Exhumation

[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 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.

[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!

[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.

[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.

[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.

[adamkle]

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.

That's a good point. Now the authorities don't want do it for science & justice, but later they will do it for money, and call it a "progress".

I'm also convinced that we will know more after the exhumation than right know (C'mon its 21st century, not 19th). Some speculations will be stopped.

At least they could try with Mary Kelly and than rethink if the exhumation of the rest make sense.

These women could rest in peace, when we hear all that they want to tell us. Now, even their bones could speak.

Best regards,
Adam

[Sox]

I think at least one thing could be cleared up, if MJK's remains were in good condition, they could verify her age.

[anna]

Hi Adam,
I think we have to be realistic in wondering how long this mystery will be popular for.It has lasted this long because the generations so far have been descended from people born just after the ripper era..great grandma's time,so to speak.I just wonder when we move on three or four generations forward if it will have the same effect.
The only fact I can see as a possible,but important reason,for any sort of exhumation of whoever is really,realistically, left down there...so where probably talking about Kelly here,is to ensure the safety of the bodies for the future.And that is all.

[Sam Flynn]

We simply don't know enough about her to match her DNA to anybody.

...which is why I suggested a search against (existing) DNA databases might throw up possible matches in parts of the genome - we wouldn't need to know anything about her to do this. It would be like finding a hair at a crime scene and connecting a robbery with any criminal - or relative of a criminal - whose DNA was already on record. In Kelly's case the chances are slim (simply because of the number of subdivisions that have occurred since her birth) but there's a possibility that at least some of her family's "genetic fingerprints" have survived the generations.

[Limehouse]

Interesting point Sam, but surely that would not be a valid reason to cross match Kelly's sample against someone's DNA already on record?

[Sam Flynn]

Interesting point Sam, but surely that would not be a valid reason to cross match Kelly's sample against someone's DNA already on record?

As I say, I've got no moral qualms about this - to my mind, historical investigation is as valid a reason as any. Aren't there precedents for such "exercises in curiosity" being carried out anyway? One thinks of possible descendants of the Russian royal family, for example, or recent stories that remains purported to be that of a composer (was it Mozart?) weren't his after all.

[anna]

Hi Sam,
Good thinking,except for the fact that we have never been 100% sure the body in Room 13 was Kelly's.Let alone taking the gamble that there was any hair left in the coffin.Tempting morsel of thought though,Sam.

[anna]

Sam,
Having read what you've just posted,another thought occurred to me.If Jack didn't wear gloves while mutilating her,(and there's no reason really why he should,considering finger printing came in later.It would make more sense for him to put gloves on after,to hide any blood on his hands.)at some point,isn't there a chance that he might have touched Kelly's hair if he re-arranged it as we discussed on another thread.If Jack's DNA was still on Kelly,and then DNA taken from some of the popular suspects current rellies,it might rule some of those out.
Just a thought.

[Limehouse]

As I say, I've got no moral qualms about this - to my mind, historical investigation is as valid a reason as any. Aren't there precedents for such "exercises in curiosity" being carried out anyway? One thinks of possible descendants of the Russian royal family, for example, or recent stories that remains purported to be that of a composer (was it Mozart?) weren't his after all.

I am not really thinking about the moral aspect Sam, but if you wanted to cross match Kelly's sample against those held in a police database that would not be a legal use of the data.

Regards

Limehouse