Unsolved Taman Shud Case - The Somerton Man

[Gordon1552]

View attachment 770891

Bust of SM compared to 3D image of the bust supplied by Gordon. 3D image has not been changed in any way. Both images have the ears 1.5 cm long and 0.9 cm at the widest part.

Distance from the top of ear to the top of head is 1.5 cm in the bust.
Distance from the top of ear to the top of head is 2.0 cm in the 3D scan.

From point of hair line to top of nose = 1.6 cm on bust.
From point of hair line to top of nose = 2.0 cm on 3D image

In the image you show, the heads are at different angles, so the 3D grab is more upright and the headshot of the bust is leaning forward a little. The other more noticeable issue is the size of the ear. The 3D ear is significantly smaller than the bust ear. I think that accounts for the variation in measurements. What you can see is the effect of the 'building' that Paul Lawson did making use of the photographs as his guide. In fairness, the optical illusion caused by light and shade delineation is part of the issue at hand. If you were to turn both images to the same colour set and then adjust the lighting you would see the problem. If I get time today I will take a look and produce that image.

 

[Redacted]

Meat takes longer to digest so it should have been there so maybe it wasn't a pasty? What other kinds of food would contain mostly potato and other ingredients that wou be quickly digested?

A soup. Or a stew, where the meat was well cooked, but the veges still half raw.

Which suggests that he might have had a sit down meal at a table.

Sent from my SM-A305YN using Tapatalk

 

[Gordon1552]

A soup. Or a stew, where the meat was well cooked, but the veges still half raw.

Which suggests that he might have had a sit down meal at a table.

Sent from my SM-A305YN using Tapatalk

There would be a lengthy list no doubt but Potato soup might be a bit warm for the weather at the time, potato salad maybe?

 

[Redacted]

There would be a lengthy list no doubt but Potato soup might be a bit warm for the weather at the time, potato salad maybe?

Most of the possibilities probably go against it being a take away meal, uless it was a pastie or fish n chips. So either he changed or he had sit down meal with a napkin to fit what's in evidence. Unless crumbs are like the matches

Sent from my SM-A305YN using Tapatalk

 

[Gordon1552]

I would agree that he most likely sat down for some food, the fact that his mouth wasn't checked is a bit concerning. Normally it's amongst the first things you would do. The man's teeth were not the best for eating anything other than soft foods like potatoes and some vegetables, maybe salmon. Any food that contains soluble fibre is more easily digested and doesn't need to be chewed.

 

[Mycroft]

AIA:

• Acts Interpretation Act (Australia)
• Army International Activities
• Army Information Architecture
• Aeronautical Industry Association
• Authorized Inspection Agency
• (1) Army Intelligence Agency; (2) ACE Intelligence Architecture; (3) ACE Interface Architecture; (4) Air Intelligence Agency
• AIA Group Limited/American Asiatic Underwriters
• Athens International Airport
• Anguilla (ISO Country code)
• Apologies In Advance
• Appreciated in Advance
• Annual-in-Advance (payment method)
• Agudath Israel of America
• Abbotsford International Airport
• Alternate Interior Angle (geometry)
• Aia (/ˈaɪ.ə/; Basque: [ai.a]) is a village situated on the slopes of Mount Pagoeta in the Basque province of Gipuzkoa, Spain.

QC:

• Queen's Counsel (UK)
• Quebec City (Quebec, Canada)
• Quebec Central (railway)
• Quasi-Cyclic
• Quiet Channel (RCA two-way radio)
• Queens College (New York)
• Quezon City (Metro Manila, Philippines)

Did the Somerton man have a contact in the Queen Counsel?

Or at the The Queen’s College in the University of Oxford?

Anyone here familiar with the Quasi-Cyclic code?


The AIA Group Limited/American Asiatic Underwriters (founded, 19 December, 1919) is an interesting one because of Cornelius Vander Starr (also known as Neil Starr or C. V. Starr).



Link to Wikipedia article.



Do any of you know the normal travel route from India to South Australia in 1948?

And what about Anguilla to South Australia in 1948?

