|
 |
 |
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
    
Dennis Bailey
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Thursday, January 20, 2005 - 7:01 am: | 
|
Why are so many ripperologists focused on JR as being upper-middle or middle class? A merhant, a doctor, artist, teacher, lawyer, royally connected. Looking at the cases of multiple, single style murderers since the 1880s we see a pattern of losers and low lifes.
Moors, Yorkshire, Boston, and many more in the USA. In Australa we had backpacker murders, Truro, and more recently Snowtown.
In all cases the culprits were the from the same mould. No doctors or famous names among them.
I would say this is even more likely with JACK in Victorian London.
Kosminski or someone like him stands out.
The lack of detailed evidence against the Maybrick Diary still makes it an interesting story, but I think the man woud have stood out more for witnesses.
The chances are still that more than one person is responsible - particularly with the double event.
Would Kelly have gone with a stranger - I don't think so. |
George Hutchinson
Inspector
Username: Philip
Post Number: 205
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Thursday, January 20, 2005 - 1:12 pm: |
|
Hi Dennis.
You would be surprised - hardly ANY serious Ripperologist believes it was a member of the middle or upper classes, as this message board should show. Dealings with the Maybrick business are not people convinced it is real, it is trying to uncover the history of the hoax for the most part.
The MEDIA has made Jack a man of finance and background because that is what excites people on the street. They don't want to know the truth when a lie is more interesting. Just look at the readership of tabloids!
While you say there was no one of wealth or connections who has been a serial killer since the 1880s - that is probably mostly true, but is a very sweeping statement. One that instantly springs to mind is the recent man in Pakistan (forgive me for forgetting his name) who had a massive family fortune and killed 100 boys after losing it.
Kosminski is a bone of contention, and you have to know WHO you are referring to. Aaron Kosminski, Nathan Kaminski, David Cohen...? If you do deep research (or even moderate research) into Kosminski you will see things don't fit and too much is set on hearsay and errors, as with all suspects that people say 'That is the guy'.
Would Kelly have gone with a stranger? Weird question, even though rhetorical. OF COURSE SHE WOULD!!!
PHILIP
Tour guides do it loudly in front of a crowd!
|
Alan Sharp
Chief Inspector
Username: Ash
Post Number: 766
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, January 20, 2005 - 1:31 pm: |
|
Another point, the namesake of the previous poster has a lot to do with it.
George Hutchinson saw Kelly with a man in a coat with an Astrakhan collar and wearing an ornate watch chain. This indicated a reasonably well-to-do man. If Hutchinson's man was the Ripper, then it wasn't a Kosminski or a Cohen, simple as that. Hutchinson's man would be more likely to be one of the more flamboyant suspects, such as Tumblety or D'Onston.
"All I know of morality, I learned from football" - Albert Camus
http://www.ashbooks.co.uk/
|
Phil Hill
Detective Sergeant
Username: Phil
Post Number: 68
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Thursday, January 20, 2005 - 2:37 pm: |
|
One of the problems about a "toff" Ripper that is often overlooked, is that an Eddy, a JK Stephen, a Lord Randolph, even a MJ Druitt would have stood out like a sore thumb in the east End of 1888.
It wasn't just that they could have worn "disguise" or "dressed down". the timbre of their voice, their accent, stance, demeanour, manners, haircut, smell would all have marked them out as very different from East Enders.
The descriptions of a real toff would have focused on their manner and approach, not just clothing, as in east End terms such a man would have seem almost literally from another planet.
That is one reason I am cautious about hutchinson's description. The clothing and the manner of the man don't fit - at least IMHO.
Phil |
Natalie Severn
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Severn
Post Number: 1481
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, January 20, 2005 - 3:34 pm: |
|
I must confess to still thinking that such a murderer could have been middle class .
Mostly this is because of the nature of the mutilations and the fact that the mutilations convinced some of the examining doctors that
someone with medical/surgical ability had carried them out.Dr Phillips[one of the police surgeons]
even said he thought the murderer had been in the habit of carrying out postmortems.Some of the doctors agreed with him while others didnt but he was a well respected doctor/surgeon.
If he had been someone with a hammer and knife and had only committed the Martha Tabram and Mary Kelly murders say,then I would be inclined to agree.But there was a degree of finesse about his method of killing,his speed,the economy he employed when removing the organs he was
after,that do suggest to me someone who had been trained or had learnt a lot about anatomy and surgery as might have Druitt who was from a family of doctors his own father being a surgeon.
Also the site of the Nichols murder just minutes from the London Hospital has always had me thinking about Student doctors and so on.
I accept that most serial killers are not from the middle class but then most of the people who lived in England at that time were from the working class---upwards of 90%---- so proportionally
and probably class for class they were about the same.
Phil,
I agree,they would have stood out in every way but remember Sgt White"s description of the man with tapering fingers emerging from Mitre Square[or rather it seems to be Mitre Square]and just after stumbling upon a murder victim he said he was rather shabby but his clothes looked as though they might have seen better days.....it was his"low, musical,refined voice" that took him by complete surprise not his clothing!
