Was Mary Kelly a Ripper victim?

[Geddy2112]

I 'heard' the whole MJK murder was staged using a dummy and red paint to force the government to take more action in the East End to reduce poverty and give more power to the police, a scare tactic... hence you could not identify the body or that we know too much about here...

[Trevor Marriott]

Yes Trevor, by "as is required" I mean to protect the evidence. The body is evidence in a murder case. 'Chain of custody', a term more familiar today, I assume, still applied in the late 19th century.
Once the police had charge of the 'evidence' it was their responsibility to secure that evidence up until the inquest, at the very least.
Can you tell me that is not true?

The police code only states what a police officer should do at a crime scene. As stated police officers as is the case of Chapman were at times posted outside mortuaries to stop unauthorized person gaining entry to gawk at the bodies.

As I stated it would not stop authorized persons from going about their normally daily routines at the mortuary and there is no evidence to suggest that was the case

What makes you think that any "doctors, surgeons, medical students, and anatomists", could come and go as they pleased?
From what I understand the body is under the jurisdiction of the coroner, and it is the coroner who grants his custody to the surgeon who will conduct the autopsy for the inquest.
No-one has permission to access the body unaccompanied by either the police, the surgeon, or his assistant.
Isn't that the way it worked?

No that isnt the way it worked back then and there is no evidence to support that view

In fact, (going on memory here) didn't Dr Bond once complain to the Home Office that another surgeon had accessed a body under his charge, without his permission?

Bingo !!!!!!!!!! You have now corroborated what I have been saying all along that bodies at mortuaries could be accessed by other bona fide medical persons who were not authorized. I rest my case

Is this imbecile(?) your organ thief?

Hardly but he also isnt your star witness you seek to rely on

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Wickerman]

As is required ?

He would have been stationed outside. That was to stop members of the public from gawking not to curtail the daily workings of the mortuary, and besides he didnt remain there all the time did he?,...

Yes Trevor, by "as is required" I mean to protect the evidence. The body is evidence in a murder case. 'Chain of custody', a term more familiar today, I assume, still applied in the late 19th century.
Once the police had charge of the 'evidence' it was their responsibility to secure that evidence up until the inquest, at the very least.
Can you tell me that is not true?

.....and doctors, surgeons, medical students, and anatomists were authorized persons to have access to the mortuary and I am sure if any of those did attend as i suggest they would have at least taken a look at the body under its sheet. and could have quickly removed the organ from Chapman.

What makes you think that any "doctors, surgeons, medical students, and anatomists", could come and go as they pleased?
From what I understand the body is under the jurisdiction of the coroner, and it is the coroner who grants his custody to the surgeon who will conduct the autopsy for the inquest.
No-one has permission to access the body unaccompanied by either the police, the surgeon, or his assistant.
Isn't that the way it worked?

In fact, (going on memory here) didn't Dr Bond once complain to the Home Office that another surgeon had accessed a body under his charge, without his permission?

What have you got a mortuary keeper who it would seem wasn't the full ticket, who didnt know his arse from his elbow

Is this imbecile(?) your organ thief?

[spyglass]

So not only do we have people proposing multiple Jack the Rippers, but now also an added "Organ thief of Whitechapel".

Why not add in a few vampires and werewolves and dragons too while you are it?

Or just one killer, with the murder of Kelly being not what it seems.
What if you asked one or even two doctors with knife skills and on the police (LE ) pay role to fake a murder and construct a crime scene.
Only they don't actually have the mind of a serial killer, and so get it wrong......In fact they are so incompetent that they can't remember who had the keys to the room and get their story's mixed up....ie Kelly , clothed or not.

Regards

[Michael W Richards]

1.However if the organs were taken as trophies at the crime scenes the we first have to ask did the killer have time to take them?

