|
 |
 |
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
    
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 1335
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Monday, March 22, 2004 - 8:43 am: |       |
I can second to that. Absolutely.
It would be another matter if it was a modern unsolved murder case, that hasn't been closed yet (here in Sweden they get closed after 25 years and no one can be charged for it). Then I think it would be relevant if there were any new forensic evidence to gain from it.
All the best
Glenn Gustaf Lauritz Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden |
Sarah Long
Chief Inspector
Username: Sarah
Post Number: 947
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Monday, March 22, 2004 - 9:01 am: | |
Glenn,
My point was just that, sometimes people don't appreciate it when people joke about their serious points.
I agree with not exhuming their remains though. I can't believe that a case gets closed after 25 years in Sweden. The culprit could still be alive so why close it? I don't think that a case closes in the UK until it is solved which means that the case of Jack the Ripper is still open. That's why Patricia Cornwall called her book "Case Closed" as it is still open.
Sarah |
Monty
Chief Inspector
Username: Monty
Post Number: 904
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Monday, March 22, 2004 - 11:11 am: | |
Guys,
This is a job for Time Team....ooooo luuuurrkkk at tharrrrrrt !!
Can someone tell me what in the name of flying donkey testes is going to be achieved from this exercise?
Apart from the shame and out and out disrespect that is ?
Monty
Our little group has always been and always will until the end... |
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 1336
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Monday, March 22, 2004 - 11:15 am: | |
Hi Sarah,
Well, the rule of closing a case after a certain amount of years, has on occasions been subjected to rather heavy debates over here, especially in later years.
Personally, I think this procedure has its relevant points. It is based on the notion that a murder becomes harder to investigate the longer the time span becomes. Witness testimonies gets unreliable and quickly beyond their date of expire only after a couple of weeks, for example. But of course, since the break-through of genetics and DNA (and considering the rapid technical developments in the field) has become a fact, the 25-year old rule has become widely challenged in recent years and it's not impossible that it may be abandoned in the future.
But from an old investigation point of view, when all you had was witness testimonies and forensic crime scene evidence that were hard to store properly for a longer period of time, I think it was a reasonable thought. I am myself accustomed to look into old cases and I can assure you, that if witness accounts and very sparse pieces of physical evidence is all you've got, it is virtually impossible after a longer period of years, and that is also why the Ripper mystery with certainty never will be solved. But today, if DNA is stored and kept under the right conditions already when the case is filed, such limitations will belong to the past, and then I believe the 25 year old rule would be superfluous and irrelevant.
But I can very much appreciate the grounds it was based upon.
All the best
Glenn Gustaf Lauritz Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden |
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 1337
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Monday, March 22, 2004 - 11:21 am: | |
Monty!
Aaah. Maybe we should give Tony Robinson and Phil a ring? 
All the best
Glenn Gustaf Lauritz Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden |
Christopher T George
Chief Inspector
Username: Chrisg
Post Number: 670
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, March 22, 2004 - 11:52 am: | |
Hi, all
I also think that this is an impractical suggestion apart from the legal implications, and Andy and Sue have pointed out that such an exhumation of the victims probably would not be possible under current British law.
Even if such an investigation were possible, as Richard Nunweek stated, we could not be sure to find the victims' remains, and in the wet soil of England, if they were still there, what would remain of them?
Certainly, any tissue would have long dissolved and even if there were bones remaining, the best we would have would be some bones that might conceivably show knife nicks. This might be helpful in determining the weapon used but would not necessarily help in identifying the killer since we still would not know who wielded the knife.
Again this is all probably impractical, but if Eddowes remains could be found, a DNA match from a bone could be made with the piece of kidney, but only IF the latter still exists, and it has not so far been found. If the kidney was rediscovered, in any case, the DNA probably would be compromised by handling in the first few hours of receipt by George Lusk if not at other times over the last 116 years.
If Stride's remains could be found, a DNA match from her bone possibly could be made with the JtR letter that was alleged by the writer to show a smudge of her blood. The photo of the letter with the blood is in Patricia Cornwell's book-- but hasn't she said that she could not get DNA from any letter at the PRO because the letters had been sealed in plastic and treated with heat? (The Openshaw letter which had been in private hands and not so treated did allow a DNA match of nuclear but not mitochondrial DNA with a Sickert letter.)
So we can see that even if the victims' remains could be found, the possible research value would be very limited. Sorry, Tim.
