Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Organ removal ? Warning Graphic Photos

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Trevor Marriott View Post

    Just to keep you happy I am willing to concede that after the body was stripped the body was exmained by those present which did not include Dr Phillips but not to the point of a preliminary post mortem it would have been more of a viewing of the wounds and on that basis they would not have found the organs missing for that to have happened the abdomen would have to have been opened up surgically as it was for the full post mortem, which would have meant that the official later PM would have been compromised.

    There is no evidence in the murder of Chapman that any form of preliminary post mortem took place.

    www.trevormarriott.co.uk
    You mean that you’re admitting that you were wrong but it’s too painful for you to actually say so? Ok. But why won’t you admit that Phillips took part when it shows that he did. He was specifically requested by Brown.

    Again Trevor you are using phrases which I have not used. I’ve not said preliminary post mortem. I have just used the phrase preliminary examination which is the phrase used in the quotes. This doesn’t mean the there was anything official called a preliminary examination. It just meant that there was an examination of the body at the mortuary before the actual PM. Dr Phillips was clearly asked to attend this by Brown and as the quote said, Phillips arrived just as this examination had begun. Why would anyone invent this?

    “Phillips assist in the preliminary examination of the body (later determined to be that of Catherine Eddowes) which was underway when he arrived.

    London Times, Oct. 1, 1888”
    And Phillips arrived at 5.20.

    it would have been more of a viewing of the wounds and on that basis they would not have found the organs missing for that to have happened the abdomen would have to have been opened up surgically as it was for the full post mortem
    Why would the abdomen have to have been opened up surgically when the killer had already done this? And consequentially Trevor, if the abdomen had been sown up how did your organ thief get at them?

    So, we have Dr. Brown requesting Dr. Phillips to join him in examining the body before th PM due to the fact that Phillips performed the PM on Annie Chapman. We don’t know why he wanted to do this before the PM but that doesn’t alter the fact that this appears to have been what happened. Brown didn’t need Phillips assistance in a PM as he was just as capable as Phillips to do a PM. Therefore he wanted to note any comparisons to Annie Chapman and Phillips was vital to that end. So what would they have been looking at? The wounds, yes. But why only the wounds? Why not check if any organs were missing? How long would that check have taken? A few seconds.

    Now I know that you don’t believe that the killer used the apron to remove body parts and I don’t particularly disagree with you on that but it might certainly have been the case that the police believed or suspected this at that time. So if the Doctor could have told the police that there were no organs missing then that particular theory could have been eliminated straight away.
    Last edited by Herlock Sholmes; 09-21-2022, 05:36 PM.
    Regards

    Sir Herlock Sholmes

    “It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into.”

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Varqm View Post

      You could conjure any time you want.You are missing the point.It does not matter.If there was not enough time they would have suggested there was not enough time.They accepted the killer took it so that implied they accepted the time frame,there was enough time to do all the killer did.Brown said there was sufficient time ,done in a hurry,a butcher or a slaughterer could do it.But with some human anatomical knowledge,enough to do the job.
      And that’s the point isn’t it. Those that were there at the time, and who saw the injuries and the conditions and the available time, had no problem with any of this.
      Regards

      Sir Herlock Sholmes

      “It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into.”

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post

        And that’s the point isn’t it. Those that were there at the time, and who saw the injuries and the conditions and the available time, had no problem with any of this.
        Yes.Not only that,doctors,forensic pathologists,,for ex. in the Peter Ustinov doc about the ripper (pathologist William Eckert),has studied this case and had no problems with the killer taking the organs.
        Clearly the first human laws (way older and already established) spawned organized religion's morality - from which it's writers only copied/stole,ex. you cannot kill,rob,steal (forced,it started civil society).
        M. Pacana

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Trevor Marriott View Post

          I should have said the post mortem Phillips did not attend the post mortem !

          Yous keep asking me questions that I have alreday answered do you not read the posts thoroughly
          e
          www.trevormarriott.co.uk
          And again…

          "The post-mortem examination of the body, which took place at the Mortuary, Golden-lane, and was conducted by Dr. Phillips, Dr. Gordon Brown, and Mr. G.W. Sequeira, occupied nearly four hours, but as to the results the doctors declined to speak."

          Daily News of 1 October 1888.


