The Jack the Ripper Mystery is Finally Solved — Scientifically

[Lewis C]

the medical experts were divided then as they still are as to how much, if any, surgical skill the ripper had. there really isnt even a consensus to this day. therefore, its foolish imho to rule out any suspect who didnt have surgical, or even medical experience. but its definitely a check mark in favor of a suspect if they did.

I agree with rj, its no surprise the drs of the time tried to distance tje ripper from their profession, and ive said it many times.
I also agree with herlocks chess analogy that the killer might have been doing what was working without knowing it professional/technically and either got lucky and or had some previous experience with cutting up bodies and or looking at anatomy books.
You would be surprised how many serial killers with no medical experience whatsoever accomplished in their post mortem mutilations.

But i also held alot of respect for Prosectors opinion also. And contemp police were looking for suspects with medical knowledge. So bottom line is we still just dont know...opinion still divided among experts.

Re Thompson vs Bury?

Bury by a mile. similar sig of post mortem mutilation via knife to the midsection, so also probably same motive (as lewis said ). the same motive all post mortem mutilating serial killers have... they enjoy it. its their sick fantasy acted upon. He Lived in the area. police person of interest. frequented prostitutes, history of violence. he spoke of the ripper.

But i also dont think thompson is a ridiculous suspect, but i would mark him as a long shot. he had the medical background, probably was in the area, maybe even near millers court. history with prostitutes. his poetry may indicate a real sick bloody fantasy. but no real connection to case, no history of violence. like i said... long shot.

but great thread!

That's about where I am, Abby. If someone did have a medical or butcher's background, that's an argument for their suspect status, but we're far from certain that the RIpper had to have formal training or work in those areas. And Thompson is a longshot, but not ridiculous. I'd say about like Tumblety.

[Abby Normal]

That's about where I am, Abby. If someone did have a medical or butcher's background, that's an argument for their suspect status, but we're far from certain that the RIpper had to have formal training or work in those areas. And Thompson is a longshot, but not ridiculous. I'd say about like Tumblety.

agree. I reserve the ridiculous tag for suspects like Van Gogh, gull, royal conspiracy, maybrick etc.

[GBinOz]

George, if we accept your premise that the killer had to have had the dissection skills of a trained surgeon, I think that would mean that there are only 3 named suspects worthy of any consideration: Thompson, George Chapman, and Oswald Puckridge. There may be other trained surgeons, but they can be ignored for other reasons. Is it your intent to reject the possibility of the Ripper being anyone but one of these three, unless it was someone that we're not aware of? Or unless we accept Trevor's argument?

Hi Lewis,

My premise is just an opinion based on considerations which are for me ongoing. As I mentioned, I am not entirely convinced that JtR is not a composite term being applied to the crimes of more than one person. It would be fair to comment that most posters would accept that the mutilations visited upon Chapman and Eddowes indicate that the same murderer was involved. However, this is from the Echo Oct 1, 1888:

THE OPINION OF THE DOCTORS.
Although there appears to be very little doubt that both this crime and the murder of the unfortunate in Berner-street about the same time is the work of the miscreant who perpetrated the previous tragedies, the doctors are of opinion that the murder in Mitre-court is a "brutal imitation" of the Hanbury-street murder. At the post-mortem examination, there were- it is stated- indications of an attempt having been made to remove the organ alluded to, but nothing was missing from the body. It is also asserted that there are indications discovered that mutilation was evidently meant in the case of the Berner-street victim.

Then there is the comment by Wynne Baxter in his summation of the Stride Inquest and referring to her injury:

There had been no skilful mutilation as in the cases of Nichols and Chapman, and no unskilful injuries as in the case in Mitre-square - possibly the work of an imitator;

I asked my daughter, an experienced theatre nurse, to look at the autopsies of Chapman and Eddowes and she asked if there was any theory that these murders were by different people. In her opinion the Chapman injuries were what would be made by a butcher and the Eddowes injuries by someone experienced in the dissection of human females. My hesitancy about her opinion is that the mobilisation of Chapman's intestines is traditionally considered a medical procedure. I am in the process of re-examining Prosector's comments in this regard.

To come back to your question. My understanding is that Oswald Puckeridge was a pharmacological chemist. I have Chapman (Klosowski) as a person of interest, but I would consider someone like Thompson as worthy of consideration for the Eddowes and Kelly murders.

We don't know, and probably never will, how many killers were involved in the Whitechapel murders, nor how many would fall within the appellation of Jack the Ripper. My current opinion is that there were at least four, but that is JMO. YMMV.

Cheers, George

[Mike J. G.]

I'm not too opposed to the idea of a couple of different killers working totally seperate from one another over the span of a year or two, as that could well be the case, but rather the idea that there were two killers simultaneously operating in the same area in the relatively short space of time between Emma Smith and MJK.

Obviously there were murders after MJ, but IMO, I'd be hesitant to at least doubt Tabram-MJK as more than one person operating in a similar style in the same area, unless we're of the opinion it was more than one person working together... Which would indicate, to me, that Emma Smith could definitely be included. I'm not even sure I'd discount McKenzie.

Emma Smith had her genitals attacked, Tabram had her genitals attacked, Nichols, Chapman, Kelly? I'm not 100% sure as she was butchered, even McKenzie had cuts to the genitals, though.

It wasn't very common to see any killer targeting the genitals of women, or getting inside their bodies, so unless it was more than one person working together, I'd be hesitant to accept that two men were doing this totally ignorant of one another.

