| Author |
Message |
    
Leanne Perry
Chief Inspector
Username: Leanne
Post Number: 808
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, October 27, 2003 - 5:44 am: |       |
G'day,
Couldn't John McCarthy's desendants then send Mary's desendents a bill for the missing rent?
LEANNE |
Shannon Christopher
Inspector
Username: Shannon
Post Number: 209
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Monday, October 27, 2003 - 6:36 am: | |
Leanne, English law states that a person's debt dies with them unless they are married and then it falls to the spouse to cover the monies owed. Once both have passed so does the debt...
Shannon
(hoping you meant that in a sarcastic way and wern't serious about it...  ) |
Leanne Perry
Chief Inspector
Username: Leanne
Post Number: 811
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, October 27, 2003 - 6:50 am: | |
G'day Shannon,
OK the debt has died, but imagine how much money would be waisted testing everyone that claimed to be a desendent of Mary's, and for what?
Hey maybe they can match my DNA to someone that had a fortune, or perhaps an heir to the throne.....see how silly it is? And all these skeletons would be homeless.
LEANNE |
Shannon Christopher
Inspector
Username: Shannon
Post Number: 212
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Monday, October 27, 2003 - 7:00 am: | |
Leanne, its their money, if they want to pay to be tested, who is to say no? Would be a nice legacy to find out you were related, and it would be a nice addition to the story to find out that hers or any of the others had decendents that escaped the hell of life in the east end and made something of themselves, don't you think?
Shannon |
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 1108
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Monday, October 27, 2003 - 12:49 pm: | |
Hi all
The remains of the victims will be moved at some point - whenever the inevitable car parks/cinemas/pubs/blocks of flats/supermarkets/rest homes for celebrities of no fixed abode are built. It would be a shame if evidence, possibly recoverable now, were by then decayed and destroyed.
In the case of Kelly at least, there can be no complaints from relatives, as we don't know who they might be.
Robert |
Gary Alan Weatherhead
Inspector
Username: Garyw
Post Number: 335
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Monday, October 27, 2003 - 1:59 pm: | |
Andrew and Shannon and All
Re: The exhumation of Custer's troops at the Little Bighorn-It is certainly true to say that the battle did not unfold as conventional history would have us believe. The exhumations and new documentation coming from previously disregarded eyewitnesses in the form of the Indians and scouts has shed new light on what actually happened. Instead of a heroic last stand by the 7th Cavalry, many of the troops tried to run from the scene of what was turning into a mass slaughter. When it was observed by the troops that their fallen comrades were being butchered, in some cases while still alive, a good many opted to commit suicide.
Custer had two wounds. One in his side and a fatal gunshot wound to his head.
As far as exhuming bodies and trying to locate MJK's relatives is concerned, I am of the belief that we may never know Kelly's true identity as I am coming to the conclusion, along with a number of other people, that she was not using her real name while she was in Whitechapel.
As far as being squimish about exhuming and handling dead bodies is concerned, I have told my wife I don't care if she buries me in the back yard. It will be the least of my concerns at that point in time.
All The Best
Gary
|
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 1112
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Monday, October 27, 2003 - 2:55 pm: | |
Gary, bit hard on the new owners should your wife sell the house. Just doing a spot of weeding and..."What the hell is this?"
Robert |
Andrew Spallek
Inspector
Username: Aspallek
Post Number: 210
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Monday, October 27, 2003 - 3:04 pm: | |
Gary,
I share your lack of squeemishness. The thought of my remians being dug up 100 years on from my death doesn't bother me in the least.
As to what might be found by exhumation:
1. It is just possible that traces of the attacker's tissue might be preserved under fingernail remnants of the deceased. Not likely, but possible. These could be tested for DNA evidence and compared to certain known suspects, Druitt for example. The probelm is whether Monty's relatives would allow his body to be exhumed or themselves to be tested for this purpose.
