Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Post Mortem Clarification

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    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."

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by Wicker Man View Post
      The notes attributed to Dr. Bond have been taken by some as the 'official' post-mortem conclusion, which is not the case.
      Hello Jon,

      Agreed. Can you..In your erstwhile opinion, hazard to ponder as to why some want to call it the "official" conclusion?
      I am at a loss to understand why. Especially as it was Phillips, in his official capacity, who tendered at least some of his conclusions at the inquest. .not Bond, please note.
      Thanks.


      Phil
      from 1905...to 19.05..it was written in the stars

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by Phil Carter View Post
        Hello Jon,

        Agreed. Can you..In your erstwhile opinion, hazard to ponder as to why some want to call it the "official" conclusion?
        I am at a loss to understand why. Especially as it was Phillips, in his official capacity, who tendered at least some of his conclusions at the inquest. .not Bond, please note.
        Thanks.


        Phil
        Those who thinks Bond's notes are the 'official' post mortem version are usually just under-read or just starting out.
        But really, I started this thread for the benefit of the person who would not have it that there was a post mortem on Saturday morning the 10th November at Shoreditch mortuary and was adamant that only one post mortem, the 'official' one was done at Miller's Court on Friday 9th November. My first post clearly mentions Phillips and Bond's relative roles so I'm flumoxed as to why this thing about Bond's notes not being official is being held up as the things we should be learning here! I wanted clarification that there was a further examination on Sat and I got it, from some of the people I trust the most to be in possession of all the relevant facts.

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by Debra Arif View Post
          Those who thinks Bond's notes are the 'official' post mortem version are usually just under-read or just starting out.
          But really, I started this thread for the benefit of the person who would not have it that there was a post mortem on Saturday morning the 10th November at Shoreditch mortuary and was adamant that only one post mortem, the 'official' one was done at Miller's Court on Friday 9th November. My first post clearly mentions Phillips and Bond's relative roles so I'm flumoxed as to why this thing about Bond's notes not being official is being held up as the things we should be learning here! I wanted clarification that there was a further examination on Sat and I got it, from some of the people I trust the most to be in possession of all the relevant facts.
          That's fine and fair enough! Glad you got your answer from those trusted souls ☺☺
          However..threads develop naturally and can diversify within the topic raising closely connecting issues. All quite normal. ☺
          It's not a problem for me at least. And clearly not for Wickerman either..from whom I quoted and asked the question of. ☺ All natural development of a thread I think.




          Phil
          from 1905...to 19.05..it was written in the stars

          Comment


          • #35
            http://www.privateautopsyflorida.com

            Surely they mean 'post-mortem'.

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by Phil Carter View Post
              That's fine and fair enough! Glad you got your answer from those trusted souls ☺☺
              However..threads develop naturally and can diversify within the topic raising closely connecting issues. All quite normal. ☺
              It's not a problem for me at least. And clearly not for Wickerman either..from whom I quoted and asked the question of. ☺ All natural development of a thread I think.




              Phil
              Well, Jon was one of those people who clarified things actually and I have already thanked him for that. I wasn't suggesting discussion shouldn't have gone there, I was just puzzled why the comment about Bond's notes was being heralded as a revelation and I didn't want the real question and subsequent answer to be overlooked -whether or not there was a post mortem on Sat 10th at Shoreditch mortuary . Jon also did a great summary of Bond's notes on another thread where he explained the descriptions of Kelly's wounds and the distinction we might make between 'removed' and 'absent' when looking at the evidence for the taking away of the heart.

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by Debra Arif View Post
                I didn't want the real question and subsequent answer to be overlooked -whether or not there was a post mortem on Sat 10th at Shoreditch mortuary .
                Indeed, I don't know of any other reason for them to have taken her there other than to have the post mortem done. I don't see any other examples of Macdonald and his officers storing Spitalfields bodies in Shoreditch, it's only Mary Kelly that goes there. As a matter of fact, out of the 15 cases for Spitalfields that Macdonald had from his election up through 12 November, they only removed 3 bodies from the scene of death.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by Gary Barnett View Post
                  Someone mentioned pedantry and I think that may be the issue here. Of course any examination, even the most perfunctory, of a dead body is 'post mortem'. But the British usage 'a post mortem' or 'the post mortem' has the same meaning as autopsy in American English. It refers to an officially-sanctioned examination of a dead body.

                  It's a potato/potarto thing.

                  Is there such a thing as a physician-directed post-mortem in the sense of a thorough and invasive examination of a dead body without a coroner's authority?
                  Once the Coroner has assigned a case to a physician for autopsy/post-mortem with a view to an inquest, the authority now lies with that physician.
                  Any doctors who choose to view the body, following accepted rules of etiquette, will approach the physician assigned to the case, not the Coroner. Legal responsibility for the body has been handed over to the named physician.

                  In this particular case Dr. Phillips was assigned responsibility by the Coroner, and doctors were invited by him to attend on both Friday and Saturday.
                  Likewise, any other doctor/surgeon who wished to view the body would approach the physician. This is the situation alluded to when I wrote: "a physician directed post-mortem." It happens when a surgeon requests to see a body for a limited examination, as Dr. Bond was inclined to do in fulfilling his duty to satisfy Anderson's request for Bond's opinion on the knife wounds.
                  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.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    .
                    Shoreditch mortuary was a two room affair with skylights

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      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."

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by Cris Malone View Post
                        Chris,

                        Has the fire gone out?

                        Gary

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Originally posted by Dave O View Post
                          Indeed, I don't know of any other reason for them to have taken her there other than to have the post mortem done. I don't see any other examples of Macdonald and his officers storing Spitalfields bodies in Shoreditch, it's only Mary Kelly that goes there. As a matter of fact, out of the 15 cases for Spitalfields that Macdonald had from his election up through 12 November, they only removed 3 bodies from the scene of death.
                          Thank you, Dave. That's a very interesting point.
                          If it doesn't sound like too much of a silly question:I don't suppose that Henry Wilton, sexton of St Leonard's could have had any influence on that decision seeing as he had offered to pay for the funeral originally?

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Originally posted by Roy Corduroy View Post
                            [ATTACH]15677[/ATTACH]
                            .
                            Shoreditch mortuary was a two room affair with skylights
                            Thanks Roy. Is the Clerk's House shown on that map?

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Originally posted by Debra Arif View Post
                              Thank you, Dave. That's a very interesting point.
                              If it doesn't sound like too much of a silly question:I don't suppose that Henry Wilton, sexton of St Leonard's could have had any influence on that decision seeing as he had offered to pay for the funeral originally?
                              Hi Debs,

                              Not a silly question. I don't know if he had any influence but actually I now suspect that Wilton is the one to come down and physically move Mary Kelly. He regularly appears in expenses moving bodies in Shoreditch (when the expenses are recorded). I see him moving one of those Spitalfields cases over to the court house in Norton Folgate and I think he probably did the other who went there. The coroner's officers in Spitalfields also covered Shoreditch, where bodies were constantly moved to the mortuary. They must have been accustomed to working with him.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                st leonards office.jpg

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X