How do we know these fingerprints belong to the
Somerton Man?
UPDATED October 8th 2014
This is the first of a series of posts that contain hitherto unknown/ unpublished information. The next set will include a significant range of documents and images that had been withheld from the public.
On first glance, this looks like a very ordinary image showing fingerprints but, as per a recent response made to a comment left by Nick Pelling, there's more to this image that makes it questionable.
In the response I pointed out:
How the image shows what appears to be a photograph of the original fingerprint card laid on a piece of paper, the highlighted areas to the top left and right appear to show the edges of the card against a plain paper background. although at the base of this image it is difficult to discern where the card finishes.
The next issue with this image questions the apparent cut made to the top right corner of the card where there is some typing shown briefly describing the source of the fingerprints. You might ask why that would be a problem and the answer is that in essence, those prints could belong to anybody because the fingerprint card itself does not contain anyone's signature nor the original description which should be shown in that top right area where the typed note appears. In other words, the prints are not authenticated. The form on the top left has been left blank as has the 'Classified and Searched By' and 'Checked by' fields center-right of the card.
Another question is where are the 'full finger' prints and or handprints that would normally be expected to be taken? You can see in this image that there is a space for 'Left' and 'Fingers' yet no prints are shown.
Finally, there is nothing on this card that identifies it as being a South Australia Police fingerprint card.
So where does this leave us? We have a questioned image showing unauthenticated, incomplete fingerprints with no signatures and we have some more questions. Under what circumstances does it make sense for the prints to have been apparently kept in a folder of some kind? If the fingerprints were evidence then they would just be a plain photograph handed to the Coroner, they wouldn't be handed over in a book like this one, they would have been marked as specific exhibits.
My thoughts are that this is an image taken much later and perhaps relatively recently. This in turn makes me think that the original fingerprints may still exist and that there is a possibility that suspended in the ink on the card are DNA cells from the hands of the person from whom these fingerprints were taken.
I suggested that someone should get in touch with SAPOL museum and ask whether they have an example set of blank fingerprint cards from the 1948 period plus an actual copy of a full set of fingerprints.
In the files, mention is made of the man's fingerprints being sent to Central Records in Sydney, the question I raise is were these the originals that were sent or photographs?
These are serious questions that need to be answered and my belief is that someone has those answers, they are not to be dismissed lightly and without any substantiating evidence as seems to have been so often the case.
I leave you with these final questions, when and where was this image taken, by whom and for what purpose?
PRETTY BOY FLOYD PRINTS
As you can see, the quality of these prints, especially those of Pretty Boy Floyd, isn't ideal, in fact, I would state that the PBF prints are not as good as SM's in appearance.
The other issue to bear in mind is that SM's fingerprints were taken when he was deceased, a different task altogether and one for which some specialist training is necessary. See the comments below.
In the response I pointed out:
How the image shows what appears to be a photograph of the original fingerprint card laid on a piece of paper, the highlighted areas to the top left and right appear to show the edges of the card against a plain paper background. although at the base of this image it is difficult to discern where the card finishes.
The next issue with this image questions the apparent cut made to the top right corner of the card where there is some typing shown briefly describing the source of the fingerprints. You might ask why that would be a problem and the answer is that in essence, those prints could belong to anybody because the fingerprint card itself does not contain anyone's signature nor the original description which should be shown in that top right area where the typed note appears. In other words, the prints are not authenticated. The form on the top left has been left blank as has the 'Classified and Searched By' and 'Checked by' fields center-right of the card.
Another question is where are the 'full finger' prints and or handprints that would normally be expected to be taken? You can see in this image that there is a space for 'Left' and 'Fingers' yet no prints are shown.
Finally, there is nothing on this card that identifies it as being a South Australia Police fingerprint card.
So where does this leave us? We have a questioned image showing unauthenticated, incomplete fingerprints with no signatures and we have some more questions. Under what circumstances does it make sense for the prints to have been apparently kept in a folder of some kind? If the fingerprints were evidence then they would just be a plain photograph handed to the Coroner, they wouldn't be handed over in a book like this one, they would have been marked as specific exhibits.
My thoughts are that this is an image taken much later and perhaps relatively recently. This in turn makes me think that the original fingerprints may still exist and that there is a possibility that suspended in the ink on the card are DNA cells from the hands of the person from whom these fingerprints were taken.