2. It might be possible to learn something further about the murder weapon by examining more closely knife marks on remaining bone. Look what they were able to tell from the examination of the bones of Custer's men.
Andy S.
|
Gary Alan Weatherhead
Inspector
Username: Garyw
Post Number: 338
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Monday, October 27, 2003 - 3:29 pm: | |
Hi Robert and Andrew
I never thought about my wifes selling the house.
I always believed she would keep it in the family as a sort of shrine to my existance.
-No, that didn't come out right. I sound like a megalomaniac.
Best
Gary |
Erin Sigler
Sergeant
Username: Rapunzel676
Post Number: 42
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Monday, October 27, 2003 - 4:06 pm: | |
I for one have no problem with exhumation, so long as the relatives approve and there's a specific purpose in mind. I've never understood this business of never speaking ill of the dead or disturbing their "eternal rest." Perhaps the spirits people report seeing of the Whitechapel vitims would finally be at peace--if you believe in that sort of thing. |
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 1113
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Monday, October 27, 2003 - 5:02 pm: | |
Hi Erin
I don't myself believe in that sort of thing (agnostic) but I'd be very interested to hear any JTR ghost stories you may have heard.
Gary, re your wife burying you in the yard : make sure you're dead first.
Robert |
Gary Alan Weatherhead
Inspector
Username: Garyw
Post Number: 339
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Monday, October 27, 2003 - 6:29 pm: | |
Hi Erin
I would also be interested to hear any stories about the restless souls of the murdered women. I know that Peter Underwood has a chapter in his book I00 Years of Mystery; (1988) on the ghosts of the ripper. Annie chapman in particular made appearances outside the doorway through which she likely took Jack on Hanbury street for about 50 years after her death. Kate Eddowes was said to haunt her corner of Mitre Square by appearing as a glowing apparition resembling a bundle of rags. Offhand. I can't think of another book that tells 'ghost stories' for want of a better term. I don't recall any similar tales from Pamela Ball's 'Psychic Investigation'
Robert-don't give my wife any ideas. I am worth more dead than alive.
All The Best
Gary |
Erin Sigler
Sergeant
Username: Rapunzel676
Post Number: 43
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Monday, October 27, 2003 - 9:51 pm: | |
I've only heard about Annie Chapman haunting Hanbury Street, I don't know any specific stories. If I run across any, though, I'll be sure to share them!  |
Leanne Perry
Chief Inspector
Username: Leanne
Post Number: 812
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, October 28, 2003 - 12:10 am: | |
G'day,
SHANNON: Mary Kelly had no children. You say: 'It would be a nice addition to the story to find out that hers or any of the others had decendants that escaped the hell of...' This is not a fairy-tail! And London's East End is not the same as that now anyway.
ROBERT: Yes the remnants will be removed someday, but by that time they will probably be broken down into fertilizer.
GARY: Has finding out that Custer was shot twice and the battle of Little Bighorn wasn't as romantic as you thought made your life any better?
ANDREW: You say: 'It is just possible' that traces might be preserved. If they exhumed a body an found something, then what? Ok, if they dug up Druitt's remains and the traces weren't a match...."Ah...Ah...Sorry...Don't worry, we'll put a nice flower there."
ERIN: How could the 'spirit people' finally be at peace? They'd have to dig up the real Rippers remains, hang them from a tree and throw daggers at them! Better still: everyone could punnish his decendants!
 
ROBERT: 'Going on a drunk' is what the 'Lloyd's newspaper' reporter claimed he said, but he didn't say to this reporter: "WE went on a drunk". He would have lost his Billingsgate Job sooner if he turned up to work hungover or late. At the inquest he played down Mary's drinking habit and her prostitution habit.
WOLF: There are no exclamation marks or bold type in the text that I have saved to a disk. Every quote and reference is in regular italics. Thanks for the tip! Prostitution wasn't illegal.