Natalie
. |
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 2913
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, January 20, 2005 - 4:59 pm: |
|
Actually, I would say that the speed in connection with rather unsatisfying circumstances on the sites, really points more to a butcher than a medical man. Butchers are quite used to cut and part a body in high speed and with efficiency in quite a different way than medical doctors, who usually is used to rather sanitary circumstances, with good lighting and where speed is not regarded with high priority in their work in the same way as a butcher.
In the case of butchers, speed, routine and efficiancy is a natural part of their occupation and fits better in with the nature and circumstances of the Ripper murders. And as for anatomical knowledge, a butcher could just as well have performed the mutilations inflicted; some elements -- like the hacking inside Eddowes' body -- puts the suggestion of a medical doctor in a rather questionable light.
We must also note that the area in the nearest vicinity of Buck's Row contained a number of slaughterhouses, where also inquiries were made by the police.
All the best
G. Andersson, author
Sweden
The Swedes are the men That Will not be Blamed for Nothing
|
Natalie Severn
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Severn
Post Number: 1482
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, January 20, 2005 - 6:19 pm: |
|
The Post mortem report which Dr Phillips makes on Annie Chapman states quite clearly why he thinks the mutilations were performed by a surgeon of considerable skill.Later victims and in particular
Mary Kelly baffled them because here the work was very much like a butcher or slaughterer.Over the weekend I"ll dig out the report and post the relevant comments he made.
Natalie |
George Hutchinson
Inspector
Username: Philip
Post Number: 208
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Thursday, January 20, 2005 - 6:39 pm: |
|
This is true, Nats - but George Bagster Phillips was rather out on his own. One man on one murder - though, as per usual, I am willing to stand corrected. I agree with Glenn, but all this sort of thing is going round in circles and is ultimately futile. We all know we will never discover the truth, so I try to make my study as one of finding out the facts by filtering out the crap from what we KNOW, rather than speculating. I have my opinions, but that is just a belief and I know it is no more than that.
In short, we know that GBP had his views on the mutilation of AC, but one man on one murder does not a doctor make!
PHILIP
Tour guides do it loudly in front of a crowd!
|
Phil Hill
Detective Sergeant
Username: Phil
Post Number: 69
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Friday, January 21, 2005 - 1:57 am: |
|
Natalie
I would have thought it VERY risky to base any argument on White's description - if it is even his. To do so rather undermines your case IMHO.
I'd also suggest that the arguments for medical knowledge have been somewhat overstated, as more recent analysis of period views has shown. In the 60s I might have agreed with you because that was a concensus then, but not now - too much very good material refutes that theory.
Sorry, I'm unconvinced
Phil |
mr poster
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Friday, January 21, 2005 - 11:14 am: |
|
Hello
Would a lower class man not have tended to blurt out the whole thing at some point? Drunk night in the pub, jealous of the fame that he caused but got no credit for?
mr poster |
Phil Hill
Detective Sergeant
Username: Phil
Post Number: 72
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Friday, January 21, 2005 - 3:40 pm: |
|
Wecome Mr Poster - our paths have not crossed before.
Isn't that a little too general?
Surely, East enders would have been as varied as any other section of the population - the drunk/the sober; the talkative/the secretive; the introvert/the extrovert?
Would an immigrant Jew necessarily be a drunkard, or even be able to speak intelligible English?
A "Kosminski"-type might have burbled incoherently.
I do think we need to be a little more specific and realistic in our thinking, don't you?
Phil |
Dan Norder
Inspector
Username: Dannorder
Post Number: 492
Registered: 4-2004
| | Posted on Friday, January 21, 2005 - 4:53 pm: |
|
Regarding the idea that people who tried to dress down would stand out like a sore thumb in the East End, Jack London, as he described in his book People of the Abyss, seemed to do an alright job of blending in.
Dan Norder, Editor
Ripper Notes: The International Journal for Ripper Studies
 Profile  Email  Dissertations  Website
|
Phil Hill
Detective Sergeant
Username: Phil
Post Number: 74
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Friday, January 21, 2005 - 5:35 pm: |
|
He was an American was he not, and hardly a "gentleman". |
Dan Norder
Inspector
Username: Dannorder
Post Number: 494
Registered: 4-2004
| | Posted on Friday, January 21, 2005 - 5:53 pm: |
|
Phil,
Yes, he was American. You'd think that would make it harder for him to fit in, not easier.
Dan Norder, Editor
Ripper Notes: The International Journal for Ripper Studies
Profile Email Dissertations Website
|
Natalie Severn
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Severn
Post Number: 1484
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Friday, January 21, 2005 - 6:14 pm: |
|
Hi folks!
Philip,
I dont think Dr Phillips was alone.Several considered that they couldnt have been the work of a slaughterman.Its true that others considered
he could have been but I think they were looking more at the butchery in Millers Court.
I would like to know the names of the doctors/surgeons of recent times who have refuted Dr Phillips observations and conclusions.
