Dr. Thomas Bond's Jack The Ripper Offender Profile.
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 16 сен 2023
- in late October, 1888, with it become more than apparent that the police were no closer to catching Jack the Ripper than they had been when the murders began, Dr. Robert Anderson, the head of the Criminal Investigation Department of the Metropolitan Police, wrote to Dr. Thomas Bond to ask him if the murderer had displayed any medical knowledge.
He enclosed the reports from the inquests into the four victims who had been murdered up to that point.
On the 9th of November, Jack the Ripper struck again and murdered Mary Kelly, in Miller's Court, off Dorset Street in Spitalfields.
Dr Bond spent much of that afternoon conducting a post mortem examination of Mary Kelly's body, and the next day (the 10th of November) he replied to Anderson's query.
His report established the idea of the canonical five victims that is often still adhered to today.
In addition, Bond also gave his opinion as to what sort of person the murderer was. In so doing, he created one of the earliest examples of criminal profiling.
This video takes a close look at Dr. Thomas Bond's profile of the Whitechapel murderer.
I admire Dr Bond. He stuck his neck out making the educated presumptions. He was a trailblazer. I think he was close. About Mary Kelly’s being naked. I think we need to take what he said into Victorian context. A woman with a ripped open nightgown and in a humiliating position. For them, that must have been considered naked. He also was involved in examining some of the remains of the victims of the Thames Torso murders. As always, brilliant video, Rich!
Exactly.
The difficult part about forming an accurate profile for Jack The Ripper is that there's never been another killer like him. You won't find another serial killer who killed using blitz-style attacks in relatively public areas, took body parts for trophies, didn't commit SA, and mutilated to the degree Jack did with Mary Jane Kelly. He was like a mix of Peter Sutcliffe, Ted Bundy, and Jeffrey Dahmer.
The closest example I can think of is the Austin murderer, who of course some folks suspect was also the ripper.
The difference however is that those three only stopped because they were caught. JTR stopped of his own accord and disappeared into history.
You're right - that's why I really can't believe that there was another serial killer operating at the same time, in the same area, and on the same type of victim as the one who did the canonical five murders.
If Bill James and Rachel McCarthy James are right in their book ”The Man from the Train”, there may have been a very prolific, and violent, serial killer in the US between 1898 to 1912. He killed entire families, including the Villisca axe murders.
Regardless, it’s an interesting book as well as an interesting theory.
@@YortOK To be fair, there’s nothing that says JTR actually stopped. What we know is that he stopped his murderous tour in Whitechapel, England. He may very well have moved his business elsewhere in the world.
It’s extremely rare that serial killers stop altogether. BTK stopped for a number of years but then continued his work until he got caught. The Zodiac may have stopped, then again he stated that his kills would appear as accidents in the future. Several serial killers have never been caught but they may have changed scenery and dumping grounds, LISK is one such recent case that may have a viable suspect now. There may be one or several
Serial killers operating in BC, Canada along The Highway of Tears.
But it’s still quite rare that serial killers stop killing on their own accord. The Texarkana Moonlight Murders is a mysterious case were the serial killer simply disappeared as well.
Now I’m just rambling. Sorry ‘bout that.
Another excellent video. The production and content are always top notch on this channel.
Richard comes across as a very likeable chap. Great content too. Subscribed. I was hoping you would consider doing a video on the fairly new suspect Hyam Hyams. The one thing that interests me is that several documentaries state that Mary Kelly was murdered with an axe and a knife. Hyams was pulled in for attacking his wife and mother with an axe. Also he had a damaged left arm and walked with a very pronounced gait. There's more connections too many to go into here but hopefully we'll see a vid on him.
I've read an argument somewhere that although it appears that the killer had some anatomical knowledge, the incisions do not follow the patterns of any standard surgical procedures of the time: it is there fore more likely that he was a slaughterman or butcher than a medical doctor or surgeon.
He could for instance have been a former medical student who dropped out, or an assistant to a field surgeon in some war. The British Empire was involved in plenty of wars at the time (assuming JTR was British to begin with).
The Victorians really wrote and spoke beautifully. Thanks for your excellent videos which are also beautifully made.
Love your research Richard 👍🇮🇪
Brilliant video as usual ! Interesting that Thomas Bond failed to notice/report one of the victims was not naked ! I don’t think Thomas Bond brought the police any closer to either the identity or personality of the Ripper, but intriguing nevertheless.
