(b. 1841, d. 1901)
Dr. Thomas Bond was the registered police surgeon for A Division, Westminster. He is most well-known today for his involvement with Mary Kelly's post-mortem examination, though he was also intimately involved in the "Thames Torso Murders" investigations of 1887-1889. Bond also examined the bodies of Rose Mylett and Alice Mackenzie and submitted reports on both.
The authors of the Jack the Ripper A-Z provide a suitable summary of Bond's life and career:
Educ. King's College and King's College Hospital. MRCS, 1864; MB, 1865; FRCS, 1866. Served with Prussian Army, 1866. Surgeon to A Division, Metropolitan Police, 1867. Assistant Surgeon, Westminster Hospital, 1873; Surgeon, 1897. Committed suicide, throwing himself from bedroom window, after a long period of insomnia and depression followed by a painful illness. (The Jack the Ripper A-Z, p. 44)
The Whitehall Torso
On 3 October 1888 a headless female torso was discovered in Whitehall (soon to become the headquarters of New Scotland Yard). Dr. Thomas Bond arrived at the scene soon after the discovery, and was called in to perform the post-mortem the following morning. He described his findings at the inquest on 8 October:
Mr. Thomas Bond, F.R.C.S., 7, Sanctuary, Westminster, deposed, - On Tuesday last, shortly before 4 o'clock, I was called to the new buildings for the Police offices, Cannon-row, and was shown the decomposed trunk of a woman. It was then lying in the basement, having been removed from the dark vault where it was found. The strings which had tied it had been cut, and it was partially unwrapped. I visited the place where it was found, and I saw the walk against which it had been lying. The wall was stained black at the place where the parcel had rested against it. I thought the body must have been there several days from the state of the wall; but I could form no definite opinion as to how long it had been there. I directed the detectives to take charge of the trunk and of the wrapper, and to remove them to the mortuary. I went to the mortuary myself first and made arrangements for the reception of the body. It arrived there in the evening, and I superintended its disinfection and the placing of it in spirits. On the next morning I made a post-mortem examination, assisted by Mr. Hibbert. The trunk was that of a woman of considerable stature, and well nourished. The head had been separated from the trunk at the sixth cervical vertebra, which had been sawn through. The lower part of the body and the pelvis had been removed, and the fourth lumbar vertebra had been sawn through in the same way as in the removal of the head, by long, sweeping cuts. The length of the trunk was 17 in., the circumference of the chest was 35˝ in., and the circumference of the waist was 28˝ in. It was all very much decomposed, but the skin was not so much decomposed as the cut parts, and I examined it for wounds. I found none on the body. The skin was light. The arms had been removed at the shoulder joints by several incisions, which had been made apparently obliquely and then downwards around the arms. The joints had been removed straight through the joint - that is, disarticulated through the joint. Over the body were clearly-defined marks, where string had been tightly tied. The body appeared to have been wrapped up in a very skilful manner. On close examination we could not find the linea alba which would indicate that the woman had borne children. It was impossible to ascertain, owing to the decomposed condition of the remains, whether there had been any wound inflicted on the neck in life. The neck had been divided by several incisions and sawn through below the larynx. On opening the chest, we found that the rib cartilages were not ossified; that one lung was healthy, but the other lung was adherent, showing that for some time the woman had suffered from severe pleurisy. This was of long standing. The heart was healthy, but there was no blood in it, and no staining of the organ with blood. That, to my mind, is an indication that the woman did not die from suffocation or drowning. The liver was in a normal condition, and the stomach contained about one ounce of partly-digested food. There was no appearance of inflammation. The kidneys were normal, and the spleen also. The small intestines and the part which attaches the intestines to the body were in place, and were healthy. The lower part of the large bowel, and all the contents of the pelvis were absent. We found that the woman was of mature age and over 24 or 25 years of age. She was, to every appearance, a well-nourished woman, and was, in fact, a large, well-nourished person, with fair skin and dark hair. There were no indications that she had borne a child, but it was possible that she might have done so. The date of death, as far as we could judge, would have been six weeks or two months before the discovery, and the decomposition occurred in the air, and not in water. I subsequently examined the arm which had been brought to the mortuary from Pimlico, and this was fully examined and will be described by my colleague, Mr. Hibbert. I found that the arm accurately fitted to the trunk. The cuts corresponded, and the general contour of the arm corresponded with the body. It was a fleshy, rounded arm. The hand was long, the fingers tapering, and the nails very well shaped. It was the hand of a person who had not been used to manual labour. Mr. Hibbert has compared the hairs, and he will tell you the result.
