autopsy notes

[Sam Flynn]

i.e. he may simply have made "X" number of cuts into the abdominal wall and then removed it piecemeal.

This is my take on it, also. A few years back I made the retrospectively indelicate suggestion that the killer excavated Annie Chapman's (and, apparently, Mary Kelly's) abdomen in much the same way as you'd cut open a pie-crust to get at the filling.

[Fisherman]

This is my take on it, also. A few years back I made the retrospectively indelicate suggestion that the killer excavated Annie Chapman's (and, apparently, Mary Kelly's) abdomen in much the same way as you'd cut open a pie-crust to get at the filling.

And how many more killers have you found that did the same thing, Gareth? If I was to tell you that it seems more or less unique, what would you think about the coupling of two killers in the same city, at the same time, who came up with the pie-crust idea, when it seems that history offers no further examples of it?

What does it take for a coupling to be made? What can be MORE indicative than a unique measure, a calling card that cannot be found elseplace?

[Fisherman]

Michael W Richards: The problem, as indicated in bold above, is that no more than 3 victims match your criteria, within the Unsolved file.

Actually, that is not my problem. It is my piece de resistance. It is the evidence that clearly shows a connection between the Ripper and the torso killer.

Yet you continually espouse a victims list that exceeds that 3, and even the accepted Canonical victims number of 5. Clearly within that mere 5 victims list at least 1 victim does not belong at all, and 2 more leave serious doubts. So on what basis would we now entertain expanding a list that is at present most probably incorrect? Hunches? Explanations that make sense to the poster? A need to explain all these events with one "sweep" of a knife?

There are common denominators all over. But it is not as if evidence A is present with all victims. It is a conglomerate of evidence that ties them together, say A, B, C, D and E. Some victims answer to A and C, some to C, D and E, some to E and B, and so forth.
There is not least an element that I have not mentioned, but that further glues the murders together. Disclosing it lies in the future, though.

Torso victims were not killed where Polly and Annie were...outdoors while soliciting, how Polly and Annie were.. subdued and partially mutilated, and with a detectable trace of skill and knowledge as Annie and Pollys killer showed.

Annie Chapman, a part-time prostitute, was subdued and murdered, her neck was cut, her abdomen was cut open all the way from sternum to pubes, the abdominal walls were cut away in large flaps and her uterus was taken away from her body. When she was found, it was noticed that there were marks of two rings on her finger, and it was thought that the killer had taken them.

Elizabeth Jackson, the part-time prostitute? Well, we can´t tell how she was killed, but she certainly had her neck cut off, her abdomen was cut open all the way from sternum to pubes, the abdominal walls were cut away in large flaps and her uterus was taken away from her body. When she was found, it was noticed that there were marks of a ring on her finger, and it was thought that the killer had taken it.

How much more of a likeness are you asking for before you start to realize the similarities?

[kjab3112]

Fisherman,

Hebbert's report clearly describes Liz Jackson's uterus and even the placenta, but it was presumably in the abdominal not pelvic section of her corpse. However, her chest had been opened with the heart and lungs removed as well as a long part of intestine. Given the report was signed off by Bond in the Westminster Hospital Report I would suggest the description is accurate.

Paul

[Debra A]

Fisherman,

Hebbert's report clearly describes Liz Jackson's uterus and even the placenta, but it was presumably in the abdominal not pelvic section of her corpse. However, her chest had been opened with the heart and lungs removed as well as a long part of intestine. Given the report was signed off by Bond in the Westminster Hospital Report I would suggest the description is accurate.

Paul

Hi Paul

I've always interpreted the finds like this, perhaps wrongly?:

The uterus and appendages, placenta and cord were wrapped in a parcel together with two flaps of skin taken from the abdominal walls. The flaps of skin included the external organs of generation of part of the skin of the right buttock. The upper portion of the vagina was attached to the uterus, but no other organs, bones etc were described in this parcel:

Dr Michael M'Coy, of 300. Commercial-road, assistant divisional surgeon, said on Tuesday, the 4th of June last, he was called to the Thames Police station, Wapping, where he was shown a portion of a human body. He found it to be two pieces of flesh of the lower part of the front of a woman's abdomen and the uterus.
The Times July 4th 1889
This portion was found at Horsleydown on the 4th June, one of the first parcels to be washed up.

The pelvis was found separately and included the lower part of the vagina. It was noted at the inquest that "The whole skin of the front of the pelvis was absent and this was found to be supplied by the portion of the body found at Horseleydown last Tuesday."
The Sun June 9th 1889

The division of the vagina and inclusion of part of the bladder in both these parcels suggests to me that the uterus was cut out. Am I wrong about this? Isn't the uterus basically supported in its position by the pelvic floor muscle and some ligaments? Is there any anatomical relationship between the abdominal flesh wall and the uterus that would necessitate them being parcelled up together?

[John G]

And how many more killers have you found that did the same thing, Gareth? If I was to tell you that it seems more or less unique, what would you think about the coupling of two killers in the same city, at the same time, who came up with the pie-crust idea, when it seems that history offers no further examples of it?

What does it take for a coupling to be made? What can be MORE indicative than a unique measure, a calling card that cannot be found elseplace?

It wasn't unique to these crimes. And as I've pointed out before, and will set out on more detail when I have more time, each crime needs to be considered on it's own merits. I'm afraid it's not as simple of looking for words like "abdominal" and "wall" then joining up the dots.