He was particularly against the idea that having knowledge of the anatomy of farm animals through being a butcher would have been of any use in removing a uterus avoiding the cervix and neighbouring organs and doing all this in a single sweep of the knife.Similarly when he removed the kidney[within 15 minutes,in the dark,under stress of capture]he knew how to do this with great skill and economy of cut.He states the kidney is an organ that is hidden under another organ or film of skin and therefore not easily located esp in conditions such as he worked under.
Phil,
Apparently it was quite a hobby among the upper classes to go slumming and they dressed down accordingly.
Can you tell me why you discount the word of
Sgt White?
George Sims tells us about the story sometime in the 1890"s and says it was treated with great seriousness by as the police at the time.
Best Wishes Natalie |
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 2934
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Friday, January 21, 2005 - 8:18 pm: |
|
Natalie,
"Similarly when he removed the kidney[within 15 minutes,in the dark,under stress of capture]he knew how to do this with great skill and economy of cut.He states the kidney is an organ that is hidden under another organ or film of skin and therefore not easily located esp in conditions such as he worked under."
That is exactly my point why a slaughterman would be more credible.
As I wrote above: "Butchers are quite used to cut and part a body in high speed and with efficiency in quite a different way than medical doctors, who usually is used to rather sanitary circumstances, with good lighting and where speed is not regarded with high priority in their work in the same way as a butcher.
In the case of butchers; speed, routine and efficiancy is a natural part of their occupation and fits better in with the nature and circumstances of the Ripper murders."
Meaning that the "great skill" would in my mind apply better to a slaughterman's conditions and working methods. Speed is not exactly a part of a medical man's work, but it is for a slaugtherman.
And what "one sweep with the knife"? There was no "one sweep with the knife" -- this is a statement that I believe it was not meant to be taken literary. Phillips apparently only used it as an expression and none of the other doctors hardly agreed on that, and looking at the closer descriptions of the wounds and taking of the organs it is certainly incorrect. Some meant that it would be enough to possess rough anatomical knowledge and there is no reason why a butcher also couldn't be aware of human anatomy.
In my opinion, very little points to a medical man. Especially when we consider the roughness of the mutilations, quite lacking from any kind of elegancy and neatness. Phillips based his judgement on the Chapman murder and had at this point not seen the hacking inside Eddowes' body -- something I wouldn't link to a medical doctor or surgeon, not matter how stressed for time he was.
The police didn't take the doctor theories more serious than other leads. They clearly considered slaughterers and similar trades to the same extent, and we know several inquiries were done in that direction.
All the best
G. Andersson, author
Sweden
The Swedes are the men That Will not be Blamed for Nothing
|
George Hutchinson
Inspector
Username: Philip
Post Number: 214
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Friday, January 21, 2005 - 9:24 pm: |
|
How confusing this is with Philip, Phil and Phillips, eh? Maybe I should change my name to 'X'!
I was of the understanding that the cut was only partially clean (though one swipe) and that a complete mess had been made of much of what was left inside her with said cut?
I really agree with what was said above, that a surgeon has slow, methodical, clinical skill and needs proper light to do these things (I am not referring to things like primitive amputation here that were done very quickly - that is a whole different ball park, and a different time). Butchery is swift and brutal. I think the partial cleanliness was a fluke.
Thank God I'm a vegetarian.
PHILIP
Tour guides do it loudly in front of a crowd!
|
Donald Souden
Inspector
Username: Supe
Post Number: 413
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Friday, January 21, 2005 - 9:31 pm: |
|
I am a bit puzzled here and that may have something to do with the definitions of classes in the USA and Britain, but almost all the serial killers who come to mind in this country would fall into the "middle-class." If nothing else, that station assures mobility and a level of privacy.
I would also agree with Natalie, at least in terms of anatomical knowledge if not necessarily surgical skill. It is all well and good for physicians (or even modern Ripperologists) to say that JtR evinced nothing more than a rudimentary sense of the human innards, but I wonder how many folks in Whitechapel in 1888 (or today for that matter) knew a womb from a bladder. I don't think I'd want Jack removing my appendix, but I rather think he'd know where to find it.
This doesn't mean Jack was a doctor or medical student, but I strongly suspect he'd learned something about the human anatomy. Maybe in a morgue, maybe in a hospital, maybe staring at picture books somewhere. I certainly think he had a fascination with what lies under the skin and unfortunately he acted upon that yearning.
Don.
"He was so bad at foreign languages he needed subtitles to watch Marcel Marceau."
|
George Hutchinson
Inspector
Username: Philip
Post Number: 219
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Friday, January 21, 2005 - 10:05 pm: |
|
Hi Don.
I wouldn't agree that most serial killers here are middle-class. Even if you exclude people like Dennis Nilsen or Brady & Hindley because they had office jobs, you still have Fred & Rosemary West, Peter Sutcliffe, John Duffy, Donald Nielson, Patrick MacKay, Kenneth Erskine, George Joseph Smith, John Christie la la la...
In fact the only truly middle-class serial killer I can think of here is Harold Shipman (and on a similar tack, John Bodkin Adams if he really was what some people thought).
