Can Mary's face ever be reliably reconstructed?!

[j.r-ahde]

Hello you all!

If the Ripper would have done his last known act about 110 years later, the following thing would have very probably taken place;

1. A general impression of the girl's face would have been made on the copy of her scull.

2. Some people would have recognised her from TV, newspapers, etc. And we would know her identity.

Now, to the point;

Many of us on these boards have made an effort to make a credible reconstruction, but can we ever do it without digging up the remains?

Like some have said, for example, the basic features from the crime scene vary with many artists...

All the best
Jukka

[kensei]

Before the crash here, I started a thread about the search for images of Mary alive and the consensus was that there are none known. But the best recreations seemed to be the artwork of Jane Coram. She actually replied to me here and explained (and please forgive me Jane if I'm not recalling quite correctly) that she used the shape of the skull in the crime scene photo only in a very general sense and relied more heavily on anecdotal descriptions of Mary. This seems like a good opportunity to ask if Jane's illustrations will be reappearing in the archive here, and if not then where else can they be found? She has really remarkable recreations of all the canonical five victims.

[j.r-ahde]

Hello Kensei!

I remember her explaining that same thing on these threads too!

And thus I believe she has made the best reconstructions of us all!

However, that was - as she pointed out too - based on the photo!

All the best
Jukka

[honey]

i think the problem for some people is that they have a fixed image of her in their own mind, so are just liable to dismiss any reconstruction that doesnt tally... similar to why some people cant accept suspect A as JTR because they are convinced its supect B.. regardless of what evidence there is to back up A.

unless we find a photo, i doubt vey much an accepted reconstruction will happen...

[Mike Covell]

I believe we also have romantic notions of what she should look like which poses a problem in itself.

If a photo was discovered, and I hope one does, people would argue over it's provenance, people would cry hoax, misidentification or choose to ignore it.

I hope one day we can find a photograph of MJK, I still hve hopes that somewere in a dusty box, hidden away in a loft space is a stack of pictures, showing her, her family and maybe even her exploits.

One can hope eh?

[Dan Norder]

While trying to make a reconstruction from a skull is not foolproof, just making up what you think the face would look like from a very poor image of an extremely mutilated face is close to worthless. Without some photo turning up that can be shown somehow to actually be her, the best we have is the newspaper illustrations, because at least they were made by artists who were actually there at the time, in some cases looking at the body and/or talking to people who knew her. Unfortunately those don't even look much like each other.

[steje73]

I may have got this completely wrong, but isn't there some doubt that her grave is actually the right one? I seem to remember reading that there may also be more than one person buried there for reasons of space. You mightn't even get the right skull.

[Dan Norder]

Hi steje73,

Well, if her grave is ever dug up, if the bones have not decayed beyond all recognition there should be plenty of wound marks from the Ripper's knife visible in various places: certainly on her neck, most likely on her leg bones, probably on her skull somewhere, possibly on her ribs, and so forth. If the bones have been rendered to dust, or close to it, then no reconstruction would be possible.

So, any reconstruction from bones that could happen in the first place would certainly be based upon remains that we would reasonably know were Mary Kelly's.

[Mr Poster]

hi hoo

The answer to the question posited at the start is and only can be No. As the question says "reliably". And the only way one would know if it was reliable is to test whatever "model" or method is used on a "known". So that would require two photos...one of a Victorian woman and then one of the same woman cut up facially like Kelly.

And thats never going to happen. So the answer can onlky be no.

p

[RJM]

There is a chance that Mary Kelly will eventually have a face.

Prior to 1967, Mary Kelly's photo of November 9th had been published on at least three occasions in France. Don Rumbelow found a print of her that year. In 1988 , a second print was returned to Scotland Yard along with the second angle of MJK taken from behind the bed, across her body. The same package also gave us photographs, for the first time, of Mary Ann Nichols, Annie Chapman, and Elizabeth Stride, whose faces were only known to us through illustrations. Later Neal Stubbings Shelden would find a picture of Annie Chapman in life with her husband John around the time of their marriage in 1869.

When Rumbelow found the photo of Kelly, the four of Eddowes, and the exterior shot of Millers Court, he was told there was a more complete album of photographs. This has never been located.

Stewart Evans (in 1993 I believe it was) purchased a collection of material belonging to journalist G.R. Sims though dealer Eric Barton. Barton told Evans that a photographic album belonging to Sims was in the collection he originally purchased from Sotheby's in the 1960s. Eric Barton died before he could locate the album for Stewart.

Other sources, including Walter Dew, have said that more pictures were taken of Mary Kelly in Millers Court and even at Shoreditch mortuary. Common sense tells us this as well. It is quite possible they exist somewhere given the photographic finds and recoveries over the last four decades. There is a good chance that Mary Kelly was photographed - as all of the other victims were - after the autopsy, and stitched up, body and face.

In the 1880s, photographs were cheap. You could get your portrait taken for a sixpence. Even the working classes and disadvantaged could afford this. One need only look through the directories to see the number of studios and photographers located in the East End to provide services. Henry Mayhew once remarked that one couldn't walk 50 yards along the Whitechapel Road without passing a photography studio.

Before Kelly met Joe Barnett, her movements are sketchy and unproven, but the last 18 months of her life is known. It's possible that Kelly and Barnett had their portrait taken near one of their residences. Occasionally I go searching for photographers and pictures hoping to find the two. Obviously it would need to be labeled. She may have been at Breezer's Hill, Pennington Street, St. George's-in-the-East before she met up with Barnett. In 1887, she's living in Thrawl Street. Mary and Joe lived at George Street, then Paternoster Row, Brick Lane, and finally in early 1888 to Millers Court. I take notice when I find period pictures from photographers around these locations. Attempting to trace Mary Kelly any further back is problematic, even through "Morganstone" and Joe Fleming.

