Who was killed by Jack the Ripper?

[Lewis C]

Hi Lewis C,

Certainly, Tabram's killer could have had anatomical knowledge and not applied it because it could have been his first kill and he had not yet decided on his definitive MO. It is an intriguing possibility.

But when it comes to finding out who killed whom, we always come up against the question of whether or not such anatomical knowledge existed in the first place.

Like the doctors of the time, several members of this forum have definitive opinions in one field or another.

I read the arguments for and against with great interest, but remain undecided.

If we could reach a consensus on the question of anatomical knowledge, we could certainly narrow down the list of suspects.

I'm on the fence about that too. Since I think it's possible some level was needed, I do think that if we know a suspect had it, that's a point in favor of his suspect status, but if we don't know a suspect had it, he could still be a good suspect for other reasons.

[Marcel Prost]

I'm on the fence about that too. Since I think it's possible some level was needed, I do think that if we know a suspect had it, that's a point in favor of his suspect status, but if we don't know a suspect had it, he could still be a good suspect for other reasons.

Yes, I think you're absolutely right, Lewis. Anatomical knowledge can certainly weigh in favor of a suspect, but its absence doesn't necessarily disqualify someone either, precisely because there is no consensus on this issue. Anatomical knowledge is only one piece of an endless puzzle.

[Fernglas]

Yes, I think you're absolutely right, Lewis. Anatomical knowledge can certainly weigh in favor of a suspect, but its absence doesn't necessarily disqualify someone either, precisely because there is no consensus on this issue. Anatomical knowledge is only one piece of an endless puzzle.

Hi Marcel, Lewis and all!
For most of the suspects their lack of anatomical/surgical knowledge and skill is reason to disqualify them. Only among the old doctors there was disconsense for whatever reason, one of the biggest gifts the officials gave the Ripper. But even among the old doctors there was a majority who was convinced that the Ripper had some up to substantial knowledge of anatomy and surgery. If you give modern doctors/surgical staff the reports about the Ripper murders and ask them about their opinion you will always hear that the Ripper had substantial knowledge and skills. You have to search long and hard for the contrarians for contrary´s sake who might tell you the Ripper was a hack just to sow discord.

I do not suck this out of my fingers when I say that the Ripper had considerable knowledge and skill in anatomy and surgery. No amateur is able to do what happened in Mitre Square, it is impossible for him. What is far too much disregarded by some are the circumstances on 30.9.1888. The Ripper made a coursebook-like kidney extraction in the dark, on his knees and under quite heavy time pressure. The situation at place negates any kind of amateur. Ask yourself, could you extract this kidney ifollowing fixed steps (you might just have read about) in the dark, crouching/kneeling on the street, not standing at a nice, alighted medical ward table and under the pressure to be very quick?
It is a sound teleological approach and logical extrapolation to posit that the Ripper had considerable anatomical and surgical knowledge and skill, since without it a solid kidney extraction under really adverse conditions and with great speed is simply not possible.

[The Rookie Detective]

Hi Marcel, Lewis and all!
For most of the suspects their lack of anatomical/surgical knowledge and skill is reason to disqualify them. Only among the old doctors there was disconsense for whatever reason, one of the biggest gifts the officials gave the Ripper. But even among the old doctors there was a majority who was convinced that the Ripper had some up to substantial knowledge of anatomy and surgery. If you give modern doctors/surgical staff the reports about the Ripper murders and ask them about their opinion you will always hear that the Ripper had substantial knowledge and skills. You have to search long and hard for the contrarians for contrary´s sake who might tell you the Ripper was a hack just to sow discord.

I do not suck this out of my fingers when I say that the Ripper had considerable knowledge and skill in anatomy and surgery. No amateur is able to do what happened in Mitre Square, it is impossible for him. What is far too much disregarded by some are the circumstances on 30.9.1888. The Ripper made a coursebook-like kidney extraction in the dark, on his knees and under quite heavy time pressure. The situation at place negates any kind of amateur. Ask yourself, could you extract this kidney ifollowing fixed steps (you might just have read about) in the dark, crouching/kneeling on the street, not standing at a nice, alighted medical ward table and under the pressure to be very quick?
It is a sound teleological approach and logical extrapolation to posit that the Ripper had considerable anatomical and surgical knowledge and skill, since without it a solid kidney extraction under really adverse conditions and with great speed is simply not possible.

I agree.

I think the idea that...

It was dark, it had been raining heavily, the Square had multiple access points for anyone to walk through at any given moment, there was at least one rotational police beat that covered the Square, and the post mortem mutilations and organ extractions took place out in the open, and not in a controlled environment; all add up together to make the idea that the Ripper knew what he was doing, all that more believable.

[GBinOz]

Yes, I think you're absolutely right, Lewis. Anatomical knowledge can certainly weigh in favor of a suspect, but its absence doesn't necessarily disqualify someone either, precisely because there is no consensus on this issue. Anatomical knowledge is only one piece of an endless puzzle.