Kinbru...I think your analysis really interesting and also appropriate for those times.
here's some of my backstory...In 1948 my father lived in Adelaide and was age 19. I wasn't born till 1955, however my memories are of my father constantly searching through a Dictionary and Encyclopedias, using their words and meanings to create his puzzles and stories by way those books. He'd often speak about his past relationship with 'a man'. They'd play board games...'the man' was his mentor / teacher and very skilled, and my father... his apprentice. He said the game was called Ego, because it was all about men's ego's. He'd always end by saying, 'that man's dead now'. Though I was a child and had no idea of what or who he was talking about, I was always told I had to remember what I'd been told, and how important it was. The stories were repetitive, and these grew longer and more complicated over time.
When my memory was later triggered as an adult, I began the process of slowly untangling what my father had told me, and this lead to the rediscovery of an I.D. card in the name of H.C. Reynolds. Thus in June 2010 I sent the I.D. to Prof. Maciej Henneberg Anatomical Science at Adelaide University. After he and his colleagues extensive comparative examination, I was informed that the I.D. photo was a match to the unidentified deceased man found on Somerton Beach in 1948.

Trying to understand what my father told me also lead to the game IGO (GO). My father said his 'mark' was MW representing both his parents names (McIntyre & Wright). I've no idea if what my father told me is true or nonsense though.
The first line of the Code if seen as an announcement of 2 players in a game of GO...does seem to fit his story though, and acts as a calculation of sorts (but done in a way to keep it secret). Thus for Mr. Reynolds (player 2) according to the I.D., born in 1900 and died in 1948 aged 48.
Using a dictionary for even 1978 shows abbreviation for Able Seamen as AB...also A for Age...B for Born...D for Died or Death. The I.D. is a US Dept. of Labour ...Seaman's Identification Card issue to H.C. Reynolds 28th. Feb. 1918...Nationality stated as British. Though we can't be certain the name is correct, the photo at age 18, does match SM. The Code could be similarly made from some of the examples you've demonstrated, and such abbreviations might help explain it. Some things are best kept simple and who knows..you may be on the right track.

 

[Mycroft]

Most of the possibilities probably go against it being a take away meal, uless it was a pastie or fish n chips. So either he changed or he had sit down meal with a napkin to fit what's in evidence. Unless crumbs are like the matches

Sent from my SM-A305YN using Tapatalk

Wasn't there talk of a party / gathering on the beach that night, thus possibility a fire's been built. Adding baked potatoes was pretty standard for then and still is.

 

[Redacted]

Wasn't there talk of a party / gathering on the beach that night, thus possibility a fire's been built. Adding baked potatoes was pretty standard for then and still is.

No soot on clothing? Charchoal dust on hands?

Scratches on back of hands though.
Did he try and take something?
And someone went to grab it back?
A child?

Sent from my SM-A305YN using Tapatalk

 

[BlueE]

Not until the profile view that I realised that he was born with Pierre Robin Syndrome.
Underdeveloped lowere jaw is a dead giveaway.
How big was the cleft in the roof of his mouth? He might've had severe sleep apnea and snore quite loudly.
He might've had to eat only soft foods or even liquids depending upon the size of the cleft in his upper palate

I don't think he had Pierre Robin Syndrome otherwise the Professor of Physiology and Pharmacology would have mentioned it at the inquest. It's just a poor reproduction of the bust in the image. Not repeated in the bust photos.

 

[BlueE]

I would agree that he most likely sat down for some food, the fact that his mouth wasn't checked is a bit concerning. Normally it's amongst the first things you would do. The man's teeth were not the best for eating anything other than soft foods like potatoes and some vegetables, maybe salmon. Any food that contains soluble fibre is more easily digested and doesn't need to be chewed.

His mouth was checked so I'm not sure why you say that. A detailed dental map was made by the first police investigators and printed in the report on 22nd Dec 1948.

Also not sure why you are saying he must have been eating potatoes or vegetables in his last meal as Coroner Cleland thought the meal must have been a pie or pastie, which suggests meat.

"I think from the food that it was probably a pie or pasty which he had eaten as his last meal." Coroner Cleland

 

[BlueE]

So much evidence. Yet somethings are missing.

If he ate a pasty, there'd be crumbs all over his clothing. If he bought a pasty, and took it away from a shop, there'd also be crumbs in his pocket.

There are no crumbs. These are not the clothes that he was wearing, when he purchased, transported and ate the pastie.

Pasties are made with flakey pastry dough.
Dough that is made with flour and oil. Pastry crumbs stick to clothing like no tomorrow.