I don't know where we'd place John George Haigh because he was more a con-man than truly middle-class.
No wonder my parents used to worry about me.
PHILIP
PS : In reference to the womb and bladder issue, the first trophy taking and removal of organs was with AC. He cut through the bottom 2/3 of the bladder and I would imagine the leakage of urine would probably tell him that it wasn't the womb - especially as Annie had been in the pub!
Tour guides do it loudly in front of a crowd!
|
Donald Souden
Inspector
Username: Supe
Post Number: 414
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Friday, January 21, 2005 - 10:30 pm: |
|
Philip,
When I said here I meant the USA. That's where I live. Granted, I'm in NEW England, but it's part of the contiguous 48.
Don.
"He was so bad at foreign languages he needed subtitles to watch Marcel Marceau."
|
Phil Hill
Detective Sergeant
Username: Phil
Post Number: 75
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, January 22, 2005 - 3:06 am: |
|
Natalie - I think we have to understand what "slumming" meant. The individuals concerned were not trying to mix with the "natives" (as it were) or pass as one of them.
I'll admit that I don't actually know how much "slumming" went on. I have read reasonably extensively in the period and have found little relevant evidence. Does anyone else have any or are we just retelling a fantasy here?
On Jack London, in an east End packed with immigrants, I suggest that a foreign (ie American) accent would fit and be accepted far more easily than an upper-class English one, with all the connotations the latter would possess.
Phil |
George Hutchinson
Inspector
Username: Philip
Post Number: 220
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, January 22, 2005 - 5:16 am: |
|
OK then, Don - Richard Speck (though a mass murderer), Henry Lee Lucas, Otis Toole, Herbert Mullin, Jeffrey Dahmer, Richard Ramirez, Arthur Shawcross...
Though I confess you have a lot more Middle Class ones like John Wayne Gacy, Ted Bundy (but I don't know where I'd place the likes of Leonard Lake, Danny Rolling etc)
Sorry for the confusion!
PHILIP
Tour guides do it loudly in front of a crowd!
|
George Hutchinson
Inspector
Username: Philip
Post Number: 221
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, January 22, 2005 - 5:19 am: |
|
Phil -
All I can suggest is that 'slumming' isn't something that would gain a lot of publicity. The homeless wouldn't have much means except accounts to philanthropists to discuss it, and the 'slummers' wouldn't exactly be anxious to tell the world what they got up to?
PHILIP
Tour guides do it loudly in front of a crowd!
|
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 2938
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, January 22, 2005 - 5:29 am: |
|
Don
(love your new tag line, by the way),
"It is all well and good for physicians (or even modern Ripperologists) to say that JtR evinced nothing more than a rudimentary sense of the human innards, but I wonder how many folks in Whitechapel in 1888 (or today for that matter) knew a womb from a bladder."
Well, maybe not the occasional Eastender as such, but as I said, I can't see why a buthcer also couldn't have a sufficient knowledge of human anatomy. I don't see this as impossible at all, on the contrary.
But it's a point well taken, that it of course could be a person who've had a former background in a hospital and not necessarily a surgeon. But I would nevertheless include an occupation where knives and cutting in flesh would be essential.
Why not a butcher with some previous experience from working in a hospital?
Hutch (sorry... Mr X).
"In reference to the womb and bladder issue, the first trophy taking and removal of organs was with AC. He cut through the bottom 2/3 of the bladder and I would imagine the leakage of urine would probably tell him that it wasn't the womb - especially as Annie had been in the pub!"
Excellent point. I agree.
All the best
G. Andersson, author
Sweden
The Swedes are the men That Will not be Blamed for Nothing
|
Natalie Severn
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Severn
Post Number: 1488
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, January 22, 2005 - 12:42 pm: |
|
Glenn, Well the point that Dr Phillips was making was about the fact that a butcher or slaughterman couldnt have carried out such mutilations.In his view the human anatomy was sufficiently different
to that of a pig a cow or a sheep to make such a tranference of skills highly unlikely anyway quite apart from the additional handicaps of working in the dark,the need to act quickly[dont get your point about slowness of method a surgeons skill was then[when anaesthetic was rudimentary] and still is dependent on speed
and accuracy.A persons body needs to be open for the shortest time possible for all sorts of reasons and today as then an anaesthetic always makes it important to work as fast as possible
Phil,you still havent said why you mistrust the account given by Sgt White.I am seriously interested in what you mean here. |
Natalie Severn
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Severn
Post Number: 1490
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, January 22, 2005 - 1:44 pm: |
|
Has anyone mentioned Neville Heath?
A middle class fighter pilot in the second world war and afterwards[1948]carried out a series of horrific sadistic murders of women and young girls. |
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 2948
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, January 22, 2005 - 2:02 pm: |
|
Hi nats,
"In his view the human anatomy was sufficiently different to that of a pig a cow or a sheep to make such a tranference of skills highly unlikely anyway quite apart from the additional handicaps of working in the dark,the need to act quickly"
And I believe a slaughterman would do those better under those conditions.
