What happened to the evidence?

[Frank]

Hello,

does anybody know what happened to all the evidence of the Whitechapel murders? Like the clothes of the victims of the bloody piece of apron found in Goulston Street?

Do they still exist in some police vaults? If so, then maybe analyses of the DNA could be done. Maybe the ripper left some hair...

Best regards,
Frank

[ChrisGeorge]

Hello,

does anybody know what happened to all the evidence of the Whitechapel murders? Like the clothes of the victims of the bloody piece of apron found in Goulston Street?

Do they still exist in some police vaults? If so, then maybe analyses of the DNA could be done. Maybe the ripper left some hair...

Best regards,
Frank

Hello Frank

The evidence is for the most part irretrievably lost. It does not exist in any police vault.

The "Ripper letters", whether they are evidence or not, largely still exist in the City of Police archives and the National Archives at Kew, but most commentators believe most if not all of the letters are hoaxes.

Witness statements still exist but may or may not describe the actual murderer but most of them probably to other men seen in the neighborhood about the time of the murders.

A "Ripper knife" still exists and is in the possession of Ripperologist Don Rumbelow, but may have been found at one of the later Whitechapel murders and not the canonical five murders of August to November 1888.

A shawl that allegedly belonged to fourth canonical victim Catherine Eddowes still exists but may or may not be authentic. No other clothes of the victims are known to survive.

The piece of apron belonging to Eddowes found in Goulston in an entranceway of Wentworth Model Dwellings is believed to be lost.

The half a kidney sent to George Lusk is believed lost as well.

Victim photographs exist, including two of the Mary Jane Kelly crime scene at 13 Miller's Court, Dorset Street. Existing too are contemporary plans drawn of the murder scene in Mitre Square as well as sketches of Eddowes.

That's about it. Frank, I hope this helps.

All the best

Chris

[Frank]

That is what I suspected or even was afraid of. But nevermind, thanks for Your quick answer.

[ChrisGeorge]

That is what I suspected or even was afraid of. But nevermind, thanks for Your quick answer.

Sorry to disappoint you, Frank.

If you don't already do so, you might consider subscribing to Ripperologist. We are just about to publish our one hundredth issue which will contain a great retrospective of different aspects of the case by many of the leading authorities on the Whitechapel murders.

All the best

Chris

[sdreid]

Keep the faith. You never know when purloined stuff like the mortuary pics might show up.

[perrymason]

Hi,

I believe Stan suggested the real reason so much evidence has gone missing over the years....."lost" is oft used instead of stolen or purloined....the second I would guess is more accurate.

Records were lost and some destroyed accidentally...like as in the Blitz, or as just general housekeeping in some cases probably....but my guess is that there are pieces of evidence, perhaps not clothing or biological samples, but maybe more pictures of room 13 for example, ...that were taken and still exist.

Maybe long forgotten in boxes in the attic somewhere, or in storage.

Cheers

[John Bennett]

In the case of the Lusk Kidney or Eddowes' apron piece, I think these items were just disposed of a while after the event.

I'm sure somebody here could well be more specific, but forensics was extremely primitive (if indeed it existed at all) in those days. Remember, after Polly Nichols' murder, they didn't scrape blood samples from the pavement - Mrs Green's son just washed it away with a bucket of water!

[Christine]

I have often stated that there is a real possibility of identifying the killer from the victim's bodies. They are all in the ground, with their DNA decaying, and they almost certainly have some of the killer's decayed DNA still in their bodies.

Obviously this is not possible with current technology, but think of where DNA technology was 50 years ago compared to now, and imagine making similar strides in the future. It might be possible to single out one person who touched all five bodies, and make statements about him, i.e. he was Irish, or a Polish Jew. That would be extraordinary.

[ChrisGeorge]

Hi,

I believe Stan suggested the real reason so much evidence has gone missing over the years....."lost" is oft used instead of stolen or purloined....the second I would guess is more accurate.

Records were lost and some destroyed accidentally...like as in the Blitz, or as just general housekeeping in some cases probably....but my guess is that there are pieces of evidence, perhaps not clothing or biological samples, but maybe more pictures of room 13 for example, ...that were taken and still exist.

Maybe long forgotten in boxes in the attic somewhere, or in storage.

