MA - FBI searches 'Creepy Creations' Shop, trafficking body parts stolen from Harvard’s school morgue, Mar 2023 *arrests*

I have 2 relatives who donated their bodies to Harvard Medical School. Their bodies were donated in 1992 and 1994, so hopefully they are not affected. Cedric Lodge was apparently hired as the mortuary manager in 1995. I am very upset about this.
If there's any doubt, it sounds like there is a hotline you can call. I am thinking of you and your family at this time. Donation of human remains is a vital service, and one that I deeply respect for those who choose to do it. Your relatives did a very noble thing. I'm so sorry this process wasn't simply not respected, but was exploited by those meant to safeguard the process for financial gain. Despicable.

MOO
 
According to the complaint, Nott was part of a ring of purchasing and selling stolen human remains, some of which were tied back to the Harvard Medical scandal, which the FBI also recently busted. A Harvard medical bag was found in Nott’s home.



 
According to the complaint, Nott was part of a ring of purchasing and selling stolen human remains, some of which were tied back to the Harvard Medical scandal, which the FBI also recently busted. A Harvard medical bag was found in Nott’s home.



Wow. That's a whole another level of stupid.
 
That is really creepy. I don't know how many times I've scrolled past listings for human bones -especially skulls- on eBay and other sites. I figured they were legit because they were so prevalent.
 
According to the complaint, Nott was part of a ring of purchasing and selling stolen human remains, some of which were tied back to the Harvard Medical scandal, which the FBI also recently busted. A Harvard medical bag was found in Nott’s home.




Last time I read about someone using human parts for decorations was a book about WWII crimes, when Nazi tried to make lampshades and gloves from human skin at the concentration sites. I wonder if there was a separate charge for this, or was it all lumped under "crimes against humanity". Anyhow, there is a precedent.
 
Last time I read about someone using human parts for decorations was a book about WWII crimes, when Nazi tried to make lampshades and gloves from human skin at the concentration sites. I wonder if there was a separate charge for this, or was it all lumped under "crimes against humanity". Anyhow, there is a precedent.
Actually, just last month, Harvard announced that the only book in their collection that they knew was bound in human skin was being rebound.


It was an old book - not related to this case, but the skin was taken from cadavers without consent, and they knew that. Which was wrong at any point in history, but Harvard decided to do something about it now.

It isn't just Nazis that did this stuff. And it's all about consent, really. There's someone that willed their skull to be used for productions of Hamlet. It was recently - I think David Tennant was the first actor who got to hold it and do the famous soliloquy on stage with it. There's Mary Shelley and her keeping her husband's heart. There's the long tradition of Victorian mourning jewellery, which is being revitalised in this century by people turning cremains into jewellery. It all comes down to consent. Those things I listed above were consensual. The stuff to do with the Harvard Medical school and the book in their collection was not consented to.

The whole point of donating your body to science is it's meant to be philanthropic. You're doing it with the aim of training the next generation of doctors and anthropologists and forensic scientists. You're not donating to Harvard medical expecting your skull to wind up on someone's mantel with a candle stuck in it. Some people would be okay with that, because they're not concerned with what happens to them after death, but it's not what they signed up for, so they have not consented to it, and they certainly did not sign off for someone to make a profit off their remains.

MOO
 
Last edited:
Actually, just last month, Harvard announced that the only book in their collection that they knew was bound in human skin was being rebound.


It was an old book - not related to this case, but the skin was taken from cadavers without consent, and they knew that. Which was wrong at any point in history, but Harvard decided to do something about it now.

It isn't just Nazis that did this stuff. And it's all about consent, really. There's someone that willed their skull to be used for productions of Hamlet. It was recently - I think David Tennant was the first actor who got to hold it and do the famous soliloquy on stage with it. There's Mary Shelley and her keeping her husband's heart. There's the long tradition of Victorian mourning jewellery, which is being revitalised in this century by people turning cremains into jewellery. It all comes down to consent. Those things I listed above were consensual. The stuff to do with the Harvard Medical school and the book in their collection was not consented to.

The whole point of donating your body to science is it's meant to be philanthropic. You're doing it with the aim of training the next generation of doctors and anthropologists and forensic scientists. You're not donating to Harvard medical expecting your skull to wind up on someone's mantel with a candle stuck in it. Some people would be okay with that, because they're not concerned with what happens to them after death, but it's not what they signed up for, so they have not consented to it, and they certainly did not sign off for someone to make a profit off their remains.

MOO

About the Nazi war crimes, sadly, the lampshades made of tattooed human skin are linked to two nasty persons, Karl-Otto Köch, the first commandant of the Buchenwald camp, and his wife Ilse Köch. The story is long, but Köch was executed by the Germans themselves for abuse of power, and Ilse got life sentence and committed suicide in prison. The story of the lampshades is long, tortuous and given the DNA testing was initially unavailable, only recently proven to be, likely, true. I think there are three aspects, 1) general crimes against humanity, 2) people possibly targeted and killed for tattooed skin, 3) general ethics. What you are talking about, lack of consent, falls into broad ethics, but it is a huge issue in medical schools.

I hope the case will be taken seriously, in recognition of the people who donated their bodies to science and whose trust in science was so badly violated.
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
199
Guests online
2,800
Total visitors
2,999

Forum statistics

Threads
593,007
Messages
17,979,632
Members
228,983
Latest member
Engeluc
Back
Top