Jack's Escape from Mitre Square

[Herlock Sholmes]

Brown and Sequeria estimated time was given by both of them during a press interview prior to the post mortem “How long would it have taken him (the killer) to mutilate the body as you found it” Brown replied “At least five minutes” Sequeira when asked the same question and states “three minutes”.

So extra time has to be added onto those times for the organ removalsbecause the organs had not been found to be missing at that time

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

I find this close to impossible to accept. So why didn’t Brown add any time during the actual Inquest as he knew very well that the Coroner was asking how long the entire act would have taken. It makes no sense for Brown to have said 5 minutes (before the PM) without the removal of the organs and 5 minutes again (after the PM) including the removal of the organs? This implies that at the time of the Press interview they knew that there were organs missing.

[Trevor Marriott]

Brown and Sequeria estimated time was given by both of them during a press interview prior to the post mortem “How long would it have taken him (the killer) to mutilate the body as you found it” Brown replied “At least five minutes” Sequeira when asked the same question and states “three minutes”.

So extra time has to be added onto those times for the organ removalsbecause the organs had not been found to be missing at that time

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

A further comment from Dr Brown on 1st Oct "the killer must have entered the square 5 minutes after the police officer left and left five minutes before he returned"

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Joshua Rogan]

A further comment from Dr Brown on 1st Oct "the killer must have entered the square 5 minutes after the police officer left and left five minutes before he returned"

This is not a comment by Brown, but an assumption by the journalist.

[Michael W Richards]

I find this close to impossible to accept. So why didn’t Brown add any time during the actual Inquest as he knew very well that the Coroner was asking how long the entire act would have taken. It makes no sense for Brown to have said 5 minutes (before the PM) without the removal of the organs and 5 minutes again (after the PM) including the removal of the organs? This implies that at the time of the Press interview they knew that there were organs missing.

I believe the medical opinions on time were estimates based on all the injuries discovered on Kate Eddowes having taken place, which of course would have included extracting organs.

[Trevor Marriott]

I believe the medical opinions on time were estimates based on all the injuries discovered on Kate Eddowes having taken place, which of course would have included extracting organs.

You can believe what you want but there is no evidence to show the doctors found organs missing at the crime

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Herlock Sholmes]

”

You can believe what you want but there is no evidence to show the doctors found organs missing at the crime
www.trevormarriott.co.uk

Then why didn’t Brown say at the Inquest when asked how long the killer would have required - ie to kill, do everything and then leave - he said 5 minutes and not .....

“ 5 minutes......oh and another three to remove the organs.”

Ditto Sequeira.

“ 3 minutes.....oh and three minutes to remove the organs.”

Come on Trevor give it up. Your theory has just crumbled.

[Trevor Marriott]

”

Then why didn’t Brown say at the Inquest when asked how long the killer would have required - ie to kill, do everything and then leave - he said 5 minutes and not .....

“ 5 minutes......oh and another three to remove the organs.”

Ditto Sequeira.

“ 3 minutes.....oh and three minutes to remove the organs.”

Come on Trevor give it up. Your theory has just crumbled.

You would like to believe that but it’s not going to go away so live with it

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Herlock Sholmes]

I believe the medical opinions on time were estimates based on all the injuries discovered on Kate Eddowes having taken place, which of course would have included extracting organs.

That makes sense Michael.

[Herlock Sholmes]

You would like to believe that but it’s not going to go away so live with it

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

But you’re asking everyone to believe something that just doesn’t makes sense Trevor. There can be absolutely no doubt at all that Brown at the Inquest meant that the killer required a minimum of 5 minutes to do what he did (which must have included removing the organs because Brown found that they were missing at the PM and so naturally factored their removal into his timing or else he’d have mentioned any extra time required at the Inquest)

This isn’t disputable because it’s there in black and white. Brown and Sequeira (who were both there at the time) believed that the killer had enough time to have done what he did (including removing the organs). Whereas you weren’t there, so on what grounds do you base your assumption that your opinion outweighs theirs?

The idea that the killer didn’t have enough time is dead unless we can categorically show that Brown and Sequeira we’re both wrong. And we can’t.

[Trevor Marriott]

But you’re asking everyone to believe something that just doesn’t makes sense Trevor. There can be absolutely no doubt at all that Brown at the Inquest meant that the killer required a minimum of 5 minutes to do what he did (which must have included removing the organs because Brown found that they were missing at the PM and so naturally factored their removal into his timing or else he’d have mentioned any extra time required at the Inquest)

This isn’t disputable because it’s there in black and white. Brown and Sequeira (who were both there at the time) believed that the killer had enough time to have done what he did (including removing the organs). Whereas you weren’t there, so on what grounds do you base your assumption that your opinion outweighs theirs?

The idea that the killer didn’t have enough time is dead unless we can categorically show that Brown and Sequeira we’re both wrong. And we can’t.