Great video. Thanks for sharing.
Very interesting indeed! I'm a wee bit surprised that Dr. Bond claimed the murderer had no medical knowledge, given that others had reported the opposite. It was also odd that he described Mary Kelly's body as being naked. Fascinating stuff! Many thanks :)
A most excellent video and IMHO Dr. Bond added much to the profile of Jack. And added more to the never ending ephemera of the mystery.. I hold no belief that his actual identity will ever be known, factually.
I always found it odd and frustrating that the officials involved disagreed so much on whether he had surgical knowledge... Like "nice work lads, we're gonna get him now" lol
Excellent, will watch tonight 👍
They found him, Aaron Kosminski, was as predicted by FBI Profilers, Douglas, Ressler and Hazelwood, to be a resident of Whitechapel, who blended in with other people who lived there. His family knew of his absence during the time of these crimes and may have suspected him. He probably experienced some sexual trauma when he was younger with a prostitute, which foster a profound hate of them. He probably was mentally ill, with escalating insanity/mental illness. Aaron Kosminski, a barber/hair dresser, is believed to have caught a venereal disease from a prostitute when he was 14/15-years-old. He was committed to a mental hospital, Colney Hatch shortly after the murders. He was identified, the only person identified, by an eyewitness.
Kosminski has to be the top of the list for sure. The profilers you have named are some of the best in the business. As the world of AI and AI computers exponentially advance, they will help in solving old crimes and new ones.
I think Thomas Bond was pretty close. But it's is some contrast between him writing that the murderer have no professional skills regarding to the cuts,but then he's stated that the murder weapon was from a professional trade. Maybe he was trying to say that the murderer was trained with handle knifes but in such raw rage state of mind that the cuts turned out sloppy looking ? I don't know. I also believe Jack the Ripper killed the two victims found after the famous 5 killings. Thank you Richard for sharing all goodies with us. 🤗🦋👍🏻
Owning a butchers knife does not mean he was a butcher etc, I own a skinning knife, butchers knife and a scalpel, but I am not a butcher or surgeon, or have any anatomical skills!
Very interesting - and peculiar - especially the part pertaining the anatomical knowledge. I don't know how thoroughly this topic has been examined, but given the otherwise detailed description, could he be right? (Who established the narrative that the White Chapel murderer was skilled with a knife?)
I wouldn't consider the statement about the victims nakedness to be altogether incorrect. Couldn't it be that to Mr. Bond, wearing a chemise was equal to being 'quite naked'?
In any case, thank you for yet another good video.
But being a doctor, and making an official statement, you would think he would know the difference between stating she was naked, and being almost naked.
I don't think he had formal knowledge of anatomy. I think he probably had a brooding interest in anatomy connected to his fantasies of killing and sought out sources of information about anatomy.
@@janetpendlebury6808 What I mean is that according to his personal (Victorian) standards of decency, wearing a chemise only could be regarded 'quite naked'☺
Mitre Square, literally minutes, in the dark, unaided. Unskilled person with sharp blade would do more damage to themselves than to the victim.
Fascinating insight from Dr Bond. Unfortunately we'll never know how accurate it is.
It is interesting that the profiling adopted by Steve Keogh, former Scotland Yard Murder Detective, he thought Martha Tabram was a victim of JTR, but not the one discovered by Louis Deemshutes. Perhaps you could interview Steve at some point. But, again, a very interesting piece.
I am fully convinced that Martha Tabram was an early victim of the Ripper, before he fine-tuned his methods. While I believe that Liz Stride was a Ripper victim, a strong argument can be made against that. For me, the Ripper killed at least four, probably six, and then was either killed, incarcerated on other charges, or, having what alcoholics call a “moment of clarity,” saw the severity of his actions, and did the decent and topped himself after Mary Kelly. Or he could have been run over by a lorry! 🤷🏻♂️
Good video Richard, as always
I wonder if in 1888 ‘quite naked’ was an acceptable way to refer to somebody dressed as Mary Kelly was when her body was found.
That is why he wrote "quite naked"preventing any misunderstanding. He got it wrong. And his suggestion that anyone could have made those cuts, incisions is laughable.
Mary may have been sketched with a chemise in deference to the public. In the Black Dahlia case, a blanket was added to the photograph of her body for publication. The doctor is the reliable source.
Crime scene photographs of Mary Kelly exist but they are too graphic to publish on YT.