Best regards
Chris George
North American Editor
Ripperologist
http://www.ripperologist.info
(Message edited by ChrisG on March 22, 2004) |
AP Wolf
Chief Inspector
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 958
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, March 22, 2004 - 1:26 pm: | |
Yes, my post was probably not suitable I admit, and I do apologise to the person concerned, but when I’m on the Casebook site late at night I suppose I suffer from the delusion that I am sat in a pub with a crowd of friends and my reaction was exactly the reaction that I would have had in a pub with a crowd of good friends. Such company is enjoyable, and such ribald commentary is part of the fun… nobody should be offended by it, as no offence is intended, and once the pub is closed and the banging of the hangover drum begins I am more than willing to discuss the case with my library head on.
Actually I’m as guilty as the original poster as it has been my long ambition to dig up the graves of both Howard Carter and Lord Carnarvon, as when I’ve got my pub head on I am convinced that the pair of them have taken missing artefacts from the tomb of Tutankhamen to their own graves.
Robert, bring your shovel, I’ll meet you on Beacon Hill at midnight and we’ll dig the varmints up!
The solution to this case is in paper and talk, not bodies.
|
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 1341
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Monday, March 22, 2004 - 1:43 pm: | |
I told you to change that brand of cognac, AP....
All the best
Glenn Gustaf Lauritz Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden |
AP Wolf
Chief Inspector
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 959
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, March 22, 2004 - 2:03 pm: | |
Thanks Glenn
but there is nothing better than SSB yet invented on this planet. So I'll stick with that. |
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 1346
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Monday, March 22, 2004 - 6:58 pm: | |
AP,
I know this is completely off the subject and belongs to the Pub Talk thread, but just one quick and very serious question for my own curiousity (then I'll leave it):
What brand is SSB? Am not an expert on the subject and I have my own favorites, but just couldn't help asking...
All the best
Glenn Gustaf Lauritz Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden |
Vincent
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Monday, March 22, 2004 - 9:48 am: | |
No offense intended to anyone but I've never understood the logic of the phrase "let them rest in peace." Either they are dead or not. Even if you believe in an afterlife then you must admit that they are long past caring what is done with their earthly remains. In fact, perhaps their poor tortured souls can't "rest in peace" until the crime is solved.
Seriously though, werent some of the victims buried in rather sturdy caskets? Wasn't at least one of them lead-lined? Even knife marks on bone would tell us something about the weapon. While I agree that exhumations are unlikely to ever occur I wouldn't be so quick to discount the possibilty of new evidence arising if they did.
Count me as an "aye" vote.
Regards, Vincent |
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 1347
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Monday, March 22, 2004 - 7:54 pm: | |
Well, Vincent,
If you don't find it necessary to treat dead bodies with respect, that is your call.
Medievial skeletons (that for some reasons have been preserved and once buried in non-sacrifical ground), is often reburied after archeological excavations in sanctified soil, religious reasons or not. They may be dead and gone but it is nevertheless a way to pay what once was a living human being some respect.
If you don't agree with that point of view, it's up to you. I don't agree with you, and I personally think the women deserves to be undisturbed after so may years.
Furthermore, also the caskets are evaporating with time, so those can't in any be regarded as protective in the way you describe.
And once again, most burial grounds are reused. How are you supposed to find the exact right spot and the right body (most of the burial spots are merely estimations, with stones raised in retrospect), if there now against all odds should be anything left?
All the best
(Message edited by Glenna on March 22, 2004)
Glenn Gustaf Lauritz Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden |
Chris Scott
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Chris
Post Number: 1087
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 23, 2004 - 12:42 pm: | |
These notes may clarify the legal aspects of exhumation:
Is it true that bodies can be removed from graves?
Yes. This is known as exhumation. A family may arrange for an exhumation if they choose to do this. Reasons may range from a family wishing to relocate remains to a family grave, criminal investigations, or graveyard alterations that disturb interred remain.
Whatever the reason in the first instance a request should be made to the diocese office in whose area the remains have been interred. They will then contact Environmental Health who will issue advice and instruction in relation to the time, manner and controls that need to be followed in order to avoid contamination and maintain dignity.
When the Borough Council has agree to an application, arrangements can made via a local funeral director for the reinterment of the remains.
A Home Office License has to be applied for and the exhumation can only take place if this is granted. Furthermore, only the owner of the Exclusive Right of Burial can request an exhumation.
A Coroner can, by Warrant, also order an Exhumation.
