The Jack the Ripper Mystery is Finally Solved — Scientifically

[FISHY1118]

Hi, Fishy. I'm unaware of any evidence which would indicate that Kelly's heart was removed in any fashion that would suggest that only a person with medical knowledge would be able to perform it.

They estimated that it took the killer 2 hours to perform the mutilations seen on Kelly, which I think is frankly far too big estimate. I don't think it would have taken that long at all.

Again, I think people underestimate what a determined killer can do.

If you've got any solid evidence that indicates that medical knowledge was necessary then I'm all for having a gander.

Cheers

Sure thing Mike , My point being that Thompson was able to perform such a procedure where as Bury, as yet has not been shown to or any evidence presented to show the same . Remember are talking about thompsom and bury as suspect goes in the murder of mary kelly . George has already gone into great detail as to the precedure used to remove her heart .

[Mike J. G.]

Sure thing Mike , My point being that Thompson was able to perform such a procedure where as Bury, as yet has not been shown to or any evidence presented to show the same . Remember are talking about thompsom and bury as suspect goes in the murder of mary kelly . George has already gone into great detail as to the precedure used to remove her heart .

I'm sorry, Fishy, but I'm still unaware of any existing evidence which would indicate that the mutilations seen on Kelly had to have been performed by somebody with medical knowledge. I was under the impression that you had the information which would indicate that medical knowledge was indeed required.

I'm not here arguing for Bury, though I do rate actual killers above and beyond people who have never been shown to have committed violence of any kind.

[Mike J. G.]

The fact is that despite us having read of varying experts with differing opinions on the level of medical/anatomical knowledge that the killer might or might not have had we still see it being promoted that the killer must have had high level of knowledge and skill. Why would we, as laymen, read of a surgeon disputing this and yet we feel that we know better. We just don’t know is the answer.

We can’t mould the criteria to fit a subject or a group of subjects. For example, If the killer had read up on anatomy because it gave him a thrill he may also have cut up animals. This would have been done in private which could include any suspect. As the level of skill/knowledge is unknown and disputed we should be wary of using it. Apart from this medical knowledge Thompson’s has nothing to favour his candidature or any proposition that he might have been around at the time (like the violent, drunkard, woman-attacking, knife carrying, prostitute consorting murderer and post mortem mutilator)

I mean, why would anyone favour him over a drug addicted, liked, poet in poor health.

Ed Gein had no medical knowledge, either, but he took apart and then dressed two women like a deer in his shed.

There's scores of evidence of average Joes cutting people up. The internet is rife with footage of cartels flaying and disemboweling rival gang members without issue.

The idea that Kelly was murdered by someone with medical knowledge is not founded in any real evidence.

[Doctored Whatsit]

Hi Fishy,

As Prosector has observed, in 1888 the first appendectomy was yet to be performed.

Cheers, George

Sadly Prosector was wrong. The first successful appendectomy took place in 1735. But it was not commonly performed for many years, and was frequently unsuccessful when attempted.

[John Wheat]

So how do you reconcile this post with your statement that the chances of there being more than one murderer are virtually zero?

I'm not sure how I can be more understandable. The Torso Killer operated for years. I doubt Mackenzie was killed by a serial killer, same with Frances Coles therefore there was all of a sudden one violent serial killer operating in a small part of London in 1888. That being Jack the Ripper and in my opinion Bury was Jack.

[John Wheat]

With all due respect John, that is just a statement of opinion in the face of actual presentation of fact.

I never said it was a fact. I'm not prepared to prefix everything I post with in my opinion. Also it's only yours and Fishy's opinion that Frances Thompson is a better suspect than Bury.

[John Wheat]

However the facts of Mary Kellys murder suggest he wasnt her killer . Therefor a poor suspect in relation to Thompson

Name these supposed facts please?

[GBinOz]

I'm always a bit baffled when people talk about medical knowledge and how some people, like Thompson, would have been able to remove Kelly's heart with ease and people, such as Bury, wouldn't have.

