druitt ('said to be a doctor'), Kozminski (supposedly worked in a hospital in Poland), etc. So perhaps Bonds' opinion wasn't as widely accepted as is sometimes supposed.

Just my two cents.

Hi RJ,

I'll contribute another two cents in favour of your opinion, and raise Klosowski as another example.

Cheers, George

[rjpalmer]

Fair enough, RJ.

But I'm still at a loss to figure out why it is being promoted here that the killer had to have medical knowledge. Bond certainly didn't think so, yet he's being used here to promote that very idea.

George will have to defend that position, Mike, as I think it is a valid point.

What I will say is that I've long been under the impression that the medicos were a little too eager to distance their own profession from the murders. Rightly or wrongly, at least some of them were insulted by the suggestion--as if it was a reflection on the medical community as a whole. In some ways, it was understandable because many years earlier the medical community had suffered a black eye during the Burk and Hare scandal.

Meanwhile, most of the medicos were fine with suggesting the killer was a trained butcher with anatomical knowledge, etc.---but a medical man? Heaven forbid!

Such is human nature, I suppose. What is interesting (to me) is that despite Bonds doubts', the police were very much investigating suspects with medical or alleged medical training, including insane medical students, Ostrog, Druitt ('said to be a doctor'), Kozminski (supposedly worked in a hospital in Poland), etc. So perhaps Bonds' opinion wasn't as widely accepted as is sometimes supposed.

Just my two cents.

[GBinOz]

But I'm still at a loss to figure out why it is being promoted here that the killer had to have medical knowledge. Bond certainly didn't think so, yet he's being used here to promote that very idea.

Phillips and Brown are the ones to be listening to rather than Bond (read up on the latter's history). I refer only to his autopsy report, not his opinion.

[Mike J. G.]

Are you wrong here? With regard to the excision of the heart from the pericardium - YES. With regard to the other mutilations - NO!

Dr. Bond wasn't of the opinion that Kelly's murderer had any medical knowledge.

Correct?

[Mike J. G.]

Thompson was a drug addict. You might care to read his poem "The Nightmare of the Witch Babies" to get an idea of the workings of his mind and his fantasy of the noble knight ridding the world of demon-ridden witches:

http://www.dxsuperpremium.com/2012/0...ch-babies.html

If penning edgy poetry while intoxicated was indicative of a murderer then I'm afraid we're all buggered, mate

[GBinOz]

There's no confirmation that the mutilations on Kelly could only have been performed by a trained professional or someone with medical knowledge. It literally has never been proven. If it were proven, we'd be able to discount a lot of suspects, but it hasn't, so we can't.

Am I wrong here?

Are you wrong here? With regard to the excision of the heart from the pericardium - YES. With regard to the other mutilations - NO!