Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Identity of Mary Jane Kelly

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Michael W Richards
    replied
    Originally posted by Jurriaan Maessen View Post
    If indeed there is but one discernable coffin present in the site as roughly calculated earlier by the University of Leicester, it's still dependent on the accuracy of the calculated location. If I understand correctly from the published survey, there were 6 or 7 other persons buried in the plot where Kelly was placed, so it still seems like a long shot, but perhaps one worth pursuing. Should Weston-Davies' attempts at exhumation somehow prove succesful, and the "single intact casket" indeed encapsulate the remains of our beloved protagonist, we may at last secure a burial befitting the last victim of the canonical five. Again: not so much to discount or verify kinship to the author, but to appropriate proper burial for poor Mary Jane. After all, she deserves nothing less.
    It would be nice to have her real name.

    Leave a comment:


  • jmenges
    replied
    Originally posted by Harry D View Post
    First of all, they don't even know which bones are Mary Kelly's in that grave, do they?
    They don’t even know where her grave is at.

    JM

    Leave a comment:


  • Harry D
    replied
    First of all, they don't even know which bones are Mary Kelly's in that grave, do they?

    Realistically, what DNA evidence could they hope to unearth?

    Leave a comment:


  • Losmandris
    replied
    That's a shame. End of the road Prospector?

    Tristan

    Leave a comment:


  • Harmonica
    replied
    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ic-church.html

    Leave a comment:


  • jmenges
    replied
    Originally posted by Jurriaan Maessen View Post
    If indeed there is but one discernable coffin present in the site as roughly calculated earlier by the University of Leicester, it's still dependent on the accuracy of the calculated location. If I understand correctly from the published survey, there were 6 or 7 other persons buried in the plot where Kelly was placed, so it still seems like a long shot, but perhaps one worth pursuing. Should Weston-Davies' attempts at exhumation somehow prove succesful, and the "single intact casket" indeed encapsulate the remains of our beloved protagonist, we may at last secure a burial befitting the last victim of the canonical five. Again: not so much to discount or verify kinship to the author, but to appropriate proper burial for poor Mary Jane. After all, she deserves nothing less.
    In the 1940s, two meters of earth was added to build up the common grave area where Mary Kelly was buried to allow for new private plots. The GPR that Wynne refers to, aimed at the plot where her headstone is currently located, detected a coffin 1 meter or less deep, meaning it’s very likely- if not definitely-a coffin from a mid-20th century burial. This was all discussed in University of Leicester’s study.

    JM

    Leave a comment:


  • MsWeatherwax
    replied
    Originally posted by Prosector View Post
    I agree that the 1887 date is a bit out of line with the dates that MJK arrived in the East End which was presumably after having been introduced to prostitution by her Cardiff relatives and was apparently in late 1886. Still the fact that Elizabeth Weston Davies had relatives of that name in Cardiff and that she (or someone else) was going under the name of Mary Jane Weston is interesting. It was also reported that Mary Jane Weston had a previous conviction for keeping a disorderly house in Cardiff and had been sentenced to two months imprisonment so that may have been some time previously.

    In reply to Ms Weatherwax - Such evidence that there is suggests that she was not buried in a pauper's grave. Henry Wilton, the sexton of St Leonard's Shoreditch who paid for the funeral, attempted later to raise money to erect a headstone (which didn't happen) and that was not usual with a pauper's grave. We have done GPR and there appears to be a single intact casket in the grave. I am reasonably confident that it is hers and that there is a fair chance of recovering useable DNA. I too am disappointed that UL are reluctant to become involved but, having met them, this is as much because of the fear of intrusion by onlookers and unwanted spectators as not having identified the correct grave.

    Prosector
    That's very exciting news, Prosector. Thank you for getting back to me, I appreciate it.

    Well, whatever the next stage is I wish you luck. I'll be sure to check back periodically to see what's happening. "Mary-Jane" and the other ladies who died are far more interesting to me than the Ripper, so it would be lovely if you were able to put a face and name to her.

