If Mrs. Maxwell Didn't See Mary Who Did She See?

[Abby Normal]

If the heart was found In the pail or accounted for before or at the time of the post mortem there would be no need to mention it missing. But if after describing it missing from the pericardium I would have then expected it to be stated it was missing from the room taken away by the killer but we don’t see evidence of that or at any time thereafter by anyone.

How anyone can say with their hand on their heart that bonds statement is enough to say the killer took away the heart beggars belief

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

HI Trevy!

If the heart was found In the pail or accounted for before or at the time of the post mortem there would be no need to mention it missing.

exactly!

But if after describing it missing from the pericardium I would have then expected it to be stated it was missing from the room taken away by the killer but we don’t see evidence of that or at any time thereafter by anyone.

not neccesarily-by stating the heart was absent, and not saying it was found, could obviously imply it was taken by the killer.

How anyone can say with their hand on their heart that bonds statement is enough to say the killer took away the heart beggars belief

Only if you dont have hands (or a heart-but then you would probably not being able to say anything) or your belief system is based on Greek Mythology.

[Trevor Marriott]

yes it could if there was any evidence to back up that implication you mention[/B]

Only if you dont have hands (or a heart-but then you would probably not being able to say anything) or your belief system is based on Greek Mythology.

Well Greek mythology has stood the test if time. I am sure my belief will also equal that. Its in the scriptures, in years to come they will mention my name along with the other famous Greeks, Plato, Socrates Aristotle and many others, and all thanks to you

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[rjpalmer]

Trevor - why on earth would the police confess to the press (ie., The Times report that you quote as evidence) the exact nature of the crime scene? And the exact nature of the mutilations and what was or was not missing?

It would be utterly stupid for the police to publicize all the facts of a crime scene. They have to keep details back from the public, otherwise they are at the mercy of any crackpot that wants to come forward and confess or prove 'inside knowledge.' Important details are deliberately left out so police can later 'test' the knowledge of the army of confessors that always comes forward in high profile cases. As you no doubt know, police secrecy has its reasons.

So, in other words, had the heart been missing from the room, Scotland Yard, the Met, H Division, etc. would not have admitted it. One only has to observe how Dr. Phillips was so utterly opposed to revealing the exact nature of the mutilations to the Coroner's jury during the Chapman case, that is, until Baxter forced his hand.

So personally, I think it is rather gullible to accept The Times report at face value. It is against the policy of Scotland Yard to give up the goods. Dr. Bond's internal report is far more credible.

[Abby Normal]

Well Greek mythology has stood the test if time. I am sure my belief will also equal that. Its in the scriptures, in years to come they will mention my name along with the other famous Greeks, Plato, Socrates Aristotle and many others, and all thanks to you

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

???? : O

[Joshua Rogan]

Well Greek mythology has stood the test if time. I am sure my belief will also equal that. Its in the scriptures, in years to come they will mention my name along with the other famous Greeks, Plato, Socrates Aristotle and many others, and all thanks to you

I think you're most likely to be compared with Homer.
D'oh!

[Abby Normal]

I think you're most likely to be compared with Homer.
D'oh!

now that was witty

[Wickerman]

Trevor - why on earth would the police confess to the press (ie., The Times report that you quote as evidence) the exact nature of the crime scene? And the exact nature of the mutilations and what was or was not missing?

Exactly!

"...for the police gave peremptory instructions to everyone not to allude to the circumstances in the faintest way. Dr. Phillips was especially emphatic in his desire that the investigations should not to be made known. .......
Up to the present the police refuse the Press any information". Echo 9 Nov.

".......no definite information has been received at the time of writing, thanks to the extreme reticence of the police". East London Observer, 10 Nov.

"Acting upon orders, the detectives and inspectors declined to furnish any information of what had occurred, and refused permission to the press to inspect the place." Daily Telegraph, 10 Nov.

Throughout the entire investigation the Met. refused to share information with the press.
The City force is a different story, but Scotland Yard & the Met. did not appreciate how to use the press to help in the investigation, so they shut them out.