I suggested that someone should get in touch with SAPOL museum and ask whether they have an example set of blank fingerprint cards from the 1948 period plus an actual copy of a full set of fingerprints.
In the files, mention is made of the man's fingerprints being sent to Central Records in Sydney, the question I raise is were these the originals that were sent or photographs?
These are serious questions that need to be answered and my belief is that someone has those answers, they are not to be dismissed lightly and without any substantiating evidence as seems to have been so often the case.
I leave you with these final questions, when and where was this image taken, by whom and for what purpose?
UPDATED 25 September 2018
Watching the struggles of another blogger regarding the issue of the fingerprints and in particular a comment made by John Sanders. His view was that the prints taken from the SM body were poor quality and 'useless' I think was the term he used.
He is mistaken which is puzzling for a person who speaks of his experience with fingerprints.
Here is the Gerry Feltus copy of the prints:
He is mistaken which is puzzling for a person who speaks of his experience with fingerprints.
Here is the Gerry Feltus copy of the prints:
By way of explanation I have loaded a couple of well-known sets of fingerprints as a rough comparison of how prints appear, in this case, they were taken whilst the subjects were alive:
AL CAPONE PRINTS
As you can see, the quality of these prints, especially those of Pretty Boy Floyd, isn't ideal, in fact, I would state that the PBF prints are not as good as SM's in appearance.
The other issue to bear in mind is that SM's fingerprints were taken when he was deceased, a different task altogether and one for which some specialist training is necessary. See the comments below.
Hi Gordon, Gerry Feltus makes a couple of points on Page 143 & Page 206 of his book whereby another man was seen been carried on the beach at 10.00pm on 30 Nov, if true, this raises a distinct possibility that a 'switch' was done late at night-for what purpose? Clive
ReplyDeleteClive, I think that there could have been a number of reasons why someone would be carried along the beach at night. A friend with a few too many under his belt is one of them. Having said that, these were the days of the 6 o'clock swill so 10 p.m. would indeed be an unusual time of night for this to be happening. Did you do any research on any special events that may have been taking place in and around Glenelg that evening? Could yield some results perhaps.
DeleteSo that others from other countries can understand, the 6 o'clock swill was the 6 p.m. last orders law in Australia for pubs and hotels in those days.
Hi Gordon, I have not found any special events in the Glenelg area for Nov 30. Reading "The News" December 1st Page 3 reports on the "Keane Case", nothing to do with the SM but, but the name rings a bell! Clive
ReplyDeleteGood stuff Clive. It's amazing what you find when you shake the trees a little. I am a big fan of that approach which in effect is the method used by experienced investigators when things start to drag their heels. Interestingly been discussing investigation Vs the academic approach, it can be a difficult concept to explain, seems to me it has more to do with art than science.
DeleteJust following through on this a little further, supposing you now did a search for T.Kean, no 'e' at the end, then lets make that Peterborough and/or Port Pirie 1948, you might be surprised at what you find. I see Port Pirie with its lead smelters, tin and uranium processing as being a place of interest and of course on the route rail line from Port Augusta to Adelaide as well as the place from where Adelaide Steamship Company ran a regular passenger service down to Port Adelaide.
Look forward to hearing from you on this.
Just discovered this site. I'm very excited to dig in! I first read about the case several years ago and it's exactly the type of thing that fascinates me to no end.
ReplyDeleteYou're welcome Beth.
DeleteHi Gordon, There was a Mr T. Kean of Port Pirie but, he was a Post master another person was a Mr Tom Kean(e)? who was noted in the "Recorder" 11-06-48 Page 4 something to do with football-not our man as he was still alive in 1949! If the SM turns out to be T. Kean and not Arnold Deutsch etc, I just feel that it will be a minor item in a newspaper which will lead to the truth. Clive
ReplyDeleteClive, I wasn't thinking of Keane as SM, rather he may have known SM and possibly that is where SM got his clothes?
DeleteEven if they didn't know each other (eg the clothes were passed through an opshop) I think Kean(e) is of interest. Is it possible through some incredible coincidentce there might have been both a Kean and a Keane? As I understand it, Keane was on clothes, but Kean was on the laundry bag?
