The cut around the umbilicus

[Suzi]

Just put in mind of a quote I heard yesterday 'The more knowledge I acquire the more uncertainties I have'

[Mascara & Paranoia]

Again I repeat the killer of Chapman would not have needed to remove the intestines to extract the uterus.

True. But taking them out of the torso would be a little more time convenient than trying to liberate an organ with them still tucked hapazardly inside. I think it's safe to say that he was ripping his victims open for some kind of self-satisfaction, not to play surgeon and emulate an operation.

The other thing we dont know is that if the organs were removed at the mortuarys bu another how much addittional cutting did that person do in order to extract the organs. If that happened it now puts a different light on everything

Are you serious?

I also wonder how many of this minority group have studied the new medical evidence.? At a rough guess I would say none.

What new medical 'evidence' (and evidence of what)? And do you have medical expertise and/or experience yourself? Genuine question.

[The Grave Maurice]

Geez, if you had to be an expert in any of the relevant fields before you could comment on the various aspects of this case, these boards would be very quiet.

[Sam Flynn]

The way you see it and the way it is from an experts view are miles apart .

I don't think that every medical expert would disagree with me, Trevor - and I say so in all humility.

You dont become a medical experts by reading the Lancet every month. Practical experience is what is required.

Well, I have at least some experience of dissection - albeit not of the human abdomen. I could do you a mean preparation of a rat, rabbit or dogfish abdomen, though, if pushed

Sam
The way you see it and the way it is from an experts view are miles apart . No disrespect but i think that you and the remaning small group who subscribe to the original theory should really re examine everyhting surrounding the new theory. You dont become a medical experts by reading the Lancet every month. Practical experience is what is required

I also wonder how many of this minority group have studied the new medical evidence.? At a rough guess I would say none. Its a shame that these regular posters want to dismiss outright new evidenec without even bothering to look at it. "Shame on you "

"New" medical evidence? Previously undiscovered notes from the physicians who examined the victims? Unknown photos appearing? "New" physical evidence based on exhumation .. ...

Your "New" term refers to recent opinions being offered decades after the women were buried.

Unless you do actually possess some previously unknown medical data regarding the victims written by the contemporary sources?

My feeling is.....not. But by all means, prove me wrong.

And before you chastise another poster for having an opinion on the medical evidence while not being a physician themselves, ....perhaps you should mind your own self as a self professed professional writer instead, since youve just posted a paragraph with 3 spelling mistakes and at least 1 grammatical error.

Cheers Trevor

[Monty]

Gareth,

You make an excellent observation as ever.

Possibly it was something he studied, tried, found it didnt work for him and reverted back?

Of course this is assuming Kelly was a victim of Eddowes killer....speaking of assumption.

Trevor, your assumption that the 'small minority' (which seems to be sizeable) here has a limited knowledge or are not experts, draws attention to your own limitations and, dare I say, arrogance.

You will gain more credability with your theories if were to persuede logically (again thats another weakness of yours) rather than belittle who you assume are unknowing sheep.

Shame indeed.

Monty

[Trevor Marriott]

Sam
The way you see it and the way it is from an experts view are miles apart . No disrespect but i think that you and the remaning small group who subscribe to the original theory should really re examine everyhting surrounding the new theory. You dont become a medical experts by reading the Lancet every month. Practical experience is what is required. Both you and I have discussed this before you do have some medical knowledge from reading up on topics but the truth be known you do not have any surgical experience and I suggest you are not qualified to commnet on any of the medical issues her. Your use of medical terms is however very impressive.

As to Eddowes murder and what could be very important point on the removal of organs you now back down slightly inferring that could be a one off.It can only be a one off if Eddowes and Chapman were kiled by different people. Again I repeat the killer of Chapman would not have needed to remove the intestines to extract the uterus. However if the killer in a frenzy riped out the intestines and did not remove the uterus, then that in itself must give some creedence to the suggestion that the same killer killed both Chapman and Eddowes and mutilated them in a frenzy but did not remove the organs at the scene. Ripping out the intestines in the frenzied attack.

