How close have people gotten

[MrBarnett]

Yes, exactly. As a person who is interested in the Ripper case and the woman known as Mary Jane Kelly in particular, I'd want her remains to be searched for obviously. On the other hand, I get the Catholic church's point of view too. I'm not that much of a religious person; actually I'm more spiritual than religious, but I think that the dead should rest in peace. Part of me hopes they will change their mind, one day. However, Prosector's research is quite impressive. His theory about MJK being Elizabeth Weston-Davies isn't too far-fetched.

Exhumation can only be sanctioned by the Home Office as far as I’m aware.

[erobitha]

Are all of the victims buried in such a communal way? Do any have a grave of their own?

Space was very tight for many places. I am only aware of MJK as being the only victim most likely to be in a communal grave. Some of the victim she exact locations were never clearly marked or located. I cite Annie Chapman in particular. Also, graves sites have been re-used by cemeteries down the years, so movement is hugely possible through disturbance. In fact, there is also the risk that some remains in coffins were dug up and burned in order to make more room for more recently deceased in the graveyard. It was a practice by many graveyards with limited burial space. I believe Mary Nichols & Catherine Eddowes are at the City of London Crematorium & Cemetery and their burial spots are clearly marked. Space is only becoming an issue there in recent years. Stride is buried at East London cemetery and would appear to be easy enough to find.

The cholera outbreak of 1850's can actually be partially attributed to city centre churches disposing the dead into the sewer systems in order to keep the numbers down in the limited burial space they had. The victorians period was one of great double standards in many ways. How to handle the dead was one such example.

[clark2710]

Yes, exactly. As a person who is interested in the Ripper case and the woman known as Mary Jane Kelly in particular, I'd want her remains to be searched for obviously. On the other hand, I get the Catholic church's point of view too. I'm not that much of a religious person; actually I'm more spiritual than religious, but I think that the dead should rest in peace. Part of me hopes they will change their mind, one day. However, Prosector's research is quite impressive. His theory about MJK being Elizabeth Weston-Davies isn't too far-fetched.

Are all of the victims buried in such a communal way? Do any have a grave of their own?

[Marie Jeanette Davies]

It's the amount of bodies that need to be gone through, the potential disruption to mass remains. Doing that on a historical whim, as it seems, doesn't merit that level of disinterment.

For the record, I think Prosectors research was sound, it's a great lead, it won't solve these crimes, but if his research is correct, it could identify MJK. But I totally get the churches view, why they don't think that it merits that level of archeology. Maybe in the future they will?

Yes, exactly. As a person who is interested in the Ripper case and the woman known as Mary Jane Kelly in particular, I'd want her remains to be searched for obviously. On the other hand, I get the Catholic church's point of view too. I'm not that much of a religious person; actually I'm more spiritual than religious, but I think that the dead should rest in peace. Part of me hopes they will change their mind, one day. However, Prosector's research is quite impressive. His theory about MJK being Elizabeth Weston-Davies isn't too far-fetched.

[Al Bundy's Eyes]

Only if disinterring a murder victim or someone who died a suspicious death's remains can lead to the solution of the case. I doubt that many people would agree to go that far in order to solve a 132 year-old mystery.

It's the amount of bodies that need to be gone through, the potential disruption to mass remains. Doing that on a historical whim, as it seems, doesn't merit that level of disinterment.

For the record, I think Prosectors research was sound, it's a great lead, it won't solve these crimes, but if his research is correct, it could identify MJK. But I totally get the churches view, why they don't think that it merits that level of archeology. Maybe in the future they will?

[Marie Jeanette Davies]

Are there no exceptions?

Only if disinterring a murder victim or someone who died a suspicious death's remains can lead to the solution of the case. I doubt that many people would agree to go that far in order to solve a 132 year-old mystery.

[Marie Jeanette Davies]

I'd be interested in seeing that. You must have some good eyes!

Me too. I can't spot them.