Cheers


Stewart Evans has made the point that the police are concerned with current cases, and do not much value material on old cases. Which is one reason why they would want to move any material on "historic" cases to the National Archives.... but before that some material might have been inadvertently lost because of refiling, as well as possibly some stuff stolen or purloined, conceivably.

I read an account about during the Civil War in the basement of the U.S. Capitol in Washington, D.C., in order to build some new bread ovens to feed the Union troops, wagon loads of old documents dating from the time of the Revolution, the Federal period, and the War of 1812, were carted down to the Potomac and just dumped in the river! Startling but apparently true. :shakehead:

Chris

[aspallek]

In the case of the Lusk Kidney or Eddowes' apron piece, I think these items were just disposed of a while after the event.

I'm sure somebody here could well be more specific, but forensics was extremely primitive (if indeed it existed at all) in those days. Remember, after Polly Nichols' murder, they didn't scrape blood samples from the pavement - Mrs Green's son just washed it away with a bucket of water!

Actually, it is difficult to imagine what value there might be to preseving blood from the pavement even today. The blood there was obviously that of Polly Nichols. If they wanted a sample of her blood it could be obtained directly from the body, not that this would have been of much value in 1888.

[John Bennett]

Actually, it is difficult to imagine what value there might be to preseving blood from the pavement even today. The blood there was obviously that of Polly Nichols. If they wanted a sample of her blood it could be obtained directly from the body, not that this would have been of much value in 1888.

I know, poor comparison. The crux of my comment was that a member of the public just sloshed the blood away.

[jmenges]

Dan Norder I believe established that the Lusk kidney was held at the London Hospital museum (possibly in the Openshaw private collection?) until the 1960s-1970s. It was rotting, and so it was binned.

I think he discussed this at the Knoxville conference so maybe someone who attended could fill in some details or correct my information if I'm wrong.

JM

[perrymason]

Stewart Evans has made the point that the police are concerned with current cases, and do not much value material on old cases. Which is one reason why they would want to move any material on "historic" cases to the National Archives.... but before that some material might have been inadvertently lost because of refiling, as well as possibly some stuff stolen or purloined, conceivably.

I read an account about during the Civil War in the basement of the U.S. Capitol in Washington, D.C., in order to build some new bread ovens to feed the Union troops, wagon loads of old documents dating from the time of the Revolution, the Federal period, and the War of 1812, were carted down to the Potomac and just dumped in the river! Startling but apparently true. :shakehead:

Chris

Hi Chris,

I can see fully how the accumulation of documentation and even physical property can be a storage issue at some stage in its history, and although it does sound bizarre, Im not surprised to read the episode you mentioned.

My contention is that when there are major criminal events in history, and some people have access to actual evidence or data related to the investigations, at some point when the crime is yesterdays news they might take a souvenir. Who of the authorities or the clerical staff in 1915, 20, or 25 for example, thought that Ripper evidence or documents were anything but curiousities and collectibles...particularly since the case was closed "unsolved" in 1892.

Ill bet that some materials collected for the investigations of Kennedy assassination, the Lindberg kidnapping, the Titanic sinking, the Hindenburg tragedy....Im sure there were plenty of "souvenirs" taken from those files as they went cold as well.

All the best Chris.

[diana]

The only thing to do at this juncture would be to monitor Ebay. With the economy the way it is somebody might be forced to sell something.

[aspallek]

Just one comment. Although the active investigation ceased, the Whitechapel Murders "case" was never closed.

[Monty]

A blood sample was gathered from Coles murder scene at Swallow Gardens.

[John Bennett]

A blood sample was gathered from Coles murder scene at Swallow Gardens.

Interesting factoid, Monty. Do we know why it was taken?

JB

[Suzi]

Or where it is?:scratchchin:

So much 'stuff' has disappeared into the ether or in Policemen's pockets /Blitz or whatever- I'm a great fan of the 'box in the attic somewhere' theory too me- Probably labeled 'Uncle Walter's London Pictures 1888' ------I wish!

[Monty]

Im currently working on a Coles article and unfortunately Im one place whilst my research is elsewhere. If I remember right Swanson attended the scene and got the sample. I think its in the Evening Standard of Feb 13 1891.

[aspallek]

Also, an attempt at preserving the remains of the Pinchin Street Torso prior to burial was made. What was left of the corpse was sealed in a container of spirits and interred in a common grave at the East London Cemetery near to where the remains of Elizabeth Stride lie. This was probably done more for the possibility of future identification rather than for evidentiary reasons.