Section 25 of the Burial Act of 1857 applies to most cases of exhumation.
this states that, with certain exceptions, 'it shall not be lawful to remove any body, or the remains of any body, which may have been interred in any place of burial, without licence' and without following any conditions prescribed in the licence.
licences are obtained by writing to the Under Secretary of State at the Home Office and supplying requested details.
if bones are removed without licence, the offence is committed by the person who actually removes the remains, and a fine may be charged for each and every body.
no offence is committed where a body is removed from one consecrated ground to another under faculty (an authority granted under ecclesiastical law).
a faculty is nearly always required for the exhumation of human remains from a place of burial which is within the jurisdiction of the Church of England.
a faculty is obtained through the Consistory Court by petition, and notice of the petition will normally have to be displayed in an appropriate public place beforehand.
Chris |
RipperHistorian
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Monday, March 22, 2004 - 8:05 pm: | |
Thank You Vincent,
Finally somebody sees the light instead of just dismiising the idea altogether.
Hopefully there are others that also want to see what would happen if the bodies were found.
Tim |
PF arm
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 23, 2004 - 8:39 am: | |
Please correct me if i'm wrong as it's only a vague 'fact' but i thought DNA could not be obtained from bone material as would most likely survive in the graves. Though having said that if your correct about one being lead lined Vincent then more than just bones may have survived.
The problem i find with the idea of obtaining DNA is what it could be used for. I'm sure (another vague fact) that contrary to some dectective programs it can't tell you a persons hair colour or physical appearance. The likelihood of the killers DNA being found and identified as such is too remote for me to contemplate and even if we did get a definate strand of the rippers DNA from any source it's useless unless you've got DNA from suspects.
All this leaves me firmly in the leave well alone category.
|
Vincent
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 23, 2004 - 9:27 am: | |
Glenn, I never once suggested that the bodies not be treated respectfully. Certaintly as a crime historian you are not suggesting that the act of exhumation is inherently disrespectful? I am not suggesting that they be disinterred and displayed in some sideshow. They can be respectfully exhumed, respectfully examined by forensic experts, and then respectfully re-interred.
I agree with you on your other points, and with the objections raised here by others. The difficulties involved would be enormous with no guarantee of any results. For that reason I am sure it will never happen. I just don't find the same moral objection to it as others do.
Regards, Vincent |
Christopher T George
Chief Inspector
Username: Chrisg
Post Number: 680
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 23, 2004 - 5:02 pm: | |
Hi, PF arm
Yes DNA can be obtained from bones found in a grave. This was the case with the bones of the Russian Imperial family recovered near Ekaterinburg. Forensic anthropologist Dr. William Maples of the University of Florida and other scientists were able to obtain bone samples for DNA analysis. Ultimately, Dr. Peter Gill at Cambridge University of Cambridge University was able to match the DNA from bones suspected to be those of Tsarina Alexandra and three of her daughters with living relatives including Prince Philip, the Duke of Edinburgh, and the same was done with remains thought to be those of Tsar Nicholas II with DNA from living male Romanovs. The scientists were able to confirm that all of the Imperial family plus two servants were in the grave, except for either Grand Duchess Anastasia or Maria and the Tsarevitch Alexis.
Best regards
Chris George
North American Editor
Ripperologist
http://www.ripperologist.info
|
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 1354
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 23, 2004 - 5:23 pm: | |
Vincent,
Yes, it's true, as a crime historian I am well aware of that it's quite common to exhume graves and dig up corps during a critical stage in a criminal investigation. I have no objections to it, on the contrary.
However, I am totally against it when we're dealing with such old cases like this, and the whole effort would result in -- nothing.
Graves are not to be disturbed unless absolutely necessary and here I don't feel that it is. What good would it do? We already know who the victims were and what killed them. We don't need to find their DNA. I just don't get it.
You may see the objections to it as morally based, that's OK. But my years indulging in crime has so far not left me totally cold and indifferent to the burial peace I feel the victims are entitled to. Here our philosophical preferences obviously differ, but that can't be helped. Yes, I am a spiritual man and I can't see what's wrong with it.
It would be another matter if it was a relatively fresh ongoing investigation and several forensic and medical clues were missing. I don't think that applies to the Ripper case, and the last one certainly not enough in order to track down the exact spots of the remains (which is impossible anyway) and then disturb what's left of their bones -- for nothing. I am sorry, I can't accept that.
All the best
Glenn Gustaf Lauritz Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden |
Paul Jackson
Detective Sergeant
Username: Paulj
Post Number: 80
Registered: 2-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 23, 2004 - 8:32 pm: | |
Hey All,
I have to agree with Glenn. If there was a suspect out there that needed to be prosecuted,
that would be one thing....but all the players are dead...all the suspects are dead...all the cops are dead. The only thing it would do is...maybe help our morbid curiosity. Would it lead to a killer? Probably not. Just more questions. Would we really want to know who JTR was? If we did, we wouldnt have these boards to chat with each other and share ideas. Thats the fun part of it. We dont really want to know...do we?