I disagree on that animal bodies are that far apart from ahuman one and even if that was the case, as I said, there is no reason why a butcher or anyone similar couldn't have enough knowledge about human anathomy anyway.
"dont get your point about slowness of method; a surgeons skill was then[when anaesthetic was rudimentary] and still is dependent on speed"
No, not in the same way as a butcher. It is not the same thing at all. Look at how crudely the mutilations are done, Nats. That is in my mind hardly the work of a medical man, in spite of the conditions on the sites. Butchers cut up bodies in a crude manner which certainly fits the Ripper mutilations better.
Doctors hardly rips people up "like a pig in the market".
I think Dr Phillips was wrong, and I can't see why we should take his word for it, when other doctors had contradicting views upon the matter.
All the best
G. Andersson, author
Sweden
The Swedes are the men That Will not be Blamed for Nothing
|
R.J. Palmer
Chief Inspector
Username: Rjpalmer
Post Number: 524
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, January 22, 2005 - 2:40 pm: |
|
"I think Dr Phillips was wrong, and I can't see why we should take his word for it...'
Glenn, I'm sorry but this is amusing. No one had more first-hand medical exposure to the victims than Bagster Phillips: 4 of the 5 post-mortems of the canonicals, and having viewed 3 of the victims in situ. So, ignore his words at your own risk. Mr. Hutchinson's quip about 'one man on one murder' actually applies much better to Dr. Bond, who didn't enter the case until late October, when he drew up a sort of 'profile' of the Ripper for Robert Anderson based on medical notes. And no wonder Bond didn't change his mind; the one canonical victim he actually examined was Mary Kelly. I'd suggest for Natalie to stick to her guns. RP |
Natalie Severn
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Severn
Post Number: 1491
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, January 22, 2005 - 5:31 pm: |
|
Hi Glenn,
If we can stay with Annie Chapman"s murder a little longer it seems to me that one of the reasons he was able to impress Dr Phillips regarding the skill with which he made his incisions is because he had daylight[sunrise was at 5.23 that day].And what impressed him was his ability to cut out the uterus,fallopian tubes and ovaries while leaving the cervix intact and attached to the uterus,which displays knowledge
of the shape and function of the uterus especially with regards to the cervix which though attached to the uterus can seem to not be part of it since its location is firmly in the vagina rather than the lower abdomen.To me this is an example of a sophisticated degree of gynaecological knowledge and skills of selection discernment and extraction that few of us could honestly claim we have with regards to the female human reproductive organs.
Best Natalie
|
Natalie Severn
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Severn
Post Number: 1492
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, January 22, 2005 - 5:34 pm: |
|
Hi RP [doing my best here
Cheers!
Natalie |
Frank van Oploo
Inspector
Username: Franko
Post Number: 451
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, January 22, 2005 - 6:57 pm: |
|
Hi all,
I think the pitfall here is that Dr. Philips' angle seems to have been that the killer had intended to take away specific organs, which in my view doesn't have to be the case. The fact that part of Annie Chapman's belly wall was also taken away might support the idea that the murderer didn't have any specific organs in mind and didn't really know where to find them.
The rough and fast work and cutting out anything that felt good to the murderer at the time fits more with the notion that he hadn't set his mind on taking away particular organs and was just 'cutting away'. The Ripper may have had some medical background, but not necessarily. He needn't even have been a butcher.
Well, these are just my thoughts.
All the best,
Frank
"Every disadvantage has it's advantage."
Johan Cruijff
|
Natalie Severn
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Severn
Post Number: 1494
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, January 22, 2005 - 7:43 pm: |
|
Hi Frank,I was just taking a quick look before turning off the computer when I saw your post.
Well I dont read his report like that at all.He states that various innards were displayed over shoulders etc and these included the belly wall you speak of.The reproductive organs[I wont spell this out as Ive written it above]were entirely removed including the rear two thirds of the bladder...."The incisions were cleanly cut,avoiding the rectum,and dividing the vagina low enough to avoid injury to the cervix uteri.
Some degree of anatomical evidence was apparent--indeed Dr Phillips believed there would have been greater evidence of anatomical knowledge if the murderer hadnt been acting in great haste[which he had to].
The medical journal "the Lancet" stated " obviously thework was that of an expert-of one,at least,who had such knowledge of anatomical or pathological examinations as to be enabled to secure the pelvic organs with one sweer of a knife"[The Lancet incidently remains in the UK the leading medical journal for doctors and surgeons].
The whole point of Dr Phillips findings were that they did not appear rough and ready at all----
--------it seems to me that this may be a myth
that was perpetuated by those in the past who did not have Dr Phillips medical knowledge.In fact he underlines his observations by saying that he himself could not have performed the mutilations in under 15 minutes.
Natalie |
Donald Souden
Inspector
Username: Supe
Post Number: 417
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, January 22, 2005 - 8:49 pm: |
|
Natalie,
I continue to agree with you. Not only do you make most of the points I would anyway, but I'm too busy trying to cope with the two feet of snow we are getting dumped upon us here to try to think of any other salient points at the moment. Keep up the good fight.
