Casebook: Jack the Ripper - Main
   

Introduction
Victims
Suspects
Witnesses
Ripper Letters
Police Officials
Official Documents
Press Reports
Victorian London
Message Boards
Ripper Media
Authors
Dissertations
Timelines
Games & Diversions
Photo Archive
Ripper Wiki
Casebook Examiner
Ripper Podcast
About the Casebook

Most Recent Posts:
Klosowski, Severin (George Chapman): Can George Chapmam reform himself to being a calculating poisoner seven years later?. - by Batman 7 minutes ago.
Doctors and Coroners: Sedgewick Saunders ....... why did he say the things he said ? - by Sam Flynn 29 minutes ago.
Non-Fiction: the victims werent prostitutes - by Michael W Richards 31 minutes ago.
Non-Fiction: the victims werent prostitutes - by Michael W Richards 38 minutes ago.
Motive, Method and Madness: Antisemitism as a diversionary tactic - by Batman 40 minutes ago.
Non-Fiction: the victims werent prostitutes - by Michael W Richards 44 minutes ago.

Most Popular Threads:
Non-Fiction: the victims werent prostitutes - (56 posts)
Klosowski, Severin (George Chapman): Can George Chapmam reform himself to being a calculating poisoner seven years later?. - (38 posts)
General Discussion: Martin Fido discovery 2018 - (7 posts)
Doctors and Coroners: Sedgewick Saunders ....... why did he say the things he said ? - (6 posts)
Motive, Method and Madness: Antisemitism as a diversionary tactic - (3 posts)
Scene of the Crimes: All Roads Lead to Dorset St., - (3 posts)

Wiki Updates:
Robert Sagar
Edit: Chris
May 9, 2015, 12:32 am
Online newspaper archives
Edit: Chris
Nov 26, 2014, 10:25 am
Joseph Lawende
Edit: Chris
Mar 9, 2014, 10:12 am
Miscellaneous research resources
Edit: Chris
Feb 13, 2014, 9:28 am
Charles Cross
Edit: John Bennett
Sep 4, 2013, 8:20 pm

Most Recent Blogs:
Mike Covell: A DECADE IN THE MAKING.
February 19, 2016, 11:12 am.
Chris George: RipperCon in Baltimore, April 8-10, 2016
February 10, 2016, 2:55 pm.
Mike Covell: Hull Prison Visit
October 10, 2015, 8:04 am.
Mike Covell: NEW ADVENTURES IN RESEARCH
August 9, 2015, 3:10 am.
Mike Covell: UPDDATES FOR THE PAST 11 MONTHS
November 14, 2014, 10:02 am.
Mike Covell: Mike’s Book Releases
March 17, 2014, 3:18 am.

Go Back   Casebook Forums > Ripper Discussions > Victims > Mary Ann Nichols

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #231  
Old 07-18-2017, 09:51 AM
David Orsam David Orsam is offline
*
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 7,916
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wickerman View Post
Cursory, is brief and not detailed.
Call it visual if you like, preliminary is also an acceptable substitute.
What I call it, or what you call it, is irrelevant. It's what it was called by Dr Phillips in 1888 which is important and at no time did he refer to a "cursory" or even a "preliminary" examination. So it must be valid for me to object when you claim that the expression "cursory examination" came from Dr Phillips' own mouth, no?
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #232  
Old 07-18-2017, 09:53 AM
David Orsam David Orsam is offline
*
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 7,916
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wickerman View Post
At the scene, the in-situ examination is often brief, and largely visual.
Yes he may touch the body, he may feel the pulse to pronounce the body dead. But the in-situ examination at the crime scene falls in to the category of cursory, visual and preliminary.
This I believe is what you accepted.
No, as to the last sentence, you are wrong and, I think, confused. I have never defined what constitutes an in-situ examination.

When I was referring to a visual examination it was in the context of what YOU meant by "preliminary examination".
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #233  
Old 07-18-2017, 09:59 AM
David Orsam David Orsam is offline
*
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 7,916
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wickerman View Post
Bond did not conduct his own separate post-mortem. Phillips (c/w Mr Clark?), Dukes, Brown, Hebbert (who took the notes for Bond?), and Gabe were all present, according to the press.
One account does say that the doctors requested permission to do this, presumably from Mcdonald.

A Coroners post-mortem would be conducted Saturday morning at 7:30 am.
What do you mean by "Bond did not conduct his own separate post-mortem"?

How do you interpret the sentence in his 10 November report which states: "I have also made a Post Mortem Examination of the mutilated remains..."?

And how do you interpret the heading in his 16 November "report": "Postmortem Examination".

If Bond didn't conduct it, who did? If it was Phillips, why did he conduct a second one?