DeleteHi Gordon, Ok, strange that there was a Captain T M Keane who moved to Adelaide in 1947 (Barrier Miner 29-08-47 Page 1) Clive
ReplyDeleteHi Clive, Good work, I think the more stones that you turn over the more likely you will come up with a result, I put a post on Pete Bowes site regarding the origin of T Keane, the only place where it appears is on the tie and the 'T' is questionable so it is the surname more than anything else that should be the focus.
DeleteThe Postmaster that you found is more than interesting, he transferred from Peterborough to Port Pirie. Can I suggest that you take a look at what services were offered by his Office? Commercial traffic was quite common in those days, they used a combination of morse code and teleprinter plus they could probably handle sending images. Commercial Codes are a whole big topic by themselves. As far as I am aware no one has looked into the possibility, (I have but not in any great depth), and that's in addition to the use of Pro Signs.
In Port Pirie there would have been masses of commercial traffic associated with the smelter, shipping of lead and uranium and more. The question is how much if any of the wireless and teletype traffic was handled by the Post Office?
You may be aware that in the UK right up into the 70s, telecoms technicians were heavily involved in all sorts of wireless and cable intercepts. I hope all of this is of interest for you. You can read more in Spy Catcher, good book.
Some thoughts for Pooh over at the CM blog, the Somerton Man's prints were taken after his death and that is quite a different story as far as how such prints are taken. There are a number of methods used for this purpose none of which would have been done without specialist training which was not a huge task but essential and I suggest that it would not have been left to an inexperienced officer. I think it was Jimmy Durham, (note the respectful spelling).
ReplyDeleteThe method likely used was print pwder, tape and perspex/glass plate. The print powder is brushed on to the deceased's fingers and blown off, a good quality tape is applied to the dusted areas of the fingers and carefully removed. This tape is then applied sticky side up to the lower surface of a piece of clear perspex or glass plate. It is the upper surface of the plate that was photographed.
Now to continue, note the numbers on the right thumb print (24), the right middle finger (18), the left middle finger (24) and the left little finger (18). These numbers represent clearly visible identification points on each of those prints. For the record, in Australia the generally accepted number of identification points for a match is between 12 and 20 with some insisting on 15. In this case the ID 'floor' appears to be 18 ID points.
So to conclude, the Somerton Man prints are fine for the purpose of identifying a dead body as any trained officer would tell you. In today's policing world better methods are available but the ones used at the time did the job and SMs prints could be used today. The real issue is that the SM prints are not certificated.
Well Pooh, what a knowledgeable fellow you seem to be.
ReplyDeleteHowever, I don't recall your having published just what your qualifications are. So, why don't we address it now, what qualifies you exactly to make the comments that you do on Police matters? Did you serve and if so what experience do you have? Which branch/es did you serve in? I ask this because quite honestly your record to date on the details of the job is shall we say apparently lacking, for example you seemed completely unaware of the way in which line ups were used and for that matter how photographs of persons should be presented. This of course is not to mention the current situation with regards to fingerprints and in my view you are way of beam here so by publishing your background and experience in this matter I would have to stand corrected.
Do you recall when we were discussing the matter of George Marshall and the weather conditions in and around Taylor's Bay and Bradley's Head? I hate to say it but you seemed to be bluffing your way through. Many years ago I learnt to sail on Sydney Harbour and became well aware of the conditions that can and do happen in and around those Bays, you can get a good knock or one that will flatten you, squalls happen regularly and sudden winds blow right up onto the head. Enough wind in fact to easily blow a rested book from a dead man's chest. As a matter of interest during that training we were told of a number of fatal accidents that occurred in that same location. Not always so sheltered.
But in all fairness, you have a right to your opinion and to voice it, but it would be beneficial all round if you were to let us know your background and your particular skills in this area to remove any doubts.
If you have that skill and experience and openly tell everyone about it then I will be amongst the first to congratulate you. In reality you do have some options in your response, you could, for example, simply ignore the question which would be an answer in and of itself. You could opt to attack me as you have done before, you could position yourself as the hapless victim or you could try to bluff and bluster your way through. There may well be other tactics but for now this would seem to cover it.
I genuinely hope that you will disclose your relative qualifications and background, you would get my respect immediately and no doubt the respect of others if you choose that option.