Don.
"He was so bad at foreign languages he needed subtitles to watch Marcel Marceau."
|
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 2955
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, January 22, 2005 - 8:53 pm: |
|
No, Natalie.
Myth or not - I se the opposite as a myth.
The mutilations are clearly roughly performed and -- I say it again -- this is for example clearly readable in Eddowes case. Also, in the case of Chapman, we can read that some of the organs were not at all cleanly cut but actually destroyed and half cut through while taken out (like the bladder). And we can also see this in the factual descriptions of Chapman and Eddowes.
Not to mention the long incision itself, opening up the body, which is jagged, uneven and more than crude, to say the least. I think a medical man would do it with more effiently even under such circumstances.
The mutilations are really a crude piece of work, and we cant be sure of that the organs actually was specifically chosen (although I suspect the womb was the target in the three canonical victims). I truly believe that someone like a butcher and with a fair knowledge of human anatomy could do and cut away the parts that you describe.
And it was certainly more medical authorities than Dr Bond who doubted Phillip's self-assured opinion about medical skills. It is also important to note that the police carried out several leads and with a fairly opened mind searched for several types of killers, few of them with actual medical background, so the police were apparently not totally sold on this idea.
And once again, several scholars have seriously challenged the "one sweep of the knife" expression -- that in particular I believe has become a myth that has led to misconceptions.
Now, shall I go on...? 
All the best
G. Andersson, author
Sweden
(Message edited by Glenna on January 22, 2005)
The Swedes are the men That Will not be Blamed for Nothing
|
Sir Robert Anderson
Inspector
Username: Sirrobert
Post Number: 181
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, January 22, 2005 - 9:09 pm: |
|
I have been of the mindset that the eye witness account of the Stride suspect points to someone other than a lower class workman. It's actually rather clever in a ghoulish way.
""You would say anything but your prayers." Spoken mildly, with an English accent, and in an educated manner.""
http://casebook.org/witnesses/
Sir Robert
"I only thought I knew"
SirRobertAnderson@gmail.com
|
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 2958
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, January 22, 2005 - 9:26 pm: |
|
True, Sir Robert,
But since this was in connection with the Stride case, I am not sure how much I would like to consider this in the Ripper context, since I have serious doubts that Stride's murder had anything to do with the Ripper at all.
All the best
G. Andersson, author
Sweden
The Swedes are the men That Will not be Blamed for Nothing
|
Sir Robert Anderson
Inspector
Username: Sirrobert
Post Number: 182
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, January 22, 2005 - 9:26 pm: |
|
"Doctors hardly rips people up "like a pig in the market". "
Unless, Glenn, they consider the person they're ripping to be a pig....
Sir Robert
"I only thought I knew"
SirRobertAnderson@gmail.com
|
Sir Robert Anderson
Inspector
Username: Sirrobert
Post Number: 183
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, January 22, 2005 - 9:33 pm: |
|
"But since this was in connection with the Stride case, I am not sure how much I would like to consider this in the Ripper context, since I have serious doubts that Stride's murder had anything to do with the Ripper at all. "
lol 5 seconds after I hit Post Message I realized I should have caveated it!
Sir Robert
"I only thought I knew"
SirRobertAnderson@gmail.com
|
Frank van Oploo
Inspector
Username: Franko
Post Number: 453
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, January 22, 2005 - 9:33 pm: |
|
Hi Natalie,
Rereading my own post now I see that I didn't write down exactly what I meant. I meant to write: that the killer had intended to take away specific organs, for which he had used both his anatomical knowledge and surgical skill.
On 13 September Dr. Phillips said: "My own impression is that anatomical knowledge was only less displayed or indicated in consequence of haste." On 19 September he reaffirmed this view: "I myself could not have performed all the injuries I saw on that woman, and effect them, even without a struggle, in under a quarter of an hour. If I had done it in a deliberate way, such as would fall to the duties of a surgeon, it would probably have taken me the best part of an hour. The whole inference seems to me that the operation was performed to enable the perpetrator to obtain possession of these parts of the body." (Sugden,page 92 paperback).
Coroner Baxter followed Dr. Phillips in his summing up: "There are no meaningless cuts. It was done by one who knew where to find what he wanted, what difficulties he would have to contend against, and how he should use his knife, so as to abstract the organ without injury to it. No unskilled person could have known where to find it, or have recognized it when it was found."
So, it really seems to have been Dr. Phillips' view on the matter, and, being unfamiliar with 'motiveless' murders like the ones Jack the Ripper committed, I can understand his view since he was most probably looking for a motive or reason for the taking the body parts. Dr. Phillips' view is what must have induced Coroner Baxter to suggest that the taking of abdominal viscera may have been the object of Polly Nichols' death as well and that the perpetrator was disturbed before he had accomplished his object.
The murderer may indeed have had anatomical knowledge and surgical skill, but needn't had to have. If he would only have had some knowledge of the female body and just ripped, cut and grabbed as he went along, I don't think Chapman's body, or any of the others', would have ended up showing different wounds.