Then there are the contents of a pastie. Diced vegetables and meat. Contents that come apart and often land upon your clothing.

There is no evidence of his consumption of what was found in his stomach.

Because the clothes he were found in are not the clothes that he was wearing when he ate it.

Sent from my SM-A305YN using Tapatalk

From Sir Cedric Stanton Hicks Inquest affidavit.

"I have been proceeding on the assumption that this (poison) was self administered. If it had not been self-administered, and the body brought there, that would remove any doubts as to the time at which death took place, as well as my other difficulties.

If death had occurred 7 hours after the man was seen to move, it would imply a massive dose. The drug which I have mentioned in a massive dose could have caused death in that time, and could still have been undiscovered.

The circumstances are consistent with its administration, and some of them even suggestive of it. Nothing is inconsistent with it"

So maybe he was helped from the beach where he was first seen at 7.00 pm to another location nearby in a car, had a bite to eat and a massive dose of this poison, administered either orally or intravenously?

He was laid flat on his back where blood pooled around his neck?

The man was driven and carried back to the same position at the beach in the early hours of the morning, after removing and changing his soiled trousers?

 

[Mycroft]

No soot on clothing? Charchoal dust on hands?

Scratches on back of hands though.
Did he try and take something?
And someone went to grab it back?
A child?

Sent from my SM-A305YN using Tapatalk

Sorry for the misunderstanding here. I'm not suggesting SM took part in that beach party scenario, but looking for another source for potatoes or food if not take-away or eaten 'at someone's house'. I'd read about some gathering or party on the beach, but I saw nothing about those involved coming forward as witnesses to anything unusual. I'm assuming these are young people, a radio for music, having food, drink and fun on the beach. If SM was deliberately poisoned, there had to be a delivery, and seems he'd ingested potato. We don't know what he drank though. If he'd vomited there be little content left to inspect at autopsy anyway. SM's shoes were polished, had no sand in them and his attire wasn't right for what I'd presume, was a casual event re-'beach party'.

It's always assumed SM was alone, but how can anyone really be sure. And just because he's said to have left his suitcase at the train station (though no ticket was found on him) how can we be certain he arrived with only one piece of luggage. He might have stored his heavy, clumsy suitcase, and still carried a smaller bag with him that day (underwear, socks, toothbrush etc.). I've watched SM's case being chewed over for several years now, thus constantly reviewed and often debating the same aspects, but with little real progress.

Since June 2010 my account, and Maciej Hennebergs comparative analysis re- the 1918 Seaman's I.D. photo... hasn't changed, and the ABC Radio National podcast includes Maciej's findings. We're hoping that last years DNA swab samples might confirm this poor man's identity, whatever name that may be. I'd like to see this man's dignity restored... Over the years I feel that some people have exploited SM, and I'd hope that would stop, once he's been identified. There's also Derek Abbott's 'family connection' claims to resolve via SM's exhumation. Whatever the outcomes, it's going to be interesting.

 

[Redacted]

I'm beginning to wonder if these things only happen in Glenelg?

19 Apr 1948 - Wife Meets "Dead" Husband In Tram - Worker (Brisbane, Qld) http://nla.gov.au/nla.news-article71436648

The Advertiser (Adelaide, SA) Wednesday 14 April 1948 p 8 Advertising

Sent from my SM-A305YN using Tapatalk

 

[Gordon1552]

His mouth was checked so I'm not sure why you say that. A detailed dental map was made by the first police investigators and printed in the report on 22nd Dec 1948.

Also not sure why you are saying he must have been eating potatoes or vegetables in his last meal as Coroner Cleland thought the meal must have been a pie or pastie, which suggests meat.

"I think from the food that it was probably a pie or pasty which he had eaten as his last meal." Coroner Cleland

Good thoughts and questions.
1. The only specific food mentioned in the documents was potato, nothing else. As you say it suggests meat but meat is not mentioned.
2. Nowhere does it say that there were traces of food found in the mouth (Constable Moss should actually have done that first inspection, again something that is easily overlooked)
3. Taking a detailed dental map is something that would be done after the mouth was washed out, that does not say it was inspected, there is no mention of the mouth and any contents thereof being inspected.