The CORONER. - About the cuts? Were they made after death? - Undoubtedly. It is impossible, owing to the state of decomposition in which the body was, to say whether there had been a cut round the neck during life which would have caused death. The decomposition was very far advanced, and the body was absolutely full of maggots. I could not have ascertained from the condition of the trunk whether any wound on the neck was made in life.
The CORONER. - Then there was nothing to indicate the cause of death? - Nothing whatever. There was nothing to show that it was sudden, but I am satisfied that it was not a death by suffocation. It was more likely death from hemorrhage, for the heart was pale, and free from clots, whereas in the great number of post-mortem examinations which I have made after a very long period, where death has been from drowning, the interior parts of the heart have been very much stained with blood. In this case the interior part of the heart was quite pale, proving, to my mind, that the woman died from hemorrhage or fainting. I did not anatomically examine the arm, but merely fitted it to the trunk.
The CORONER. - Can you give us any opinion as to the height of the woman? - We believe the height of the woman to have been about 5 ft. 8 in. Those measurements depend more upon the measurements of the arm than of any measurements which have been made of the trunk.
The CORONER. - Was the woman a very stout woman? - She was not a very stout woman, but she was a thoroughly plump woman, and a fully developed one. There was no abnormal excess of fat, but the body was that of a thoroughly well nourished, plump woman. These measures are not strictly diagnostic to an inch, but they lead to a very fair inference that she was a very tall, big woman, at least 5 ft. 8 in. high. The hand was certainly that of a woman, as I have said, who was not used to manual labour.
The CORONER. - Would the hand be that of a refined woman? - The hand was that of a woman not used to hard work. (Times, 9 October 1888)
Just over a week later on 17 October, a decomposed leg was discovered close to where the torso had been found on the 3rd. Dr. Bond was recalled to the inquest on 22 October to discuss the new finding:
Mr. Thomas Bond, F.R.C.S., was again examined. He said: - I was sent for to the Embankment site of the new police offices on the 17th. I went into the recess of the vault where the body was found, and I found there a human leg partially buried. It was uncovered; but it had not been removed from the place where it was found. I examined the earth which had covered it, and I found that this gave unmistakable evidence of having covered the leg for several weeks - that the leg had been there for several weeks. Decomposition had taken place there, and it was not decomposed when placed there. The upper part of the leg was in a good state of preservation; but the foot had decomposed, and the skin and nails had peeled off. The limb was removed, and next morning it was examined by Mr. Hibbert and myself. We found that the leg had been divided at the knee joint by free incisions, and very cleverly disarticulated without injury to the cartilages. The limb and foot agreed with the arm and hand in general character - in general contour and in size. We had no doubt that the leg belonged to the body and to the arm. I took the opportunity, I may say, while in the vault to examine the spot where the body was found, and I am quite sure that the last witness is wrong as to the body not having been there a few days before. The body must have lain there for weeks, and it had decomposed there.
The CORONER. - You think it had decomposed in that spot?
Mr. Bond. - Yes, the decomposition was of a character of a body only partially exposed to the air. The brickwork against which it had leant was deeply covered with the decomposed fluid of the human body turned black, and it could not have done that in a day or two. The stain is not superficial, but the brick work is quite saturated. I should think it must have been there quite six weeks when found - from August. There was no mark of a garter on the leg, and there were no corns on the foot, which was well shaped. (Times - 23 October 1888)
Examining a Ripper Suspect
On 16 October, just a day before the amputated leg was discovered in Whitehall, Dr. Bond was called in to examine a lunatic who had been arrested at King street police station in connection with the Whitechapel murders. As far as we know, this was the first time Bond was brought into the actual Ripper investigation. The Times briefly described the event:
Some importance has been attached by the police to the arrest made at King-street Police-station on Tuesday morning. The man arrested entered the police-station about 9 o'clock and complained of having lost a black bag. While the officials were taking note of the case he began to talk about the women murdered in Whitechapel, and offered to cut off the sergeant's head, and spoke in a rambling, non-sensical manner. In answer to a question as to what his business was, he said he had studied some years for the medical profession, but gave it up for engineering, and that he had been staying for some nights in coffee-houses. His talk became of such a rambling character that Dr. Bond, the divisional surgeon, was sent for, who examined him, and pronounced him to be a very dangerous lunatic with a homicidal tendency. The man is described as resembling the description of the person last seen with the women at the East-end on different occasions. He was dressed in a serge suit, with a hard felt hat, and is of a very strong build. Although he gave his age as 67, he looks much younger. Before his removal to Bow-street photographs were taken of him. He was also asked to write his name, and it is stated the writing is somewhat similar to that of letters received by the police and others. The detectives have been tracing the man's antecedents and his recent movements. The latest inquires seem to show that there is no evidence forthcoming likely to connect him with these crimes. In July last the man was brought up at Lambeth Police-court on a charge of being abroad as a person of unsound mind, and the magistrate ordered his removal to Lambeth Infirmary. He subsequently left that institution, and since August 15 he has lodged at a coffee-house in the Westminster-bridge-road. The keeper of the house states that the man has slept there every night without exception up to Monday of the present week. (Times - 18 October 1888)
Drafted into Service
On 25 October, Robert Anderson sent a letter to Dr. Bond asking for his assistance with the Ripper investigation. He sent along copies of the evidence given at the inquests into the murders of Polly Nichols, Annie Chapman, Elizabeth Stride and Catherine Eddowes, and asked Bond to deliver his "opinion on the matter."
