Elizabeth Jackson-Abortion related or not?

[Debra A]

Dr Bond said in his report, read at the June 22nd inquest on Elizabeth Jackson, that the woman had not been dead more than 24 hours when her first remains were found, she had not been delivered at the time of death [backed up by observations made in Hebbert's reports on the post mortem indications showing the condition of the cervix and vagina] and that the child, he believed had been removed after death through an incision into the left side of the uterus.
He stated there was nothing to show a cause of death from violence or natural causes and that no instruments had been used for the purpose of procuring an abortion.
The parts needed to determine if a noxious substance had been administered were missing apparently.

I suggested to Trevor in the torso thread that the reason a verdict of wilful murder was brought might have been because the jury disregarded Dr Bond evidence and listened to the Coroner when he suggested that some experienced abortionists were highly skilled and might not have left traces of instrument use {objects introduced in to the uterus via the vagina and cervix) and went with the wilful murder verdict.
Wilful murder verdicts were regularly brought in in cases where abortion was suspected. I think Trevor misunderstood what I was saying , thinking 'wilful murder' was not used in those cases perhaps?

As I've mentioned before in the past, Dr Hebbert was curator of the Wesminster Hospital Pathological Museum in 88 and 89 and in 1889 in the Westminster Hospital reports there is a list of new pathological specimins added to the museum that year. I mentioned before that amongst that list is this object:

LIST OF PATHOLOGICAL SPECIMENS

ADDED TO THE MUSEUM DURING 1889.



By CHARLES A. HEBBERT.
11. Uterus with false passage from a case of criminal
abortion. — The organ is opened and on the posterior wall is
seen a groove which begins at the os internum, traverses
the whole thickness of the wall, and pierces the posterior
surface just below the Fundus. In the jar is a piece of
cotton wool found in the peritoneal cavity, and which was
thrust through the uterus presumably on the point of a
sound. Presented by T. Bond, Esq.

This exhibit was presented by Thomas Bond and I've always wondered if it was related to Elizabeth Jackson's case. I've looked for other possible cases in 1889 but drew a blank at the time, maybe someone else can find which case of death by procuring an abortion it refers to as the case would have been brought to inquest at least.

[Trevor Marriott]

Dr Bond said in his report, read at the June 22nd inquest on Elizabeth Jackson, that the woman had not been dead more than 24 hours when her first remains were found, she had not been delivered at the time of death [backed up by observations made in Hebbert's reports on the post mortem indications showing the condition of the cervix and vagina] and that the child, he believed had been removed after death through an incision into the left side of the uterus.
He stated there was nothing to show a cause of death from violence or natural causes and that no instruments had been used for the purpose of procuring an abortion.
The parts needed to determine if a noxious substance had been administered were missing apparently.

I suggested to Trevor in the torso thread that the reason a verdict of wilful murder was brought might have been because the jury disregarded Dr Bond evidence and listened to the Coroner when he suggested that some experienced abortionists were highly skilled and might not have left traces of instrument use {objects introduced in to the uterus via the vagina and cervix) and went with the wilful murder verdict.
Wilful murder verdicts were regularly brought in in cases where abortion was suspected. I think Trevor misunderstood what I was saying , thinking 'wilful murder' was not used in those cases perhaps?

As I've mentioned before in the past, Dr Hebbert was curator of the Wesminster Hospital Pathological Museum in 88 and 89 and in 1889 in the Westminster Hospital reports there is a list of new pathological specimins added to the museum that year. I mentioned before that amongst that list is this object:

LIST OF PATHOLOGICAL SPECIMENS

ADDED TO THE MUSEUM DURING 1889.



By CHARLES A. HEBBERT.
11. Uterus with false passage from a case of criminal
abortion. — The organ is opened and on the posterior wall is
seen a groove which begins at the os internum, traverses
the whole thickness of the wall, and pierces the posterior
surface just below the Fundus. In the jar is a piece of
cotton wool found in the peritoneal cavity, and which was
thrust through the uterus presumably on the point of a
sound. Presented by T. Bond, Esq.

This exhibit was presented by Thomas Bond and I've always wondered if it was related to Elizabeth Jackson's case. I've looked for other possible cases in 1889 but drew a blank at the time, maybe someone else can find which case of death by procuring an abortion it refers to as the case would have been brought to inquest at least.

The Oct 88 Torso was missing a uterus was it not ?

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Debra A]

The Oct 88 Torso was missing a uterus was it not ?

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

The whole pelvis and pelvic organs were missing in the Whitehall case. The uterus would have been put in in evidence at the inquest had it been found and a verdict of wilful murder brought in. It is not connected to that case. It is connected to a definite death by procuring abortion as catalogued, probably sometime in 1889 when it was handed over to the museum.

