organs

[Ben]

The fact that that Phillips didn't believe Eddowes to have been killed by Chapman's murderer should serve as a cautionary reminder that we shouldn't take his Chapman-related views as gospel with regard to the degree of medical knowledge evinced by that murder. Unfortunately, no second opinions were offered as they were in Eddowes' case, where the preponderance of evidence pointed towards an essentially unskilled operator. Neither Sequeira nor Saunder detected any evidence of anatomical knowledge, and Phillips was none too impressed either.

Brown's views were certainly not in the majority when it came to Eddowes' autopsy, thus reinforcing the importance of additional medical professionals at the autopsy of any one crime.

Best regards,
Ben

[Wickerman]

Hi Wickerman,

Thanks for the observations, but you must not read my posts much. If there is anybody on here more vocally denying Kelly was a Ripper Victim then I have yet to meet them.

Sorry for that, I guess I'm still tuning in to the different personalities..

[Supe]

Trev,

despite the non believers it still comes dowm to the fact that the killer did not remove the organs and take them away from any of the victims.

We need to be mindful of what we say. That the Ripper did not remove his victims's organs is your opinion, perhaps even a passionately held belief. Your opinion may be an informed one, it might even be correct--but it is not yet fact.

And your conversation with the master butcher signifies nothing as I presume he is a rational being who respects his fingers, not a hell-bent serial killer.

Don.

[Trevor Marriott]

To negate the suggestion that the kilrer was a butcher as part of tests etc recently conducted I sought the assistance of a master butcher who started off working in a slaughterhouse, he states he could remove the uterus from a human body in day light. Having regard to the fcat that the organs in a pig are situated in very simliar positions to that of a human. However he states he would not be able to or in fact want to try in darkness with a long sharp knife for fear of cutting his own fingers.

despite the non believers it still comes dowm to the fact that the killer did not remove the organs and take them away from any of the victims.

Hi Wickerman,

Thanks for the observations, but you must not read my posts much. If there is anybody on here more vocally denying Kelly was a Ripper Victim then I have yet to meet them. I do know the ones that agree with me as loudly on Liz.

In a nutshell, I do believe the "Ripper", as the killer is known, mutilated abdomens post mortem for some of their contents. Murders that dont have that element as a focal point of the whole bloody exercise after Early September I dont believe were related. They were categorized as Jack's while knowing that at least one other killer of women who mutilates was at large, and that the C5 answer doesnt show us a consistent pattern, and that still leaves a lot of murdered women, by knife, as unsub murders. Unknown or Unidentified Subjects.

Cheers Wman.

[Wickerman]

Hi all,

With all due respect, none of the comments related to the ease in which the organ accesses could be done truly factor the imminent danger, darkness, potentially squirming subject, the desire to remain as blood free as possible...etc.

Dr Phillips seemed to recognise a trained hand at work, thats not to say it was a surgeon, far from it, but someone familiar with doing what he did. Also, as Wynne-Baxter said, the degree of anatomical knowledge displayed raises these crimes way above the level of the common criminal (paraphrase).

There is the "in the moment" component here, mortal danger to the killer....if he's caught, they would bring back hangings for sure, and that coupled with an attending physicians opinion that the killer of Annie Chapman didnt just grab anything, you have to believe that cursory knowledge of anatomy is a factor here. When adding in the fact that Kate is killed in the darkest area of the square, opposite the gaslamp but far from it....and her kidney is extracted while the killer was over her and she on her back. He cuts clothing with his knife, how difficult would it have been to slit her dress up the back instead of lying her face up, and just accessing the organ desired. I think thats an example of the skill again, he might not even know that from the back would be a better choice, but he might know roughly where each kidney was.

Due to the Chapman murder, Phillips suggested the hand of experience was at work, "only less so in consequence of haste" (Phillips), or words to that effect. The Lancet did not see how the killer could have been a disturbed maniac, for reasons they listed. Publicly, we still read of dangerous lunatics, but privately some authorities may have been considering a more professional solution.
Didn't one letter writer gloat, "They say I'm a doctor now, ha, ha!".

Then came the Eddowes murder, a change of tactics?
Phillips thought Eddowes had been killed by a copycat killer, more sloppy than Chapman? Laserations to the face make this next one look like a lunatic was at work... (intentional red-herring?)
But Phillips saw how carefull the left kidney had been removed, this is unlikely to be a random "slash & grab" incident.
Who knows?, perhaps the killer was sending a message to the authorities... (I know what I'm doing and I'm no maniac!)


[It is all too easy to read too much into these crimes, likewise too little]

Its interesting that there is a valid organ oriented killing scenario, based on the evidence, for Annie,... and by the method and overall timing, perhaps one for Kate, but there is no explanation for what happened to Mary Jane if her heart is what he wanted.

