Exhumation

[joelhall]

there are a few bits and pieces here which i have to say are just fanciful. no offence

[Sam Flynn]

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.

It might not, Limehouse - although it's an interesting question whether identifying the remains of a corpse wouldn't constitute legal usage of such a database. The difference here is that one would be using the data to identify a victim, rather than the perpetrator, of an unsolved crime.

[Sam Flynn]

If Kelly did indeed originate from a provincial Welsh or Irish town, would there not then be a greater chance of her "genetic fingerprints" surviving ?

Quite possibly, Jon - albeit in fragmentary form, as the genome gets "diluted" between offspring and over successive generations. Assuming one or more of her siblings went on to have children, one sixteenth of Mary Kelly's DNA would survive in the genes of her great grand-nephews/nieces.

[adamkle]

If Jack didn't wear gloves while mutilating her,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.

Good idea, but it's almost impossible, I'm afraid. Jack's DNA on her hair? That would be a miracle... What from? His fingers were bleeding? Or he kissed her head? It was 120 years ago... But, who knows... Maybe he broke his nail and left it in the flesh? Or left HIS hair somewhere?
By the way, what kind of remains of popular (but rather serious) suspects do we have (without digging the graves)?
Cornwell has Druitt's mDNA, isn't she? We have also Deeming's skull... Surely, there are more remains.

[Jon Guy]

[QUOTE=Sam Flynn;26730 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.[/QUOTE]

If Kelly did indeed originate from a provincial Welsh or Irish town, would there not then be a greater chance of her "genetic fingerprints" surviving ?

[Jon Guy]

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.

DNA testing was also performed succesfully on Joseph Merrick`s bones, and he died within a year of Kelly. Although, I do believe they also used an old plater caste that had some of his hairs present.

The testing was done to investigate his illness.

[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

[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.

[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.

[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.

[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]

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.

[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.

[Sox]

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

[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