"The signature characteristics observed in these infamous Jack the Ripper
murders were compared to a 1981–1995 cohort of 3359 homicide cases from Washington
State’s HITS database. The analysis revealed that the signature displayed in six of the
Whitechapel murders was extremely rare. There were only six records of female victims,
one a prostitute, with probed, explored, or mutilated body cavities. There were only two
cases, both females who were not prostitutes, where the body was left in an unusual posi-
tion and body cavities were explored, probed, or mutilated"

The Jack the Ripper Murders: A Modus Operandi
and Signature Analysis of the 1888–1891
Whitechapel Murders
ROBERT D. KEPPEL1
*, JOSEPH G. WEIS2
, KATHERINE M. BROWN1 and
KRISTEN WELCH1

[Mike J. G.]

Can you hear the distant boos Mike?

Let's just be glad that they're distant!

[FISHY1118]

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 .

Hi Mike , Ive had this same debate with Trevor M. Its important to know the difference between the ''Mutilations'' and ''Organ Removal'' , of course any idiot can mutilate but the way in which Mary Kellys heart was removed according to Dr Bonds post mortem report was a newly known Medical technique at the time of the murders . Which as ive already stated, there is no known evidence Bury ever new how to or had such knowledge of such a technique ,where as Thompson new exactly how to perform it . I hope that clears things up . cheers.

[FISHY1118]

Name these supposed facts please?

I did , and there not supposed ,they are the facts . DR bonds post mortem report .

[John Wheat]

I did , and there not supposed ,they are the facts . DR bonds post mortem report .

They are not facts they are Dr Bond's opinion.

[FISHY1118]

They are not facts they are Dr Bond's opinion.

There the facts of how Mary Kellys heart was removed .

[FISHY1118]

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.

I guess the bold section is where we differ , i cant do speculation and the possibility that Bury might have somehow acquired such knowledge . I can only go by what is known as opposed to what is not where any suspects are concerned ,and what is currenty known about both in the area of medical procedure removal of Mary Kellys heart, i tend to favour Thompson a better suspect than Bury .

[GBinOz]

They are not facts they are Dr Bond's opinion.

I have never before observed someone claiming that an autopsy report is just an opinion. If this is the standard to be established we are all wasting our time.

[Mike J. G.]

Hi Mike , Ive had this same debate with Trevor M. Its important to know the difference between the ''Mutilations'' and ''Organ Removal'' , of course any idiot can mutilate but the way in which Mary Kellys heart was removed according to Dr Bonds post mortem report was a newly known Medical technique at the time of the murders . Which as ive already stated, there is no known evidence Bury ever new how to or had such knowledge of such a technique ,where as Thompson new exactly how to perform it . I hope that clears things up . cheers.

Allo, Fishy,

So it's proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that the heart was undoubtedly removed in this fashion, and it's proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that Thompson (not being physically fit and healthy aside) knew how to perform this procedure?

I'm just perplexed that if we know both of these things as facts, why Thompson isn't put onto a grander stage by all and sundry in the Ripper community.

If, as I'm presuming, none of it is without its uncertainty, then we're back to square one. "Square one" being us not having a clue one way or another who could have done the murder and mutilation, effectively not ruling anyone out who was physically able and could conceivably be in the area.

If it's a solid fact that the killer of MJK had to have been medically trained, then Thompson doesn't come close to Chapman, IMO, who was in the area, physically able, and a murderer of women.

Cheers

[Mike J. G.]

One thing we know about Bury, is he mutilated his wife's corpse after death, and made some cuts near the genital regions. Could be something, could be nothing, but it's not insignificant.

My issue with Thompson is, as far as being even remotely close to what we could consider as being Ripper-like, he wasn't close at all. He wrote poetry and may have dated a prostitute.

If, though, it's a genuine fact that MJK's heart was proven to have been removed in a certain manner, and Thompson can be shown, provably, that he had the knowledge to perform that procedure, that's a different story... But I suspect that's not the case.

[FISHY1118]

I talked about motive. What you're talking about here has nothing to do with motive.

I was talking about the Medical Procedure /Technique used to remove Mary Kellys heart ,and why thompson was abetter than bury becasue of it . You can feel free to discuss motive about any of the murders if you like . Im just giving you the facts as per Dr Bonds post mortem report .

Lets be also clear where Dr Bonds is concerned, at no point did he ever say the ''Internal Organs'' that were removed from of Mary Kelly abdoman showed no medical skill or knowledge . The ''quote'' being used by some to describe Bond saying the ''killer had no such skill'' is used by Dr Bond with the specific use of the words ''The Mutilations'' Not the internal organs .

[FISHY1118]

Allo, Fishy,

So it's proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that the heart was undoubtedly removed in this fashion, and it's proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that Thompson (not being physically fit and healthy aside) knew how to perform this procedure?

I'm just perplexed that if we know both of these things as facts, why Thompson isn't put onto a grander stage by all and sundry in the Ripper community.

If, as I'm presuming, none of it is without its uncertainty, then we're back to square one. "Square one" being us not having a clue one way or another who could have done the murder and mutilation, effectively not ruling anyone out who was physically able and could conceivably be in the area.

If it's a solid fact that the killer of MJK had to have been medically trained, then Thompson doesn't come close to Chapman, IMO, who was in the area, physically able, and a murderer of women.

Cheers

1 YESSSS

2. YESSSS .

3 . So am I.