[Sam Flynn]

And how many more killers have you found that did the same thing, Gareth? If I was to tell you that it seems more or less unique, what would you think about the coupling of two killers in the same city, at the same time, who came up with the pie-crust idea, when it seems that history offers no further examples of it?

The point about the pie-crust method is that it's a reasonably obvious method for exposing the contents of the pie, if I can put it that way. Given this "obviousness", I wouldn't be particularly surprised if others had adopted the same method entirely independently, nor that other examples did exist, either in the LVP or at other times. The problem is (a) none of us has a 100% encyclopedic knowledge of every murder that ever occurred; and (b) not every detail of every such murder makes its way into print.

[Sam Flynn]

It's not as simple of looking for words like "abdominal" and "wall" then joining up the dots.

...nor of cutting along the dotted line, as the case may be.

[Fisherman]

It wasn't unique to these crimes. And as I've pointed out before, and will set out on more detail when I have more time, each crime needs to be considered on it's own merits. I'm afraid it's not as simple of looking for words like "abdominal" and "wall" then joining up the dots.

Not unique? Examples, please.

[Fisherman]

The point about the pie-crust method is that it's a reasonably obvious method for exposing the contents of the pie, if I can put it that way. Given this "obviousness", I wouldn't be particularly surprised if others had adopted the same method entirely independently, nor that other examples did exist, either in the LVP or at other times. The problem is (a) none of us has a 100% encyclopedic knowledge of every murder that ever occurred; and (b) not every detail of every such murder makes its way into print.

I am still going to need examples, not just an unsubstantiated idea that it probably happened.

[Fisherman]

Fisherman,

Hebbert's report clearly describes Liz Jackson's uterus and even the placenta, but it was presumably in the abdominal not pelvic section of her corpse. However, her chest had been opened with the heart and lungs removed as well as a long part of intestine. Given the report was signed off by Bond in the Westminster Hospital Report I would suggest the description is accurate.

Paul

The uterus and two large slips of the abdominal wall were NOT found in the body of Jackson. It was washed up as a bundle, containing also the placenta and cord.
Debra asks a number of things about it. I would value your opinion.

[Debra A]

The uterus and two large slips of the abdominal wall were NOT found in the body of Jackson. It was washed up as a bundle, containing also the placenta and cord.
Debra asks a number of things about it. I would value your opinion.

Wynne Baxter originally opened an inquest at Wapping on June 5th on just the uterus and skin flaps taken from the abdominal wall found at St George Stairs, Horselydown. As further remains were found in Battersea and the West End the inquest was completed at Wapping and a burial order in the name of Elizabeth Jackson issued. The inquest on the largest part of the body was then transferred to Battersea where Braxton Hicks was the coroner. Elizabeth has her death registered in two different districts, Stepney, which covers the Wapping find and Wandsworth, which covers Battersea.

[Sam Flynn]

I am still going to need examples, not just an unsubstantiated idea that it probably happened.

I can't give you examples, Fish, and I've already said why. In case you missed them, here are those reasons again: "(a) none of us has a 100% encyclopedic knowledge of every murder that ever occurred; and (b) not every detail of every such murder makes its way into print"

Sorry for the repetition, but it seems to be something I often find myself having to do in the context of these discussions.

[Fisherman]

I can't give you examples, Fish, and I've already said why. In case you missed them, here are those reasons again: "(a) none of us has a 100% encyclopedic knowledge of every murder that ever occurred; and (b) not every detail of every such murder makes its way into print"

Sorry for the repetition, but it seems to be something I often find myself having to do in the context of these discussions.

Yeah, I am really, really thick. However, I have sought high and low for parallels, and I have spoken to a criminologist with great anatomical interest and insight, and it seems that thosw who ought to be in the knbow concur that this is a more or less unique thing.

So frankly, much as I accept that a full encyclopedic knowledge is not there in any case (but if the interest is there, a search can be made), and that details like these are not always spelt out for various reasons, there is no other thing I can do but to say that it DOES take evidence to bolster any suggestion that many cases are pie-crust cases.
And as long as I don´t see any evidence at all of such cases, my stance remains the same: this is a VERY odd matter.

And to be fair, Gareth, let´s look at things from a less than fundamentalist view:

Killers are not very common.

Serial killers are very, very much rarer.

Serial killers who eviscerate are very much rarer that serial killers per se.

Serial killers who take away the abdominal walls in large flaps, are rarer than hen´s teeth.

And no matter how we look upon things, we have TWO such killers working in the same city at the same time, in an era when serialists are freakishly poorly listed.

Why would we NOT accept that a common identity is the reasonable suggestion? All "but´s" applied.

[Fisherman]

Wynne Baxter originally opened an inquest at Wapping on June 5th on just the uterus and skin flaps taken from the abdominal wall found at St George Stairs, Horselydown. As further remains were found in Battersea and the West End the inquest was completed at Wapping and a burial order in the name of Elizabeth Jackson issued. The inquest on the largest part of the body was then transferred to Battersea where Braxton Hicks was the coroner. Elizabeth has her death registered in two different districts, Stepney, which covers the Wapping find and Wandsworth, which covers Battersea.

Thanks for outlining this. The reason I posted is that kjab3112 seems to think that the uterus was found within Jacksons body.