They have been misrepresented by what they said, and researchers have failed to acknowledge this fact

the Star interview was before the organs were found to be missing.

You argue that the "at least 5 minutes" stated by Brown, which he infers could have been longer than 5 minutes, and the 3 minutes by Sequeria incorporates all that the killer did to Eddowes including the organ removals.

If you just take Sequeiras time of 3 minutes, it was, and is physically impossible for all that to have been done in three minutes, when it took Dr Brown`s expert 3 minutes to just remove the uterus in the experiment, and clearly Dr Brown had concerns regarding the time the killer had otherwise he would have not asked his expert to carry out the time test.

You cannot conclusively state what time the couple left the spot where they were seen standing, the later that was the more the time the window of opportunity closes

Given Dr Sequeiras time of 3 mins which you say incorporates the removal of the organs, and Given Dr Browns expert who took 3 mins to remove a uterus again casts a major doubt, and coupled with my experienced modern day expert who took 2 minutes to remove a kidney under a controlled test, both Brown and Sequeria are unsafe to totally rely on simply because what both state are nothing more than guesses.

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[NotBlamedForNothing]

The mutilation timespan (including organ removal) must be partly a function of the available lighting.
The perceived intensity of light is called lux.
Has anyone ever estimated the lighting level, in terms of lux (or lumens)?
What is the point of arguing over mutilation time, or time with the victim, if the lighting condition has not been properly estimated?

[DJA]

Weather,lighting,rainfall ..... all been done

[NotBlamedForNothing]

Does 'done' mean 'properly estimated', or 'argued in forums'?
Can you point me to the answer?

[DJA]

What did your last slave die from?

Look for it yourself.

Lux would have been .0001 at best, unfortunately lux meters prolly hadn't been invented let alone sitting around in Mitre Square.

Mao's Last Dancer (film) - Wikipedia

As a consolation,I can tell you what they used for snow.



Meh, waning crescent moon ,30% illumination at best.
Cloud cover 50% at best.
Darkest corner of Mitre Square.

[JeffHamm]

There is no double dipping, and modern day medical experts clearly dont concur with you, and I wonder why? They are unbiased where you it would seem have an agenda to prop up the old accepted theory

You want to believe that the killer took the organs and it seems you are doing you level best to try to show that these organ removals were done in almost record time that clearly doesn't even fit with the skill and expertise of the Victorian doctors. Talk about being blinkered !

Dr Browns inquest testimony

“Dr. Brown—“The bladder was in no way injured in the body, and I may mention that a man accustomed to remove the portions removed was asked by me to do so as quickly as possible. He accomplished the task in three minutes, but not without injuring the bladder”

A more recent exercise I commissioned with a mortuary took an experience eviscerator two minutes to make a mid-line incision locate and remove a kidney. This was done under mortuary conditions with an element of haste attached to the exercise for obvious reasons, and in full lighting, not in almost total darkness from a blood filled abdomen using a long bladed knife on a wet pavement, and with the eviscerator wearing surgical gloves to allow him to be able to grip the organ,something the killer would not have had access to!

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

Right, so Dr. Brown opened the body, etc, and removed the uterus in 3 minutes. We need to take off time from his 3 minutes since we both agree JtR also opened the abdominal cavity, etc. Brown damaged the bladder, JtR the bowel, and JtR didn't get the whole thing (suggesting JtR may have been in more haste). And your 2 minutes to get the kidney includes getting into the body, so yes, you're double dipping. In fact, you're now tripple dipping, and counting the time to open up the body twice (once for Dr. Brown's uterus removal, and then again for the kidney excersis) and you're not discounting JtR for that time, so JtR opens the abdomen, then you're adding in the time for opening the abdomen and removing the uterus, then adding on again the time to open the abodmen and get the kidney, etc. You're not evaluating the evidence appropriately, you have to take those 2 and 3 minute total times, and remove all of the time except the cut to remove the organ, because we all know JtR did all the rest. Apparently your blinkers prevent you from acknowledging that.

And no, I don't want to believe the killer took the organs, although I recognize you want to believe they did not. Rather, I'm saying the evidence leads to that conclusion, and your arguments to the contrary do not stand up to scrutiny.

And there are, as presented many times on the boards, modern day medical opinions that have no problem with JtR doing all he did in the space of time available. Collect enough opinions and you'll eventually find one to your liking.

You're allowing your desire to overturn things cloud your judgement of the evidence, and triple dipping in times, erroneous claims about the Anatomy Act, and a refusal to accept clear statements like Kelly's heart was taken away and Eddowes was wearing an apron, don't lend themselves to being viewed as strong counter-arguments.

It's a fun idea, would make a great screen play even, but it's not supported by anything that could be viewed as actual evidence.

- Jeff