2. And if as is suggested why were no organs removed from any other victims other than chapman and eddowes?

Hi again Trevor,

For # 1 above, I believe that there was not time in Bucks Row, that there was time in the Hanbury Backyard, that there was time in the passageway at Berners Street, that there was probably not time IF it was indeed Kate that was seen with Sailor Man, and plenty o time in Millers Court. Thats 3 venues where the evidence allows for that time, and 1 that is a question mark.

On #2, presuming that Marys heart wasnt taken by the killer, as your theory suggests...then my answer would be in Chapmans case its because its the same killer that wanted to take organs from Polly. I dont believe that the same man killed Kate, so I guess he took something to mimic the prior acts.

[Batman]

So not only do we have people proposing multiple Jack the Rippers, but now also an added "Organ thief of Whitechapel".

Why not add in a few vampires and werewolves and dragons too while you are it?

[Trevor Marriott]

We do have an account of a constable posted at the mortuary, as is required, to stop unauthorized people gaining access to the body.

As is required ?

He would have been stationed outside. That was to stop members of the public from gawking not to curtail the daily workings of the mortuary, and besides he didnt remain there all the time did he?, and doctors, surgeons, medical students, and anatomists were authorized persons to have access to the mortuary and I am sure if any of those did attend as i suggest they would have at least taken a look at the body under its sheet. and could have quickly removed the organ from Chapman.

What have you got a mortuary keeper who it would seem wasn't the full ticket, who didnt know his arse from his elbow
Evidential conflicts involving all of those who were involved at the mortuary, and we are asked to accept all of this because it props up the old theory, what a load of old tosh.

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Wickerman]

....

We simply do not know who came, and went and what they did at the mortuaries during those 12 hours windows when the bodies were left.

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

We do have an account of a constable posted at the mortuary, as is required, to stop unauthorized people gaining access to the body.

[Trevor Marriott]

I cant help but notice Trevor that the reason for taking any organs, whether it happened by the killer or after the fact by morticians, is absent from these discussions.

Motive.

Something delusional would be preferable to me in some of the organ removals, rather than a contrived and sober act, because a sober act would infer a meaningful purpose. To that end, is it your opinion that the organs were for sale or perhaps for research?

A trophy, or as a reminder, seems more likely to me. We are in the process here in Toronto of starting a trial for a 60 something year old landscaper who is charged with the murder of 8 individuals over a 7 year period. He planted some of the remains in decorative planters he tended to around his own, and clients, properties. Speculation about why he would do that... rather than much more logically disposing of the remains in a large forested ravine just off his property... has included his desire to revisit the crimes by being able to get in close proximity to the remains.

Although I believe Tumblety to be a weakish premise, the jars with uteri does make some sense if trophies were the objective.

Hi
I take on board what you say

However if the organs were taken as trophies at the crime scenes the we first have to ask did the killer have time to take them?

And if as is suggested why were no organs removed from any other victims other than chapman and eddowes

If he did remove the organs from both of the and my latest research shows he didn’t then
we have to the ask if organ
harvesting was the motive then why did he take the same organ twice,and why did he remove it using two different procedures,that fact alone in my opinion rules out butchers and slaughterers

Again I say mitre sq is key to the organ removal issues

As to Tumblety the uteri seen were some years previous I believe and if he had a collection would he want more. I would suggest you read the chapter on his suspect viability in my book

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Michael W Richards]

I cant help but notice Trevor that the reason for taking any organs, whether it happened by the killer or after the fact by morticians, is absent from these discussions.

Motive.

Something delusional would be preferable to me in some of the organ removals, rather than a contrived and sober act, because a sober act would infer a meaningful purpose. To that end, is it your opinion that the organs were for sale or perhaps for research?

A trophy, or as a reminder, seems more likely to me. We are in the process here in Toronto of starting a trial for a 60 something year old landscaper who is charged with the murder of 8 individuals over a 7 year period. He planted some of the remains in decorative planters he tended to around his own, and clients, properties. Speculation about why he would do that... rather than much more logically disposing of the remains in a large forested ravine just off his property... has included his desire to revisit the crimes by being able to get in close proximity to the remains.

