Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

MJK pregnancy

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • MJK pregnancy

    I've often wondered, assuming that various stories about Mary being pregnant are true (do we have confirmation of this?), if the enlarged state of the uterus could have affected Jack in some way? If she were in fact pregnant, could that have thrown him off and perhaps caused him to take the heart instead? Long shot I know

  • #2
    Originally posted by Spotty View Post
    I've often wondered, assuming that various stories about Mary being pregnant are true

    (do we have confirmation of this?),
    NO

    if the enlarged state of the uterus could have affected Jack in some way? If she were in fact pregnant, could that have thrown him off and perhaps caused him to take the heart instead? Long shot I know
    G U T

    There are two ways to be fooled, one is to believe what isn't true, the other is to refuse to believe that which is true.

    Comment


    • #3
      Haha, ok!

      Comment


      • #4
        And I think that the Drs may have noticed at the postmortem, and it is open to debate if the heart was taken from Miller's Court.
        G U T

        There are two ways to be fooled, one is to believe what isn't true, the other is to refuse to believe that which is true.

        Comment


        • #5
          The heart could have been burned in the grate at Miller's Court, for all we know. It has been said that Dr Bond's report showed that Mary Jane was not pregnant but in fact it doesn't say, one way or another.

          Comment


          • #6
            The heart could have been burned in the grate at Miller's Court, for all we know. It has been stated that Dr Bond's report showed that Mary Jane was not pregnant but in fact it doesn't say, one way or another.

            Comment


            • #7
              There's a lot of over-reaction and misinformation when it comes to the subject of Mary Kelly having a child. Critics keep resorting to the "so-and-so would have mentioned it" argument.

              It doesn't make them wrong. It's just a case of trying hard to make your case.

              Originally posted by Spotty View Post
              I've often wondered, assuming that various stories about Mary being pregnant are true (do we have confirmation of this?), if the enlarged state of the uterus could have affected Jack in some way? ... and perhaps caused him to take the heart instead? Long shot I know
              I think this is a sensible theory. Any possible divergence from the pattern must be explained.

              My own explanation, expressed on another thread, was that he didn't take the uterus from the room because she'd born him a child, and that is what "affected him. Not impossible.

              Comment


              • #8
                It has been stated that Dr Bond's report showed that Mary Jane was not pregnant but in fact it doesn't say, one way or another.
                It says very specifically "Not Gravid".
                "It is a capital mistake to theorise before one has data. Insensibly one begins twisting facts to suit theories instead of theories to suit facts." Sir Arthur Conan Doyle (as Sherlock Holmes).

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Bridewell View Post
                  It says very specifically "Not Gravid".
                  So either Bond didn't know what he was talking about (unlikely) or Mary Kelly was not pregnant.
                  "It is a capital mistake to theorise before one has data. Insensibly one begins twisting facts to suit theories instead of theories to suit facts." Sir Arthur Conan Doyle (as Sherlock Holmes).

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Okay, Bridewell,

                    I'll agree that, by "uterus not gravid" Bond meant "not pregnant".

                    I didn't know that it really means burdened by child, and only in its secondary definition can it refer to the condition of the lining during or after pregnancy.

                    But that doesn't negate the small possiblity that he meant the uterus did not show signs of gravidity or the conditions of pregnancy, and it be a very early pregnancy he could be missing, or didn't want to make public out of discretion.

                    Today, I believe the term gravidity can be used to specify the number of children a woman has had. I think this would be more relevant in Mary's case but I don't believe that was the case in 1888.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      "Today, I believe the term gravidity can be used to specify the number of children a woman has had." Quote mine.

                      Correction: the term Gravida refers to the number of pregnancies a woman's had. Gravida plus the number.

                      The freedictionary gives a date of around 1925 for the term but 1880 for the use of para as in primipara or multipara.

                      http://www.thefreedictionary.com/gravida

                      The gist of the thread is really about why he didn't take the uterus away with him. But, now that the technical terms are clear, I think we can agree that the dead woman was not pregnant at the time she was killed.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        I've been asked where Dr Bond says that MJK was "not apparently gravid" and am somewhat embarrassed to have to say that I can't find it! Mea culpa if I am in error on this. My recollection is that, about 3 years ago, I speculated that MJK might have been pregnant and the phrase "not apparently gravid" was quoted back at me. The archives (Casebook) suggest that Jeff Leahy raised this issue in January 2004 when he posted this:-

                        "I spoke to Paul Begg today who confirms that he is unsure where the reference to Kelly being Gravid comes from in A to Z." (my italics).

                        I apologise if I have misled on this. If anyone can throw any light on the resultant confusion I would greatly appreciate it - especially if it removes some of the egg from my face.
                        "It is a capital mistake to theorise before one has data. Insensibly one begins twisting facts to suit theories instead of theories to suit facts." Sir Arthur Conan Doyle (as Sherlock Holmes).

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          I found the Jeff Leahy post about Mary Kelly's alleged pregancy. He quotes the autopsy report as saying Mary had "uterus underhead".

                          http://www.casebook.org/forum/messages/4921/6266.html

                          I thought that "underhead" was another technical term until I realized her uterus was found under her head.

                          Perhaps the misunderstanding came because the words ran together.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            I found this on another website.

                            http://victorianripper.niceboard.org...miller-s-court

                            The whole "not gravid" thing has been around for a while obviously, but what was the original source? (It wasn't me!)
                            "It is a capital mistake to theorise before one has data. Insensibly one begins twisting facts to suit theories instead of theories to suit facts." Sir Arthur Conan Doyle (as Sherlock Holmes).

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              It may have been a misquote from the Jack the Ripper A to Z, 1991, with the negative place in the wrong place and attributed to Bond.

                              ...the uterus was neither stolen nor APPARENTLY gravid.
                              http://www.casebook.org/forum/messages/4921/9064.html

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X