[DJA]

The Chief Superintendent,City of London Police was responsible for strategy,standards and operational policy.

RL Stevenson's cousin Henry Smith was a Newcomen .... oops,newcomer to the position in 1885.

Exactly!

"...for the police gave peremptory instructions to everyone not to allude to the circumstances in the faintest way. Dr. Phillips was especially emphatic in his desire that the investigations should not to be made known. .......
Up to the present the police refuse the Press any information". Echo 9 Nov.

".......no definite information has been received at the time of writing, thanks to the extreme reticence of the police". East London Observer, 10 Nov.

"Acting upon orders, the detectives and inspectors declined to furnish any information of what had occurred, and refused permission to the press to inspect the place." Daily Telegraph, 10 Nov.

Throughout the entire investigation the Met. refused to share information with the press.
The City force is a different story, but Scotland Yard & the Met. did not appreciate how to use the press to help in the investigation, so they shut them out.

[Trevor Marriott]

Exactly!

"...for the police gave peremptory instructions to everyone not to allude to the circumstances in the faintest way. Dr. Phillips was especially emphatic in his desire that the investigations should not to be made known. .......
Up to the present the police refuse the Press any information". Echo 9 Nov.

".......no definite information has been received at the time of writing, thanks to the extreme reticence of the police". East London Observer, 10 Nov.

"Acting upon orders, the detectives and inspectors declined to furnish any information of what had occurred, and refused permission to the press to inspect the place." Daily Telegraph, 10 Nov.

Throughout the entire investigation the Met. refused to share information with the press.
The City force is a different story, but Scotland Yard & the Met. did not appreciate how to use the press to help in the investigation, so they shut them out.

You know as well as I do that if the press what to know something they have a way of finding it out, and here we have another example of not accepting what is written in the press because it doesn't fit with a theory, and I am full aware of the use of primary and secondary press sources but we have a number of primary sources all saying the organs were all accounted for.

The Times 10th November

“The latest account states upon what professes to be indisputable authority that no portion of the woman's body was taken away by the murderer."

After the newspapers published the various articles stating that all the organs were accounted for, was there any rebuttal to this from any official sources at the time, or in the years that followed? The answer is no because all the facts and evidence points to all the organs being accounted for and this was accepted on that basis.

I know that the press do have a habit of making things up but there is too much in the public domain which suggests the organs were all accounted for, and almost nothing of evidential value, or anything else in the public domain to show the heart was taken away.

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Sam Flynn]

RL Stevenson's cousin Henry Smith was a Newcomen .... oops,newcomer to the position in 1885.

The rail pioneer was a different Robert Ste(ph)enson, but I liked the Newcomen pun anyway

[DJA]

You have no idea what I am posting about.

Quite frankly,you are a serial pest.

[Wickerman]

....
After the newspapers published the various articles stating that all the organs were accounted for, was there any rebuttal to this from any official sources at the time, or in the years that followed?

You do realize that if the authorities declared the heart to be missing they risk repeating a second fiasco like the kidney episode. Pranksters now begin mailing boxed hearts to the press.
It is not an important detail to share with the public. The authorities said nothing on the subject.
What we read in the press is all conjecture.

[DJA]

How many kidneys were sent in?

Just a rough guess

[Sam Flynn]

You have no idea what I am posting about.

Quite frankly,you are a serial pest.

I merely said that I liked your pun linking Robert (Louis) Stevenson and steam pioneer Thomas Newcomen, and out that the other steam pioneer was a different Robert Stephenson.

[Trevor Marriott]

You do realize that if the authorities declared the heart to be missing they risk repeating a second fiasco like the kidney episode. Pranksters now begin mailing boxed hearts to the press.
It is not an important detail to share with the public. The authorities said nothing on the subject.
What we read in the press is all conjecture.

So Dr Gabe, Supt Arnold, and DI Reid all made it up then when they accounted for the heart not being missing? and with Reid he is a main primary source.

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk