“Was Francis Thompson Jack the Ripper?” Joseph C. Rupp, M.D., Ph.D.

[FISHY1118]

From Dr. Michael Biggs, modern day Forensic Pathologist (provided by Trevor):

”The Virchow “method” isn’t really a specific technique for removing the heart in particular, but it refers more generally to the principle of removing organs one-by-one for individual examination. My preference for most cases is to remove all the organs together as a single “block”, and then place them onto a dissection bench for systematic examination. However, in certain cases (e.g. stabbings) I will adopt the one-organ-at-a-time (Virchow) approach, as this makes it easier to follow stab wound tracks through the body (whereas removing them all together distorts measurements and makes it easier to lose track).

Getting back to the reports you sent, where it says things like, “…the Pericardium was open below & the Heart absent…” this is what you might expect if the heart has been removed on its own (i.e. the “Virchow” method). For better access and to allow us to see the various vascular attachments, we tend to open the pericardium (fibrous sac enclosing the heart) using an inverted T-shape incision, so if the pericardium really was just “open below” then that implies that someone either didn’t know (or care) what they were doing, or didn’t have time to do it “properly”. So it goes against the person having anatomical skill/knowledge... but only very slightly…”


So….forgive me i don't take your opinion on this matter seriously.

Forgive me if i dont forgive you for ignoring the evidence of Medical Experts who were there at the time in favour of biggs in relation to medical skill and or knowedge .

[FISHY1118]

Also, I assume that you missed the quote from Virchow himself which was shown some time ago, to the effect that surgery in Victorian times was only beginning to catch up with what slaughterers had been able to do for a long time?

Forgive me if i dont forgive you for ignoring the evidence of Medical Experts who were there at the time in favour of biggs in relation to medical skill and or knowedge .

[GBinOz]

Prosector:

Bond was a curious character. Although he was described as a surgeon he was in fact appointed as Surgeon to the Out Patients Department of the Westminster Hospital which meant that he hardly got to do any operative surgery himself. He committed suicide by jumping out of a window in 1901 ostensibly because he was having trouble sleeping but he was also suffering from a urinary stricture almost certainly the result of gonorrhoea.

Although he was adamant that Jack did not possess surgical skill or anatomical knowledge don't forget that the only victim that he saw was Mary Jane and I don't think anyone could have deduced anything from that killing. She certainly was butchered and very little evidence of skill or otherwise was left although the way he extracted her heart from below through the abdominal cavity did, in my opinion, show some evidence of anatomical expertise. It's not an easy approach to the heart (he couldn't get at it through the chest although he did try because he had no rib retractors).

I have studied all the post mortem reports in detail and those of Phillips and Brown stand out as models of their kind. Detailed, accurate and thoughtful as you'd expect from two experienced police surgeons in one of the most busy crime and accident ridden areas in 19th century Britain. They both though that the Ripper had anatomical knowledge and some degree of surgical skill but that he wasn't a fully fledged doctor. I would entirely agree with that. There is clear evidence that his technique improved from Polly Nichols to Kate Eddowes - he was on a learning curve.

[GBinOz]

Interesting video here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hRegFdyWwUw&t=3081s

A former casebook member, Moonbegger, nominates Thompson as his prime suspect, and opposes Lechmere as a suspect in Buck's Row.

[Admin]

At this time, I would like multiple people on here, to take a deep breath and ask yourself, "Do I need a six-month break from the strife of internet life?"

I will be happy to oblige.

[Fiver]

Can you show evidence that proves Gull wasnt the ripper Herlock? . Because all youve done in the past in regards to Gull is povide the same old speculation , bias opinions , circumstancial waffle . Feel free to flog that dead hourse again tho , i guess it makes for a good laugh every now and then .

Wait, there's somebody that still believes in the Royal Conspiracy?