Rich, why do you think the Police only say 5 murders when really it seems more than 5 murders ? Great post thank you 👍
I think Bond may have also been a little out on the timescale for the Nichols (Bucks Row) murder. I'm not sure that three or four hours could have elapsed, unless they were working on a body-dump theory. And I'm fairly sure that that possibility had already been ruled out by the time of the Kelly murder.
The blood evidence alone should have been telling to someone of Bond's distinction. Whether you are in Christer's camp and believe the blood may still have been flowing under pressure, or of the opinion that it was oozing due to gravity... it was still fluid at (around) 3.45, and people had been past their in the previous three hours, not least of whom was PC Neil.
Similar details apply at Mitre Square.
I'm not sure if he is merely citing typical times for the rigor/temp compared to the time of autopsy as an academic exrcise, but those times wouldn't help an investigation.
Unless I've misunderstood.
Excellent
To my mind, it seems we too easily conflate the distinct elements of anatomical knowledge and surgical skill. One who was experienced at butchering certain animals might be good with a knife, but may or may not be well versed on human anatomy. No matter what, we are all speculating here. I can imagine, however, that the murderer might not have been surgically skilled as much as being knowledgeable about the human organs he was insistent on mutilating or removing. Perhaps he knew where to go but was more crude in his technique than a skilled surgeon would expect to be. But then, my opinion is worth only the value of the cyberspace it is typed upon. If the experts of the day found no agreement on such details, why should we who have only written reports and limited photographic images of some victims expect to find the final answer?
2 thoughts - 1/ the reference to a nude Kelly needs explaining, but obviously we can't ask Bond. He certainly saw the body, but also had no possible reason to deliberately lie about the topic. So it may possibly be that he simply and clumsily was trying to say she was very much on 'open' display - a sort of 'for-all-intents-and-purposes-she-was-naked' sort of idea on his part. After all, as far as I remember, her legs were splayed and uncovered, and her breasts were also on display (if not attached). Any modesty towards her body was well and truely gone.
2/ As to the variance in opinions about medical knowledge, who can say? But Bond did have the advantage of having access to evidence from 5 different bodies, a good amount of time to cogitate on that evidence; and was asked to study that specific question as a matter of importance. Other doctors saw only 1 body, needed to get their thoughts ready for an impending coronial enquiry, and weren't concentrating specifically on the experience of the killer, but possibly treating it more as a 'by the way, I think...' sort of thing. Again, who knows?
I think Dr Thomas Bond's report is very interesting and worth a closer look at the events surrounding it. One thing that always gets my attention is when others try to discredit a very organized and professional evaluation by a respectable Doctor. The fact that Mary Kelly was sketched with a chemise on was done out of respect. This, like the other "errors" in the report, are jibberish and the statements seem desperate.
What was considered 'middle aged' in 1888? In most of the photographs I've seen, everyone over the age of twenty looks old!
Enjoyable video, thank you 😊
As anyone of around 60 was classed as old in those days, middle age would be mid 20's/30's. They usually looked old because they worked hard, from around 12 years old, and did not have a great diet.
@@janetpendlebury6808 That puts me on the cusp of decrepitude 😂
"Quite naked" is not actually the same as "completely naked".
Perhaps it is semantics and not an error, after all if I was quite quiet, it would not mean I was completely silent.
It's also worth noting the way the Victorians used the word quite. They used it in the affirmative sense. As in beyond doubt, without question, completely and utterly. So there's still some doubt about why he said it..
First off, thank you for the video, the wonderful narration and the brilliant research - as always Mr. Jones.
I personally think it’s way more likely that JTR was dressed as the general male population in Whitechapel and blended in quite well (coat or no coat). Moreover I think he most likely held a steady job considering he committed the murders on weekends and holidays. To extract organs in a haste with very little illumination at hand must simply indicate quite an extensive anatomical knowledge and at least some “surgical” skill. Particularly when using such a long blade as is suspected. Bond seems to believe that the women’s throats were cut first, when it’s quite evident that all were strangled first, with the only possible exception being Mary Kelly. Then again, I have my doubts that Kelly was killed by JTR. I’m not so sure Elizabeth Stride was his victim either.
I think George Hutchinson is a very likely suspect in the Mary Kelly murder and Stride may have been murdered by someone else, possibly Kidney. But in all honesty I’m more uncertain regarding Stride. Diemschutz may have interrupted the planned mutilation. However, that can be argued in the much later Frances Coles murder in 1991 too.
