Exhumation

[Brenda]

An evil scientist could harvest some Mary Kelly DNA and produce her clone. Then we'd know what she looked like.

I'm not being serious, please don't attack. But that is about the only thing an exhumation would solve regarding Mary. We simply don't know enough about her to match her DNA to anybody.

Let the ladies RIP.

[anna]

Oh gawd,where do you start on this one.Thankfully,we have our Sam to give a sensible view on things.
As anyone who knows my posts,knows I get sentimental over "the five"..and pretty protective towards their memory as individuals too.
Sam is quite right in that the coffins would have had a brass name plaque.Wherever they were buried,their murders were too well known for their final resting place not to have been carefully noted,whether in a public grave or not.
There is also another viewpoint to be taken here.
Many of the Eastend cemetries have been dug up over a long period of time,without the public being aware of it,until quite recently.
When I see plaques going down with vague locations and the excuse given that they cannot locate victims as they are in a public grave, rings warning bells to me.
We cannot say that it would be wrong to exhume them because of disturbing others.....because we don't know who is still left down there in anyway.
So.Bringing up Kelly would at least ensure that we have her forever.
Has nothing to do with being a ripper "fan".Has to do with saving her from a digging machine,when some cemetry official decides he wants the room at some time in the future.
Don't know whether I'd wan't it done.But the above is now becomming a reality,as there was a programme on telly admitting that nowadays if you are buried there will be no guarantee that it will be forever,as we would all like to think.It is unfortunately a practical world that we live in now.

[joelhall]

Hi Stan,...it seems that the only remotely useful thing one could do would be to sequence Kelly's DNA, in the faint hope that we might find a possible clue to her identity - in itself extremely unlikely without having DNA from a modern survivor of the "Kelly" clan with which to compare it. Since we know of no such survivors, the possibility is remote - unless her family spawned a dynasty of ne'er-do-wells, in which case searches against a criminal DNA database might throw up a possible match.

though without any of her children the best is mitdna.... which could involve extremely high numbers ofpeople with all sorts of surnames, kellys included.

[adamkle]

I understand very well all the objections. But did the powers ever consider preparing the exhumations?

By the way, there is one thing I'm afraid of. One day Dan Brown will write a book about JtR and "the Royal conspiracy" (maybe "The Solomon key" is the first step. At least there will be Freemasons!). Then the throngs of tourists will storm the graves and demand checking what's inside. That would be pathetic.

Yes, then I cry: Rest the victims in peace!

[Sam Flynn]

Hi Stan,

I still don't see what it would accomplish. Adam, I'm not knocking your question.

...it seems that the only remotely useful thing one could do would be to sequence Kelly's DNA, in the faint hope that we might find a possible clue to her identity - in itself extremely unlikely without having DNA from a modern survivor of the "Kelly" clan with which to compare it. Since we know of no such survivors, the possibility is remote - unless her family spawned a dynasty of ne'er-do-wells, in which case searches against a criminal DNA database might throw up a possible match.

[sdreid]

I still don't see what it would accomplish. Adam, I'm not knocking your question. I'm sure such a thing has crossed the mind of most of us at one time or another. There is no moral objection to exhuming them from me. After all, they are dead and everyone who knew them in life is dead. We've dug up Jesse James and President Taylor here in the States of late and they've been dead for over 100 years. Maybe exhumation is more of a taboo in the U.K. - I don't know.

[Sam Flynn]

Hi Joel

plus theres the biggest problem pointed out - noone really knows whos in the ground.

Without looking it up, weren't some (most?) of Jack's victims buried in coffins with brass plaques affixed to the lids? I'm not advocating exhumation, by the way, although I have no moral qualms about the matter. It's just that I agree with you that such an exercise would be of limited use.

[joelhall]

I know there was long discussion about it on Casebook in 2004, but I have several questions. Maybe someone would like to answer it.

1. Thanks of exhumation we could compare the cuts on the bones of the "canonical" victims. If they are similar, then probably the knife and the murderer would be the same, right?
2. It was 120 years ago, so it could be a miracle but... If any of the victim was buried in her own clothes, than we could find - literally - bloody fingerprints on it, right?
3. The DNA of the victims would be useful. For many reasons.