Cheers all.

My suggestion is, don't be herded into assuming Kelly was a Ripper victim.

What was he to do, Mike, short of drilling a hole in her chest and sucking her heart out through a straw? Besides, I fail to see what mutilating Eddowes' face would be explained if all Jack had a specific "orientation" at her uterus... or her kidney, of course. Or a length of her colon.

Thats a very fair point Sam, as is what had peeling flesh off a thigh have to do with heart extraction. But in the case of Catherine, her non-organ related injuries might be an indication of something new from the killer, perhaps the facial wounds were personal, as perhaps Marys were. Doesnt mean their "personal" killer is the same man though, neccesarily.

All the best Sam.

[Sam Flynn]

Its interesting that there is a valid organ oriented killing scenario, for Annie,... and perhaps one for Kate, but there is no explanation for what happened to Mary Jane if her heart is what he wanted.

What was he to do, Mike, short of drilling a hole in her chest and sucking her heart out through a straw? Besides, I fail to see what mutilating Eddowes' face would be explained if all Jack had a specific "orientation" at her uterus... or her kidney, of course. Or a length of her colon.

Hi all,

With all due respect, none of the comments related to the ease in which the organ accesses could be done truly factor the imminent danger, darkness, potentially squirming subject, the desire to remain as blood free as possible...etc.

There is the "in the moment" component here, mortal danger to the killer....if he's caught, they would bring back hangings for sure, and that coupled with an attending physicians opinion that the killer of Annie Chapman didnt just grab anything, you have to believe that cursory knowledge of anatomy is a factor here. When adding in the fact that Kate is killed in the darkest area of the square, opposite the gaslamp but far from it....and her kidney is extracted while the killer was over her and she on her back. He cuts clothing with his knife, how difficult would it have been to slit her dress up the back instead of lying her face up, and just accessing the organ desired. I think thats an example of the skill again, he might not even know that from the back would be a better choice, but he might know roughly where each kidney was.

So thats a cursory knowledge, and cursory knowledge and opinions of targetting are not elements to be taken lightly.

Its interesting that there is a valid organ oriented killing scenario, based on the evidence, for Annie,... and by the method and overall timing, perhaps one for Kate, but there is no explanation for what happened to Mary Jane if her heart is what he wanted.

Cheers all.

[diana]

Even today, when I buy a whole roasting chicken and clean it out I can find the kidneys alongside the spine without too much difficulty.

[FutureM.D.]

Hello Jukka!

Not necessarily, particulary because I believe that the ripper was an immigrant (most likely Polish or Russian Jew, given the ethnic composition of the east end); I feel it is unlikely that he would be english literate, or even if he was, that he would be at all interested in Anatomy-Physiology from a medical perspective. One exposure that he might of had were in the anatomical exhibits that took place in London at the time. Also one must consider that as there weren't an abundance of supermarkets in the east end , most people would have atleast a basic knowledge of how to butcher animals for purposes of self sustinance.

I was using the term "inferior" spatially. If you study anatomy it has its own spatial terminology.

Superior = above (head is superior to the feet)

Inferior = below (feet are inferior to the head)

Lateral = to the side (arms are lateral to the trunk)

Medial = toward the middle (nose is medial in the face)

Dorsal or Posterior = toward the back (spine is located dorsally or posteriorly)

Anterior = to the front (eyes are on the anterior of the face)

I was not referring to an inferior choice. This was my fault for trying to show off.

Its not your fault at all, as I said, I saw both potentials, but for me the interest was in his skill level not where the penetration or incision was made. See ....thats the thing, up is logistical as well as emotional,....as is down, and inferior in this case has both meanings potentially present, in the location of the wound, and the skill involved....so we both used the word differently but with valid points I think.

Its 6 of one and half a dozen of another Ms D

Cheers

[Sam Flynn]

I was not referring to an inferior choice. This was my fault for trying to show off.

...don't be giving yourself an inferiority complex, now, Di

[diana]

Clarification

I was using the term "inferior" spatially. If you study anatomy it has its own spatial terminology.

Superior = above (head is superior to the feet)

Inferior = below (feet are inferior to the head)

Lateral = to the side (arms are lateral to the trunk)

Medial = toward the middle (nose is medial in the face)

Dorsal or Posterior = toward the back (spine is located dorsally or posteriorly)

Anterior = to the front (eyes are on the anterior of the face)

I was not referring to an inferior choice. This was my fault for trying to show off.

[j.r-ahde]

Hello Future MD!

One person on these boards - if I remember correctly - told, that getting anatomical books was relatively easy in the LVP.

Do you find it possible, that JtR could have been a kind of random reader, picking some info here and there?

All the best
Jukka