Organ removal ? Warning Graphic Photos

[GBinOz]

Hello George,

I don’t have much of an answer apart from an echo of what Debra Arif said - why would the Press invent something as specific as this if there wasn’t some truth to it. We know that the Press can get stuff wrong, even jazz things up to sell a few extra copies, but these explanations don’t ring true to me for these.

I can’t really answer on the details or to what extent they recreated the conditions. I accept of course that they couldn’t have recreated it exactly unless they’d grabbed a corpse that had died a few minutes ago which of course isn’t plausible. It appears to have satisfied Brown though.

Hi Herlock,

I am not one that advocates the discarding of press reports, so I see no reason to doubt what is being said in this case. However, it is easy to latch onto the three and a half minutes without questioning its relevance to the circumstances of what happened in Mitre Square. That said, it does have to be admitted as another piece in the puzzle.

Cheers, George

[Trevor Marriott]

I’m not trying to claim that this was A1 security George but was it so easy to steal body parts? This was a very high profile case after all. I’m wondering might there even have been a reporter or two hanging around to see what Doctors or police officers might show up? Would the Doctors have bothered telling the press when the PM was taking place or would they have just hung around knowing that a PM was due? As I said in my other post can we be sure that there wasn’t another PM on that day or at least an attendant or two milling around. I’m certainly not saying that body parts couldn’t have been stolen as I believe Trevor has evidence that this did occur but this isn’t evidence enough to prove that organs were taken at the mortuary in this case.

You need to read back on the posts which describe the activities of body dealers in Whitechapel and the illict trade in organs from mortuaries and complict mortuary attendants let me refresh your memory set out below are just two examples taken from several books written on the topic of body dealers by Professor Elizabeth Hurren from Leicester University

" I make mention of a documented case from 1887 where a body dealer who was simply referred to as ‘Ward’ who was masquerading as an ‘undertaker’ acquired the corpse of “Patrick O’Brian, a male, aged 66, who died in St. Giles and Bloomsbury Workhouse on 27th October 1887” the deal to acquire the body was made with a nod and handshake at “7pm on the 29th of October” in person with mortuary staff. At the time the body was intact. On arrival at the back of St. Bartholomew’s Hospital later that night, the body was found to be missing a limb. I am sure it didn’t fall off en route to the hospital.
Two other cases of similar note relate to the deaths of two separate females Mary Beckett and Elizabeth Murphy both died at the Mile End Infirmary on the 13th and 14th March 1888 respectively, a body dealer named ‘Slade’ arranged to discretely collect their bodies for sale on “16th March 1888 at 6.15pm” from the mortuary attendant who was paid a supply fee.

So there was a flourishing trade in both bodies and body parts, and in particular female body parts !!!!!!!!!!!!!!

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[GBinOz]

I’m not trying to claim that this was A1 security George but was it so easy to steal body parts? This was a very high profile case after all. I’m wondering might there even have been a reporter or two hanging around to see what Doctors or police officers might show up? Would the Doctors have bothered telling the press when the PM was taking place or would they have just hung around knowing that a PM was due? As I said in my other post can we be sure that there wasn’t another PM on that day or at least an attendant or two milling around. I’m certainly not saying that body parts couldn’t have been stolen as I believe Trevor has evidence that this did occur but this isn’t evidence enough to prove that organs were taken at the mortuary in this case.

Hi Herlock,

I don't disagree with what you say, but the fact is that according to the testimony at the inquest the nurses should have found the body in the locked shed, but testified that they found it in the yard. This creates a possibility that the body could have been tampered with, but not a certainty. A question worthy of discussion is, did a similar opportunity exist in Eddowes case?

Cheers, George

[Herlock Sholmes]

Hi Herlock,

In the spirit of debate, not disagreement, I would pose the question you asked me earlier - under what circumstances?
Did the three and a half minutes include the strangulation, throat cut, face cutting, or just the mutilation of the abdomen and organ extraction? Was the recreation conducted in the dark with the body on the ground? Would an expert practitioner be expected to achieve faster results than someone who had performed the operation only once before? The experiment would have been conducted on a cadaver, so did they recreate the blood in the abdominal cavity? How did they recreate the warmth of the body?

I have no set opinion on all this, and I hope there will be genuine discussion without the usual adversarial component.

Cheers, George

Hello George,

I don’t have much of an answer apart from an echo of what Debra Arif said - why would the Press invent something as specific as this if there wasn’t some truth to it. We know that the Press can get stuff wrong, even jazz things up to sell a few extra copies, but these explanations don’t ring true to me for these.