Bond examined the papers for two weeks and then wrote his response on 10 November. Mary Kelly had been killed the morning before, and Bond had spent much of that day performing the post-mortem examination. It seems that the Kelly murder prompted Bond to tackle Anderson's request with a new sense of urgency.
The report read as follows:
The Mary Kelly Murder
I beg to report that I have read the notes of the 4 Whitechapel Murders viz:
1. Buck's Row.
2. Hanbury Street.
3. Berner's Street.
4. Mitre Square.
I have also made a Post Mortem Examination of the mutilated remains of a woman found yesterday in a small room in Dorset Street -
1. All five murders were no doubt committed by the same hand. In the first four the throats appear to have been cut from left to right. In the last case owing to the extensive mutilation it is impossible to say in what direction the fatal cut was made, but arterial blood was found on the wall in splashes close to where the woman's head must have been lying.
2. All the circumstances surrounding the murders lead me to form the opinion that the women must have been lying down when murdered and in every case the throat was first cut. 3. In the four murders of which I have seen the notes only, I cannot form a very definite opinion as to the time that had elapsed between the murder and the discovering of the body.
In one case, that of Berner's Street, the discovery appears to have been made immediately after the deed - In Buck's Row, Hanbury Street, and Mitre Square three or four hours only could have elapsed. In the Dorset Street case the body was lying on the bed at the time of my visit, 2 o'clock, quite naked and mutilated as in the annexed report -
Rigor Mortis had set in, but increased during the progress of the examination. From this it is difficult to say with any degree of certainty the exact time that had elapsed since death as the period varies from 6 to 12 hours before rigidity sets in. The body was comparatively cold at 2 o'clock and the remains of a recently taken meal were found in the stomach and scattered about over the intestines. It is, therefore, pretty certain that the woman must have been dead about 12 hours and the partly digested food would indicate: that death took place about 3 or 4 hours after the food was taken, so one or two o'clock in the morning would be the probable time of the murder.
4. In all the cases there appears to be no evidence of struggling and the attacks were probably so sudden and made in such a position that the women could neither resist nor cry out. In the Dorset Street case the corner of the sheet to the right of the woman's head was much cut and saturated with blood, indicating that the face may have been covered with the sheet at the time of the attack.
5. In the four first cases the murderer must have attacked from the right side of the victim. In the Dorset Street case, he must have attacked from in front or from the left, as there would be no room for him between the wall and the part of the bed on which the woman was lying. Again, the blood had flowed down on the right side of the woman and spurted on to the wall.
6. The murderer would not necessarily be splashed or deluged with blood, but his hands' and arms must have been covered and parts of his clothing must certainly have been smeared with blood.
7. The mutilations in each case excepting the Berner's Street one were all of the same character and shewed clearly that in all the murders, the object was mutilation.
8. In each case the mutilation was inflicted by a person who had no scientific nor anatomical knowledge. In my opinion be does not even possess the technical knowledge of a butcher or horse slaughterer or any person accustomed to cut up dead animals.
9. The instrument must have been a strong knife at least six inches long, very sharp, pointed at the top and about an inch in width. It may have been a clasp knife, a butcher's knife or a surgeon's knife. I think it was no doubt a straight knife.
