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

[Sam Flynn]

Reckon they are flaps as mentioned.

Correct.

[Debra A]

Debs
I am aware of that report, but as you and many others must know it is ambiguous, and therefore in the light of other evidence is unsafe to totally rely on.

Absent from the pericardium means just that, it was not where it should have been in the body. Surely it it were missing from the room, someone would have actually stated that important fact, but no one did, and I have to ask why did no one mention it ? The answer is because it was found not to be missing at some point.

It could easily have been found in the pail which it would seem contained internal organs and body parts which was sent to the home address of Dr Phillips,before the post mortem and why would DI Reid the head of Whitechapel CID and who was directly involved in the investigation later state no organs were missing?

The truth is out there, just hard for some to accept.

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

Trevor, DJA is not me. His name is Dave.
Saying that. IMO the weight of evidence leans towards the heart being taken, which is not propping up an old theory because contemporary reports are not clear on the subject either and the whole topic has always been open to debate.

[Trevor Marriott]

Ok, the actual wording was:
"The Pericardium was open below & the heart absent".
No mention of where the heart was located. Not like the other organs all described where found. Not the heart.

As stated before, the heart was absent from the pericardium, which is where it should sit in the body. There is no way that comment can be suggestive of the heart being taken away.

It's a rose by any other name Trevor.
Yes, at no point does he say it is missing, so we cannot say it is?
Also, at no point does he say it is found, so we cannot say it was.
Deal?

No you are right we cannot say for sure, but we can use what other witnesses say who were also involved to come to a definitive answer based on all the arguments for and against,and the only argument for is the ambiguous statement of Bond,and what Hebbert later said, and the lack of corroboration at the time or in the years thereafter

It is required that when an organ is identified as removed, that it should be stated where found, if it is not missing. Otherwise the report is incomplete.
Otherwise, any superior (Anderson/Warren?) will ask, "if it was absent, then where was it found?"
That is an obvious point to be clarified by the report.

That is not a requirement you have just made that up

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Trevor Marriott]

I am aware of that.

Doubt Reid took a stock take.

Perhaps because I have my own barrow,my preference is Dr Phillips with the pail in his living room

I'm honestly quite open on the whole topic,unless there is real evidence.

Reid didnt need to take stock, he was there, and would have been responsible for collating all the evidence before it was sent to Swanson. You have to accept that no one in any official capacity states that the heart was taken away by the killer.

Walter Dew was another to become involved he mentions nothing about the missing heart in his memoirs in the prat where he talks about Miller Court.

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Sam Flynn]

I wouldn't take Walter Dew's memoirs on Miller's Court as being in any way trustworthy.

[Trevor Marriott]

Excuse me, is this the same Trevor Marriott who rejects the typically inaccurate press accounts in favor of the reliable official reports?

When an official inquest statement is taken down at the time the evidence is given by the witness who then signs it as being correct there is no dispute on the content, especially when that statement is still around for us to examine as is the case of Eddowes. What we can question is what was recorded by the press outside of what is in the inquest statement because as we have seem there are many conflicting press reports.

Dr Bond's report to Anderson at the request of Warren certainly qualifies as an official report, by a physician who was present while the body was still at the crime scene.

I am not disputing this, save for the fact that the report makes no mention of the heart being taken away by the killer, if it had have been why was such and important issue not recorded. How would Anderson and Warren have ever known about it? If it was deliberatly excluded I would imagine they would have not been happy bunnies if and when they found out

This Lloyds account begins by telling the reader that, "Mr. Arnold entered by the window".
Superintendent Arnold climbed in through the window?

Another example of why press report have to be treated with caution. But of course Dr Gabe says the same thing about where the heart was located in the room, corroboration ? You cant cherry pick !