I'm not suggesting that anyone need to have this knowledge, as it's pretty grim, but I do find it a little naive that people discount the fact that we have ample evidence, for instance, of South American gangs cutting rivals up and removing their hearts and heads and all manner of things, on camera, without any issues. Literally going into the chest with a knife and removing a heart in seconds.

The medical knowledge of the Ripper is in doubt. Frankly, I don't see anything in the medical reports that would indicate that the killer was a trained medical professional as opposed to merely being a person who had some experience cutting people up.

I'm not here to argue for Bury, and while I think he's a good suspect, I've no fixed suspect at all and I tend to believe he's not been named. But I don't understand the narrative that an average Joe couldn't have done these murders. You'd be surprised what sick and perverted people can accomplish.

Unless we start assuming that the likes of Isis and the South American drug cartels are all medically trained professionals who just happened to leave the trade in favour of extremism and criminal activity.

Hi Mike,

You use the example of South American gangs cutting rivals up and removing their hearts, and I can see that you may observe an equivalency with the likes of Bury hacking out the heart of Kelly....except that is not what happened.

Kelly's heart was not hacked out - it was accessed via her abdominal cavity. No problem. Bury emptied her abdominal cavity, reached under her ribs and cut out her heart in a slash and grab procedure....except that is not what happened.

Her heart was surgically removed from the fibrous sheath called the pericardium that enclosed the heart, leaving the pericardium in place. This was a medical procedure rarely taught by Virchow, who had Thompson as a pupil. Regardless of how sick and perverted Bury may have been, he did not have the technical knowledge or skill to have achieved this procedure.

Cheers, George

[Herlock Sholmes]

Gull wasnt a surgeon but a Physician with a vast degree of medical knowledge , Bury was Neither . In the spirit of fairness we talking about Thompson v Bury as who is a better suspect .

True enough but we’ve seen on here how opinion from the medical experts on the ripper’s possible medical or anatomical knowledge varies. There appears to be no consensus so we shouldn’t assume that he did or didn’t or rather as to what level of knowledge or skill. If it was an absolutely proven fact, agreed to by every medical expert that we could ask, then yes, on that aspect Thompson’s would score higher than Bury; it still wouldn’t make him a particularly strong suspect though. That said, as we don’t have exhaustive biographies of most suspects, so we don’t know if any given suspect might have acquired some anatomical knowledge or knife skills at some point. Many of the poor took work where they could and often moved between different types of work so how can we be certain that someone didn’t spend time working in a slaughterhouse for example?

So, if we park this disputed area for a while, and examine Thompson and Bury then I’d find it strange if anyone could rate Thompson above Bury for very obvious reasons.

[Mike J. G.]

Hi Mike,

You use the example of South American gangs cutting rivals up and removing their hearts, and I can see that you may observe an equivalency with the likes of Bury hacking out the heart of Kelly....except that is not what happened.

Kelly's heart was not hacked out - it was accessed via her abdominal cavity. No problem. Bury emptied her abdominal cavity, reached under her ribs and cut out her heart in a slash and grab procedure....except that is not what happened.

Her heart was surgically removed from the fibrous sheath called the pericardium that enclosed the heart, leaving the pericardium in place. This was a medical procedure rarely taught by Virchow, who had Thompson as a pupil. Regardless of how sick and perverted Bury may have been, he did not have the technical knowledge or skill to have achieved this procedure.

Cheers, George

Hi, George. This thread has nothing to do with Bury, and I've mentioned a few times I'm not here promoting Bury. You could pretty much replace the hypothetical Bury with any other suspect and I'd still agree that they could have done what was seen on Kelly.

Can you post a link to the evidence which details and confirms your description of the procedure supposedly performed on Kelly? I'm going to assume that it's genuinely been confirmed that what you're saying is correct, so if you can point me in the right direction, I'll read it.

Cheers

[Herlock Sholmes]

Ed Gein had no medical knowledge, either, but he took apart and then dressed two women like a deer in his shed.

There's scores of evidence of average Joes cutting people up. The internet is rife with footage of cartels flaying and disemboweling rival gang members without issue.