10. The murderer must have been a man of physical strength and of great coolness and daring. There is no evidence that he had an accomplice. He must in my opinion be a man subject to periodical attacks of Homicidal and erotic mania. The character of the mutilations indicate that the man may be in a condition sexually, that may be called satyriasis. It is of course possible that the Homicidal impulse may have developed from a revengeful or brooding condition of the mind, or that Religious Mania may have been the original disease, but I do not think either hypothesis is likely. The murderer in external appearance is quite likely to be a quiet inoffensive looking man probably middleaged and neatly and respectably dressed. I think he must be in the habit of wearing a cloak or overcoat or he could hardly have escaped notice in the streets if the blood on his hands or clothes were visible.
11. Assuming the murderer to be such a person as I have just described he would probably be solitary and eccentric in his habits, also he is most likely to be a man without regular occupation, but with some small income or pension. He is possibly living among respectable persons who have some knowledge of his character and habits and who may have grounds for suspicion that he is not quite right in his mind at times. Such persons would probably be unwilling to communicate suspicions to the Police for fear of trouble or notoriety, whereas if there were a prospect of reward it might overcome their scruples.
I am, Dear Sir,
(HO 144/221/A49301C, ff. 220-223)
Dr. Bond's post-mortem notes on Mary Kelly were long thought to be lost, until in 1987 they were returned anonymously to Scotland Yard, along with several other Ripper-related documents and photographs. The report provides our best view into the actual level of mutilation performed on Mary Kelly:
Position of body
The body was lying naked in the middle of the bed, the shoulders flat, but the axis of the body inclined to the left side of the bed. The head was turned on the left cheek. The left arm was close to the body with the forearm flexed at a right angle & lying across the abdomen. the right arm was slightly abducted from the body & rested on the mattress, the elbow bent & the forearm supine with the fingers clenched. The legs were wide apart, the left thigh at right angles to the trunk & the right forming an obtuse angle with the pubes.
The whole of the surface of the abdomen & thighs was removed & the abdominal Cavity emptied of its viscera. The breasts were cut off, the arms mutilated by several jagged wounds & the face hacked beyond recognition of the features. The tissues of the neck were severed all round down to the bone.
The viscera were found in various parts viz: the uterus & Kidneys with one breast under the head, the other breast by the Rt foot, the Liver between the feet, the intestines by the right side & the s pleen by the left side of the body. The flaps removed from the abdomen and thighs were on a table.
The bed clothing at the right corner was saturated with blood, & on the floor beneath was a pool of blood covering about 2 feet square. The wall by the right side of the bed & in a line with the neck was marked by blood which had struck it in a number of spearate splashes.
The face was gashed in all directions the nose cheeks, eyebrows and ears being partly removed. The lips were blanched & cut by several incisions running obliquely down to the chin. There were also numerous cuts extending irregularly across all the features.
The neck was cut through the skin & other tissues right down to the vertebrae the 5th & 6th being deeply notched. The skin cuts in the front of the neck showed distinct ecchymosis.
The air passage was cut at the lower part of the larynx through the cricoid cartilage.
Both breasts were removed by more or less circular incisions, the muscles down to the ribs being attached to the breasts. The intercostals between the 4th, 5th & 6th ribs were cut through & the contents of the thorax visible through the openings.
The skin & tissues of the abdomen from the costal arch to the pubes were removed in three large flaps. The right thigh was denuded in front to the bone, the flap of skin, including the external organs of generation & part of the right buttock. The left thigh was stripped of skin, fascia & muscles as far as the knee.
The left calf showed a long gash through skin & tissues to the deep muscles & reaching from the knee to 5 ins above the ankle.
Both arms & forearms had extensive & jagged wounds.
The right thumb showed a small superficial incision about 1 in long, with extravasation of blood in the skin & there were several abrasions on the back of the hand moreover showing the same condition.
On opening the thorax it was found that the right lung was minimally adherent by old firm adhesions. The lower part of the lung was broken & torn away.
The left lung was intact: it was adherent at the apex & there were a few adhesions over the side. In the substaces of the lung were several nodules of consolidation.
The Pericardium was open below & the Heart absent.
