Skip Navigation


NDT Advance Access originally published online on April 11, 2008
Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation 2008 23(10):3343-3349; doi:10.1093/ndt/gfn198
This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
23/10/3343    most recent
gfn198v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Wolf, G.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Wolf, G.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author [2008]. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of ERA-EDTA. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org



A kidney from hell? A nephrological view of the Whitechapel murders in 1888

Gunter Wolf

Department of Medicine, University of Jena, Jena, Germany

Gunter Wolf, Department of Internal Medicine III, Friedrich Schiller University, Erlanger Allee 101, D-07740 Jena, Germany. Tel: +49-3641-9324301; Fax: +49-3641-9324302; E-mail: gunter.wolf{at}med.uni-jena.de



  Abstract

In the poor Whitechapel district of the East End of London in the fall of 1888, at least five prostitutes were brutally murdered, and in all but one case, also mutilated. The murderer was never caught and became known by his nickname ‘Jack the Ripper’. The left kidney and the uterus were cut out and taken away from one of the victims named Catherine Eddowes. A kidney was also cut out of the body from another victim, but not taken away. Two weeks later, George Lusk, president of the Whitechapel Vigilance Committee, received a small cardboard box with half of a longitudinally divided kidney and a letter entitled ‘From hell claiming that the kidney inside the box was taken from the victim. The kidney was brought to Dr Thomas Horrocks Openshaw, the Curator of the London Pathological Museum, where the kidney could be microscopically examined. The press jumped on the topic and made a circumstantial case that this kidney had been indeed torn from the body of Catherine Eddowes. According to the later memoirs of Major Henry Smith of the City Police published more than 20 years after the incident, the kidney left in the corpse of Catherine Eddowes was in an advanced stage of Bright's disease and the kidney sent to George Lusk was in exactly a similar stage. Today, the majority of criminologists believe that the kidney sent to Mr Lusk was a hoax as were other letters signed with Jack the Ripper. However, the murderer took organs from his victims, and in the case of Catherine Eddowes, the kidney. Serial killers often mutilate their victims and abscond with the removed body parts as trophies. By removing the kidney from Catherine Eddowes, Jack the Ripper may have tried to take possession of the conscience, emotions and desires of one of his victims, attributes residing in the kidney as described in the Bible. Jack the Ripper was never caught; many suspects have been suggested, and the murder series ended as suddenly as it had begun. We will never know who this mentally disturbed ‘nephrophilic’ was. Today, the story of Jack the Ripper is part of contemporary culture.

Keywords: Bright's disease; history of nephrology; Jack the Ripper; kidney; serial murder

Received for publication: 10. 1.08
Accepted in revised form: 14. 3.08


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.