Although I believe Tumblety to be a weakish premise, the jars with uteri does make some sense if trophies were the objective.

[Trevor Marriott]

The only mistake was undressing/washing the body.,Phillips complained (Chapman). In Nichols case it was the inmate's fault.In Chapman's case we do not know who was telling the truth/lie.Whether somebody illegally procured organs was a non-issue.
-----

There were no organs found missing from Nichols when they did the post mortem, and why was that? If it was supposed to be the same killer who was intent on harvesting organs, none missing from Tabram, Stride, Kelly any of the later victims

The simple answer is that her abdomen was not ripped open enough for anyone at the mortuary to be able to remove organs in a way they were removed from the other two victims without possible discovery, because the doctors would have noticed any later attempt to open up the abdomen more than was first observed at the crime scenes and initially at the mortuaries.

It should also be noted that in support of the above out of all the victims it is strange that the only two who were found missing organs were the only two who had their abdomens ripped open to the extent anyone wanting to remove organs would not have had to open the abdomens any further to be able to access the organs and remove them.

We simply do not know who came, and went and what they did at the mortuaries during those 12 hours windows when the bodies were left.

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Varqm]

Robert Mann was able to secure Nichol's body from "organ harvesting " then there's no reason to doubt he did it with Chapman's.

----

The only mistake was undressing/washing the body.,Phillips complained (Chapman). In Nichols case it was the inmate's fault.In Chapman's case we do not know who was telling the truth/lie.Whether somebody illegally procured organs was a non-issue.

Nichols

James Hatfield, an inmate of the Whitechapel Workhouse,said he accompanied Mann, the last witness, to the mortuary,
and undressed the deceased. Inspector Helson was not there.
[Coroner] Who gave you instructions to do all this? - No one gave us any. We did it to have the body ready for the doctor.

Chapman

Mr. George Baxter Phillips: "No. Sarah Simonds, a resident nurse at the Whitechapel Infirmary ","She was directed by
Inspector Chandler to undress it,".

Inspector Chandler: "I did not instruct the nurses to undress the body and to wash it."


- Chandler had credibility issues with the handkerchief.

Inspector Chandler, recalled

[Coroner] Did you see the handkerchief taken off the body? - I did not. The nurses must have taken it off the throat.
[Coroner] How do you know? - I don't know.
[Coroner] Then you are guessing? - I am guessing.
The Coroner: That is all wrong, you know. (To the jury). He is really not the proper man to have been left in charge.

-----

[Trevor Marriott]

How can we possibly accept these two assertions. The idea that qualified medical professionals would take organs from bodies that are part of the most infamous murder spree of the time, especially where the mutilation and organ harvesting is one of the defining features, beggars belief.

The qualified medical professionals you refer to were made up of doctors,surgeons, medical students and anatomists, all capable of removing organs in double quick time.

Much of what ripperology is made up of also beggars belief

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[etenguy]

If you accept that the killer of eddowes and chapman did not remove the organs the he showed no anatomical knowledge in their murders.

If you also accept that the killer of Kelly did not remove ana take away the heart then you have to accept that no anatomical knowledge was shown in her murder either so that may link the three to the same killer.

I say may

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

How can we possibly accept these two assertions. The idea that qualified medical professionals would take organs from bodies that are part of the most infamous murder spree of the time, especially where the mutilation and organ harvesting is one of the defining features, beggars belief.

[Trevor Marriott]

So the argument that Mary's killer could not possibly be the same man who murdered Annie and Kate because in their murders he showed anatomical knowledge while in Mary's he did not is now defunct?

If you accept that the killer of eddowes and chapman did not remove the organs the he showed no anatomical knowledge in their murders

If you also accept that the killer of Kelly did not remove ana take away the heart then you have to accept that no anatomical knowledge was shown in her murder either so that may link the three to the same killer.

I say may

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk