Jack The Ripper Forums  - Ripperology For The 21st Century  

Go Back   Jack The Ripper Forums - Ripperology For The 21st Century > Inquest and Doctors' Reports

Inquest and Doctors' Reports Forum for discussion of the coroner's reports and inquest reports for the various victims of the Whitechapel Murders, including the observations and autopsy reports by the attending physicians

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old January 9th, 2015, 07:30 PM   #11
Harry Poland
Resident sceptic
 
Harry Poland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 45
Default

I wouldn't go for ether, it's very slow acting. Regarding ether as an accelerant, it has a tendency to burn off very quickly often leaving whatever you intended to burn intact.

Source: Direct experience, p*****g about with easy start as a 18 year old mechanic many many moons ago.
Harry Poland is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 9th, 2015, 07:35 PM   #12
Stevi B
Registered User
 
Stevi B's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Birmingham, England
Posts: 156
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Howard Brown View Post
Stevi:

Putting myself in the shoes of a prostitute being offered to get a buzz of this ether....I don't think I'd allow a stranger to put a rag over my mouth
Bear in mind the victims were intoxicated. To use your analogy of putting yourself in the prostitutes` shoes, they may well have agreed to inhale the ether themselves first, so JtR wouldn`t have to first put the rag over her mouth.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Howard Brown
Chloral Hydrate
The idea that the victims ( some of them, not all ) being 'chloralhydrated' did make the rounds back then, as I recall, but for one reason or the other that theory went out of vogue.
Doctors, who had to use their nose fairly often back in the LVP in determining what a murder/death victim ate, drank, ingested prior to their death... did not at any time notice evidence of chloral hydrate. My wife, Nina, tells me that it would have been extremely difficult to detect chloral unless there was a rather large amount ingested by a willing/unwilling user.
Its said that it would take around 21 grams of the stuff to kill a 150 pound person, presumably a healthy one....Chloral hydrate was unpredictable...one former Ripper suspect, Roslyn D'Onston, used 'Sudden Death' as a signature...referring to the sudden death that might occur to someone who ingested the minimum amount, as in a standard, typical, ordinary dose.
Good point. I`ll look into this and post something up separately.

Thanks for your comments.
Stevi B
__________________
Some people see things as they are and ask: "Why?"
I dream of things that never were and ask "Why not?" - Kennedy
Stevi B is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 9th, 2015, 07:42 PM   #13
Stevi B
Registered User
 
Stevi B's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Birmingham, England
Posts: 156
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Harry Poland View Post
I wouldn't go for ether, it's very slow acting. Regarding ether as an accelerant, it has a tendency to burn off very quickly often leaving whatever you intended to burn intact.

Source: Direct experience, p*****g about with easy start as a 18 year old mechanic many many moons ago.
Yes ether is slow acting but is it not possible that Jack could have given the victim ether early. Then, as he walked with them, the ether takes effect, to observers the victim is drunk (which, of course, she was). As to rapid burning, ether might burn off quickly but an ether-soaked rag dropped in an already lit fire (as in MJK`s room) would extentuate the flames and destroy the evidence.

Stevi
__________________
Some people see things as they are and ask: "Why?"
I dream of things that never were and ask "Why not?" - Kennedy
Stevi B is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 11th, 2015, 10:50 AM   #14
Cris Malone
Historian
 
Cris Malone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Jackson, Tennessee
Posts: 2,440
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stevi B View Post
Q. Could Jack the Ripper have used an anaesthetic to render the victims unconscious before "ripping" them?

Although the issue was not raised in the inquests (as far as I know but am prepared to be corrected), it may be of interest to examine the development of anaesthetics and possible connexions with the JtR events.
Hi Stevi,

The issue of the use of chemicals to subdue the victims was raised during both the Stride and Eddowes inquests. In fact, in the case of the city investigation Dr. William Saunders, chemical analyst for the City of London, was brought in to be present at the post mortem examination and to take samples back to his lab for analysis.

In the other three "canonical murders." both Nichols and Chapman appear to have been throttled while there is some evidence that Kelly put up a brief resistance before her throat was cut.

I would think that if a person was being subdued by putting a cloth over their face involuntarily, there would have been considerable resistance, because there would be some time for a physical response before the chemical took effect. All of the examples noted were in a controlled environment and with the patient's presumed consent.

It may be just simply (in Stride and Eddowes' cases) that they were quickly grabbed and thrown to the ground with their throats immediately cut. That is the conclusion the police surgeons came to in both cases. There were abrasions on the side of Eddowes face which indicate to me she was either suddenly hit or slammed to the ground with her face into the pavement until he could cut her throat.

I don't believe people react to total surprise as quickly as many seem to think.

If some kind of anesthetic was involved in these murders then the medicos at the time missed it because they did look for it in at least two of the cases.
__________________
Best Wishes,
Cris Malone
______________________________________________
"Objectivity comes from how the evidence is treated, not the nature of the evidence itself. Historians can be just as objective as any scientist."
Cris Malone is online now   Reply With Quote
Old January 11th, 2015, 02:47 PM   #15
Cris Malone
Historian
 
Cris Malone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Jackson, Tennessee
Posts: 2,440
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stevi B View Post
...
As to the evidence? If JtR had used ether then the rag found in Goulston Street would have contained it. A much more plausable explanation (in my opinion) than walking round with a rag wiping his hands. He would hold the ether soaked rag so as to dispel the faint (not distinct) aroma. When it was found it would be extremely unlikely that the most conscientious police officer would sniff the rag seeing it had blood, and faecel matter.
You are aware that this "rag" was part of the victim's own apron that she was wearing? And if she did inhale the fumes voluntarily, she had a dozen real rags on her at the time.

But then, if it was voluntary as you speculate, why not just let them sniff from the bottle? Nothing incriminating to worry about - except the bottle.
__________________
Best Wishes,
Cris Malone
______________________________________________
"Objectivity comes from how the evidence is treated, not the nature of the evidence itself. Historians can be just as objective as any scientist."
Cris Malone is online now   Reply With Quote
Old January 11th, 2015, 03:03 PM   #16
Stevi B
Registered User
 
Stevi B's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Birmingham, England
Posts: 156
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cris Malone View Post
Hi Stevi,
The issue of the use of chemicals to subdue the victims was raised during both the Stride and Eddowes inquests. In fact, in the case of the city investigation Dr. William Saunders, chemical analyst for the City of London, was brought in to be present at the post mortem examination and to take samples back to his lab for analysis
The statement from Saunders reads "I carefully examined the stomach and its contents more particularly for poisons of the narcotic class with negative result"
So from his own statement, Saunders was paying attention to digested narcotics, whereas eveidence of ether would be found in the nasal passages, throat, lungs - which he did not examine.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cris Malone
In the other three "canonical murders." both Nichols and Chapman appear to have been throttled
I have replied to the cases of Nichols and Chapman on another thread - see here: http://www.jtrforums.com/showthread.php?t=22733.

Thanks for your interest in my theory
Sorry for delay in replying

Stevi B
__________________
Some people see things as they are and ask: "Why?"
I dream of things that never were and ask "Why not?" - Kennedy
Stevi B is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 11th, 2015, 03:10 PM   #17
Stevi B
Registered User
 
Stevi B's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Birmingham, England
Posts: 156
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cris Malone View Post
You are aware that this "rag" was part of the victim's own apron that she was wearing? And if she did inhale the fumes voluntarily, she had a dozen real rags on her at the time.

But then, if it was voluntary as you speculate, why not just let them sniff from the bottle? Nothing incriminating to worry about - except the bottle.
Of course I`m aware that the found rag was part of her apron. But consider this. She volunteers to inhale the ether. Jack pours a few drops on the part of the apron, she lifts it up, sniffs it and is under. Jack has to get rid of the tell-tale evidence so he cuts the apron and takes the portion away.
I did not say, imply or reason "she had a dozen real rags on her at the time" - which is rather trivalising my argument. As for why not sniff from the bottle? This would be harder to dispose of the bottle, and if discarded the evidence might still be there, if he tipped the rest of the contents away, his methodology is revealed.

Stevi B
__________________
Some people see things as they are and ask: "Why?"
I dream of things that never were and ask "Why not?" - Kennedy
Stevi B is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 11th, 2015, 06:27 PM   #18
Cris Malone
Historian
 
Cris Malone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Jackson, Tennessee
Posts: 2,440
Default

Hi Stevi,

I was not trying to trivialize you or your statements. As a relatively new member the extent of your knowledge is not known by me. You did state at the start that you believed that none of the victims had been examined for anasthetics but would stand to be corrected. If you had mentioned a portion of apron found in Goulston St. instead of a "rag" and how the ether would have been utilized via the apron, I would understand a little better.

My mention of the other rags Catherine Eddowes had in her posession was to point to their availability for her to offer instead of the dirty apron.

Gordon Brown testified that the victim's breath was checked for signs of chemicals. Whether the methods used were conclusive I can not say, but it is what we have. I suspect that Dr. Saunders presence at the post mortem was more than to just convey the victim's stomach to his lab as that could have been done by Brown who apparently was the one who removed and secured the stomach at Golden Lane mortuary anyway.
__________________
Best Wishes,
Cris Malone
______________________________________________
"Objectivity comes from how the evidence is treated, not the nature of the evidence itself. Historians can be just as objective as any scientist."
Cris Malone is online now   Reply With Quote
Old January 11th, 2015, 06:42 PM   #19
Wicker Man
Researcher
 
Wicker Man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 2,008
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stevi B View Post
The statement from Saunders reads "I carefully examined the stomach and its contents more particularly for poisons of the narcotic class with negative result"
So from his own statement, Saunders was paying attention to digested narcotics, whereas eveidence of ether would be found in the nasal passages, throat, lungs - which he did not examine.
It is probably worth mentioning that it was standard procedure to remove the stomach for independent analysis. The smell-test was the prevailing method at the time to check for alcohol & narcotics.
It was also standard practice to open the skull and check the brain.

No suspicion needs to be attached to the fact this was done.
An autopsy was not complete without it.
__________________
Regards, Jon S.
"
The theory that the murderer is a lunatic is dispelled by the opinion given to the police by an expert in the treatment of lunacy patients......."If he's insane
" observed the medical authority, "he's a good deal sharper than those who are not".
Reynolds Newspaper, 4 Nov. 1888.
Wicker Man is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 12th, 2015, 05:33 AM   #20
Stevi B
Registered User
 
Stevi B's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Birmingham, England
Posts: 156
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cris Malone View Post
Hi Stevi,

I was not trying to trivialize you or your statements. As a relatively new member the extent of your knowledge is not known by me. You did state at the start that you believed that none of the victims had been examined for anasthetics but would stand to be corrected. If you had mentioned a portion of apron found in Goulston St. instead of a "rag" and how the ether would have been utilized via the apron, I would understand a little better. My mention of the other rags Catherine Eddowes had in her posession was to point to their availability for her to offer instead of the dirty apron
Hi Cris, I realise now that I should have made my point a little clearer over the rag/apron issue. As to your point about Catherine having othher rags, even if this was the case, then these could have been used by her to stem the blood loss (so no part of my "ether theory".

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cris Malone
Gordon Brown testified that the victim's breath was checked for signs of chemicals. Whether the methods used were conclusive I can not say, but it is what we have. I suspect that Dr. Saunders presence at the post mortem was more than to just convey the victim's stomach to his lab as that could have been done by Brown who apparently was the one who removed and secured the stomach at Golden Lane mortuary anyway.
Brown`s comments at the inquest refer to the cuts to the nose, nasal passage and larynx. Such injuries would have allowed any evidence of ether in the throat to have escaped before she was moved for post-mortem examination. So even if Brown did check for signs of chemicals on the victim`s breath, none would have been found (not least because she was not breathing, but also because of the injuries). Saunders did seal the stomach to be removed for his pm, so what else do you think he may have done? I do not mean this to sound in an arrogant way but am curious as to your reasoning on this particular point.

Stevi
__________________
Some people see things as they are and ask: "Why?"
I dream of things that never were and ask "Why not?" - Kennedy
Stevi B is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
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

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:50 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.10 Beta 2
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright @ Howard & Nina Brown 2015-2022