In the abdominal cavity was some partially digested food of fish & potatoes & similar food was found in the remains of the stomach attached to the intestines.(MEPO 3/3153, ff. 10-18)
Bond's report cleared up some long-standing questions concerning Mary Kelly. We now know that there was indeed an organ missing from Kelly's body: her heart. We also know that Kelly was almost certainly not pregnant at the time of death, as such a condition would surely have been noted during the post-mortem. Stephen Ryan, an Australian researcher, has suggested, however, that Bond's notes remain incomplete, and that additional papers may have once existed which discussed her reproductive organs.The Rose Mylett Murder
When the body of Rose Mylett was discovered on 20 December, Dr. Brownfield and Dr. Harris were immediately called upon to perform the post-mortem. The next day Robert Anderson personally wrote to Dr. Bond to have him "investigate the case personally", but Bond was unavailable, being out of town that day. Dr. Bond's assistant, Mr. Hibbert, opened the letter instead and took it upon himself to perform another examination. Finally, on 24 December, Bond himself examined Mylett's body and compared his notes with Hibbert's. Whereas the other doctors had agreed that the injuries were consistent with murder, Bond demurred, suggesting accidental strangulation instead. He testified at the inquest on 2 January:
Dr. Thomas Bond, 7, Sanctuary, Westminster Abbey, F.R.C.S., stated that he was asked to examine the body by Mr. Anderson, Assistant Commissioner of Police. Witness examined the body on the 24th of December. Mr. Hibbard, Demonstrator of Anatomy at Westminster Hospital, had examined the body on the Saturday with Drs. Brownfield and Harris, and he supplied witness with his notes. On the Monday witness had the body reopened, and compared his notes with his (witness's) observations. He and the other doctors agreed, with the exception of the mark on the throat. At the date of his examination the mark, which had been described as the mark of a cord, had disappeared. The other marks, which were described as finger marks, witness saw. He also saw in front of the larynx three extravasations of blood, where incisions had been made, and found blood effused around the larynx and deep congestion of the mucous membrane of the larynx. Witness took possession of the contents of the stomach and had what remained analysed. Witness could find no injury to the skin where the mark had been. He agreed with the deductions of Drs. Brownfield, Hibbard, and Harris that the deceased died from strangulation, but his opinion was that it was not murder. The amount of violence which would be required to rapidly strangle an able-bodied woman would leave such a mark on the neck that it would not disappear even during the five days that had elapsed. Witness should have expected to find injuries to the skin and tissues under the skin. The woman's skin was of such a nature that it would take a mark like wax, and from previous experience witness knew that strangulation might occur through a tight dress or a collar and leave deep marks. His opinion was that the woman, in a state of drunkenness, fell down and the larynx was compressed against the neck of the jacket, and that the mark described as the mark of a cord must have been produced by the rim of the collar, either while she was dying or while she was dead in the interval between the finding of the body and its being undressed.
By the CORONER. - The injury to the larynx must have been caused before death, but the mark above that might be caused before or after dearth.
By the Jury. - The collar of deceased's jacket measured 14 in. Witness did not think the collar of deceased's jacket was stiff enough to strangle her. He thought it was possible that the woman made the finger marks herself. Had it been a case of quick strangulation he should have expected to find more contortion of the face. (Times - 3 January 1889)
Bond's testimony did not sway Coroner Wynne E. Baxter, who noted in his summation on 9 January:
Of the five doctors who saw the body, Dr. Bond was the only one who considered the case was not one of murder. Dr. Bond did not see the body until five days after death, and he was, therefore, at a disadvantage. Dr. Bond stated that if this was a case of strangulation he should have expected to find the skin broken, but it was clearly shown, on reference being made to the records of the Indian doctors in the cases of the Thug murders, that there were no marks whatever left. Other eminent authorities agreed with that view. In this case the deceased was completely helpless and would be easily overcome. (Times - 10 January 1889)
Nevertheless, Bond's opinion did carry some sway with Robert Anderson, who would write in his memoirs in 1910: "the Poplar case of December, 1888, was a death from natural causes." (The Lighter Side of My Official Life, footnote to Chapter 9)
The Alice Mackenzie Murder
As with the Rose Mylett investigation, Dr. Bond was called in to perform a second examination into the death of Alice Mackenzie, after Dr. Phillips had already performed the initial post-mortem. He and Phillips had several differences of opinion. Phillips saw no connection between the Mackenzie murder and the canonical Ripper murders, while Bond believed this latest murder was indeed part of the same series.Dr. Bond's report reads:
I beg to report that in accordance with your instructions I this day inspected the dead body of a woman, who has been identified as Alice McKenzie, at Whitechapel. Before I went to the mortuary I called on Dr. Phillips & he kindly accompanied me. He informed me that the post mortem was completed yesterday & that the wounds on the throat of the woman had been so disturbed that any examination I might make, unassisted would convey no definite information as to the nature of the injuries. He pointed out to me the original wounds, their character and direction & I was able to form an opinion that there could be no doubt that the cuts were made from left to right & as far as I was able to make out, the knife appears to have been plunged deeply into the neck on the left side of the victim below the sterno mastoid muscle & brought out by a tailed incision just above the larynx on the same side. There appeared to have been two stabs, & the knife then carried forward in the same skin wound, except that a small tongue of skin remained between the two stabs. The incisions appeared to me to be in a direction from above downwards and forwards with several small superficial cuts extending upwards & tailing off into mere scratches. The two main cuts appeared to be about 3 inches long but Dr. Phillips stated that before the parts were disturbed the cuts which I saw extending down wards, really were in a direction upwards.