The idea that Kelly was murdered by someone with medical knowledge is not founded in any real evidence.

I agree Mike. I suspect that we would be surprised at what knowledge or skill someone can acquire under the right circumstances or even if they set out to acquire it. I don’t have any medical knowledge but I’ve often wondered if luck might also have played some part? What I mean by that is I wonder what the result would have been if the killer had tried doing the same organ removal under the same adverse conditions ten times on different nights. Might it have been the case that say twice or three times the organ was removed intact but on the other seven or eight times it was damaged? After all the killer cut out Eddowes uterus but left a piece.

[Mike J. G.]

I agree Mike. I suspect that we would be surprised at what knowledge or skill someone can acquire under the right circumstances or even if they set out to acquire it. I don’t have any medical knowledge but I’ve often wondered if luck might also have played some part? What I mean by that is I wonder what the result would have been if the killer had tried doing the same organ removal under the same adverse conditions ten times on different nights. Might it have been the case that say twice or three times the organ was removed intact but on the other seven or eight times it was damaged? After all the killer cut out Eddowes uterus but left a piece.

Exactly, Herlock. I'm genuinely perplexed at where people are pulling these supposed facts about medical knowledge from. I've read of no evidence which confirms that Kelly was mutilated by someone with said knowledge, and I'd have thought that if such evidence existed then that would all but confirm that the killer did indeed have such knowledge.

[GBinOz]

True enough but we’ve seen on here how opinion from the medical experts on the ripper’s possible medical or anatomical knowledge varies. There appears to be no consensus so we shouldn’t assume that he did or didn’t or rather as to what level of knowledge or skill. If it was an absolutely proven fact, agreed to by every medical expert that we could ask, then yes, on that aspect Thompson’s would score higher than Bury; it still wouldn’t make him a particularly strong suspect though. That said, as we don’t have exhaustive biographies of most suspects, so we don’t know if any given suspect might have acquired some anatomical knowledge or knife skills at some point. Many of the poor took work where they could and often moved between different types of work so how can we be certain that someone didn’t spend time working in a slaughterhouse for example?

So, if we park this disputed area for a while, and examine Thompson and Bury then I’d find it strange if anyone could rate Thompson above Bury for very obvious reasons.

Hi Herlock,

Realistically, in how many disputes are there absolutely proven facts, agreed to by every expert? We are not talking about anatomical knowledge or knife skills. We are pointing to dissection procedures. The mobilisation of the small intestines was a procedure used in the dissection rooms, as was the deviation of the incision around the right side (never the left) of the navel. Is it your contention that Bury knew these procedures? The surgical removal of the heart proper from the enclosing pericardium was a medical procedure known by few students. Was Bury one of them? No! These were procedures employed by someone very familiar with the dissecting room. If not Thompson, someone like him, but certainly not someone like Bury.

Cheers, George

[GBinOz]

Hi, George. This thread has nothing to do with Bury, and I've mentioned a few times I'm not here promoting Bury. You could pretty much replace the hypothetical Bury with any other suspect and I'd still agree that they could have done what was seen on Kelly.

Can you post a link to the evidence which details and confirms your description of the procedure supposedly performed on Kelly? I'm going to assume that it's genuinely been confirmed that what you're saying is correct, so if you can point me in the right direction, I'll read it.

Cheers

Hi Mike,

Read the post mortem report for Kelly. It says "the pericardium was opened from below and the heart was absent". So the enclosing sheath was in place but the heart had been removed from below - via the abdominal cavity. The heart proper was surgically incised from its enclosing sheath - not a slash and grab.

Cheers, George

[Mike J. G.]

Hi, George,

In another thread you posted this:

"There has been much debate as to whether he (Bond) meant that the heart was absent from the body or from the room, but I believe he (Bond) was saying that the heart had been surgically removed from the sheath (the pericardium) in which it had been contained."

If this is just something you personally believe, and there's no actual evidence to confirm that it's true, then I'm not sure why it's being promoted as actual evidence in this thread.

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?