Tweet
How do we find the woman who was identified as Mary Jane Kelly?
After 137 years it would appear that we are all none the wiser as to who this woman really was.
Her identity is a complete mystery.
But why?
We would expect certain "witnesses" to be unaccounted for, i.e. Hutchinson, Lewis and Schwartz... but for an actual murder victim to be present and a murder scene, yet remain unidentified, is relatively rare.
It would also be understandable if MJK had been dismembered and dumped in various places along the Thames, but to have a full and literal body of evidence and STILL not be able to identify who she really was, then how is that even possible, and how can it be remedied?
What do we actually know for certain about her?
Is anything whatsoever that we think we know about her, have any connection to the actual truth?
Why has her true identity remained elusive this entire time?
Well, one thing IS for certain; she would appear on the 1881 and 1871 census returns.
But how do we find a proverbial needle in a haystack?
Could AI be of help?
The question is; could AI tech/algorithm be able to compile a list of all the female names on those respective censuses within the correct age range, and then discard any women who then appear on the 1891 census?
It may be a big ask, but i feel confident that over time, there must be a way to make a short list of viable candidates for the real MJK.
But before that; is there another way to find her?
Will she ever be identified?
And does the failure for anyone to have ever definitively identified her, have any connection to the idea that MJK was arguably the Ripper's swansong?
in other words, was she hiding from someone and changed her true identity to try and protect herself from the man who was chasing her?
Was she the Ripper's primary target, and did her murder appear to signal the end of the series because the killer had finally found her?
Is there anything in her past that caused her to give what seems to be a completely false identity?
Can she ever be found?
After 137 years it would appear that we are all none the wiser as to who this woman really was.
Her identity is a complete mystery.
But why?
We would expect certain "witnesses" to be unaccounted for, i.e. Hutchinson, Lewis and Schwartz... but for an actual murder victim to be present and a murder scene, yet remain unidentified, is relatively rare.
It would also be understandable if MJK had been dismembered and dumped in various places along the Thames, but to have a full and literal body of evidence and STILL not be able to identify who she really was, then how is that even possible, and how can it be remedied?
What do we actually know for certain about her?
Is anything whatsoever that we think we know about her, have any connection to the actual truth?
Why has her true identity remained elusive this entire time?
Well, one thing IS for certain; she would appear on the 1881 and 1871 census returns.
But how do we find a proverbial needle in a haystack?
Could AI be of help?
The question is; could AI tech/algorithm be able to compile a list of all the female names on those respective censuses within the correct age range, and then discard any women who then appear on the 1891 census?
It may be a big ask, but i feel confident that over time, there must be a way to make a short list of viable candidates for the real MJK.
But before that; is there another way to find her?
Will she ever be identified?
And does the failure for anyone to have ever definitively identified her, have any connection to the idea that MJK was arguably the Ripper's swansong?
in other words, was she hiding from someone and changed her true identity to try and protect herself from the man who was chasing her?
Was she the Ripper's primary target, and did her murder appear to signal the end of the series because the killer had finally found her?
Is there anything in her past that caused her to give what seems to be a completely false identity?
Can she ever be found?
Comment