I noticed that too, but maybe he meant that the throats were cut 'first' before the mutilations.
@@adelecurry7405 You’re quite right. I may have misunderstood the meaning.
1991 or 1891?
More of this!
Really interesting 😊😊
I think that this is a man who we should listed to. His methodology was well ahead of his time, and his conclusions in many cases align with what we have later found to hold true of serial killers. He strikes me as being a generation ahead of the other observers of the crime scenes in his thinking. Far from being of little use, he provides the modern Ripperologist, with the nearest thing they will get to a CSI report.
I couldn't agree less!
@@adoculos4521 In the interest of balance, I couldn't agree more with Ben.
Another top video Richard. I bet Dr Bond struck quite a few truths in his criminal profiling. These differing opinions create some confusion.. The complete nakedness of the woman on the bed is clearly misinformed though.. Being the Doctor who performed the initial post mortem on the victim in Millers Court, this seems a huge lapse in his memory of how she was displayed. I could say similar of Walter Dew in his surmation of how he first encountered the sight that greeted him... Some things don't quite ring true as you aluded to with the chemise.. It leaves us with very strange information
Ps Bonds evidence in the Mary Pearcey case seemed much more detailed and, if I'm honest, lost me in parts...
Interesting!
Eddowes has the letter E in it according to every report I have seen over the last 50 years or so
Dr. Bond’s use of the word, ‘naked,’ could have been used in its other sense, which would be synonymous with, ‘undisguised,’ blatant,’ ‘obvious,’ and implying ‘unprotected,’ and exposed to the eyes of others while in an indecent state, (not her nudity, her condition) completely exposed to the world and, ‘defenceless.’ After seeing another human being left in such a butchered state, one would feel protective after the fact, and maybe think of the indignity of it all even if only subconsciously.
Dr. Bond surmising that these were the acts of an unskilled hand may have been another unconscious act, one to protect his own profession from being associated with this kind of act. If the Ripper was thought skilled enough to maybe be a surgeon, then it would quickly follow - especially to the press, and public - that he could only be a doctor.
I don’t know the attitudes of these people so it doesn’t seem unlikely that a doctor in Victorian England might have a dim view of the destitute of the Whitechapel area, and with prostitutes it may have been dimmer still. The class divide of the time must have lead to some very incongruous opinions when they weren’t being held privately but being offered up as professional opinion.
I’d like to know more about the detailed reasoning behind any, and all of the original medical opinions of this case. Why are they, and where are they, varied, exactly. Maybe they don’t even exist?
Thanks for making videos eh.
during the victorian era the piano legs had pants . to man of this period she was naked...
The Mystic Meg of his day.
Interesting yet again @ JACK THE RIPPER TOUR
Very interesting. Personally I would take what Dr Bond said with a lot of credence. He was there at the time, and seems to have thought deeply about more than just the murder of Mary Kelly. But about the profile of the person who could have committed the crime too. So in some respects he was ahead of his time. I'm sure he will have made some mistakes. But as a guess, i'd think he would have got a lot more right than wrong in his profile of the killer.
If Dr. Bond was right in his opinion that the killer hadn't the anatomical knowledge even that of a horse slaughterer, why did he use a butcher's or a surgeon's knife (6:16) then?
Many videos or present day cases where muliations were carried are out there. In many instances perpetrated by gang members or random psycho's. Often organs are removed such as the heart, intestines or other organs without much sophistication but with reasonable efficiency. No reason why JTR coudn't do this too in low light with the right tools and basic knowledge.
I often wonder if the culprit was a policeman who knew when to strike, could hide himself in plain sight and keep an eye on proceedings. Maybe not a local cop but one who could get info if he wanted? Just my musings....
Occasionally thought that myself. Or someone with a police uniform.
Thought this a possibility as well. Seems to know the pattern of the police patrols, catches the women off-guard, blends back into society with ease.
Very risky, if he was noticed by a real policeman near a crime scene that would be the finish.
@@sirlawrence9161 Said ladies wouldn't be seen dead within half mile of a copper in uniform...
@@adelecurry7405 Coppers do tend to cover up for each other...
I think his theory has legs but may be a non runner.
He is not factoring in a lot of non medical knowledge about the cases that I think he didn't know.
