| Author |
Message |
    
BAPearce
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Thursday, October 16, 2003 - 7:43 am: |       |
I have seen a lot of programmes where peoplse faces have been "reconstructed" by hand modelling and computer to show how they would have looked alive.I was wondering wheter any of this amazing technology could do something with the in situ photographs taken at Millers Court to show how she might have looked alive.It would be interesting |
Gary Alan Weatherhead
Inspector
Username: Garyw
Post Number: 316
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Friday, October 17, 2003 - 4:50 am: | |
Hi BA
That is an interesting idea. A person who is experienced in facial reconstruction could give us a true glimpse of what Kelly looked like. Of course we would need her skull and this would require digging up her remains. There could be forensic value in doing so and digging up the remains of individuals in criminal cases has become fairly common recently. As we speak a court has ordered the body of Billy the Kid to be recovered from the grave.
Forensic pathologists like James Starz and Clyde Snow have gotten fairly adept at convincing U.S. courts to allow the removals for identification and forensic reassesment.
All The Best
Gary |
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 1015
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Friday, October 17, 2003 - 7:26 am: | |
Hi all
Also, if permission for Kelly's exhumation were ever granted, maybe there'd be the possibility of homing in on the area she came from, using genetic analysis. After all, I imagine that people were fairly static and inbred in those days, compared with now.
Robert |
Belinda Pearce
Police Constable
Username: Belinda
Post Number: 1
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Friday, October 17, 2003 - 7:55 am: | |
I never thought about the possibilities of genetic analysis that makes it even more interesting what are the chances of this happening I wonder.BAPearce alias Belinda |
Gary Alan Weatherhead
Inspector
Username: Garyw
Post Number: 317
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Friday, October 17, 2003 - 9:11 am: | |
Hi Belinda and Robert
It would be interesting to do a forensic analysis of MJK's remains assuming there is anything left to find. I think as time goes on it may be possible for science to provide a useful exhumation.
So far exhumations of long dead figures such as Jesse James and Billy The Kid have been for the purpose of clearing up confusion about their true identities. However, information came forward in the Jesse James case proving exactly the position of the body at the time of death, ruling out certain suspected diseases, verifying known physical ailments, etc.
There is also the problem of MJK's true identity which we may be getting closer to solving on these very boards. From what little I know of DNA testing we would need MTC-DNA, which only comes from the female side and at this point I
would point you to a thread which I have seen on these boards which talks knowledgeably about such testing and which I can't place at the moment.
I have spent plenty of time on the ancestry websites trying to get relatives of MJK to come forward and so far a lot of people believe they are related to her: But I have not come across one who can provide me with the information I am looking for to verify this purported relationship. Then again, if we don't know truly
who she is there may be an internal inconsistancy in my elimination process. I had better stop her as I have completely confused myself.
Robert
You mention inbreeding. What do you know about my ancestors and who told you?
All The Best
Gary |
Christian Jaud
Sergeant
Username: Chrisjd
Post Number: 38
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, October 17, 2003 - 12:24 pm: | |
Hi Belinda,
back in the days of the "old boards" there were some attempts to "reconstruct" e.g. Kelly's face. More from an artistical point and less scientific, but interesting nonetheless.
I don't remember who did them, but maybe they can be re-posted here.
regards
Christian
|
Mick Lyden
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Friday, October 17, 2003 - 1:51 pm: | |
Hello,
Seeing as someone has expressed a wish to see it again,here is my facial reconstruction of Mary Kelly,showing the various stages.
Note I have tried to follow the bone structure,layering on flesh as I did so.
Also note that Like Jack,I have left Mary's eyelids intact!
Enjoy,
Mick Lyden
 |
Richard Brian Nunweek
Inspector
Username: Richardn
Post Number: 317
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, October 17, 2003 - 4:28 pm: | |
Hi Mick,
Four words describe that effort , Brilliant, excellent, well done, we have here a face that I personal consider a more then possible likeness, the book leanne and myself are producing, will show a similiar likeness, therefore I would consider your work to be as good as you would ever get on a modern day reconstruction.
Full praise to you.
Regards Richard. |
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 1019
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Friday, October 17, 2003 - 4:45 pm: | |
Mick, that's amazing. And am I imagining it, or does the face look Irish?
Robert |
Jeff Hamm
Detective Sergeant
Username: Jeffhamm
Post Number: 132
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Friday, October 17, 2003 - 4:57 pm: | |
Hi,
Now isn't that amazing! Well done. If we could ever find a photo of Mary while alive, it would be facinating to make a comparison to see how similar the reconstruction is.
- Jeff |
Richard Brian Nunweek
Inspector
Username: Richardn
Post Number: 318
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, October 17, 2003 - 5:11 pm: | |
Hi Robert,
My first reaction, aged mid twenties and of irish resemblance.