[Monty]

John- I was right! Evening Standard. Its in Connell & Evans The man who hunted...page 92. Im sure its in the sourcebook, along with the reason, which has escaped me, sorry.

[George Hutchinson]

Jonathan - If Dan mentioned this at Knoxville, I don't remember it.

Monty - Any idea why a blood sample was taken if the blood was naturally assumed to be from FC and forensics at that point was so basic that all that could be established was if blood was mammalian (or is that a myth)?

Christine - Forgive my bluntness, but I find your theory utterly bizarre - though it's not the first time I've heard it from someone by any means. DNA is difficult to extract from inside the bones of ancient burials. How could a third party's DNA be extracted when their sole contact with the body would have been fleeting on flesh and clothes long since vanished? What samples would you compare it to even if this were outside the realms of science fiction?

PHILIP

[Chava]

Jonathan - If Dan mentioned this at Knoxville, I don't remember it.

Monty - Any idea why a blood sample was taken if the blood was naturally assumed to be from FC and forensics at that point was so basic that all that could be established was if blood was mammalian (or is that a myth)?

Christine - Forgive my bluntness, but I find your theory utterly bizarre - though it's not the first time I've heard it from someone by any means. DNA is difficult to extract from inside the bones of ancient burials. How could a third party's DNA be extracted when their sole contact with the body would have been fleeting on flesh and clothes long since vanished? What samples would you compare it to even if this were outside the realms of science fiction?

PHILIP

Was there in fact any semen found on or around the bodies? They were prostitutes, so it may not have been indicative if any was found. And he carved up their sexual organs pretty well, so I doubt it would be noticed there among all the blood and tissue. But was there any evidence of sexual activity on the bodies? For some reason I have an idea that they looked and didn't note any.

Also, the dna--should it be found and be testable--would not point to 'Irish' or 'Polish Jew'. It might point to a Jew only if he was a Cohen or a Levi--dna studies have shown that in those cases, a distinct dna link was found on the y chromosome, and the position of priest or levite is passed directly from father to son, along with, apparently, the appropriate chromosome. I doubt you'd get any other nationality, or any other Jew for that matter, off a simple dna test.

[Christine]

Hi Philip.

The killer must have certainly left skin cells in the victims bodies. Even if he wore gloves, but no mask, he probably left skin cells. One cell would be enough, in theory. The DNA would be deteriorated, of course, but that wouldn't necessarily be an insurmountable problem. To use a rough analogy, a body deteriorates into bones and whatever DNA left would be in bones--just a skeleton of the original DNA.

As far as what samples you'd compare it to, first you'd be looking for sequences that only occur in certain sub-populations, like the Irish, or the Polish. This is not definitive because people can move around, of course. But if you had a strong suspect, you could start looking for relatives. A person's DNA matches 50% to a sibling, 25% to a niece or nephew, and so on. And the matches are different for male and female relations, so if you could track down a large number of relations of a suspect, you could say that relation one should match the suspect .1% in this way and .2% in another way, and so on. If a deteriorated DNA on a victim was found to match the relationship profile expected of deteriorated DNA of a suspect, that would be very strong evidence.

Another analogy that might help is of documents cut up into single words. A large percentage of the words in these documents are missing, but they are removed in a partly predictable way--"the" is almost always gone, but "with" is sometimes kept. You have some information about the "Eddows" document--certain unusual words will or won't be found in it. So you look for words that you can't otherwise explain, analyze their relative frequency, and look through your suspect documents for uncommon words found or not found in the amounts predicted by the relatives you've been able to locate.

Or, you look for these key words that are found on all the victims, but don't belong to the victims themselves, and relate them back to what you know about the general population. This sort of technique has been used on living, healthy people to tell descendants of slaves what tribe in Africa their ancestors belonged to, for example. In some cases they've been able to narrow it down to very small populations.

Obviously it is impossible with our current technology. But we might someday have a way of analyzing DNA instantly without completely grinding up and destroying a sample. If we had enough information about human DNA in general, we might be able to pick out bits and pieces and make some definitive statements about a person who touched the bodies.

So while it's very speculative, and may well never be possible, I certainly don't think it's outrageous by any means.

[Christine]

Sorry Chava, posts crossed.