LEANNE |
Erin Sigler
Sergeant
Username: Rapunzel676
Post Number: 45
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, October 28, 2003 - 2:04 am: | |
Leanne, I was only kidding. I generally don't believe in ghosts.
Look, they're dead--what do they care? If your objection is religious, then you should remember that the body is only a shell. What made Mary Kelly, well, Mary Kelly, is long gone. The same is true for all of the victims and for the suspects as well.
As someone with a history degree who maintains a keen interest in the subject, I think discoveries like the one regarding Custer have made my life immeasurably better. Were we just supposed to go on believing a lie? All things being equal, I'd rather our children (and ourselves, for that matter!) the truth about history, no matter how ugly or unpleasant that truth may be.
Do you know how much we learned about Roman society from the excavations of Pompeii and Herculaneum? Plenty of corpses there. Would you have them remained buried, their secrets forever lost, because someone didn't think it was right to disturb the resting place of the dead? See, as someone who grew up in a strict fundamentalist household, I've never liked having anyone's morality imposed on me. I'm not a total relativist, but on balance, I think the greater purpose must prevail.
Wasn't Mary Kelly buried in a pauper's grave? If so, and no relatives can be traced, don't her remains belong to the city of London or whatever parish it is in which they're buried? As for the other Ripper victims, it's up to their relatives to approve or deny a request for exhumation, and I think that in that cirumstance we should abide by their decisions. |
Andrew Spallek
Inspector
Username: Aspallek
Post Number: 212
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, October 28, 2003 - 2:15 am: | |
Leanne wrote:
You say: 'It is just possible' that traces might be preserved. If they exhumed a body an found something, then what? Ok, if they dug up Druitt's remains and the traces weren't a match...."Ah...Ah...Sorry...Don't worry, we'll put a nice flower there."
Yes, Leanne, exactly. And, of course, we'll pay the lab for the DNA test.  We would have done no harm whatsoever to poor Monty. In fact, we would have all but eliminated him as a suspect. But I'm not suggesting any body be exhumed against the family's wishes -- and therein lies the rub regarding exhumation of a potential suspect.
Erin wrote:
If your objection is religious, then you should remember that the body is only a shell. What made Mary Kelly, well, Mary Kelly, is long gone. The same is true for all of the victims and for the suspects as well.
As one who holds strong Chirstian religious views, I believe that the eternal "rest" of the dead has nothing whatsoever to do with the disposition of the physical remains. So the "leave them rest" objection does not have a basis in Christianity. And, let's remember that in spite of their professions, at least Kelly and Stride were members of Christian congregations and presumably would have shared the belief I have described.
But -- I do not support frivolously disturbing a grave -- by the same Christain beliefs, as this would be showing disrespect for God's ultimate creation. Whether such tests as I have proposed are "frivolous" is a matter for legitimate debate. Therefore, I respect the opinions and beliefs of those who disagree with me on this matter.
Andy S.
|
Leanne Perry
Chief Inspector
Username: Leanne
Post Number: 814
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, October 28, 2003 - 3:51 am: | |
G'day Erin,
Have a look at Mary Kelly's grave today on the 'Mary Jane Kelly'/'Kelly's grave' board. People are still visiting, paying their respects and laying flowers today, including Richard and 'I'.
LEANNE |
Gary Alan Weatherhead
Inspector
Username: Garyw
Post Number: 340
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, October 28, 2003 - 5:51 am: | |
Hi Leanne
RE: "Has finding out that Custer was shot twice and the battle of Little Bighorn wasn't as romantic as you thought made your life any better?"
I never felt that human slaughter was romantic or anything to make ones life better or more uplifting. If it is history and we can more accurately document exactly what transpired, then I think it is an appropriate area of study. If someone disagrees with disturbing the dead to edify history, I can respect that opinion as well.
I suspect that regardless of what any of us think on the subject, historical exhumations are becoming a fact of life.
