Read Online Complete History of Jack the Ripper by Philip Sudgen - Free Book Online
Authors: Philip Sudgen
Ads: Link
away by one of Mrs Green’s sons who worked at the stables but Spratling could still see traces of it between the paving stones.
It was a discovery by Inspector Spratling that brought Dr Llewellyn tumbling from his bed for the second time that night. From Buck’s Row the inspector quickly repaired to the mortuary in Old Montague Street. He arrived to find the place locked up and the body still on the ambulance in the yard. But the keeper of the mortuary had been sent for and while waiting for him to come Spratling began taking a description of the dead woman. At some time between 5.00 and 5.20 Robert Mann, the keeper, turned up with the keys and the body was moved into the mortuary. There Spratling completed his description of the deceased and, upon lifting her clothes, discovered that her abdomen had been savagely ripped open from as high as the breast bone and that her intestines were exposed. Dr Llewellyn,hastily summoned by Spratling, made a fresh examination of the woman and was appalled at the extent of her injuries. ‘I have seen many terrible cases,’ he would tell the press, ‘but never such a brutal affair as this.’ 2
The character of the wounds do not appear to have been identical to those which had been inflicted upon Martha Tabram. But, unfortunately, no report from Dr Llewellyn on the Buck’s Row murder has survived. We must gather what we can from the brief references in police reports and from press notices of the doctor’s inquest testimony.
The earliest report on the case in the records of the Metropolitan Police is signed by Inspector John Spratling and dated 31 August 1888. At this time Llewellyn had made two preliminary examinations of the body, one in Buck’s Row and the other at the mortuary, but he had not yet conducted a full post-mortem. The inspector summarized Llewellyn’s findings thus:
. . . her throat had been cut from left to right, two distinct cuts being on left side, the windpipe, gullet and spinal cord being cut through; a bruise apparently of a thumb being on right lower jaw, also one on left cheek; the abdomen had been cut open from centre of bottom of ribs along right side, under pelvis to left of the stomach, there the wound was jagged; the omentum, or coating of the stomach, was also cut in several places, and two small stabs on private parts; [all] apparently done with a strong bladed knife; supposed to have been done by some left handed person; death being almost instantaneous.
Subsequent police reports added only one significant detail to this information. Chief Inspector Donald S. Swanson, writing on 19 October, noted: ‘At first the Doctor was of opinion that the wounds were caused by a left-handed person but he is now doubtful.’ 3
On the morning of Saturday, 1 September, Llewellyn carried out a post-mortem examination. His evidence, presented to the inquest the same day, can now only tentatively be recovered by a comparison of the various newspaper versions.
There was bruising about the face. A bruise running along the lower part of the jaw on the right side of the face might have been caused by a blow from a fist or by the pressure of a thumb. On the left sideof the face was a circular bruise. Llewellyn thought that this might have been caused by the pressure of fingers.
There were two incisions in the throat. One, about four inches long, began on the left side of the neck at a point immediately below the ear and ran about an inch below the jaw. The second was about eight inches long and encircled the throat. It commenced on the left side of the neck about an inch in front of the first, ran about an inch below the first incision and terminated at a point about three inches below the right jaw. This cut had severed both carotid arteries and all the tissues down to the vertebrae. Both incisions had been made from left to right. They must have been inflicted, thought the doctor, with ‘a strong-bladed knife, moderately sharp, and used with great
It was a discovery by Inspector Spratling that brought Dr Llewellyn tumbling from his bed for the second time that night. From Buck’s Row the inspector quickly repaired to the mortuary in Old Montague Street. He arrived to find the place locked up and the body still on the ambulance in the yard. But the keeper of the mortuary had been sent for and while waiting for him to come Spratling began taking a description of the dead woman. At some time between 5.00 and 5.20 Robert Mann, the keeper, turned up with the keys and the body was moved into the mortuary. There Spratling completed his description of the deceased and, upon lifting her clothes, discovered that her abdomen had been savagely ripped open from as high as the breast bone and that her intestines were exposed. Dr Llewellyn,hastily summoned by Spratling, made a fresh examination of the woman and was appalled at the extent of her injuries. ‘I have seen many terrible cases,’ he would tell the press, ‘but never such a brutal affair as this.’ 2
The character of the wounds do not appear to have been identical to those which had been inflicted upon Martha Tabram. But, unfortunately, no report from Dr Llewellyn on the Buck’s Row murder has survived. We must gather what we can from the brief references in police reports and from press notices of the doctor’s inquest testimony.
The earliest report on the case in the records of the Metropolitan Police is signed by Inspector John Spratling and dated 31 August 1888. At this time Llewellyn had made two preliminary examinations of the body, one in Buck’s Row and the other at the mortuary, but he had not yet conducted a full post-mortem. The inspector summarized Llewellyn’s findings thus:
. . . her throat had been cut from left to right, two distinct cuts being on left side, the windpipe, gullet and spinal cord being cut through; a bruise apparently of a thumb being on right lower jaw, also one on left cheek; the abdomen had been cut open from centre of bottom of ribs along right side, under pelvis to left of the stomach, there the wound was jagged; the omentum, or coating of the stomach, was also cut in several places, and two small stabs on private parts; [all] apparently done with a strong bladed knife; supposed to have been done by some left handed person; death being almost instantaneous.
Subsequent police reports added only one significant detail to this information. Chief Inspector Donald S. Swanson, writing on 19 October, noted: ‘At first the Doctor was of opinion that the wounds were caused by a left-handed person but he is now doubtful.’ 3
On the morning of Saturday, 1 September, Llewellyn carried out a post-mortem examination. His evidence, presented to the inquest the same day, can now only tentatively be recovered by a comparison of the various newspaper versions.
There was bruising about the face. A bruise running along the lower part of the jaw on the right side of the face might have been caused by a blow from a fist or by the pressure of a thumb. On the left sideof the face was a circular bruise. Llewellyn thought that this might have been caused by the pressure of fingers.
There were two incisions in the throat. One, about four inches long, began on the left side of the neck at a point immediately below the ear and ran about an inch below the jaw. The second was about eight inches long and encircled the throat. It commenced on the left side of the neck about an inch in front of the first, ran about an inch below the first incision and terminated at a point about three inches below the right jaw. This cut had severed both carotid arteries and all the tissues down to the vertebrae. Both incisions had been made from left to right. They must have been inflicted, thought the doctor, with ‘a strong-bladed knife, moderately sharp, and used with great
Similar Books