Oh look, We've just discovered this painting that that shows extensive artistic merit, perhaps in the style of Van Gough. Let's ask that street corner bum if he painted it.

Sorry to be sarcastic Marcel, but I feel that surgical skill is being relegated to the realm of "anyone with a knife".

[Fiver]

Oh look, We've just discovered this painting that that shows extensive artistic merit, perhaps in the style of Van Gough. Let's ask that street corner bum if he painted it.

Sorry to be sarcastic Marcel, but I feel that surgical skill is being relegated to the realm of "anyone with a knife".

Most of the doctors who examined the victims disagree with you.

"I think that the murderer had no design on any particular organ of the body. He was not possessed of any great anatomical skill.' - Dr. G. W. Sequeira, surgeon

[Coroner] Would you consider that the person who inflicted the wounds possessed anatomical skill?
[Dr. Frederick Gordon Brown] He must have had a good deal of knowledge as to the position of the abdominal organs, and the way to remove them.
[Coroner] Would the parts removed be of any use for professional purposes?
[Dr. Frederick Gordon Brown] None whatever.
[Coroner] Would the removal of the kidney, for example, require special knowledge?
[Dr. Frederick Gordon Brown] It would require a good deal of knowledge as to its position, because it is apt to be overlooked, being covered by a membrane.
[Coroner] Would such a knowledge be likely to be possessed by some one accustomed to cutting up animals?
[Dr. Frederick Gordon Brown] Yes.

[andy1867]

put yourself in the position...(Obviously iI don't mean literally)...But..would you know how to get a uterus?..or a kidney? or even know what they looked like?
I wouldn't because i've no knowledge of anatomy, or removal of organs (Obviously I'm a Wednesday fan and have tried tearing me own eyes out at Hillsborough)...but seriously..in the dark, quickly?

[The Rookie Detective]

I would say that it would be possible for the average person at the time to have some basic and general understanding of human anatomy.

But it's the capability that the killer showed in being able to use a knife, and then use that knife to evicerate and extract certain organs.

That would needed to have taken someone who at the very least had done it before.

The murder of Chapman was the turning point.

Knowing where things are in the body isn't particularly impressive, but knowing where and how to cut, and then being able to locate and extract various organs, indicates that the killer also had the ability to combine his anatomical knowledge with his ability to also get what he wanted by the use of a knife.

The chasm between having a theoritcal understanding, and having practical ability to actually use of a knife to cut someone open and remove organs, is absolutely vast.

The killer had to have been someone who was accustomed to cutting things open.

Whether that be animals or humans

[Tom_Wescott]

True enough, Rookie, but I think it's a mistake to attribute the cutting up of things (animals, for instance) to the killer's trade. There were no shortage of animals around Whitechapel and Spitalfields. And no shortage of knives.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Doctored Whatsit]

True enough, Rookie, but I think it's a mistake to attribute the cutting up of things (animals, for instance) to the killer's trade. There were no shortage of animals around Whitechapel and Spitalfields. And no shortage of knives.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

Hi Tom,

Agreed, but there is a little more in the evidence. The killer knew exactly how to swiftly end a life with a throat slitting in a manner designed to get little or no blood on his person - like, for example, a slaughterer would do. He knew exactly what he was doing, and he could work swiftly with a knife, very sharp, and 6-8 inches long and probably longer, according to the surgeons. That is no ordinary everyday man, and no average knife. There is a very definite steer here to someone accustomed to doing this sort of thing.

I don't insist on it defitely being a slaughterer, but I think someone of that ilk would be very likely, as they possessed the necessary weapon and skills, and most others didn't.

[The Rookie Detective]

Hi Tom,

Agreed, but there is a little more in the evidence. The killer knew exactly how to swiftly end a life with a throat slitting in a manner designed to get little or no blood on his person - like, for example, a slaughterer would do. He knew exactly what he was doing, and he could work swiftly with a knife, very sharp, and 6-8 inches long and probably longer, according to the surgeons. That is no ordinary everyday man, and no average knife. There is a very definite steer here to someone accustomed to doing this sort of thing.

I don't insist on it defitely being a slaughterer, but I think someone of that ilk would be very likely, as they possessed the necessary weapon and skills, and most others didn't.

Totally agree.

The idea that an "average" person was able to do what the Ripper did, is not likely IMO.

The idea that lots of men carried a 6 to 8 inch knife, and that most men were capable of cutting throats, has a rather Dickensian feel to it, and belongs in the realms of fantasy and enigmatic Ripper myth that so many Ripperologists adhere to.

In reality, post mortem mutilation murder was very rare, and only a handful of people would have had the capacity, skill and abnormal mental state to be able to inflict those wounds.

It's odd that after 137 years, there are still scores and scores of suspects.

Baffling.