Let look at the theory.
* A group of semi-homeless alcoholic prostitutes decide to blackmail the British government over something provably false.
* The British government decides this is a serious threat to the monarchy.
* With the resources of the British Empire at their disposal, the Conspiracy picks a crack team - an elderly stroke victim known for his progressive views on women, a man who wasn't in England, and a coachman.
* The men assigned to eliminate the blackmailers decide the best way to do this is murder them in a way that turns the women from nobodies to household names, implicates the Masons, and undermines public confidence in the authorities.
* The British government agrees this is the best way to quietly and secretly eliminate the blackmailers.
* The victims fail to notice or respond when only members of their blackmail club are being messily butchered by the Ripper. They repeatedly meet him alone, at night. expecting a large wad of cash instead of messy butchery.
* Over a year after the doctor stops murdering and leaving clues implicating the Masons, the authorities decide he is a threat to them.
* Though the doctor is well known in the medical community and pictures of him have appeared in the print, the conspirators decide to fake the doctor’s death and put him in an asylum instead of killing him.
* The painter spends the next several decades leaving clues in his paintings and hiding a child from the Conspiracy. To do this the painter does nothing whatsoever to hide his identity or location from the Conspiracy.
* Nobody in the Conspiracy cares about the painter betraying them or does anything to silence him.
* The sole exception is the coachman, who spends more than a decade to failing at getting murdery with the painter or the child.
* When the coachman assassin runs over himself with his own cart, the Conspiracy does not replace him and the painter dies of natural causes 4 decades later.

That's before we consider that the source of the story admitted it was a hoax.

[Fiver]

Forgive me if i dont forgive you for ignoring the evidence of Medical Experts who were there at the time in favour of biggs in relation to medical skill and or knowedge .

None of the the doctors who examined the victims claimed that the Ripper used the Virchow method. That is the claim of modern theorists.

Most of the authorities did not agree that the murderer had some sort of medical training.

Here are the opinions of the medical types.

Dr Llewellyn - “some rough anatomical knowledge”

Coroner Baxter - "considerable anatomical skill and knowledge”

Dr Phillips - "seemed to indicate great anatomical knowledge.”

Dr Sequeira - "not possessed of any great anatomical skill"

Dr Brown - “a great deal of knowledge”, but could have been "some one accustomed to cutting up animals".

Dr Saunders did not think the killer showed anatomical skill.

Dr Bond - "no scientific nor anatomical knowledge"

So the assessments of skill are:
None - Bond, Saunders
Some - Lllewellyn, Sequeira
A lot - Baxter, Brown, Phillips

[Fiver]

Prosector:
Bond was a curious character. Although he was described as a surgeon he was in fact appointed as Surgeon to the Out Patients Department of the Westminster Hospital which meant that he hardly got to do any operative surgery himself. He committed suicide by jumping out of a window in 1901 ostensibly because he was having trouble sleeping but he was also suffering from a urinary stricture almost certainly the result of gonorrhoea.

That's enough "evidence" that I'm surprised someone hasn't claimed Bond was the Ripper.

Although he was adamant that Jack did not possess surgical skill or anatomical knowledge don't forget that the only victim that he saw was Mary Jane and I don't think anyone could have deduced anything from that killing. She certainly was butchered and very little evidence of skill or otherwise was left although the way he extracted her heart from below through the abdominal cavity did, in my opinion, show some evidence of anatomical expertise. It's not an easy approach to the heart (he couldn't get at it through the chest although he did try because he had no rib retractors).

I have studied all the post mortem reports in detail and those of Phillips and Brown stand out as models of their kind. Detailed, accurate and thoughtful as you'd expect from two experienced police surgeons in one of the most busy crime and accident ridden areas in 19th century Britain. They both though that the Ripper had anatomical knowledge and some degree of surgical skill but that he wasn't a fully fledged doctor. I would entirely agree with that. There is clear evidence that his technique improved from Polly Nichols to Kate Eddowes - he was on a learning curve.

Brown also said it could have been "some one accustomed to cutting up animals".