Skip to content

Are we done here?

6 Comments Post a comment
  1. B Deveson #

    No, we ain’t done yet. Just one small example of material that needs to be examined is the South Australian (OK, and other States) Police Gazettes for 1948. Under the 70 year rule these will come available, or should become available, on New Years Day. 2020 will also be a important year because there should be more SM related stuff in the Police Gazettes for 1949.
    And in 2022 Jessie’s birth certificate will become available. If she was born in Australia (which I doubt) and if we can guess her birth name (which I doubt).. A nil result will still be something, won’t it?
    And what about Jessie’s marriage certificate? In the WA records supposedly,in which case it should be accessible. But maybe she never married Prosper?

    December 19, 2018
  2. Where are you putting Jessica in the scheme of things, Byron?

    December 19, 2018
  3. B Deveson #

    Jessie’s role? I think her role was that of an accidental poisoner. The medical men involved in the SM affair all suspected a poisoning with something out of the ordinary even talking about hemlock and diphtheria toxin. It is known that Jessie had a lifelong interest in pharmacology/toxicology and her uncle described himself as a pharmacologist and was a sometime court witness in toxicology matters. He was also a perfumer, a pharmacist and a pharmaceutical manufacturer at times.
    I think it was one of the Clellands who investigated hemlock growing close to, or in, Glenelg. It is a pity that the remains of the pasty (?) in SM’s stomach contents were not preserved for further study.
    Isn’t the nub of the SM case a suspected poisoning with something out of the ordinary?
    I think that the relationship between Jessie and her uncle would bear investigating. Did Jessie have much to do with him? Did Jessie pick up her interest in pharmacology from her uncle? I don’t know but I suspect so. DA once said that Jessie rarely spoke of her parents. Maybe she was brought up by her uncle at some stage?
    Pharmacologists didn’t grow on trees in 1948 and I think it is beyond mere coincidence that a woman with an interest in pharmacology appears to be linked in other ways to the SM case.

    December 20, 2018
  4. B Deveson #

    Pete, See:

    I note that The Tamam Shud – Somerton Man case description includes the following statement.

    “Detectives from the state of Victoria initially believed the man was from there because of the similarity of the laundry marks to those used by several dry-cleaning firms in Melbourne.”

    I hadn’t heard this before and if it is correct then it would be worth trying a FOI request to the Victoria coppers.

    I searched for similar laundry or dry cleaning marks in the 1940s worldwide and the only similar marks I could find were in California (I can’t remember the town at present).

    December 20, 2018
  5. “Isn’t the nub of the SM case a suspected poisoning with something out of the ordinary?”

    Bloody right it is a suspected poisoning, and the ‘something out of the ordinary’ means I’ll probably never give it away.

    December 20, 2018
  6. Clive #

    Until Jessie’s birth certificate is produced, her background is suspect, that’s assuming her birth certificate is available and, didn’t go the way of the SM’s suitcase etc. She may have been born in 1921, but whether her natural parents were Thomas & Nellie is questionable.

    December 22, 2018

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s