All the best,
Frank
"Every disadvantage has it's advantage."
Johan Cruijff
|
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 2959
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, January 22, 2005 - 9:36 pm: |
|
Sir Robert,
"Unless, Glenn, they consider the person they're ripping to be a pig...."
I believe that it under the circumstances of the sites would be more suitable for a medical doctor to use his skills in a more efficient manner while performing mutilations within a short time frame than ripping people up this way, whatever his feelings were about the victim.
All the best
G. Andersson, author
Sweden
(Message edited by Glenna on January 22, 2005)
The Swedes are the men That Will not be Blamed for Nothing
|
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 2960
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, January 22, 2005 - 9:44 pm: |
|
"The murderer may indeed have had anatomical knowledge and surgical skill, but needn't had to have. If he would only have had some knowledge of the female body and just ripped, cut and grabbed as he went along, I don't think Chapman's body, or any of the others', would have ended up showing different wounds."
True Frank,
I can certainly go along with this.
And regarding Eddowes, Coroner Baxter would in my mind have been in complete error if he had stated that there "were no meaningless cuts". I can't see why a man with a former medical profession would make a lot of unnecessary random stabbing inside the body, considering the shortage of time to his disposal. Surely this is no indication of the conduct of an "expert".
Of course, someone with a medical background can't be completely ruled out, but I find it doubtful.
All the best
G. Andersson, author
Sweden
The Swedes are the men That Will not be Blamed for Nothing
|
Frank van Oploo
Inspector
Username: Franko
Post Number: 455
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, January 22, 2005 - 10:03 pm: |
|
"Of course, someone with a medical background can't be completely ruled out, but I find it doubtful."
I completely agree with you there, Glenn. (Yuk, how agreeable we are!)
I'm off to bed now, so, sleep tight or welterusten as we say in Holland.
Frank
"Every disadvantage has it's advantage."
Johan Cruijff
|
Natalie Severn
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Severn
Post Number: 1495
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, January 23, 2005 - 5:43 am: |
|
I think we are getting somewhere actually.Just as I think it unwise to rule out a surgeon,an assistant at post mortems,a student doctor,a midwife even[just as was considered possible at the time]so do I think a person such as Druitt,Chapman[a barber surgeon trained in hospitals in Eastern Europe], Cutbush who like Druitt was literate and is said to have studied medical books keenly could have carried out the mutilations.Where I have problems is reconciling
what those in the past have had to say about the findings of the police doctor most involved in the post mortem examinations with those WITHOUT medical knowledge who have cast scorn on those findings without a really convincing arguement.
I am not qualified to pilot a plane and would be at sea trying to work out a fault of navigation.Neither am I a doctor and so think twice about
disputing the claims of such a person so clearly trained to the highest degree possible in anatomy
and the navigation involved in quickly and efficiently locating the organs in question-the uterus and cervix both intact.
Finally Glenn I myself would have thought that this man was in a state of high excitement/mania while he was busy carrying out these mutilations
and however thorough and methodical he may have been in normal circumstances this could not and would not have been the case that night.
Best to both Frank and Glenn
and thanks to Don and RJ
Natalie |
George Hutchinson
Inspector
Username: Philip
Post Number: 234
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Sunday, January 23, 2005 - 9:45 am: |
|
I personally think we're getting nowhere and just bouncing it about so I'm bored with this thread and probably won't post on it again.
Nats : Neville Heath doesn't count. I did think of him but he wasn't a serial killer (as he only killed 2)
Sir Robert A : I don't agree about the Stride 'Anything but your prayers' - this was ages before the murder and he had gone by the time Mr Broad-Shoulders was about.
Glenn : Hit 'em! I've read nothing on this strand that has made me change my mind!
PHILIP
Tour guides do it loudly in front of a crowd!
|
Natalie Severn
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Severn
Post Number: 1502
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, January 23, 2005 - 10:05 am: |
|
Oh Well Bully for You!!!Maybe other threads are a bit of a bore too ,Philip!
But not to include Neville Heath is ridiculous----at the trial nobody knew how many people he had murdered because he had been in the Middle East and several witesses spoke of his murderous depravity there....
Natalie
|
Frank van Oploo
Inspector
Username: Franko
Post Number: 456
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, January 23, 2005 - 4:04 pm: |
|
Hi Natalie,
I wasn’t trying to discredit Dr Phillips’ skills, knowledge and experience as a police surgeon. I certainly do not think I’m smarter or better than he was, as I have no medical background whatsoever. But there are several things I considered before reaching the view that Dr Phillips’ angle in Chapman’s case may put people on the wrong track.
First of all, although Dr Phillips had been a very experienced police surgeon, he wasn’t experienced in dealing with the murders committed by someone like Jack the Ripper, who killed and mutilated without an obvious reason. He, like many others, was probably trying to make some sense of it all and did so by drawing the conclusion that, as the uterus had been cleanly cut from the pelvis, this must have been the objective of the deed and that therefore it must have been someone who knew where to find this particular organ and how to retrieve it from the abdominal cavity intact.