[Marie Jeanette Davies]

The woman's enigmatic existence continues in death, as it did in life.

It does, indeed.

[Losmandris]

The high definition blowup of MJK2 does show two teeth that are likely to be false teeth.

I'd be interested in seeing that. You must have some good eyes!

[Wickerman]

The woman's enigmatic existence continues in death, as it did in life.

[tanta07]

The real answer is no-one can claim they have found her 100%.

It simply cannot be achieved without some kind of DNA proof.

My candidate is Welsh girl Mary Thomas who was born in 1863 in Carmarthen, Wales. Her story I have tracked so far has unearthed very close similarities to the stories MJK herself gave to people including Barnett. It is an ongoing investigation, but I am confident I can answer most of those qestions around the clues to her identity.

My Mary had a few sisters, so I plan to at some point try and trace their lines as close as I can to a living relative for their mDNA. Then,we just need MJK's DNA. Which actually after all this, may yet prove to be the toughest challenge of all. I am not the only searcher, and neither is DJA.

Maybe one of us will get lucky at some point.

Dr. Turi King went pretty far down this road a few years back, before getting discouraged by many issues. She wrote an entire paper on it, but this article provides some of the main issues.

https://phys.org/news/2017-03-jack-ripper-victim.html

[clark2710]

The problem is, the Catholic church won't allow her remains to be searched for. I'm Italian and unfortunately I know a thing or two about Catholicism, being a lapsed Catholic myself. Catholics believe that the dead mustn't be "disturbed" and their remains disinterred.

Are there no exceptions?

[Marie Jeanette Davies]

I see your point, but it is possible Joe simply didn't know Maria by any name other than Julia. I get the impression that Whitwchapel denizens could play loose with names, nicknames, and monikers. Particularly if they were a bit on the shady side.

We do get the impression that Mary and Joe fought often and hard, and I don't think it was without violence, nor always about Mary being a streetwalker.

Yes, it's plausible. He would have learnt her real name at the inquest though, wouldn't he? So why not saying Maria was "Julia"? Maybe it wasn't that relevant and the press didn't report it. I concur... After all, we know that Mary was quarrelsome when intoxicated and that she and Joe were often drunk. As to Barnett beating her, I seem to remember that Mary told one of her associates (maybe Maria Harvey or Julia Venturney) that he was good to her, whereas "the other Joe" (Flemming?) ill-used her for living with Barnett. I wonder if Joe Barnett knew that he used to visit Mary and treat her badly. If so, perhaps it was one of the reasons why they fought hard.

[Pcdunn]

It may have been her. The fact that "Julia" was apparently never identified makes you think she was actually Maria Harvey and the two shirts thing seems too much of a coincidence, but then again I don't get the reason why Joe didn't say that "Julia" and Harvey were one and the same.

I see your point, but it is possible Joe simply didn't know Maria by any name other than Julia. I get the impression that Whitwchapel denizens could play loose with names, nicknames, and monikers. Particularly if they were a bit on the shady side.

We do get the impression that Mary and Joe fought often and hard, and I don't think it was without violence, nor always about Mary being a streetwalker.

[Marie Jeanette Davies]

Well, most think this Julia was Maria Harvey. It's just that Harvey claimed to have stayed with Mary on the previous Monday & Tuesday, but this woman referred to as 'Julia' by Barnett he claimed shared the room with him & Kelly in the nights previous to him leaving, which was on 30th Oct.
So, thats a bit of confusion.
Likewise, Harvey claims to have been with Joe & Mary on Thursday 8th Nov., but at the inquest Barnett didn't identify the women as Harvey, yet they knew each other & were in the same court.

So, is it really confirmed that Harvey was 'Julia'?
Both claimed to have left two shirts in the room.

It may have been her. The fact that "Julia" was apparently never identified makes you think she was actually Maria Harvey and the two shirts thing seems too much of a coincidence, but then again I don't get the reason why Joe didn't say that "Julia" and Harvey were one and the same.