          There seems to have been a few attempts to fraudulently place Phillips at the inquest Trevor
          Regards

          Sir Herlock Sholmes

          “It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into.”

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Trevor Marriott View Post

            he could have taken a cursory look at the body, but we have no evidence of what he did when he arrived at the mortuary or who was there or how long he remained.

            www.trevormarriott.co.uk
            Trevor/all,

            There is no record of anybody realising the organs were missing until Dr Brown's post-mortem on the Sunday afternoon.

            Prior to that post-mortem, who said this, who did that, and so on; is mere conjecture.

            Dr Phillips is irrelevant here. It was not his jurisdiction. He was not called to the inquest.

            Dr Brown detailed his post-mortem findings at the inquest. He went through it step by step, from removal of the stomach contents to discovering a kidney had been removed.

            At this point, there are two options for a reasonable person:

            1) There simply isn't any record of anybody noticing the organs were missing prior to Dr Brown's post-mortem and I accept it.

            2) I don't accept it, but I've made my point and that's that.

            Trevor, you're engaging in allowing your own thread to be derailed by someone who derails threads as a habit. You will not post anything that will prevent him from repeating the same points ad nauseam. You have a decent idea here that is worthy of consideration, and so your best bet is to move away from this whole: "there was a pre-examination and I suggest it was noticed the organs were not there.": there is no record of anybody noticing the organs were missing at a pre-examination.

            It would be useful to get back to the OP which involves a lot more than a pre-examination supposed to involve noticing the organs missing. Fine, the point is noted, but there is nothing on record to support it and so draw your own conclusion but let's get back to the wider OP.

            Comment


            • Again from Cris Malone on Golden Lane mortuary:

              “……it was a most modern facility for its time and described as such. In 1877, a coroner's court was added so jurors would not have to travel any distance in the weather to view the body. At the time of the murders, a Mr. Davies was in charge of the facility and was a professional under employment of the City.

              And as already mentioned, there would have been a guard placed 24/7. This was the result of a long standing civil and cultural controversy involving the use of mortuaries. I researched this for my article in the NIR. The source material for the above was this :
              The London Journal, Vol. 34 No. 1, March, 2009, 1–15; Houses for the Dead: The Provision of Mortuaries in London, 1843–1889;Pam Fisher, University of Leicester, UK

              As also previously mentioned, the transport and care of the body was under Dr. Brown's direct supervision from the time he arrived on the scene until after the preliminary examination was completed by himself, Sequeira and Phillips shortly before 6 a.m”
              Regards

              Sir Herlock Sholmes

              “It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into.”

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Fleetwood Mac View Post

                Trevor/all,

                There is no record of anybody realising the organs were missing until Dr Brown's post-mortem on the Sunday afternoon.

                Prior to that post-mortem, who said this, who did that, and so on; is mere conjecture.

                Dr Phillips is irrelevant here. It was not his jurisdiction. He was not called to the inquest.

                Dr Brown detailed his post-mortem findings at the inquest. He went through it step by step, from removal of the stomach contents to discovering a kidney had been removed.

                At this point, there are two options for a reasonable person:

                1) There simply isn't any record of anybody noticing the organs were missing prior to Dr Brown's post-mortem and I accept it.

                2) I don't accept it, but I've made my point and that's that.

                Trevor, you're engaging in allowing your own thread to be derailed by someone who derails threads as a habit. You will not post anything that will prevent him from repeating the same points ad nauseam. You have a decent idea here that is worthy of consideration, and so your best bet is to move away from this whole: "there was a pre-examination and I suggest it was noticed the organs were not there.": there is no record of anybody noticing the organs were missing at a pre-examination.

                It would be useful to get back to the OP which involves a lot more than a pre-examination supposed to involve noticing the organs missing. Fine, the point is noted, but there is nothing on record to support it and so draw your own conclusion but let's get back to the wider OP.
                You and Fishy derailed the last one and your third musketeer was banned. Grow up. I’m dealing with the details. Not the fantasies. Ignore the vendetta and mind-games and focus on the subject. Your silly ignorings and snide digs don’t wash with me.

                "The post-mortem examination of the body, which took place at the Mortuary, Golden-lane, and was conducted by Dr. Phillips, Dr. Gordon Brown, and Mr. G.W. Sequeira, occupied nearly four hours, but as to the results the doctors declined to speak."