Richard. |
Belinda Pearce
Police Constable
Username: Belinda
Post Number: 4
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, October 18, 2003 - 7:17 am: | |
That is remarkable.It has always seemed so strange to me that he mutilated her so much yet left her hair intact she was described as having a very fine head of hair that reached almost to her waist I can't understand why he didn't hack it off too |
Joe
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Saturday, October 18, 2003 - 12:24 pm: | |
Now, if your reconstruction is correct, we really then know she is a good looking young lady. |
Mick Lyden
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Friday, October 17, 2003 - 4:59 pm: | |
Hello Richard and Brian,
Many thanks for your kind words.They are much appreciated.
Regards,
Mick Lyden
|
Chris Scott
Chief Inspector
Username: Chris
Post Number: 640
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, October 19, 2003 - 4:53 pm: | |
Hi Mick
Very impressive job on the facial reconstruction and of great interest.
I have been working for some time on a clean up of the whole famous picture to try and bring out the main structures in the room. I still have some way to go but as your excellent face picture seemed to generate a lot of interest I thought I'd post as far as I have got. It is a much humbler effort but may be of some interest.
there is still a way to go and I will post the finished picture when done.
Chris
 |
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 1034
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, October 19, 2003 - 5:54 pm: | |
Looks great so far, Chris. Much clearer. I think I can see a polka dot pattern on her chemise (if it is her chemise). And the tin bath has really come out well.
Robert |
Mark Andrew Pardoe
Detective Sergeant
Username: Picapica
Post Number: 116
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, October 19, 2003 - 6:05 pm: | |
This is good stuff from both Mick and Chris. I agree, she does look Irish.
What also interests me is: there is a structure with two large panels behind the bed; it looks like a door.
Cheers, Mark
(As we say in Nottingham: "When one door closes, another slams in your face". We're not an optimistic lot in Nottingham. Probably comes of watching Notts County play) |
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 1035
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, October 19, 2003 - 6:20 pm: | |
Yes, Mark, it does look like a door. It must have been a very ramshackle partition.
Sounds like there's a lot of Jehovah's Witnesses in Nottingham.
Robert |
Glenn L Andersson
Chief Inspector
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 524
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, October 19, 2003 - 6:33 pm: | |
Yes, Ive always thought that looked like an old door as well.
Nice work, Chris and Mick.
Is that Photoshop, Illustrator or Macromedia Freehand you're using there?
All the best
Glenn L Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden |
Andrew Spallek
Inspector
Username: Aspallek
Post Number: 190
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Monday, October 20, 2003 - 12:57 pm: | |
Interesting attempt at reconstruction, Mick. In my absolutely amateur opinion I think you've made her jaw too narrow. To me she seems much more square-jawed. The rest of her body seems rather stout or stocky, which would be consistent with a rather square face. Anyway, that's the way I've always imagined Mary.
Andy
|
Richard Brian Nunweek
Inspector
Username: Richardn
Post Number: 323
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, October 20, 2003 - 1:37 pm: | |
Hi Andrew,
We must remember, that in the 1888s stocky was not how we interpret it today, the human body has changed so much, due to better nutrition, I Would imagine eight- eight and half stone was considerd stocky during that period, remember the average waist size for a woman was about 22 inches, not only women but men were a great deal less in weight also.
I remember even in the 1960s a nine stone woman was considered well built, nowadays [ pardon me ladys] a lot of young women would be only to pleased to be that weight, it is simply times have changes regarding the quality and quantity of our food.
If one looks at the body of kelly even allowing the mutalation, the bone structure, and frame suggests to me she was only if that slightly above average for that period.
Regards Richard. |
Andrew Spallek
Inspector
Username: Aspallek
Post Number: 194
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Monday, October 20, 2003 - 2:09 pm: | |
Hi Richard,
I was just going by what I observe in the picture. "Stocky" was my description. "Stout" might be a better word. He face seems to me to contain the lines of square jaw rather than the pointed jaw drawn in the interesting depiction above. In my opinion, a square jaw also seems to be more consistent with the body frame I see in the photograph.
Andy
|
Erin Sigler
Sergeant
Username: Rapunzel676
Post Number: 17
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Monday, October 20, 2003 - 4:46 pm: | |
Both of you have done an amazing job with the photographs. I'm in awe!
P.S. I'm almost embarrassed to ask, but I was wondering what a "stone" would correspond to in American pounds. |
Richard Brian Nunweek
Inspector
Username: Richardn
Post Number: 329
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, October 20, 2003 - 5:05 pm: | |
Hi Erin.
If you are refering to the weight '
There are 14lb to a stone.
8 stone=112lb
8st 7lb=119lb
9stone= 126 lb
Richard |
Mark Andrew Pardoe
Detective Sergeant
Username: Picapica
Post Number: 119
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, October 20, 2003 - 6:01 pm: | |
You must also note 112lb or 8st equals 1 hundredweight (1cwt). Arn't Imperial units much more fun than those boring metric things?
Next week we'll consider area with its rods, poles and perches.
Cheers, Mark |