The other thing we dont know is that if the organs were removed at the mortuarys bu another how much addittional cutting did that person do in order to extract the organs. If that happened it now puts a different light on everything

I also wonder how many of this minority group have studied the new medical evidence.? At a rough guess I would say none. Its a shame that these regular posters want to dismiss outright new evidenec without even bothering to look at it. "Shame on you "

[Sam Flynn]

The chicane around the navel is certainly thought-provoking, however we don't see the same thing happen in the other murders. Both Kelly's and Chapman's abdomens were opened up via three panels of flesh - more or less regular, it seems, in the case of Kelly; somewhat irregular in Chapman's case. Indeed, Chapman's navel - far from being neatly circumnavigated - was missing from the scene, together with a hunk of belly wall. We have no detailed information about Nichols, but from what little we know it seems that her abdomen was irregularly "skated over" with the knife.

From this it appears that, if the Ripper had any knowledge of post-mortem abdominal opening at all, he seems to have learned it after Hanbury Street, only to revert back to the "three flaps" method after Mitre Square. In other words, Eddowes seems to have been a one-off in this regard, and the fact that the navel was left on a promontory of skin might have been purely accidental. Whether it was or it wasn't, there's about as much skill on display as there is consistency of technique between murders.

Perry
If you are not a medical expert then please refrain from trying to give expert opinion on medical matters. Leave it to the experts.

Hi Trevor,

I did allude to a contemporary professional opinion on the matter that coincides with my own take on the skill exhibited. Its not my theorizing...I just happen to agree with it.

Cheers

[Monty]

Perry
If you are not a medical expert then please refrain from trying to give expert opinion on medical matters. Leave it to the experts.

Does the same go for comments made on menstrual cycles and aprons?

The cut on Eddowes is far from expert, any person can see when comparing Eddowes sketch and photo Gareth provided.

Then again its not as if expertise was needed.

Monty

[Archaic]

Perry
If you are not a medical expert then please refrain from trying to give expert opinion on medical matters. Leave it to the experts.

Mr. Marriott, these are public forums.

Every member has a right to comment as they see fit- even you.

Best regards, Archaic

[Sam Flynn]

Just wanted to say that my experts have also passed the same comment based on their re examination of the records.

The more this topic is discussed the more doubt there is surrounding the original theory

So now we are left with only two theories regarding the removal of the organs.

1. Was JTR an experienced medical man ? because that process could not have been carried out by just anyone reading a medical book or a slaughterman

It rather depends on how one views the process, Trevor. The way I see it, the process consisted of crudely cutting someone open, shoving their entrails aside, and hacking out wobbly bits from their insides. I rather think that humans were able to do that millennia before medical books, or indeed slaughtermen, ever existed.

[Trevor Marriott]

Perry
If you are not a medical expert then please refrain from trying to give expert opinion on medical matters. Leave it to the experts.

It is not established whether Kate Eddowes was killed by anyone nicknamed "Jack the Ripper", so at this point any skill or knowledge that is or is not demonstrated with Kate can be used comparatively with prior and forthcoming victims but not to establish "Jack the Rippers" skill levels.

In that vein, the cut seems to me to be a result of pulling the blade up against the skin, causing it to slightly fold and bunch at the leading edge, resulting in a jagged line. I doubt that it represents anything along the lines of post mortem training. These were not skillfully executed cuts.

I think there are valid reasons for the opinion of Kates murder by one physician, that there was no visible evidence of skill or training by her killer.

Cheers all

[Trevor Marriott]

Just wanted to say that my experts have also passed the same comment based on their re examination of the records.

The more this topic is discussed the more doubt there is surrounding the original theory

So now we are left with only two theories regarding the removal of the organs.

1. Was JTR an experienced medical man ? because that process could not have been carried out by just anyone reading a medical book or a slaughterman, and as i have continued to state everything connected to the murders of Eddowes and Chapman is against the killer being able to remove the organs at the scene

2.The second theory is were the organs removed prior to post mortem at the locations where the bodies were left by someone with more than a reasonable amount of medical knowledge

If i were a betting man i know where my money is going