We would have to have a much more extensive database of the human population before any random DNA sample could be definitively called "Irish" or "Jewish" or "Polish Jew" and even then it wouldn't be 100% because people cross populations. But there are already DNA sequences that can be definitively traced to some unknown person who lived in a little village in Germany, and they can even estimate when this person lived by how much variation is found in the sequence. Since the sequence is not found outside of people descended from villagers, either the person lived in the village at the approximate time, or his descendant went to the village not long after. If we knew thousands, or even millions, of these sort of weird sequences, and we could find one on the victims, that would be very interesting. We might someday be able to say "someone who touched this body was descended from a man who lived in Poland in 900 AD and whose descendants are overwhelmingly Jewish." Something along those lines.

[Edward]

How many men do you estimate these women were intimate with over the last three to four days of their lives. I doubt that they thoroughly bathed very frequently. Any stray DNA found on the bodies could be from any number of persons unknown, thus contaminating the sample(s). DNA used to trace ancestors is undoubtedly pristine.

[George Hutchinson]

You are talkng about the retention of intact cells of a third party within the very bones of the victims. I just don't get your reasoning at all.

PHILIP

[jmenges]

Jonathan - If Dan mentioned this at Knoxville, I don't remember it.

Hmm. Well, I thought he was going to mention it in a talk at the conference. Maybe I shouldn't have said anything, but who knows. Hopefully his research findings will be described in detail later.

JM

[Frank]

How many men do you estimate these women were intimate with over the last three to four days of their lives. I doubt that they thoroughly bathed very frequently. Any stray DNA found on the bodies could be from any number of persons unknown, thus contaminating the sample(s). DNA used to trace ancestors is undoubtedly pristine.

Let's for a second imagine, that the clothes of the victims were found and that non-victim DNA could be found. I agree that there would be a lot a different DNA from a lot of different men. But if the victims were all killed by one man, his DNA would be on all (or most) of the victims. I don't think that that would apply to anyone other. At least it would be a possibility to shorten the number of suspects.

Surely there would still be the problem of reference specimen, but that would be another topic. But as I said, that's only an imagination as the evidence seems to be lost.

As to the suitability of such old specimen compare the case of Kaspar Hauser http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaspar_Hauser, in which a much older samples of hair and blood were analysed.

[Pirate Jack]

I think it most unlikely that any DNA of any value could ever be traced after 120 years. Exhuming the bodies would be almost impossible given that any remains would have shifted and decomposed. Kelly’s grave marker is unlikely to sit on the original spot. And even if you did find some remains that you could identify as MJK, the most you could tell from that DNA test is roughly were MJK came from.

So perhaps the church is correct. Let them rest in peace.

There simply is NO surviving DNA, of any use, and there is unlikely ever to be so.

The letters are Hoax’s, and have been sealed in laminate. (Although I guess its possible the original ‘Lusk Letter’ is out there somewhere and could turn up).

The Shawl is Edwardian.

The Lusk Kidney, I believe survived in a jar to the late 1950’/60’s and was destroyed.

I’m not convinced even the ‘knife’ is actually connected to the case.

Pirate

[Frank]

I agree that exhuming the bodies would be useless. In the case of Kaspar Hauser I mentioned the samples were taken from clothes exposed in a museum. Exhuming is not possible since due to the bombings in World War II everything was turned upside down and the remains were just buried again without caring which part of a body belongs to whom. Maybe the problem in London would be quite similar.
Nevertheless the bodies were washed in the mortuary...

[Monty]

Philip,

Monty - Any idea why a blood sample was taken if the blood was naturally assumed to be from FC and forensics at that point was so basic that all that could be established was if blood was mammalian (or is that a myth)?

Let me work on it and I'll get back to you.

Youre right, mamilian or not was the standard test. Like I say, let me work on it.

The kidney was destroyed in the 1950s I believe, again, let me work on it.

Monty
:)

[George Hutchinson]

No, dammit, Monty. Tell me NOW!!!

PHILIP

[Mike Covell]

John Plimmer wrote that a "Wine Glass of Blood" was found at the scene, wonder where that went!:lol:

[Monty]

No, dammit, Monty. Tell me NOW!!!

PHILIP

I might, then again.....

...you can wait till I get home !

Monty
:)

PS If I do, its snowing again here.

