Misconception about Mary's Right arm

[richardh]

I have read this on a few websites and I have also had to correct some posters on this forum regarding Mary's Right arm post-mortem.

An article appears on whitechapeljack.com (linked)

https://whitechapeljack.com/the-whitechapel-murders/mary-jane-kelly/

this is a screenshot of the part that is incorrect:


This misconception comes from a misunderstanding of the terminology used by Dr. Thomas Bond.
Bond, in his report, stated:
"The right arm was slightly abducted from the body and rested on the mattress. The elbow was bent, the forearm supine with the fingers clenched."

It is the word 'abducted' used in this sentence that has seemingly given way to an urban legend that the arm was severed (or partly severed) from her body. This is NOT the case.

In medical terminology, a limb that is described as being 'abducted' means that the limb in question (leg or arm usually) is simply moving or has moved away from the midline of the torso. The basic anatomical position of a body is a set standard and allows medical professionals to describe in their reports the position of a given part of human anatomy. Terminology is also a set standard and there is a long list of words used to describe the positioning of the limb/body part in question.

Cutting a long story short, for a limb to be abducted from the body is simply a medical way of saying the limb has been positioned away from the midline. So if you stand with your arms held out like an airplane your arms are fully abducted from your body or your arms are 90 degrees abducted from your body:

http://www.machinedesign.com/sites/machinedesign.com/files/uploads/2015/02/DiffBtwn.jpg

It does NOT mean your arm has been disconnected from your body.

Unless there is reliably documented information from this case that Mary's right arm was indeed cut (or partially severed) from her body then I can say with certainty that Dr. Bond was simply stating a medical fact that her arm was fully connected to her body but moved slightly away from her midline.

[Sam Flynn]

Indeed, Richard. I pointed this out a few years back, but it's good to remind people of what precisely Bond meant.

Accuracy is important!

[Joshua Rogan]

Hi Richard,
There is at least one press report that says one arm was indeed partially severed - Daily News 10th Nov;

"Some of the internal parts of the body had been taken away, while, in addition, one arm was almost severed from the trunk, and one hand thrust inside the empty cavity of the abdomen."

Dr Bond says only "...the arms mutilated by several jagged wounds..." and that "both arms and forearms had extensive and jagged wounds".
Were these wounds deep and severe enough for a non-medical witness to describe the arm as "almost severed"? When does severe become severed?
It's worth noting that the head too was sometimes reported as "severed or almost severed" from the body, and Bond reports that "The tissues of the neck were severed all round down to the bone".

[richardh]

If we take 'abducted' to mean (in the incorrect sense) severed, then the witness (newspaper) would see that the arm was totally detached and noticeably disconnected from the body and be quick to report as such. So the 'almost severed from the trunk' as stated in the newspaper is either seeing a badly mutilated arm which is nonetheless still attached to the body or they are simply embellishing the words in Bond's report.

If the arm was severed or even 'almost severed' (which is not severed at all!) then Bond would have stated this clearly in his report. The fact that he actually used the word 'abducted' tells us that the arm was still firmly attached to the body - damaged, yes, but still very much attached.

Hi Richard,
There is at least one press report that says one arm was indeed partially severed - Daily News 10th Nov;

"Some of the internal parts of the body had been taken away, while, in addition, one arm was almost severed from the trunk, and one hand thrust inside the empty cavity of the abdomen."

Dr Bond says only "...the arms mutilated by several jagged wounds..." and that "both arms and forearms had extensive and jagged wounds".
Were these wounds deep and severe enough for a non-medical witness to describe the arm as "almost severed"? When does severe become severed?
It's worth noting that the head too was sometimes reported as "severed or almost severed" from the body, and Bond reports that "The tissues of the neck were severed all round down to the bone".

[Sam Flynn]

An arm with "several" wounds could conceivably become "severed" once transmitted via the jungle grapevine.