[MsWeatherwax]

I suppose you're aware of the two cases in 1889 listed on oldbailey.org, Debra?

[Debra A]

I suppose you're aware of the two cases in 1889 listed on oldbailey.org, Debra?

No, Mrs Weatherwax. Do you have a link? Thanks

[Errata]

If Elizabeth Jackson died of an abortion, she died slowly, over a period of days, from an amazingly careful abortionist.

Which happened all the time, I won't lie. Sepsis killed a lot of women in this position, as did slow bleeds. But we are talking days here, because the cervix would need that much time to reseal. And if we knew whether or not she still had her mucus plug that would be super helpful, but I'm pretty sure we don't.

Which begs the question, what was the abortionist doing with her 2-5 days after the procedure? To be at her death?

And why go in abdominally to remove the fetus? They had no hope of sealing the uterus to prevent death from infection or allow Jackson to ever have children again or even live, so they might as well take the whole uterus. Thats what doctors with the most modern equipment did.

And if they were trying to save the child immediately after the death of the mother, there would be no reason to hide that from the authorities or medical professionals. It would be somewhat peculiar, but not incomprehensible. There would be no reason to hide what had been done in the name of trying to save a baby's life.

I think that Elizabeth Jackson met an untimely end that may have been a result of her pregnancy (maybe) but the removal of the fetus had nothing to do her wishes or plans. She didn't sign on for that. No woman did. Thats not how abortions worked then, it's not how they work today. What happened to her was unique. And not even remotely medically necessary or even slightly medically advisable.

[Debra A]

If Elizabeth Jackson died of an abortion, she died slowly, over a period of days, from an amazingly careful abortionist.

Which happened all the time, I won't lie. Sepsis killed a lot of women in this position, as did slow bleeds. But we are talking days here, because the cervix would need that much time to reseal. And if we knew whether or not she still had her mucus plug that would be super helpful, but I'm pretty sure we don't.

Which begs the question, what was the abortionist doing with her 2-5 days after the procedure? To be at her death?

And why go in abdominally to remove the fetus? They had no hope of sealing the uterus to prevent death from infection or allow Jackson to ever have children again or even live, so they might as well take the whole uterus. Thats what doctors with the most modern equipment did.

And if they were trying to save the child immediately after the death of the mother, there would be no reason to hide that from the authorities or medical professionals. It would be somewhat peculiar, but not incomprehensible. There would be no reason to hide what had been done in the name of trying to save a baby's life.

I think that Elizabeth Jackson met an untimely end that may have been a result of her pregnancy (maybe) but the removal of the fetus had nothing to do her wishes or plans. She didn't sign on for that. No woman did. Thats not how abortions worked then, it's not how they work today. What happened to her was unique. And not even remotely medically necessary or even slightly medically advisable.

Thanks Errata. Yes, these are all the same points I have argued against Trevor too -for eternity I feel!
I still think it possible that the wilful murder verdict brought at inquest could be because the jury might have been influenced into that verdict by the Coroner suggesting that criminal abortionists could be very skilled and not leave a trace.
It is certain there was no abortion because there was no birth as you say.

The whole uterus was removed by the way, with a sweep of the knife that took in the upper part of her vagina and posterior portion of her bladder, so there was no attempt at life saving for Elizabeth here.

Thanks to Mrs Weatherwax I did see the cases that the uterus might apply to. One a death of a woman writhing in agony for days after she had induced a labour and birth by taking lovage and brandy she claimed and the herbalist responsible was around to treat her in this case but that's because she had money to bring him back to treat her. He may have also used instruments on her. It was the after treatment that linked the pair as he was seen by witnesses leaving her house.

[Debra A]

If Elizabeth Jackson died of an abortion, she died slowly, over a period of days, from an amazingly careful abortionist.

.

Witnesses claim to have seen her on the 3rd June the night before her death. I've always assumed she was still pregnant at that time but I suppose there is a remote possibility that she wasn't and she did actually die of an infection but then I'm guessing parts of her abdominal cavity would be rancid with infection that would still be present and noticeable?

[Pierre]

What could suggest it was Jack the Ripper?

Dr Bond said in his report, read at the June 22nd inquest on Elizabeth Jackson, that the woman had not been dead more than 24 hours when her first remains were found, she had not been delivered at the time of death [backed up by observations made in Hebbert's reports on the post mortem indications showing the condition of the cervix and vagina] and that the child, he believed had been removed after death through an incision into the left side of the uterus.
He stated there was nothing to show a cause of death from violence or natural causes and that no instruments had been used for the purpose of procuring an abortion.
The parts needed to determine if a noxious substance had been administered were missing apparently.

