|
 |
 |
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
    
Richard Lawrence
Sergeant
Username: Rl0919
Post Number: 11
Registered: 6-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, August 21, 2003 - 9:18 am: |       |
Gary,
I believe you are right that DNA could be used to confirm the identities of some of the victims. But in most cases those identities are not in doubt. The biggest problem is that for the DNA to be useful, there must be something to compare with, such as DNA from a relative. In the cases where the identity of the body is in doubt -- Mary Kelly and the Pinchin St torso -- I'm not aware of any known or presumed relatives to compare with.
Anyhow, the thing I personally have the most doubt about is whether any perpetrator DNA could be located in the graves. Victim DNA should be there, at least in some cases. I should note, however, the decay of bodies is highly variable depending on climate, conditions of burial, etc. Some of the bodies might be in relatively good condition, while others might be gone to dust, bones included.
|
Gary Alan Weatherhead
Inspector
Username: Garyw
Post Number: 266
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, August 21, 2003 - 12:49 pm: | |
Hi Richard
All good points.
Best
Gary |
Robert Charles Linford
Chief Inspector
Username: Robert
Post Number: 633
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, August 21, 2003 - 3:37 pm: | |
It's possible to imagine marginal uses for exhumations. If Kelly's DNA was compared with McCarthy's it might settle once and for all whether she and McCarthy were related (though I doubt that they were).
If enough of Kelly's skull survived, it might be possible to "rebuild" her face, to give a reasonable idea of what she would have looked like.
And it might be possible to get a clearer idea of the heights of both victims and suspects.
I can't see it ever happening, though.
Robert |
Andrew Spallek
Detective Sergeant
Username: Aspallek
Post Number: 103
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, August 21, 2003 - 4:11 pm: | |
Well, maybe there is hope. Since the Pinchin torso was preserved and buried specifically with the intention to be exhumed if it were possible to shed new light on the case, it would seem to me that present day officals might be talked into it. Then, once the torso is exhumed I could see justification for exhuming at least one Ripper victim in order to compare in microscopic detail things like knife cuts into surviving bone tissue.
Andy
|
Richard Lawrence
Sergeant
Username: Rl0919
Post Number: 13
Registered: 6-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, August 21, 2003 - 11:33 pm: | |
Allright, let me summarize the possibilities raised so far for examining remains:
* DNA of victims and suspects could be compared to reveal any previously unknown familial relations (Kelly/McCarthy, etc.).
* DNA of victims could be compared to known or presumed relatives to confirm identities of remains. Unfortunately, this may be of little use in the most mysterious cases, since there are no known or presumed relatives to compare with.
* Bones could be measured to confirm heights of victims and suspects.
* Facial reconstruction on the Kelly corpse might give a better idea of her appearance (since unlike other victims, her face was so mutilated that mortuary photographs cannot be used to determine her appearance).
* Bones could be examined for knife marks or other signs to potentially reveal clues about how the murders and mutilations were committed. For example, it could be determined whether a leverage tool was used to split Kelly's femur.
Any other ideas?
|
Robert Charles Linford
Chief Inspector
Username: Robert
Post Number: 640
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Friday, August 22, 2003 - 2:43 pm: | |
A couple more possibilities : exhumation of suspects might one day tell us whether the suspect was genetically predisposed to certain mental disorders. For instance, Druitt's DNA might tell us whether he would have been likely to have suffered his family's mental problems, provided of course a) that these problems are genetically determined and b)that the gene(s) for the illness can one day be identified.
Re Kelly, I don't see how an exhumation could identify the body as Kelly's. But it might provide proof that the body wasn't Kelly's - as Irish genes probably differ slightly from, say, Anglo-Saxon ones, in the event of "Kelly's" body having Anglo-Saxon genes, we could probably say that the body wasn't Kelly's.
Robert |
Andrew Spallek
Detective Sergeant
Username: Aspallek
Post Number: 106
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, August 23, 2003 - 12:43 am: | |
Lisa,
I visited that cemetery earlier this year (along with the City of London Cemerery at Manor Park). At that time I didn't realize that the Torso and Coles were buried there. I searched in vain for Stride's grave, which is not marked, being a bit too timid to ask the caretakers. In fact, I did not see any Victorian era graves, at least not marked. The oldest I saw dated from the early 1900's. Maybe you could enlighten me as to where they hide the "really old" ones! Actually, I think I was in the vicinity of Stride's gravesite.
Andy
|
Vincent
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Monday, August 25, 2003 - 10:34 am: | |
Perhaps someone more familiar with British law regarding exhumations can enlighten me on something. I have always felt that the one area of the case where DNA would be able to make an important contribution would be if there were slides taken, and then re-discovered, of the "From Hell" kidney. Would the possibility of a DNA Match between Eddowes remains and the kidney be enough to warrant an exhumation? Or would the only way to match it be to compare it to the Eddowes descendants that Mr Shelden has (brilliantly I might add) discovered? That would certainly be an easier way (assuming their cooperation of course) but would it be as accurate a test?
Regards, Vincent |
Lisa Jane
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 26, 2003 - 8:47 am: | |
Hi Andy
The last time I was at the cemetary it was to attend a funeral, and that was years ago! However if you are interested, the cemetary has a website, and you can requst a search for information. See:
http://www.eastlondoncemetery.co.uk/
Regards
Lisa
|
Richard Lawrence
Sergeant
Username: Rl0919
Post Number: 16
Registered: 6-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 26, 2003 - 9:56 pm: | |
Vincent,
A DNA match from a kidney sample to Eddowes relatives would provide only a probability that the kidney came from Eddowes. A match to Eddowes own remains (assuming the DNA was still usable) could provide a definitive match.
As to whether an exhumation would be warranted by the possibility of such a comparison, that's somewhat subjective. Legally, I doubt an exhumantion could be compelled, since there is no chance of a prosecution in the case. But the possibility of a significant find might convince the relatives to give their permission.
|
Andrew Spallek
Detective Sergeant
Username: Aspallek
Post Number: 147
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Friday, September 19, 2003 - 11:22 pm: | |
See Pinchin Street Murder thread (under Victims)for further information on the gravesite.
Andy
|
shelley wiltshire
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Wednesday, July 28, 2004 - 4:15 pm: | |
If the 'from hell' kidney could definately be confirmed that this was indeed the kidney sent to George lusk, the the kidney would be preserved, but some or most DNA of the kidney could be lost, but on the other hand there might be just enough DNA to make a match with the body of Catherine eddowes, however trying to match the DNA with living decendants of Eddowes might prove unfruitful,so it would be better to exhume the body of Eddowes herself. It is very difficult if not impossible to obtain DNA from soft tissues,blood stains etc, the only sure DNA that can be taken from very old bodies, is the bones,and teeth. Which brings me to ask, if the bodies are in poor condition,what about taking DNA from the teeth, as these last. |
|
Use of these
message boards implies agreement and consent to our Terms of Use.
The views expressed here in no way reflect the views of the owners and
operators of Casebook: Jack the Ripper.
Our old message board content (45,000+ messages) is no longer available online, but a complete archive
is available on the Casebook At Home Edition, for 19.99 (US) plus shipping.
The "At Home" Edition works just like the real web site, but with absolutely no advertisements.
You can browse it anywhere - in the car, on the plane, on your front porch - without ever needing to hook up to
an internet connection. Click here to buy the Casebook At Home Edition.
|
|
|
|
Closed: New threads not accepted on this page