All The Best
Gary |
Alan Sharp
Detective Sergeant
Username: Ash
Post Number: 138
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, October 28, 2003 - 6:19 am: | |
Sometimes I have difficulty beleiving what I am reading. In what way did anybody ever think that the Battle of Little Big Horn was romantic? Custer and his troops went to Little Big Horn with orders to commit an atrocity on the scale of My Lai. They thought it was going to be a relatively easy and relaxing day of slaughtering ineffectual old men, women and children. Instead they got exactly what they deserved.
Sorry, a little off topic I know but a particular bugbear of mine.  |
Leanne Perry
Chief Inspector
Username: Leanne
Post Number: 817
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, October 28, 2003 - 6:32 am: | |
G'day Alan,
Sorry, I have no idea what happened at Little Big Horn. It wasn't a part of my history class!
LEANNE |
Gary Alan Weatherhead
Inspector
Username: Garyw
Post Number: 341
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, October 28, 2003 - 7:21 am: | |
Hi Alan
I have some of the papers and broadsheets of the day which indicate that the battle was portrayed as the slaughter of brave soldiers by Indians who were considered savages and less than human. At the time it was a romantic story and many people still choose to believe the romantic myth.
The retribution for the battle was the escalation of the Plains Indian Wars wherein tremendous numbers of Indians were slaughtered and which culminated in the tragedy of Wounded Knee.
Interestingly, Custer's nickname as given by the Indians was 'Son of Morning Star'. This sounds as if the Indians respected Custer and this is what people chose to belive at the time. The true story is that Custer attacked an Indian village at dawn while the morning star (Venus) was still in the sky. Custer waited until all the young men of the village were gone and slaughtered the woman and children and old men.
Sorry to go off topic.
All The Best
Gary
|
Shannon Christopher
Inspector
Username: Shannon
Post Number: 214
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, October 28, 2003 - 8:35 am: | |
All, I have created a thread for this in PUB TALK where we can get into more detail about it and other such events in history that were told from the "winning side" and were completely wrong in what was recorded for history.
Gary, point of intererst. Custer and his men attacked at 3:00 in the afternoon. It was at the same time Benteen and his men met what they thought to be the war party from the village. Neither knew at the time that the Lakota had joind in the frey and doubled the size of the indian army. Not only that, the Lakota brought a new repeating rifle that more than evened the odds against the soldiers (who wile being calvary still were not completely mounted, not well armed. They still had the Springfield single shot cartridge rifles from the civil war)
Shannon |
Dan Norder
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Sunday, October 26, 2003 - 5:07 am: | |
Richard, those newspaper reports have been thoroughly discredited. Many newspapers got lots of things wrong. You can't just take everything any of them said at face value without double checking.
And there is nothing at all "obvious" about the suggestion that the police would try to keep it secret if MJK had a son. There would be absolutely no reason to hide that knowledge (if it were true), unless you've already bought into the concept of a conspiracy theory and are looking to use circular reasoning to justify it.
The fact that your grandmother talked about being alive at that time is absolutely no proof of anything. Just because someone *might* know (or might *think* they know) more about the killings doesn't come anywhere close to supporting that someone actually *does* know anything.
Wishful thinking doesn't make it so. |
Saddam
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Sunday, October 26, 2003 - 12:41 pm: | |
"...if someone were to come forward tomorrow who stated categorically that they did know the truth, would we believe them?"
>>I hereby come forward right now and categorically state that I know the truth.
Saddam
|
Mick Lyden
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Saturday, October 25, 2003 - 8:09 pm: | |
Hello Richard,
It is of course very difficult to tell which parts of Kelly's story are true and which are not.
I personally don't believe her name was either Mary or Kelly
I am going to have a go at researching into the Irish woman "Kate Kenny".
This was a name put forward by somebody quite recently but frustratingly,we have heard nothing since.
By the way,as requested I have E-mailed you so we can have a private chat.
Regards,
Mick |