Secondly, with reference to Eddowes’ case Drs Sequeira and Saunders deposed that it was their view that the murderer had had no particular design on any particular organ and that he didn’t possess any great anatomical skill.
In addition Swanson wrote in a report: “The surgeon, Dr Brown, ..., and Dr Phillips, ..., having made a post-mortem examination of the body, reported that ... the mutilation so far gave no evidence of anatomical knowledge in the sense that it evidenced the hand of a qualified surgeon, so that the police could narrow their inquiries into certain classes of persons. On the other hand, as in the Metropolitan Police cases, the medical evidence showed that the murder could have been committed by a person who had been a hunter, a butcher, a slaughterman, as well as a student in surgery or a probably qualified surgeon."
Furthermore, in Eddowes’ case the uterus hadn’t been taken out of the body intact, nor in the cases of Nichols and Chapman had the perpetrator succeeded in cutting off their heads, something he seems to have tried. Plus, although perhaps less important in this context, in Chapman’s case he had cut 3 flaps of belly wall from the body, one of which he had also taken with him.
Finally, in the cases of mutilating killers similar to the Ripper that I know of, none of them had a medical background. Richard Trenton Chase, mentally probably the most imbalanced, cut out both kidneys (among other things) in the case of one of his victims.
This is why I wrote that I think Dr. Philips' opinion that the killer had intended to take away specific organs and had used his medical skill and knowledge to do it, doesn't have to be true and, again, may put people on the wrong track.
Of course, this is only my view and I may be wrong.
All the best,
Frank
"Every disadvantage has it's advantage."
Johan Cruijff
|
Natalie Severn
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Severn
Post Number: 1507
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, January 23, 2005 - 4:26 pm: |
|
Hi Frank,
Yes,I can see why you were cautious over this whole matter.Dr Phillips did seem to want to point the finger at someone like Tumblety who at one time was thought to be selling uteri to an American Doctor or something similar.
I think though that the uterus was intact-at least that is what is written in "the Facts" book of Paul Begg.Also the ability to take out the kidney which is hidden behind a membrane and to have done this in such pressing circumstamces points to someone with a significant anatomical knowledge this has to be acknowledged-I know I wouldnt know where to find the kidney let alone remove it nor the uterus for that matter without training myself through medical text books first.
And this is what I believe he did.
So for me it narrows the field down a bit to someone-maybe OK not a surgeon or even student doctor perhaps but some kind of specialist slaughterman who improved on his skills through practising
or a self taught person studying medical texts so that he could commit the mutilations.
Cheers Frank
Natalie |
Lindsey Millar
Inspector
Username: Lindsey
Post Number: 240
Registered: 9-2004
| | Posted on Sunday, January 23, 2005 - 7:39 pm: |
|
Nats,
Has anyone mentioned Neville Heath?
A middle class fighter pilot in the second world war and afterwards[1948]carried out a series of horrific sadistic murders of women and young girls.
I am taking this to the "Shades of Whitechapel thread. Because I'm interested in learning more.
Bestest,
Lyn
"When a man grows tired of London, he grows tired of life" (or summat like that)
|
Sir Robert Anderson
Inspector
Username: Sirrobert
Post Number: 190
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, January 23, 2005 - 8:27 pm: |
|
"1) There were never any "signs of recent connexion". A toff would not have wanted to actually use the services of these women. "
I'm not sure that's true. I don't want to put words in your mouth, but to me that reads like "Although he was deranged enough to slaughter and mutilate, Jack drew the line at sex as he was of more refined sensibilities."
I'd be willing to read something into evidence showing that Jack had had sex with his victims, but I don't think its absence tells us much.
Sir Robert
"I only thought I knew"
SirRobertAnderson@gmail.com
|
Frank van Oploo
Inspector
Username: Franko
Post Number: 458
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Monday, January 24, 2005 - 6:10 pm: |
|
Hi Natalie,
“So for me it narrows the field down a bit to someone-maybe OK not a surgeon or even student doctor perhaps but some kind of specialist slaughterman who improved on his skills through practising or a self taught person studying medical texts so that he could commit the mutilations.”
I can go along with that. I think he may have gotten hold of at least one (illustrated) book with some sort of anatomical and/or medical contents.
Another interesting thing is that Phillips saw less evidence of medical expertise in Eddowes’ murder than in that of Chapman and therefore was inclined to believe that these murders were not done by the same hand.
All the best,
Frank
"Every disadvantage has it's advantage."
Johan Cruijff
|
|
Use of these
message boards implies agreement and consent to our Terms of Use.
The views expressed here in no way reflect the views of the owners and
operators of Casebook: Jack the Ripper.
Our old message board content (45,000+ messages) is no longer available online, but a complete archive
is available on the Casebook At Home Edition, for 19.99 (US) plus shipping.
The "At Home" Edition works just like the real web site, but with absolutely no advertisements.
You can browse it anywhere - in the car, on the plane, on your front porch - without ever needing to hook up to
an internet connection. Click here to buy the Casebook At Home Edition.
|
|
|
|