    Leave a comment:


  • Jurriaan Maessen
    replied
    If indeed there is but one discernable coffin present in the site as roughly calculated earlier by the University of Leicester, it's still dependent on the accuracy of the calculated location. If I understand correctly from the published survey, there were 6 or 7 other persons buried in the plot where Kelly was placed, so it still seems like a long shot, but perhaps one worth pursuing. Should Weston-Davies' attempts at exhumation somehow prove succesful, and the "single intact casket" indeed encapsulate the remains of our beloved protagonist, we may at last secure a burial befitting the last victim of the canonical five. Again: not so much to discount or verify kinship to the author, but to appropriate proper burial for poor Mary Jane. After all, she deserves nothing less.

    Leave a comment:


  • Losmandris
    replied
    Do keep us informed Prosector this sounds like intriguing stuff! What is the process like for requesting an exhumation? Tricky one would imagine?

    Tristan

    Leave a comment:


  • TheTypeWriter
    replied
    Originally posted by Prosector View Post
    I agree that the 1887 date is a bit out of line with the dates that MJK arrived in the East End which was presumably after having been introduced to prostitution by her Cardiff relatives and was apparently in late 1886. Still the fact that Elizabeth Weston Davies had relatives of that name in Cardiff and that she (or someone else) was going under the name of Mary Jane Weston is interesting. It was also reported that Mary Jane Weston had a previous conviction for keeping a disorderly house in Cardiff and had been sentenced to two months imprisonment so that may have been some time previously.

    In reply to Ms Weatherwax - Such evidence that there is suggests that she was not buried in a pauper's grave. Henry Wilton, the sexton of St Leonard's Shoreditch who paid for the funeral, attempted later to raise money to erect a headstone (which didn't happen) and that was not usual with a pauper's grave. We have done GPR and there appears to be a single intact casket in the grave. I am reasonably confident that it is hers and that there is a fair chance of recovering useable DNA. I too am disappointed that UL are reluctant to become involved but, having met them, this is as much because of the fear of intrusion by onlookers and unwanted spectators as not having identified the correct grave.

    Prosector
    So what will happen next if you don't mind me asking? This sounds promising so far.

    Leave a comment:


  • jmenges
    replied
    Hi Wynne,
    How are you certain that your casket lies in what is/was 16-67?

    JM

    Leave a comment:


  • Prosector
    replied
    I agree that the 1887 date is a bit out of line with the dates that MJK arrived in the East End which was presumably after having been introduced to prostitution by her Cardiff relatives and was apparently in late 1886. Still the fact that Elizabeth Weston Davies had relatives of that name in Cardiff and that she (or someone else) was going under the name of Mary Jane Weston is interesting. It was also reported that Mary Jane Weston had a previous conviction for keeping a disorderly house in Cardiff and had been sentenced to two months imprisonment so that may have been some time previously.

    In reply to Ms Weatherwax - Such evidence that there is suggests that she was not buried in a pauper's grave. Henry Wilton, the sexton of St Leonard's Shoreditch who paid for the funeral, attempted later to raise money to erect a headstone (which didn't happen) and that was not usual with a pauper's grave. We have done GPR and there appears to be a single intact casket in the grave. I am reasonably confident that it is hers and that there is a fair chance of recovering useable DNA. I too am disappointed that UL are reluctant to become involved but, having met them, this is as much because of the fear of intrusion by onlookers and unwanted spectators as not having identified the correct grave.

    Prosector

    Leave a comment:


  • MsWeatherwax
    replied
    Prosector, I'm really glad you've posted.

    I was very disappointed at the UL findings that exhumation would be almost impossible. It has always been my understanding that Mary-Jane was buried in a fairly high quality casket, with metal handles and a name plate. Surely this would be highly unusual for a paupers grave?

    Has anyone discounted the possibility of using metal detection or GPR to narrow down the location of her grave? Or is there evidence that suggests she might have been removed from her casket/reinterred?

    I'm not usually in favour of exhumation of victims of crimes, but there are enough question marks over "MJK" that there is the very real possibility that her identity could be pivotal, either by proving or disproving your theory.

    Leave a comment:


  • Al Bundy's Eyes
    replied
    Originally posted by MrBarnett View Post

    Ooh, you are awful...
    Sources mate, sources....

    Leave a comment:


  • MrBarnett
    replied
    Originally posted by Al Bundy's Eyes View Post

    Good points there Gary. Interestingly, Elizabeth's husband tried to kill himself by cutting his throat. That'll be a code 73.
    Ooh, you are awful...

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X