Paul |
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 1357
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 23, 2004 - 9:25 pm: | |
Hey Paul,
I couldn't have said it better myself. Right on the money.
All the best
Glenn Gustaf Lauritz Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden |
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 2248
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 24, 2004 - 1:21 am: | |
Hi all
Just a quick note to say that IF we could pinpoint Kelly's remains and IF we could extract DNA, then this might help us narrow down her birthplace in Ireland, and even any current relatives descended from her siblings.
One other point to put into the pros and cons, is that we would not just be disturbing the victims' bodies, but those of others too.
I remember once hearing that the body of William the Conqueror was dug up after 100 years or so and found to be in a remarkable state of preservation. Anyone else hear this?
Robert |
Alan Sharp
Chief Inspector
Username: Ash
Post Number: 541
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 24, 2004 - 4:48 am: | |
As a matter of interest on the Kelly's birthplace thing I searched all the Limerick newspapers a couple of weeks ago to see if I could shed any light on matters. The only thing I found was this, in the Limerick Chronicle of 10th November 1888.
A rumour prevailed in Limerick today that the murdered woman was in some way connected with the city, where it is said her parents at one time resided; but thismay be fund to be one of those vague reports which are so freely circulated on occasions such as this. However we are informed that the police in this city have been communicated with, and that inquiries are now being instituted to ascertain the truth or otherwise of the rumour in question.
I searched the paper for a year on from this date but couldn't find any follow-up. |
Dan Norder
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 23, 2004 - 7:16 pm: | |
Chris George wrote:
"(The Openshaw letter which had been in private hands and not so treated did allow a DNA match of nuclear but not mitochondrial DNA with a Sickert letter.)"
Chris has got that last part majorly inverted.
Cornwell claims to have mitochondrial DNA (not Nuclear DNA) on the Openshaw letter that "cannot be ruled out" as being the same mitochondrial DNA from a Sickert letter.
mDNA is essentially passed down unchanged from person to person maternally. You and your mother and her mother and her mother, as well as that person's children and all the children from the females of that group and so forth should all have the same mDNA. You can't use mDNA to identify a single person, you can only use it to try to come up with probable inclusion within a large genetic group.
If Cornwell did, in fact, have a nuclear DNA match (and match instead of not being able to be ruled out as a match), that would be a person to person match... of course we would still be debating if that person was Sickert or someone else (like someone who handled the letters later), and still be pointing out that a hoax letter writer does not a killer make. |
Jeff B
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 23, 2004 - 9:44 pm: | |
This exercise would only be of use if we could find the murderers DNA within one of the victims remains. And I'm don't think this would be possible after a hundred years. The only tissue left would be within bone. And how could the murders DNA possibly be embedded in the victims bone?
Now IF we COULD get the murderers DNA off of a victim though this would not be of no use NOW, it absolutely WOULD be of use in the future. Eventually we WILL be able to tell all kinds of things from just DNA including many aspects of physical appearance. And if the Ripper WERE in fact an Eastern European Jew we would most likely be able to tell this just from the DNA. So to say that just because the murderer is dead that any piece of his DNA recovered from a victim would be useless is plain wrong. We don't need a person to try and match up with the DNA. Just having this DNA would tell us a good deal of information about the killer in the near future. |
Vincent
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 24, 2004 - 9:55 am: | |
Glenn, you wrote regarding exhumation: "I am totally against it when we're dealing with such old cases like this, and the whole effort would result in -- nothing."
But that's the real question isn't it? How do you know that it would result in nothing? Frankly, if--and I'll agree that these are some big if's-if we could locate some or all of the victims, and if at least one was relatively intact, then the forensic knowledge gained could be huge.
I guess it comes down to whether or not you believe the gain could outweigh the cost (the moral cost for lack of a better term.) I personally think that it could.
The financial cost is something else again.
Regards, Vincent |
|
Use of these
message boards implies agreement and consent to our Terms of Use.
The views expressed here in no way reflect the views of the owners and
operators of Casebook: Jack the Ripper.
Our old message board content (45,000+ messages) is no longer available online, but a complete archive
is available on the Casebook At Home Edition, for 19.99 (US) plus shipping.
The "At Home" Edition works just like the real web site, but with absolutely no advertisements.
You can browse it anywhere - in the car, on the plane, on your front porch - without ever needing to hook up to
an internet connection. Click here to buy the Casebook At Home Edition.
|
|
|
|