I will say again for the last time because it is obvious that you are not going to listen, and your mind is firmly made up as to what you want to believe which is your choice. No one is disputing the medical record, it is what it is. but it has to be accepted that the "absent from the pericardium" is an ambiguous statement and is not proof that the heart was taken away by the killer, especially when there is other more reliable evidence available which suggests it was not

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Trevor Marriott]

Trevor, DJA is not me. His name is Dave.
Saying that. IMO the weight of evidence leans towards the heart being taken, which is not propping up an old theory because contemporary reports are not clear on the subject either and the whole topic has always been open to debate.

Hi Debs

It was not my post that referred to you as Dave !

Yes you are right, it has been open to debate, but it seems that many who debate it are not prepared to accept the the heart was not taken away by the killer, and continue to prop up the old theory, and continue just using the ambiguous statement of Bond to prove their beliefs when there is clearly other evidence available to prove them wrong.

In my opinion many seasoned researchers have themselves become brainwashed over the years, with the old accepted theories on the Ripper and find it hard to accept anything which may negate those theories that they so readily accept.

"History is there to be challenged, and challenge it we will !"

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Trevor Marriott]

I wouldn't take Walter Dew's memoirs on Miller's Court as being in any way trustworthy.

I am not suggesting you do, but he did attend the crime scene, and makes no mention of the missing heart in those memoirs.

According to you its a no win situation, if he wrote in his memoirs that the heart was not missing, would you still say that same comment that he is unreliable?

Come down of that wooden fence you might get splinters !

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Jon Guy]

Reid didnt need to take stock, he was there, and would have been responsible for collating all the evidence before it was sent to Swanson.

No, Abberline was responsible.

Was Reid at Millers Court on the Friday ?

[Trevor Marriott]

No, Abberline was responsible.

Was Reid at Millers Court on the Friday ?

Yes he was at Millers Court on the Friday

Reid was head of Whitechapel CID so I would suggest he and Abberline would have been working together on the case. After all it would have been Reids officers who were working the case so he would have known as much as Abberline.

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Jon Guy]

Yes he was at Millers Court on the Friday

I know Bowyer asked for Reid at Commercial Police Station on the Friday morning, but Beck was in charge
What source do you have for Reid being there on Friday ?

[Sam Flynn]

I am not suggesting you do, but he did attend the crime scene, and makes no mention of the missing heart in those memoirs.

According to you its a no win situation, if he wrote in his memoirs that the heart was not missing, would you still say that same comment that he is unreliable?

Come down of that wooden fence you might get splinters !

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

I'm not sitting on any fence, Trevor. I'm just saying that Dew's memoirs are unreliable apropos events at Miller's Court. I seriously doubt that his involvement was as great as he claimed, and it's even possible that he wasn't actually there.

[Joshua Rogan]

I know Bowyer asked for Reid at Commercial Police Station on the Friday morning, but Beck was in charge
What source do you have for Reid being there on Friday ?

Daily News 10 Nov;

"Within a very short time half a dozen cabs arrived in Dorset street from Whitehall, conveying detectives from the Criminal Investigation Department, among them being Inspectors Abberline and Reid."

[Jon Guy]

Daily News 10 Nov;

"Within a very short time half a dozen cabs arrived in Dorset street from Whitehall, conveying detectives from the Criminal Investigation Department, among them being Inspectors Abberline and Reid."

Thanks JR.

[Michael W Richards]

I also found it interesting that Abberline, Reid, and several other men returned to that room, to re-sieve ashes apparently, on Saturday morning. I would imagine that documenting a 10 x 10 room and its contents should be relatively manageable. Like copying down a phrase written in chalk exactly would be.

I think that as far as the thread question goes, I don't believe its necessary to accept a premise that she saw anything unusual with respect to Mary or anyone else at all that morning. The "Corrie" bit when she describes an exchange that supposedly happened, seems to me intentionally placed. To suggest a knowledge and friendship, which I doubt existed. I think Carrie Maxwell would be the type to peak out the curtains at Mary-like characters, while chastising them under her breath.

I see Carrie Maxwell as just grabbing her 15 minutes.