Given the diagram of the teeth or rather missing teeth, the man would have found difficulty in chewing some foods especially meats. The more missing teeth, the more difficulty. This from what I read, can lead to unpleasant digestion problems. That is possibly why no meat was mentioned, there likely wouldn't have been meat in his diet for that reason. If it was there it would have been mentioned even to qualify what was said.

Redacted's comment is also correct, no mention of any crumbs at the scene or on the man, if a pie or pasty hade been eaten, you would expect that even if much of it had been brushed off. Maybe you've experienced that? I certainly have.

Here's a note regarding the dental map:

 

[BlueE]

Good thoughts and questions.
1. The only specific food mentioned in the documents was potato, nothing else. As you say it suggests meat but meat is not mentioned.
2. Nowhere does it say that there were traces of food found in the mouth (Constable Moss should actually have done that first inspection, again something that is easily overlooked)
3. Taking a detailed dental map is something that would be done after the mouth was washed out, that does not say it was inspected, there is no mention of the mouth and any contents thereof being inspected.

Given the diagram of the teeth or rather missing teeth, the man would have found difficulty in chewing some foods especially meats. The more missing teeth, the more difficulty. This from what I read, can lead to unpleasant digestion problems. That is possibly why no meat was mentioned, there likely wouldn't have been meat in his diet for that reason. If it was there it would have been mentioned even to qualify what was said.

Redacted's comment is also correct, no mention of any crumbs at the scene or on the man, if a pie or pasty hade been eaten, you would expect that even if much of it had been brushed off. Maybe you've experienced that? I certainly have.

Here's a note regarding the dental map:

I quoted the police report from December 1948 which includes this dental map. I hold the police investigation in high regard, they were thorough, can't question their honesty and they had no agenda to hide his identity.

There is no evidence they did not check the mouth, in fact there is evidence they did check the mouth but did not find any food in the mouth.

There is no reason why there should have been traces of food in his mouth as the Inquest thought what ever food was eaten was hours before SM's death and this was hard to estimate because the stomach contents were mixed with blood and his digestion may have stopped hours before they thought because of the poison.

Again I ask where did you get the information that he had potato in his stomach, I can't find any mention that he did from the Inquest documents so please copy where this is stated?

The teeth map is very important and as the lack of number 2's or lateral incisors matches Robin Thompson (and he may have had more missing teeth that matched) combined with Robin's unusual ear formation which also matched, it's almost certain he was SM's son. This supports Jo Harkness's emotional reaction in first seeing the bust.

As far as the person who was embalmed and frozen that Mr Lawson made the cast of somehow was decomposing there is no evidence of this. None. Not the supposed picture which is probably someone else or the sworn evidence to the Inquest that Mr Lawson made. If there was any suggestion that the man he took the bust of was decomposing he definitely would have mentioned it when he was describing difficulties he had in making the cast. The embalmer made a good job of embalming the body.

While we all have approached finding the identity of SM from different ways, I don't think you should ignore police evidence or sworn affidavits to the Inquest which you do with your suggestion that the man the cast was made of wasn't the unknown man found on Somerton Beach. Police state in their report on 22nd Dec 1948, 26th Nov 1959, Mr Lawson and others in the Inquest swear that the man had fair hair or gingery blonde, or mousy ginger hair going slightly grey at the sides. This matches the gingery blonde or fair hair samples that Mr Lawson caught in the plaster when making the cast of the unknown man found on Somerton Beach.

 

[Gordon1552]

I quoted the police report from December 1948 which includes this dental map. I hold the police investigation in high regard, they were thorough, can't question their honesty and they had no agenda to hide his identity.

There is no evidence they did not check the mouth, in fact there is evidence they did check the mouth but did not find any food in the mouth.

There is no reason why there should have been traces of food in his mouth as the Inquest thought whatever food was eaten was hours before SM's death and this was hard to estimate because the stomach contents were mixed with blood and his digestion may have stopped hours before they thought because of the poison.

Again I ask where did you get the information that he had potato in his stomach, I can't find any mention that he did from the Inquest documents so please copy where this is stated?

The teeth map is very important and as the lack of number 2's or lateral incisors matches Robin Thompson (and he may have had more missing teeth that matched) combined with Robin's unusual ear formation which also matched, it's almost certain he was SM's son. This supports Jo Harkness's emotional reaction in first seeing the bust.

As far as the person who was embalmed and frozen that Mr Lawson made the cast of somehow was decomposing there is no evidence of this. None. Not the supposed picture which is probably someone else or the sworn evidence to the Inquest that Mr Lawson made. If there was any suggestion that the man he took the bust of was decomposing he definitely would have mentioned it when he was describing difficulties he had in making the cast. The embalmer made a good job of embalming the body.

While we all have approached finding the identity of SM from different ways, I don't think you should ignore police evidence or sworn affidavits to the Inquest which you do with your suggestion that the man the cast was made of wasn't the unknown man found on Somerton Beach. Police state in their report on 22nd Dec 1948, 26th Nov 1959, Mr Lawson and others in the Inquest swear that the man had fair hair or gingery blonde, or mousy ginger hair going slightly grey at the sides. This matches the gingery blonde or fair hair samples that Mr Lawson caught in the plaster when making the cast of the unknown man found on Somerton Beach.

OK, let's step through this one point at a time:
1. I do not question the police standards of reporting, I never suggested that are you inferring otherwise?
2. The Police nor the medical examiners made any mention of looking through the mouth for food particles or anything else. They counted the teeth and did nothing else, that was recorded and in the documentation. Had they looked for anything they would have specified 'no food particles were found' that is not the case.
3. If you have supporting documentation that shows food doesn't stay in the mouth for 3 to 4 hours then please share that so we can resolve that issue
4. 'Again' you ask? I don't recall you asking that question but since you bring it up, try page 89 Clelands comments, image attached. No need to apologize
5. The teeth, Robin had no 'missing' teeth, they were there but in a different position, in other words there were no gaps. The Somerton Man's teeth are as per the attached image. Missing teeth means no teeth. In the inquest documents you will read a comment that you would notice the missing teeth if he smiled but not if he spoke.
6. With regards to the ear, that particular type of ear was a family trait, I have a photograph of one of Jo's grandchildren whose mother came along after SM's time and the ear is of a similar type as SMs, it's not that uncommon.
7. The two pre-burial photographs are from the Police files. I respectfully suggest that if you have a problem or other evidence that says they are not of the Somerton Man then you should take it up with them. I recommend that you read Gerry Feltus's book The Unkown Man, it would resolve a lot of issues for you. I stand by my comments regarding decomposition especially given the high incidence of power outages in Adelaide at the time. I gather you didn't take up my suggestion that you look through Trove, it's well worth reading about them. They have a direct bearing on the state of the body, frozen, slight defrost, frozen again, slight defrost again and again and again etc etc. The evidence of decomposition is in the photographs that you dismiss. Seek some better-qualified opinion on what that can do to a body in cold storage. Even if that body had been embalmed. You should also note that the body that was shown to Mr. Lawson was not identified to him as being the body of the man found on Somerton Beach, you'll find that in Mr. Lawson's diaries.

With great respect, you need to read more deeply before passing comments and asking these kinds of questions. If you can substantiate what you are saying then you should do so right up front along with reference materials, photographs and article information. Words alone can be quite powerful but they need also to be convincing, substantiation is key. I endeavour to do that on every occasion and where I can't I acknowledge it. I would much prefer to work alongside people rather than be constantly defending the evidence that is there for all to see.

 

[Redacted]

No crumbs upon his clothes,
No food particles stuck between the teeth.
No napkin and no toothbrush found upon him nor nearby.
Evidence of a meal though.
Inference by the Coroner that a meal, being a pie or pastie, had been eaten a few hours before time of death.

Time of death around midnight or later therefore becomes probelmatic if it's implied that the deceased was on Somerton Beach for the entire time from 7:30 pm, and in the same clothes all day until he was discovered deceased the next morning.

And what of the scratches on the back of the hands?
No evidence from witnesses of the deceased having these injuries by the bus conductor nor ticket seller prior to his arrival at Glenelg.



Sent from my SM-A305YN using Tapatalk

 

[Kurve]

Time of death around midnight or later therefore becomes probelmatic if it's implied that the deceased was on Somerton Beach for the entire time from 7:30 pm, and in the same clothes all day until he was discovered deceased the next morning.

And what of the scratches on the back of the hands?

He might have scratched his own hands when the sand mites came out. Wind could have swept away his dinner crumbs.

 

[Redacted]

No crumbs upon his clothes,
No food particles stuck between the teeth.
No napkin and no toothbrush found upon him nor nearby.
Evidence of a meal though.
Inference by the Coroner that a meal, being a pie or pastie, had been eaten a few hours before time of death.

Time of death around midnight or later therefore becomes probelmatic if it's implied that the deceased was on Somerton Beach for the entire time from 7:30 pm, and in the same clothes all day until he was discovered deceased the next morning.

And what of the scratches on the back of the hands?
No evidence from witnesses of the deceased having these injuries by the bus conductor nor ticket seller prior to his arrival at Glenelg.



Sent from my SM-A305YN using Tapatalk

I'm guessing that all this means that he wasn't wearing the same clothes when he ate, and that he brushed his teeth afterwards, and probably got into an altercation.

The most obvious possibility is that he was staying overnight. He was probably in pyjamas when he ate the pastie, then brushed his teeth before retiring to bed.

Put further, it's probable that he woke finding himself quite Ill and tried to decamp for help. Possibly sustaining the injuries when his hands were pulled from the door knob? Maybe something larger - A small child was ripped from his hands by someone with long fingernails? The evidence is incongruent with eating or dying at the location in which his body was found.

The coroner suggests that he died from a poison. Yet there's nothing found upon him or at the locality where the deceased was found to show how the poison was transported nor administered.

There is no evidence of vomit nor soiling upon the clothes that the deceased was found in, nor at the locality where the deceased was found.

However, if he was in pyjamas and at a house or some other lodging away from any possible witness to his death.... However, there must've been a witness to him dying or his actual death - someone who cleaned him up, redressed him and transported him to the beach locality if he was dead, or someone who told him to get dressed and chucked him out of their house after an altercation, maybe thinking that he was intoxicated?

Did someone take exception to him holding Robin?


Sent from my SM-A305YN using Tapatalk

 

[BlueE]

OK, let's step through this one point at a time:
1. I do not question the police standards of reporting, I never suggested that are you inferring otherwise?
2. The Police nor the medical examiners made any mention of looking through the mouth for food particles or anything else. They counted the teeth and did nothing else, that was recorded and in the documentation. Had they looked for anything they would have specified 'no food particles were found' that is not the case.
3. If you have supporting documentation that shows food doesn't stay in the mouth for 3 to 4 hours then please share that so we can resolve that issue
4. 'Again' you ask? I don't recall you asking that question but since you bring it up, try page 89 Clelands comments, image attached. No need to apologize
5. The teeth, Robin had no 'missing' teeth, they were there but in a different position, in other words there were no gaps. The Somerton Man's teeth are as per the attached image. Missing teeth means no teeth. In the inquest documents you will read a comment that you would notice the missing teeth if he smiled but not if he spoke.
6. With regards to the ear, that particular type of ear was a family trait, I have a photograph of one of Jo's grandchildren whose mother came along after SM's time and the ear is of a similar type as SMs, it's not that uncommon.
7. The two pre-burial photographs are from the Police files. I respectfully suggest that if you have a problem or other evidence that says they are not of the Somerton Man then you should take it up with them. I recommend that you read Gerry Feltus's book The Unkown Man, it would resolve a lot of issues for you. I stand by my comments regarding decomposition especially given the high incidence of power outages in Adelaide at the time. I gather you didn't take up my suggestion that you look through Trove, it's well worth reading about them. They have a direct bearing on the state of the body, frozen, slight defrost, frozen again, slight defrost again and again and again etc etc. The evidence of decomposition is in the photographs that you dismiss. Seek some better-qualified opinion on what that can do to a body in cold storage. Even if that body had been embalmed. You should also note that the body that was shown to Mr. Lawson was not identified to him as being the body of the man found on Somerton Beach, you'll find that in Mr. Lawson's diaries.

With great respect, you need to read more deeply before passing comments and asking these kinds of questions. If you can substantiate what you are saying then you should do so right up front along with reference materials, photographs and article information. Words alone can be quite powerful but they need also to be convincing, substantiation is key. I endeavour to do that on every occasion and where I can't I acknowledge it. I would much prefer to work alongside people rather than be constantly defending the evidence that is there for all to see.

I'll try to keep to the steps to make this easy for you.