I can’t really answer on the details or to what extent they recreated the conditions. I accept of course that they couldn’t have recreated it exactly unless they’d grabbed a corpse that had died a few minutes ago which of course isn’t plausible. It appears to have satisfied Brown though.

[Trevor Marriott]

I thought I’d read something on this subject on an old thread on JTRForums also from Cris Malone. I just found it, from 2013. Trevor posted on it too, making the same old points that he’s making her but being disagreed with by a different group of people. This is the post from Cris…


An early experiment?

I ran across this article from the Oct. 6 edition of the East London Observer in the extensive press reports section at Casebook.

It is describing the drama at the Eddowes inquest on Thursday, Oct. 4th as the last witness, Dr. Gordon Brown, revealed to the court that the same organ (plus a kidney) that had been removed from Annie Chapman had also been excised from Catherine Eddowes. Although rumors and speculation had persisted since the day of the murder, this was the first time that an official confirmation had been made about this. The medicos and the police had been elusive on this bit of evidence up to this time.

What is particularly interesting is the line I've placed in bold. This is supposed to be from Gordon Brown himself, although this revelation can not be found in the official written testimony or anywhere else as far as I can determine. If true, it helps to explain why the medicos in this case may have reached their conclusions about the time it took for the murderer to commit the act.

I have included the majority of the relative piece in this article so the part in bold can be seen in perspective. The entire article can been found in the Casebook press reports, East London Observer, Saturday, Oct. 6, 1888.


“...Probably the murder was committed with a sharp-pointed blade at least six inches long, and the throat had been cut right through to the vertebral cartilages, just as was the case, it will be remembered, in the Hanbury-street murder. Dr. Brown said that he had removed the stomach, but had not as yet had time to examine it so as to determine whether any kind of drug had been administered. The left kidney, the witness went on to explain, had been removed in a particular manner. "Do you," said the City Solicitor, Mr. Crawford, "draw any conclusions from that?" and the answer evidently received the deepest attention. "I think that somebody who knew the position of the kidney and how to cut it out must have done it." It had been manifest for some little time that the City Solicitor in his cross examination of the witness had been leading up to what he knew would prove sensational, and the profoundest interest was displayed by all in court as the fact of the anatomical knowledge of the assassin became established by repeated answers of the surgical expert; and when at length in answer to explicit inquiry he stated that precisely the same organ - the uterus with its ligaments - as had been found missing in the case of Annie Chapman was also missing here, together with the left kidney, the sensation in court was profound. The possibility of this had, of course, been surmised, but all information on the results of the post-mortem examination had been steadily refused, and this announcement came as a startling confirmation of what had before been only suspected. In proof of the anatomical and surgical skill of the assassin, Dr. Brown added that for the purpose of practically testing the time required for what had been done to this unfortunate woman, an expert practitioner had actually performed this operation, and found that it took three minutes and a half. The witness was disposed to believe that the murderer had been hurried, and had probably done all he intended to do, or he would not have slashed and hacked the face about, which he had no doubt done merely for the sake of concealing the identity of the woman. "Would the parts removed be of any use for professional purposes?" asked Mr. Crawford. "Not the slightest," was the reply. "Would the knowledge necessary for these mutilations be likely to be possessed by one engaged in cutting up animals?" was another question put, and the answer was unhesitatingly, "Yes, sir."


It was followed by this comment by highly respected researcher Debra Arif:

“That's a very interesting find, Cris.

It would be an odd thing for the press to totally invent a statement like that without any basis in fact. It would shed a whole new light on why the timings for organ removal were accepted at the time, if true. Excellent.”

I agree. Why would the newspaper invent something like this? Certainly the press can make errors but something like this? You can’t mis-hear or mis-quote something as specific as this.

Yes but we have no knowledge under what conditions that test was conducted if it was in a mortuary with a body on a slab easy for a skilled surgeon in three and a half minutes and in the case of Eddowes two organs were removed so double the time and we dont know if the body used had already been open up if not again more time needed.

I am sure the test was not done in the dark in the street from a blood filled abdomen and besides added time for the couple to walk into the square and for the killer to murder and mutilate, rifle her pockets and purportedly cut a piece of apron, and notice the surgeon used in this test damaged the bladder. The bladder of Eddowes was not damaged I wonder why bearing in mind the killer would have been feeling blind in the abdomen. The answer is the killer did not remove the organs

But lets not forget Dr Phillisp in the Chapman case where he states at least 15 mins to carry out the murder and remove the uterus

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Herlock Sholmes]

The peculiar thing is Herlock, that the nurse testified at the inquest that when they arrived they found the body in the ambulance in the yard.

Cheers, George

I’m not trying to claim that this was A1 security George but was it so easy to steal body parts? This was a very high profile case after all. I’m wondering might there even have been a reporter or two hanging around to see what Doctors or police officers might show up? Would the Doctors have bothered telling the press when the PM was taking place or would they have just hung around knowing that a PM was due? As I said in my other post can we be sure that there wasn’t another PM on that day or at least an attendant or two milling around. I’m certainly not saying that body parts couldn’t have been stolen as I believe Trevor has evidence that this did occur but this isn’t evidence enough to prove that organs were taken at the mortuary in this case.

[GBinOz]

In proof of the anatomical and surgical skill of the assassin, Dr. Brown added that for the purpose of practically testing the time required for what had been done to this unfortunate woman, an expert practitioner had actually performed this operation, and found that it took three minutes and a half.

Hi Herlock,

In the spirit of debate, not disagreement, I would pose the question you asked me earlier - under what circumstances?
Did the three and a half minutes include the strangulation, throat cut, face cutting, or just the mutilation of the abdomen and organ extraction? Was the recreation conducted in the dark with the body on the ground? Would an expert practitioner be expected to achieve faster results than someone who had performed the operation only once before? The experiment would have been conducted on a cadaver, so did they recreate the blood in the abdominal cavity? How did they recreate the warmth of the body?

I have no set opinion on all this, and I hope there will be genuine discussion without the usual adversarial component.

Cheers, George

[Herlock Sholmes]

Why would they have called Phillips in any event if what you say did happen, Dr Brown was quiet capable of examining the body to see if organs were missing when he was present with the body soon after it arrived at the mortuary, and none of those also present make mention of any preliminary examination.

Your source for what you seek to rely on is a newspaper report and as is known they are notoriously unreliable

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

Don’t start with the ‘seek to rely on’ nonsense Trevor. Can’t we have a break from that?

Brown said at the inquest that he called Phillips in. Was that made up to?

Why would a preliminary investigation be invented by someone? Be serious Trevor.

Why would a newspaper simply invent the story about the experiment?

These are inconveniences that you’re trying to sweep under the carpet.

[Herlock Sholmes]

How could the doctors tell if they were missing?

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

By looking.

[Trevor Marriott]

Agreed. He arrived as a preliminary examination was taking place which he joined in. A preliminary examination where the extent and nature of the injuries would have taken place. Where they would have noticed a missing kidney and uterus unless he specifically called Phillips in just to look at her facial injuries. Get real Trevor.

Why would they have called Phillips in any event if what you say did happen, Dr Brown was quiet capable of examining the body to see if organs were missing when he was present with the body soon after it arrived at the mortuary, and none of those also present make mention of any preliminary examination.

Your source for what you seek to rely on is a newspaper report and as is known they are notoriously unreliable

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Trevor Marriott]

Or that the condition of those parts would have made them unsuitable to a professional.

How could the doctors tell if they were missing?

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[GBinOz]

An interesting point by Monty (Neil Bell) over on JTRForums (same thread)

“In the case of Chapman, as Mann stated the Mortuary was locked, with only the 2 nurses permitted inside to strip the body, and that he then handed the keys of said locked mortuary to the Police for them to look after, wouldn't that draw doubt upon your theory?”

These mortuaries weren’t simply open sheds with ‘get your free body parts here’ signs.

The peculiar thing is Herlock, that the nurse testified at the inquest that when they arrived they found the body in the ambulance in the yard.

Cheers, George

[Joshua Rogan]

Dr Phillips did not take part in the post mortem

According to the Times 1 Oct he did;

The body was removed as soon as possible to the mortuary in Golden-lane, where it was examined in the presence of Dr. Brown and Dr. Sequeira. Dr. Phillips, of Spital-square, the surgeon of the H Division of Metropolitan Police, arrived shortly afterwards, and assisted in the preliminary examination of the body.

In the afternoon a post-mortem examination of the body was made by Dr. Brown, assisted by Dr. Sequeira, Dr. Phillips, and Dr. M'Kellar (the chief surgeon of the Metropolitan Police). Dr. Yarrow (H Division Metropolitan Police) and Dr. Sedgwick Saunders were also present at the examination."

[Herlock Sholmes]

An interesting point by Monty (Neil Bell) over on JTRForums (same thread)

“In the case of Chapman, as Mann stated the Mortuary was locked, with only the 2 nurses permitted inside to strip the body, and that he then handed the keys of said locked mortuary to the Police for them to look after, wouldn't that draw doubt upon your theory?”

These mortuaries weren’t simply open sheds with ‘get your free body parts here’ signs.

[Herlock Sholmes]

I can’t find the actual quote but I seem to recall the late Nick Warren calling the killer a trophy taker who removed body parts at the scene. Nick Warren was a surgeon.