The contemporary illustrations of Mary Kelly tell us little. We do not know if any of the artists had access to her after she was stitched up and prior to being interred.

There is every reason to believe there are more photographs of Kelly out there - and of the other victims - if we only keep looking.

Cheers,

Robert

[j.r-ahde]

Hello Robert!

There is a chance that Mary Kelly will eventually have a face.

Prior to 1967, Mary Kelly's photo of November 9th had been published on at least three occasions in France. Don Rumbelow found a print of her that year. In 1988 , a second print was returned to Scotland Yard along with the second angle of MJK taken from behind the bed, across her body. The same package also gave us photographs, for the first time, of Mary Ann Nichols, Annie Chapman, and Elizabeth Stride, whose faces were only known to us through illustrations. Later Neal Stubbings Shelden would find a picture of Annie Chapman in life with her husband John around the time of their marriage in 1869.

When Rumbelow found the photo of Kelly, the four of Eddowes, and the exterior shot of Millers Court, he was told there was a more complete album of photographs. This has never been located.

Stewart Evans (in 1993 I believe it was) purchased a collection of material belonging to journalist G.R. Sims though dealer Eric Barton. Barton told Evans that a photographic album belonging to Sims was in the collection he originally purchased from Sotheby's in the 1960s. Eric Barton died before he could locate the album for Stewart.

Other sources, including Walter Dew, have said that more pictures were taken of Mary Kelly in Millers Court and even at Shoreditch mortuary. Common sense tells us this as well. It is quite possible they exist somewhere given the photographic finds and recoveries over the last four decades. There is a good chance that Mary Kelly was photographed - as all of the other victims were - after the autopsy, and stitched up, body and face.

In the 1880s, photographs were cheap. You could get your portrait taken for a sixpence. Even the working classes and disadvantaged could afford this. One need only look through the directories to see the number of studios and photographers located in the East End to provide services. Henry Mayhew once remarked that one couldn't walk 50 yards along the Whitechapel Road without passing a photography studio.

Before Kelly met Joe Barnett, her movements are sketchy and unproven, but the last 18 months of her life is known. It's possible that Kelly and Barnett had their portrait taken near one of their residences. Occasionally I go searching for photographers and pictures hoping to find the two. Obviously it would need to be labeled. She may have been at Breezer's Hill, Pennington Street, St. George's-in-the-East before she met up with Barnett. In 1887, she's living in Thrawl Street. Mary and Joe lived at George Street, then Paternoster Row, Brick Lane, and finally in early 1888 to Millers Court. I take notice when I find period pictures from photographers around these locations. Attempting to trace Mary Kelly any further back is problematic, even through "Morganstone" and Joe Fleming.

The contemporary illustrations of Mary Kelly tell us little. We do not know if any of the artists had access to her after she was stitched up and prior to being interred.

There is every reason to believe there are more photographs of Kelly out there - and of the other victims - if we only keep looking.

Cheers,

Robert

Making just two points;

In addition to that, that MJK was younger than the others, she was obviously a runaway kid. So, getting any kind of reliable photo of her is difficult. Not to talk about verifying!

The other thing; even if her face would have been stitched up, how accurate that face could have been about her alive? OK, I have always emphasized me being not so good with medical things, but the remains of her face could have swollen, or something like that.

All right, editing the following thing to this post; the best way to find a photo of Mary might be to look for " a tall girl in the crowd". But I wonder, how accurate a blow-up of the woman would be, even with modern digital technology!

All the best
Jukka

[detective abberline]

MJK's Face

If we know where she's buried and that seems a bit dodgy then a study of her skeleton could certainly reveal defence wounds etc. As to her facial features, if someone can find a photo of her that would be fantastic. her skeleton would also help in that area.

Cheers

[Exicutioner151]

G'Day
One question that i haven't seen but might be out of the question , does anyone know if thier was a "death mask" made of anyone of the five ? I do know death masks were common amongst the well to do and famous faces of the period . and who was the one to make the mask ? I would assume it would be mabey coroner or funeral director ,especially one who thought he could get some money out of it . Nothing like a greedy funeral director ! Surely one living in the period might snip a mask or 2 as a trophy due to the rippers notorious slayings with a large man hunt going on .
Another thing i might ask is has thier been any reports of grave disturbances to mary kellys grave ? For the same reasons as a trophy ,as we know thier were photos missing that were later returned . One would only need to look to the dark sides of the human psyche to wonder such things .It is known mary kelly was the most beautiful of the 5 ,and the almost cult following she has today some of that could have been spawned in 1888.
As for can marys face be reconstructed if her skull can be retrieved and preserved and hasen't gone to dust, a mold can be made of her skull and reconstructed in clay with the correct dimentions from her race . But as for me i doubt this can ever be done due to time and possible damage to the casket from water seepage and creepy crawlies that have aided her decay.

Exicutioner151

[swindells1970]

Mary Kelly

I am new to these forums but have studied this subject for many years now. It is supposed, if MJK is to be believed, that she worked in Paris as an artists moded. If this was the case, somewhere, someone must have a painting of her. Research into the style of poses at the time (could even be of the saucy painting / postcard type knowing MJK was a prostitue) is something I am investigating at the moment along with Parisian artists of that era. Any information gratefully accepted

Chris

[Mitch Rowe]

My crude reconstruction of Marys face. I just copy/mirror/paste from the best side to the worst. Then I sort of filled in the rest with airbrush. A first attempt. Very crude!