'Truth is incontrovertible. Panic may resent it. Ignorance may deride it. Malice may distort it. But there it is.' Winston Churchill ...
The Coroner's Notes
When the Coroner receives the various submissions, how will he assess what he finds before him? Thousands of comments about the case have been made across numerous platforms, and you can be sure that the SA Police have received countless unsolicited submissions from the public.
What follows is not the actual notes made by the coroner but a simulation of sorts, a hypothesis. It describes and discusses the core information set he must review to reach a conclusion based on the DNA claims. I have had the benefit of advice from a trusted legal source.
For the purpose of this post, we will focus entirely on the claim made that Carl Webb was the Somerton Man. Whilst we are, in this example looking at a single cold case, the principles can be applied broadly to any cold case investigation where clarity and factual integrity are key.
What follows is not the actual notes made by the coroner but a simulation of sorts, a hypothesis. It describes and discusses the core information set he must review to reach a conclusion based on the DNA claims. I have had the benefit of advice from a trusted legal source.
For the purpose of this post, we will focus entirely on the claim made that Carl Webb was the Somerton Man. Whilst we are, in this example looking at a single cold case, the principles can be applied broadly to any cold case investigation where clarity and factual integrity are key.
1. Chain of Custody: Where Did the Evidence Come From?
Who handled this material—whether a rootless hair shaft, a slip of paper, or another artifact—before it reached the lab? When, where, and how was it collected?
Proper chain of custody ensures no contamination or mix-up has occurred. Needs airtight documentation to confirm that the evidence is authentic and tied to the correct individual.
2. Sample Usage and DNA Testing: Was the Only Sample Consumed?
If you only had a single, limited hair shaft for DNA extraction, did the analysis process use it up entirely? Could another lab independently verify those findings?
Destructive testing is common in DNA extraction from old or degraded samples. But if the entire sample was consumed, confirming results without new samples becomes very difficult. Does any leftover material exist for potential re-testing?
3. Testing Methodology: How Was the Profile Built?
Did the lab rely on imputation (predicting missing DNA segments from partial data)? If so, how extensive were the missing portions, and how might that affect reliability? If the imputation exercise was carried out by another, why didn't the lab do it?
Advanced techniques can reconstruct partial genetic profiles, but they also introduce more “educated guesswork.” Need clarity on how these results were obtained and how any uncertainties were handled.
4. Were Multiple Hair Samples Tested in the Same Lab?
The Question: Were there separate protocols, negative controls, and rigorous decontamination steps to ensure that rootless hair samples weren’t mixed with those containing roots from the same or another individual?
Handling several samples from the same historical figure (or multiple figures) in the same facility could lead to contamination. Must scrutinise whether the lab maintained robust separation and documentation for each sample.
5. Where Did the Relatives’ Samples Come From?
This claim of identification hinges on genealogical analysis—matching the Somerton Man’s DNA to the family line of Carl Webb—when, where, and how were Carl Webb’s relatives’ samples obtained? Who verified their authenticity? What process was used?
Must confirm that any “relative” samples truly belong to legitimate family members, that consent was properly obtained, and that the chain of custody for those samples is as transparent as for the subject.
6. Why No Mention of Height or Other Traits?
This claim revolves around the body of a man found on Somerton Beach, his appearance has been well recorded and documented, and his height, his hair colour, his eye colour, and even his dental chart are recorded including photographs.
Some advanced DNA tests can hint at hair color or other phenotypic traits, though height prediction isn’t always included.
Why was there no mention of the donor’s height or other relevant details—especially if historical records documented the deceased man’s stature?
Correlating genetic findings with established physical descriptors can strengthen or weaken a case for identity. Why was this missed/omitted it is a potential gap that needs explanation.
7. Consistency with Known Facts vs. Circumstantial Logic
Do the DNA findings align with established historical facts, such as the individual’s last known whereabouts or physical features (like “gingerish” hair)? Or do they rely heavily on circumstantial logic, such as “He wasn’t seen after 1947, so it must be him”?
While circumstantial evidence can be compelling, one must distinguish between firm genetic proof and “it fits the timeline” inferences. Both need proper weighting.
8. Transparency and Documentation
Has the lab or investigator provided a clear, step-by-step account of how samples were handled, analyzed, and compared?
In a legal or quasi-legal review, thorough documentation is essential. Without it, even strong DNA findings may come into question.
Concluding Thoughts
In a high-profile, long-standing mystery like the Somerton Man case, the coroner’s perspective boils down to one core principle: factual certainty. By asking pointed questions—about the chain of custody, possible contamination, genealogical matches, and more—the coroner seeks to establish whether an identification or conclusion can be trusted beyond a reasonable doubt.
Historically, narratives about this case have often taken on lives of their own, overshadowing the actual forensic record. By applying the coroner’s skepticism and insistence on rigorous evidence, we can strip away speculation and focus on what’s truly provable. That mindset—the relentless pursuit of detail and verifiable truth—is what elevates any serious investigation to a more reliable and, ultimately, conclusive outcome.