The cuts appeared to have been inflicted with a sharp strong knife. I could form no opinion as to the width of the blade or the length of the knife, but undoubtedly the cuts might have been done with a short knife; it must in my opinion have had a sharp point. I believe the cuts were made from the front while the woman's head was thrown back on the ground. There were two bruises high up on the chest which looked as if the murderer had made the cuts with his right hand while he held the woman down with his left. There were no bruises on the woman's face or lips.
On the right side of the abdomen extending from the chest to below the level of the umbilicus there was a jagged incision made up of several cuts which extended through the skin & subcutaneous fat & at the bottom of this cut there were 7 or 8 superficial scratches about 2 inches long parallel to each other in a longitudinal direction. There was also a small cut eighth of an inch deep, quarter inch long on the mons veneris. I think that in order to inflict the wound which I saw on the abdomen the murderer must have raised the clothes with his left hand & inflicted the injuries with his right.
Dr. Phillips showed me a small bruise on the left side of the stomach which he suggested might have been caused by the murderer pressing his right hand on the stomach while he used the knife with his left hand, but I saw no sufficient reason to entertain this opinion. The wounds could not have been self inflicted, & no doubt the wound in the throat would cause almost immediate death & I do not think the woman could call out if held down in the position she appears to have been in when the wounds were inflicted. The wounds on the abdomen could have nothing to do with the cause of death & were in my opinion inflicted after death. I see in this murder evidence of similar design to the former Whitechapel murders viz. sudden onslaught on the prostrate woman, the throat skilfully & resolutely cut with subsequent mutilation, each mutilation indicating sexual thoughts & a desire to mutilate the abdomen & sexual organs.
I am of opinion that the murder was performed by the same person who committed the former series of Whitechapel murders.
I am dear Sir,
( MEPO 3/140, ff. 259-262)
In the end the general police consensus was that the Mackenzie murder was not part of the Jack the Ripper series. Bond was never called to testify at the inquest.The Killer a Doctor?
In general, Dr. Bond believed that the Whitechapel killer had no medical training or knowledge, not even that of a butcher. Nick Warren, modern-day researcher and practising surgeon, points out that Bond's previous involvement in the Thames Torso investigations may have led him to an unwise conclusion. Sugden paraphrases Warren's argument:
Bond had been instructed by the Home Office to investigate the 'Thames Torso' murders. From 1887 to 1889 the dismembered remains of four women were recovered along and near the Thames. Three of them were fully decapitated and the heads were never found. Now, the beheadings in these cases suggested to Bond that their perpetrator possessed anatomical skills. So when he considered the Ripper evidence and noted that the murderer had apparently tried and failed to decapitate two of his victims, Annie Chapman and Mary Kelly, he put him down as an unskilled operator. Unfortunately, modern experience suggests that Bond's assumption that only skeletal dismemberment required 'anatomical skill' is a false one. (Sugden, Complete History of Jack the Ripper)
MEPO 3/140, ff. 259-262
MEPO 3/3153, ff. 10-18
HO 144/221/A49301C, ff. 220-223
Times (London) - 9 October 1888
Times (London) - 18 October 1888
Times (London) - 23 October 1888
Times (London) - 3 January 1889
Times (London) - 10 January 1889
The Jack the Ripper A-Z (Begg, Fido and Skinner)
The Ultimate Jack the Ripper Sourcebook (Evans and Skinner)
The Lighter Side of My Official Life (Anderson)
The Complete History of Jack the Ripper (Sugden)