[Christine]

There's no intact DNA anymore, obviously. The question is whether technology might advance to the point where it can easily analyze deteriorated DNA. This is my analogy to picking out a pile of words. Intact DNA is a book, but this scenario would be looking only at words. Someday we may reach the point where we can quickly look at the remains (with an improved electron microscope, for example) and come up with a pile of millions of words. Find an unusual word on all five victims, and you have a starting point for someone who touched all five victims. So far as I can tell from the various coroner's reports, no one person in the employ of the police touched all five victims.

Now if that unusual word could tell us that the person who touched all five victims was descended from a man who lived in a particular village in Germany in prehistoric times...damn that's very interesting. A lot more interesting than MJK's bolster, even if it is flesh.

And all this is speculation, call it science fiction if you will, but it's also all just an improvement of things that we already do, slowly, inaccurately, and haphazardly. So I'm not holding my breath, but this is still a very real possibility someday.

[protohistorian]

John Plimmer wrote that a "Wine Glass of Blood" was found at the scene, wonder where that went!:lol:

I have that at my apartment, only now it's a baseball sized glob of goop.:shakehead:

[Monty]

Philip,

Couldnt located the Evening Standard piece however Lloyds Weekly of 22nd February also reports the same incident, see the snippet below.

There is no official report that I can locate however Lloyds merely states that they assumed the sample went off for analysis.

Cheers

Monty
:)

[cappuccina]

...where the other "Mary Kelly Crime Scene photos" went to...

I cannot put my hands on it at the moment, but I distinctly remember reading that hte photographer took at least 10 shots; we have two....where did the others go...??

There is no way that a photgrapher having to set up the cumbersome equipment of the time, and given the nature of the crime at hand, and the bad weather conditions he was working under, would have taken only two shots...

[Steve F]

...where the other "Mary Kelly Crime Scene photos" went to...

I cannot put my hands on it at the moment, but I distinctly remember reading that hte photographer took at least 10 shots; we have two....where did the others go...??

There is no way that a photgrapher having to set up the cumbersome equipment of the time, and given the nature of the crime at hand, and the bad weather conditions he was working under, would have taken only two shots...

Ahhh....so,that's what those 8 photo's are in my attic! Should I scan 'em and post'em or what?:1tongue:

[sdreid]

Regarding blood forensics, I believe it could be tested for poison as well as whether it was mammalian. I suppose they could have tested it for poison to eliminate the slim possibility that the murder was a poisoning where the throat cut was added later as a red herring. I know, that's out there a bit but that's the only reason I can think of right now. They already knew that the blood came from a mammal.

[Bob Hinton]

If you think losing the evidence from the Ripper killings is frustrating you ought to work with me on a case I’m researching at the moment, the Mamie Stuart case.

She vanished in 1919 and her remains were found in a cave in 1961. I have serious doubts about this case and am trying to pull all the evidence together.

Along with the remains in the cave were found a number of items of jewellery and items from her clothing. Most importantly a hair slide was found still containing her hair. Since this would have rotted from the scalp the roots should still be there allowing a DNA match to be made with her surviving relatives.

Imagine my frustration to learn that these items that were on display in the South Wales Police museum have now disappeared.

Not only that they have also managed to lose the remains!

At least we know where all the Rippers victims are!

[Pirate Jack]

At least we know where all the Rippers victims are!


Well NO we don’t Bob,

We only have an approximation of where they were buried. Most of the gravesites have been re-used. There are approximation markers for Eddows and Nichols. Annie Capmans grave was re-used in the 1980’s. And the gravestone of MJK is an approximate location, not an exact spot. So I think we can only be certain of where LIZ is buried.

So even if you did ever get permission to exhume the bodies, which is highly unlikely. You’d never discover any useful information about the killer. They would be almost impossible to identify from other peoples remains.

So apart from possibly identifying where MJK came from, nothing could be gained from such an exercise of modern or even future DNA information.

Pirate

[George Hutchinson]

I'm afraid we don't even know for sure where Liz is buried either - although she has a nice surround and everything, it's still only an approximation. Annie's site has been buried over at LEAST twice.

And no one knows if Martha even had a funeral!

PHILIP

[Frank]

Did the police then even look for hairs not belonging to the victim on the clothes?
Even the colour and the length of those hairs could be worthy information in my opinion.
But I supose they did not...

[JacknJill]

I have heard some speculation that some of the evidence was purposefully destroyed. By a police official who was in on it (rising from the police suspects)/didn't want Jack found.