And why do you now refer to a "Coroners post-mortem"? What other kind of post-mortem is there?
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #234  
Old 07-18-2017, 10:03 AM
David Orsam David Orsam is offline
*
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 7,916
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wickerman View Post
One account does say that the doctors requested permission to do this, presumably from Mcdonald.
Are you referring to this story in the Daily Chronicle of 10 November:

"Half an hour later he [Phillips] was joined by Dr. Bond, the Chief Surgeon of the Metropolitan Police, and together they commenced a post-mortem examination on the spot as soon as the requisite authority had been obtained.

Please tell me. If Phillips (and Bond) had obtained the requisite authority from the coroner to conduct a joint post-mortem examination in the room, why did Phillips need to conduct a second post-mortem examination in the mortuary?
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #235  
Old 07-18-2017, 10:18 AM
Wickerman Wickerman is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 9,751
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Orsam View Post
Yes, that's what I'm saying. There isn't enough available material to prove what happened in that room.

That's why I keep making the point that while what you say is quite possible it is not certain.

But when I ask you to say the same about my point of view you refuse to do it.

Well let's try it. Do you agree that what I have been saying is quite possible?
I think the main difference between both our views is that while I am attempting to blend what we know from inquest testimony, Dr Bonds notes & the various press articles, you seem to want to stick with what the doctors said & wrote, while challenging the press coverage.
Maybe I'm wrong but it does seem that way to me.

One other comment.
While Dr Bond's notes entitled Post Mortem Examination 'could' have been a record of what took place on Saturday, I seriously doubt it. On Saturday Phillips is in charge of the Coroners post-mortem for the inquest. I very much doubt any other doctor present would be allowed to conduct his own post-mortem in parallel. My view is that they were present as observers.

I have two questions.
As you mentioned the last page of Bond's first examination, is on the first three pages.
Do those notes end in the middle of the page, or at the end?
Likewise, with the last page of the next four, for the P.M.
Do the notes end in the middle of the page, or at the end.

I ask to be sure there is no reason to believe pages are missing for each group of notes.
__________________
Regards, Jon S.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #236  
Old 07-18-2017, 10:19 AM
David Orsam David Orsam is offline
*
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 7,916
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wickerman View Post
Professional interest?
The most significant murder in recent history is bound to be the source of numerous questions from both the authorities and the medical men.
The thing is, Jon, Bond's report was required ASAP.

As you are no doubt aware, there is a note of telephone message in the Home Office files of the police response to a request for that report as follows:

'Body is believed to be that of a prostitute much mutilated. Dr Bond is at present engaged in making his Examination - but his report has not yet been received. Full report cannot be furnished until medical officers have completed enquiry.'

Note 'medical officers' plural. And Bond did not furnish his report on 9 November. It wasn't written until the next day. That suggests to me, not that he had a mere professional interest in the Saturday morning post-mortem examination, but that he could not submit his report until it was completed. What does it suggest to you?
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #237  
Old 07-18-2017, 10:21 AM
David Orsam David Orsam is offline
*
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 7,916
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wickerman View Post
The fact he sent his notes off on the same day might suggest nothing else was uncovered at the Coroners post-mortem.
How does that suggest any such thing?

How do we know the entire section under "Postmortem Examination" wasn't written in the afternoon on Saturday?

And the same for his entire report of 10 November.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #238  
Old 07-18-2017, 10:23 AM
Wickerman Wickerman is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 9,751
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Orsam View Post
What I call it, or what you call it, is irrelevant. It's what it was called by Dr Phillips in 1888 which is important and at no time did he refer to a "cursory" or even a "preliminary" examination. So it must be valid for me to object when you claim that the expression "cursory examination" came from Dr Phillips' own mouth, no?
Right, he does not say "cursory", he described a "cursory" examination, he doesn't call it anything but an examination.
__________________
Regards, Jon S.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #239  
Old 07-18-2017, 10:25 AM
David Orsam David Orsam is offline
*
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 7,916
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wickerman View Post
Besides, Dr bond's notes only concern themselves with the mutilations, as requested. That was the extent of his professional obligation to Anderson.
Really? Look at the first sentence.

"The body was lying naked in the middle of the bed, the shoulders flat, but the axis of the body included to the left side of the bed."

What does that have to do with the mutilations?

And what about this:

"In the abdominal cavity was some partly digested food of fish & potatoes & similar food was found in the remains of the stomach attached to the intestines".

What does that have to do with the mutilations?
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #240  
Old 07-18-2017, 10:27 AM
David Orsam David Orsam is offline
*
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 7,916
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wickerman View Post
He may have, but any notes by any other medical men have gone the same way as Phillips's post-mortem notes. None have survived.
But you understand that I am suggesting that the notes under the heading of "Postmortem Examination" might be a summary of Bond's notes (or Hebbert's notes if you prefer) of the Saturday post-mortem, right?
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 03:26 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.