                Daily News of 1 October 1888.
                Last edited by Herlock Sholmes; 09-21-2022, 07:08 PM.
                Regards

                Sir Herlock Sholmes

                “It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into.”

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post

                  You and Fishy derailed the last one and your third musketeer was banned. Grow up. I’m detailing with the details. Not the fantasies. Ignore the vendetta and mind-games and focus on the subject. Your silly ignorings and snide digs don’t wash with me.

                  "The post-mortem examination of the body, which took place at the Mortuary, Golden-lane, and was conducted by Dr. Phillips, Dr. Gordon Brown, and Mr. G.W. Sequeira, occupied nearly four hours, but as to the results the doctors declined to speak."

                  Daily News of 1 October 1888.
                  Dr Phillips would only be relevant to the OP in the event he mentioned that he noticed organs were missing at a pre-examination. He didn't, nor did anyone else.

                  It was Dr Brown's jurisdiction, and he was called to the inquest.

                  Dr Brown detailed his Sunday afternoon post-mortem findings, from top to bottom, and part way through detailed a kidney being missing. This is the first time an authoritative figure makes reference to organs being missing.

                  At this point you usually respond with: "prove it". Save yourself the time. Nobody can. You're left to draw your own conclusion.

                  In the event you believe it was noticed earlier but wasn't recorded, then you're entitled to your opinion.

                  You've made that opinion known on a few occasions on this thread. Stop clogging up the thread with the same points ad nauseam.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Fleetwood Mac View Post

                    Dr Phillips would only be relevant to the OP in the event he mentioned that he noticed organs were missing at a pre-examination. He didn't, nor did anyone else.

                    It was Dr Brown's jurisdiction, and he was called to the inquest.

                    Dr Brown detailed his Sunday afternoon post-mortem findings, from top to bottom, and part way through detailed a kidney being missing. This is the first time an authoritative figure makes reference to organs being missing.

                    At this point you usually respond with: "prove it". Save yourself the time. Nobody can. You're left to draw your own conclusion.

                    In the event you believe it was noticed earlier but wasn't recorded, then you're entitled to your opinion.

                    You've made that opinion known on a few occasions on this thread. Stop clogging up the thread with the same points ad nauseam.
                    What gives you the right to tell others what they can or can’t post? Although I do recall your ‘if I was a moderator’ fantasy on the other thread. Let go of the vendetta. It’s pointless.

                    Trevor has repeatedly claimed that Phillips wasn’t at the PM but evidence exists to say that he was. So isn’t that's a point worth making or do we just blindly accept what Trevor says? It appears to be your way.

                    Ive never said that we can prove that they found the kidney missing before the PM. But it’s certainly worth knowing and accepting that Dr. Brown requested Phillips presence and that we have evidence that they were examining the body when he arrived and that he took part in that examination. He can only have been requested so that he could check any similarities or dissimilarities with Chapman. These similarities can only have been in terms of wounds and missing organs. So although we can’t prove anything it would be a sweeping under the carpet of evidence if we do not consider the very real possibility that they would have checked for missing organs during that examination. Would they have neglected to have checked something that would have taken them a matter of seconds to do?





                    Regards

                    Sir Herlock Sholmes

                    “It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into.”

                    Comment


                    • Evening Standard, October 1st.

                      “The post-mortem examination of the woman found in Mitre-square was made yesterday afternoon at the City mortuary, Golden-lane. The proceedings lasted from 2.30 until six o'clock. Dr. Brown, of 17, Finsbury-circus, surgeon to the City Police force, conducted the operations, and was assisted by Dr. Sequeira of 34, Jewry-street, and Dr. G. B. Phillips, of 2, Spital-square. Dr. Sedgwick Saunders was also present”

                      Phillips at the PM again.
                      Last edited by Herlock Sholmes; 09-21-2022, 08:30 PM.
                      Regards

                      Sir Herlock Sholmes

                      “It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into.”

                      Comment


                      • Morning Advertiser, October 1st,

                        “The unfortunate woman had not been identified. The post mortem examination of the body, which took place at the mortuary, Golden lane, and was conducted by Dr. Phillips, Dr. Gordon Brown, and Mr. G W Sequeira, occupied nearly four hours, but as to its results the doctors decline to speak.”