You can imagine Anderson and Warren sat there 'who shall we go for'?
'What about Dr Bond? , the surgeon from A Division..'
'Ha ha yeah why not. Write that letter to him now. Make sure you end it with.' we value your opinion '
' Let's see how close he gets to knowing what's going on!!! '
To say the suspect probably wore a cloak to cover the blood etc on his clothes and hands was in my opinion way off the mark , Victorian streets especially in the poorer areas were very poorly lit if lit at all ( hence a constable carried a lamp ) and if he lived near by he would be back in doors in no time , after all no one actually saw the man let alone what state his clothes etc were in .
What is a chemise?
it is a ladie's blouse - I think that it is a French word . . .
Well that's a contradiction to popular belief.. In every report I have heard or read previously.. It's always been said that that the murderer had knowledge of the anatical workings of the human body as a surgeon or a butcher might..
I feel sorry for Thomas Bond sometimes. Since I found out how his life came to an end
Can you tell us how his life ended?
Hi Kevin. He committed suicide by jumping out of the window of his flat in The Sanctuary building that I show in the video. He had been in a lot of pain for several years.
Very sad, he must have been desperate.
@@JackTheRipperTours Have we stumbled across another Ripper suspect? Surgical skills, familiar with police work, suicide.
Seems strange he makes no mention that the last 2 killings he set about butchering the victims faces.
Jtr reminds me of Ed gein in that he inflicted facial inverted v-shaped wounds on some victims and succeeded in eviscerating Mary Kelly's face altogether, perhaps, like gein, to wear as a mask. This implies a personal link to the victims; that jack was a regular, known to the girls. And he becomes a spree killer, like the Suffolk strangler (Jack strangled his victims first)
I think Bond might have been the Ripper
i agree with mr bond on most points. i dont believe Jack had any surgical knowledge.
In my opinion there are two prime suspects. Francis Tumblety and Aaron Kosminsky. Of the two, I would say Tumblety is the more likely. He attempted to purchase Uteri for whatever purpose and reputedly had a collection of them. He was also a woman hater due to finding out his wife or partner was or had been a prostitute, had a pseudo medical past (a quack) and left for France very soon after the last murder. Kosinski only because he was known to be psychotic and living the local area. I have read that Tumblety's landlady said he returned one evening with blood on his clothes although I don't k now the source of that.
We must remember that quite naked to the Victorians is much different to how we would word it today. A woman in a chemise or her "undergarments" would be "naked" then. He saw the brutality of the murders and his class, social station, etc would also influence his opinion of the murders. Only a brute or ape could do such things, not a skilled or educated person. We must consider the age and not compare it to modern day.
The Doc wrote "quite naked" - he was incorrect, move on...
@@davekeating.If that's the way you like to picture the victim that's up to you.
Didn't Bond state that a later victim after the canonical five, was one of the Whitechapel murderer and was killed by somebody with anatomical knowledge...contradicting himself on his report in this video?
Working with what he had I would say he did a good job. At times a bit of social snobbery but then he was Victorian.
I think doctor Thomas bond is jack the ripper.
I'm not sure how much knowledge the typical Victorian had as to the location and connective tissue in regards to removing a uterus.
I consider myself fairly well read, and of at least average intelligence, but I know that I would struggle to perform the removal of pretty much any internal matter with any confidence, let alone if working quickly, with the obstruction of clothing and no suction to remove the blood that would be pooling to some serious degree in the abdominal cavity.... and all that in the dark.
There had to be SOME sort of anatomical understanding.
As to the "naked" comment, I believe I read/heard somewhere, (I think maybe on a documentary I saw about Victorian beachwear and those crazy wheeled beach huts...) that it carried a slightly different meaning in Victorian times, and that it could also refer to someone who was very scantily clad, or wearing something that did little or nothing to hide what was beneath. (e.g. wearing a wet, clinging swimsuit in a cold sea.)
Annoyingly, the only reference that leaps to mind is not very helpful, as it comes from an episode of Doctor Who where the Doctor apologises to Queen Victoria for the "nakedness" of Rose, who is wearing tight denim shorts at the time. But I promise that I heard/read it before ever seeing that episode.
I PROMISE!!!
Sounds like he was shooting in the dark.
Bond was part right🙂
Maybe it was him, a group of them, every time I hear about each person involved in this, they all sound guilty. The downside I've not being able to travel back in time 😊🤍✌️.