I suggested to Trevor in the torso thread that the reason a verdict of wilful murder was brought might have been because the jury disregarded Dr Bond evidence and listened to the Coroner when he suggested that some experienced abortionists were highly skilled and might not have left traces of instrument use {objects introduced in to the uterus via the vagina and cervix) and went with the wilful murder verdict.
Wilful murder verdicts were regularly brought in in cases where abortion was suspected. I think Trevor misunderstood what I was saying , thinking 'wilful murder' was not used in those cases perhaps?

As I've mentioned before in the past, Dr Hebbert was curator of the Wesminster Hospital Pathological Museum in 88 and 89 and in 1889 in the Westminster Hospital reports there is a list of new pathological specimins added to the museum that year. I mentioned before that amongst that list is this object:

LIST OF PATHOLOGICAL SPECIMENS

ADDED TO THE MUSEUM DURING 1889.

By CHARLES A. HEBBERT.
11. Uterus with false passage from a case of criminal
abortion. — The organ is opened and on the posterior wall is
seen a groove which begins at the os internum, traverses
the whole thickness of the wall, and pierces the posterior
surface just below the Fundus. In the jar is a piece of
cotton wool found in the peritoneal cavity, and which was
thrust through the uterus presumably on the point of a
sound. Presented by T. Bond, Esq.

This exhibit was presented by Thomas Bond and I've always wondered if it was related to Elizabeth Jackson's case. I've looked for other possible cases in 1889 but drew a blank at the time, maybe someone else can find which case of death by procuring an abortion it refers to as the case would have been brought to inquest at least.

Hi,

So let´s try and find out what could suggest that Jack the Ripper was the killer of Elizabeth Jackson?

1. Does Jack the Ripper "claim" a victim during the days of the findings of the body parts? Yes. In the letters to Leman police station. "I see you have found the pieces. Look for more pieces".

2. Is there any escalating violence in this case, any "new" shock value? Yes. Killing and dismembering a pregnant woman.

3. Does he care about hiding the ID of the victim? No. As with the C-5, the killer did not care to hide the ID.

4. Signature alike? Well, not much. But that is just because people are used to see only the signature of the C-5. It is a matter of definition. A wider definition. Ripping and dismembering. (Fisherman will like this.)

5. MO alike? Partly. Some pieces placed on dry land. But why throw them in the Thames when he could have had so much fun placing them in Scotland Yard or in Whitechapel? How much fun is Battersea Park? We need an explanation for that. So here is:

6. an hypothesis: He could not show up in Whitechapel in June 1889. People could have recognized him. "Oh, murder!". Remember? So he had to do all the ripping and dismembering somewhere else and could not transport them anywhere he wanted.

7. If he wrote the letters to Leman police station he did want the police to find the pieces: Look for more pieces! That is not the wish of an illegal abortionist.

Regards, Pierre

[Elamarna]

Pierre

That whole hypotheses seems to rest on him being the writer of the letter.

That is going to be very hard to substantiate.

steve

[Pierre]

Pierre

That whole hypotheses seems to rest on him being the writer of the letter.

That is going to be very hard to substantiate.

steve

Hi Steve,

but you have 2 and 3 as well!

Regards, Pierre

[Debra A]

I think a discussion specifically about Elizabeth Jackson as a victim of JTR should have its own thread, Pierre. I think it will generate more posts than the question of abortion, and information placed here, for or against abortion as a contributory factor, will then get swallowed up again.

[Elamarna]

Hi Steve,

but you have 2 and 3 as well!

Regards, Pierre

Yes but 2 and 3 need not link specifically to JtR

is 2 really an escalation on Kelly? that is open to personal opinion surely.
Kelly is certainly more horrific, Jackson appears more clinical. indeed some do argue it is clinical, which I do not by the way.
you then have a de-escalation to Mackenzie.

so while I accept you can use it in an argument it is not that strong.

on 3, the argument only works if you accept he knew who they were surely, If he did not know who he killed why did it matter?

Again you can use it as supporting evidence/data, when taken with your own comments on 4 and 5. it seems clear to me that the hypotheses without the letter is weak.

Steve

[John Wheat]

No its most likely death by murder and probably a serial killer.

[Errata]

The whole uterus was removed by the way, with a sweep of the knife that took in the upper part of her vagina and posterior portion of her bladder, so there was no attempt at life saving for Elizabeth here.

Wait a minute. That was the only injury to the uterus wasn't it? Or am I getting confused?