                        Phillips at the PM.
                        Regards

                        Sir Herlock Sholmes

                        “It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into.”

                        Comment


                        • It’s difficult to see how Chapman’s organs might have been taken in the mortuary with a Police Officer on guard until Dr. Phillips got there.

                          “Inspector Chandler, recalled, said he reached the mortuary a few minutes after seven. The body did not appear to have been disturbed. He did not stay until the doctor arrived. Police-constable 376 H was left in charge, with the mortuary keeper. Robert Marne, the mortuary keeper and an inmate of the Whitechapel Union Workhouse, said he received the body at seven o'clock on Saturday morning. He remained at the mortuary until Dr. Phillips came. The door of the mortuary was locked except when two nurses from an infirmary came and undressed the body. No one else touched the corpse. He gave the key into the hands of the police. “
                          Regards

                          Sir Herlock Sholmes

                          “It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into.”

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post
                            Morning Advertiser, October 1st,

                            “The unfortunate woman had not been identified. The post mortem examination of the body, which took place at the mortuary, Golden lane, and was conducted by Dr. Phillips, Dr. Gordon Brown, and Mr. G W Sequeira, occupied nearly four hours, but as to its results the doctors decline to speak.”

                            Phillips at the PM.
                            So what is your point in showing Phillips was at the later post mortem ?

                            You cannot disprove the fact that he could have attended the crime scene and viewed the body there when asked to do so by Dr Brown after all there was nearly 60 mins when the body was laying in Mitre Square before being moved to the mortuary, time enough for him to attend and view the body

                            And what does it prove as to who attended the post mortem all that matters is that the organs were documented as missing at that time, not before, and not at any preliminary post mortem which did not happen.

                            You keep citing newspaper reports which are notorioulsy unsafe there were no reporters inside the mortuary what they reported as happened is nothing more than conjecture.

                            www.trevormarriott.co.uk

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post
                              It’s difficult to see how Chapman’s organs might have been taken in the mortuary with a Police Officer on guard until Dr. Phillips got there.

                              “Inspector Chandler, recalled, said he reached the mortuary a few minutes after seven. The body did not appear to have been disturbed. He did not stay until the doctor arrived. Police-constable 376 H was left in charge, with the mortuary keeper. Robert Marne, the mortuary keeper and an inmate of the Whitechapel Union Workhouse, said he received the body at seven o'clock on Saturday morning. He remained at the mortuary until Dr. Phillips came. The door of the mortuary was locked except when two nurses from an infirmary came and undressed the body. No one else touched the corpse. He gave the key into the hands of the police. “
                              But it has been documented that at the inquest a nurse stated the body was outside the mortuary I am sure it didnt decide to move itself from inside to outside for a breath of fresh air. The nurses had no reason to lie, but perhaps the mortuary attendant did, after all it has been documented that mortuary attendants were complict in the illicit trade in organs.

                              www.trevormarriott.co.uk

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post
                                Ive never said that we can prove that they found the kidney missing before the PM. But it’s certainly worth knowing and accepting that Dr. Brown requested Phillips presence and that we have evidence that they were examining the body when he arrived and that he took part in that examination. He can only have been requested so that he could check any similarities or dissimilarities with Chapman. These similarities can only have been in terms of wounds and missing organs. So although we can’t prove anything it would be a sweeping under the carpet of evidence if we do not consider the very real possibility that they would have checked for missing organs during that examination. Would they have neglected to have checked something that would have taken them a matter of seconds to do?
                                Hi Herlock,

                                You make some very good points here. Problem is that we haven't found anything, yet, that details the actual purpose of the preliminary examination, and are probably unlikely to find anything as after the 4 hour post mortem the doctors "declined to speak".

                                It can be looked at two ways. As you say, it would have taken a short time to check the organs at the preliminary examination, and isn't it likely that that was its purpose? OR. If matters involving Phillips had been sorted at the preliminary examination, what was the necessity of his attendance at the post mortem?

                                Cheers, George
                                “Contrariwise,” continued Tweedledee, “if it was so, it might be, and if it were so, it would be but as it isn’t, it ain’t. That’s logic.”

                                “Oh, you can't help that,” said the Cat: “we're all mad here. I'm mad. You're mad.” “How do you know I'm mad?” said Alice. “You must be,” said the Cat, or you wouldn't have come here.”

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X