What do you think? With all the respect for the victims...

1. possibly but doubtful. there would be much decay, and its not necessarily true he used the same knife, nor do we know who else to look at to see if theres a match. plus theres the fact you would tell the type of knife, not the exact one by marks in bone (this isnt like ballistics). youre more likely to tell how the cuts were made, pointers to cause of death, etc. if youre lucky of course
2. no. fresh blood on fabric spreads, its not like finger grease on a window, plus human cells decompose, and iron degrades. test this by pricking your finger touching a shirt then letting it age 120 years basically, no chance.
3. no use at all really, theres nothing to compare it to.

at best you could discover a few physical/physiological details of the victims. not really even any use to ripperologists.

plus theres the biggest problem pointed out - noone really knows whos in the ground.

joel

[Limehouse]

Adam,

Surely if you believe in God and justice, you must realise that only God's judgement on the killer is now possible. No court of law could ever bring the killer to book for his/her crimes.

It would be enormously difficult to locate the correct bodies. It would involve disturbing a lot of other burials, with only a remote chance of the correct bodies being found. Even if the bodies were located, after 120 years there is the very real possibility that nothing will be left to test.

Let them rest.

[adamkle]

Hello all!

About all that could possibly be retrieved is victim DNA and I don't know what that would gain even if it could be recovered.

For example. There is still a chance that somewhere in London Hospital there are slides of kidney, sent to Lusk. Without Eddowes' DNA, we couldn't check if it was her (then the sender would be JtR himself) or somebody else's (then it would be a hoax).
And remember about cut marks on the bones...

Would it make a jot of difference to the women concerned? Would it bring the killer to justice? No, I don't think it would. It would only serve to satisfy the curiosity of Ripper 'fans'. It would be immoral and extremely disrespectful... Those woman died in violence. Let their secrets lie buried with them undisturbed.

Look, I believe in God, soul and JUSTICE. There were tens of men wrongly accused (f.e. as well known as Sickert or Carroll). There were women slashed. It's not 'curiosity' for me. If we have a chance to bring justice, let's do it. It's not victim's secret. Their broken dreams were their secrets. And THESE are their tragedies and murderer's secret!
Kelly's death was the worst thing that could happen to her. There is nothing worse, even the exhumation.

One day, maybe for a hundred years, we might need these samples. And then we will probably have just ashes. And just the ashes of justice.

Yours sincerely,
Adam

[j.r-ahde]

Hello John!

Most of the discussions about the exhumation has concerned finding out about the face of Mary Jane Kelly.

I have wondered, why her remains - despite having the best chances to be found - should be dug up only to know her facial appearance!

RIP, all of you victims!

All the best
Jukka

[John Bennett]

Limehouse - you've put it well

Let it be, as they say. We don't know where the graves are exactly and there are no benefits (in ANY context) in exhuming the bodies anyway. It's just too long ago.

I think it's a very naive view that any examination of the victims' remains will herald new evidence. Clutching at very thin straws in fact.

We know more about the victims' lives now than we ever did (thanks to people like Neal Shelden) and their slide into poverty is sad, but no more than their terrible end.

Let them rest in peace.

[Limehouse]

Hi Adamkle,

Exactly whose interests would be served in digging up these women in the vain hope that some DNA or other foresnsic evidence can be found?

Would it make a jot of difference to the women concerned? Would it bring the killer to justice? No, I don't think it would. It would only serve to satisfy the curiosity of Ripper 'fans'.

It would be immoral and extremely disrespectful to go digging and poking around in old, common graves, some of which cover a failry large area, in the quest of finding 120 year old bodies that should be left in peace.

Those woman died in violence. Let their secrets lie buried with them undisturbed.

[sdreid]

About all that could possibly be retrieved is victim DNA and I don't know what that would gain even if it could be recovered.

[j.r-ahde]

Hello adamkle!

Because we don't know for sure about JtR, I used the word "obviously"!

We don't know for sure either, that which letters if any was written by JtR!

The only way with MJK would be a lucky hit from the stores of the Scotland Yard and such hasn't happened yet!

All the best
Jukka