1. Yes you have repeatedly questioned the standard of police investigation, from PC Moss not happening to notice a box of matches to him or others not looking in the mouth which was false. Also you questions the very integrity of the police investigation (listed twice in reports which I've given dates for and both are in your cashe of documents so I assume you've read them) and Inquest which clearly describes the hair, height, build, teeth, and ears of the SM which matches the bust of the man Mr Paul Lawson made, because somehow it doesn't match the person you think is the SM.

I think you should consider that the original body Mr Lawson made inquires about disposing of may have been the body that was already in the morgue when SM was brought in. The one that Mrs Elizabeth Thompson burst into tears when identifying and had a picture of them both for evidence. Also Stanley Salotti identified him as did James Mack.

2. Wrong. They clearly looked in the mouth and checked the back of mouth for signs of a plate. However fixating on scraps of potato that were never found in the stomach and have no relation to when the food may have been eaten, which the Inquest concentrates on is going to get you going around in circles for 10 years and missing important lead that could identify the unknown man.

3 and 4. Dr John Cleland "...we did not find any evidence of potato, although he had been eating potato". If you are saying when you eat something it is still going to be in your mouth 4 or more hours later then you prove it See comments above for an unsubstantiated comment that he had been eating potato and irrelevant detail that will not identify the unknown man.

5. Robin's teeth are exactly as described in the dental map that was made by investigating police. Both have number 2 upper incisors missing. In both it is not noticeable when talking. It's possible in the photo of Robin has more back teeth missing that matches the SM dental map made by initial investigating police. Just because the dental map show a gap for the missing teeth, for recording, in real life the person looks like Robin.

His exact missing teeth and ear similarity are both discussed by Professor of Professor of Anthropological and Comparative Anatomy at the University of Adelaide, Australia. He was recently interviewed in the Radio National podcasts which have been linked on here and with both the unusual features or the teeth and ear occurring together in Professor Henneberg's opinion Robin is the son of the Somerton man.

6. Professor Hanneberg has seen the ear from the bust and in his opinion it is the same or very similar to Robin's I am aware Mr Lawson had difficulties in getting the mould of the ear and perhaps you should have used Robin's actual ear when comparing.

7. There was no problem with the embalming of the SM. Doesn't matter if there were any or many power outages. No problems with making the bust other than with excess water from defrosting that occurred unless Mr Lawson was lying under oath. The bust was made of the man found on Somerton beach matching the descriptions in the police reports, Mr Lawson's affidavit and in particular the hair samples found still in the plaster matched all police and Inquest descriptions of his hair.

If the second photo was SM in a supposed decomposed state, why wasn't this attached in Inquest evidence? Maybe it was and returned to the photographer, as per police photographer Mr Dunham's affidavit, as it was obviously a fake or disinformation?

So you have the teeth chart made by initial police investigations matching exactly to Robin's missing upper teeth. You have Robin's ears also said to be unusual matching the ears on the bust of SM. The hair colour of the hair still in the plaster from making the bust matches the descriptions given in two police reports and all descriptions in the Inquest.

You have already disregarded police statements and the expert physiological and pharmacological report of Prof Hicks when saying barbiturates were the cause of death when they weren't and I guess now you want to disregard the expert Anthropological and Comparative Anatomy opinion of Prof Henneberg with his opinion of the teeth, ears and facial features.

If you have a picture of a person you think to be SM he should only have three teeth on the bottom right lower jaw and 4 on the upper right. If he doesn't then you should not be considering this person as a possibility for SM. His teeth missing the upper number 2 incisors will look very much like Robin's. If he you are unable to accept these basic facts and want to go around in circles please do not involve me!

 

[Redacted]

Cigarettes.

Can someone humour me, because I'm a nosey parker and want to know whether the deceased was left or right hand dominate.

Which hand had tobacco tar staining to the pointer and middle fingers?

Did he favour smoking cigarettes from a particular side of the mouth? Which teeth were more tobacco stained? Vis a vis Which side of the lips had the most tobacco staining?

Sent from my SM-A305YN using Tapatalk

 

[Kinbru]

The coroner suggests that he died from a poison. Yet there's nothing found upon him or at the locality where the deceased was found to show how the poison was transported nor administered.

Do you know, if they found any injection marks of some kind from a needle?



In my head, I always thought he was stabbed with a needle or drank/ate something given to him, his cigarettes was switched, or he administered the poison himself.

When it comes to cigarettes, my grandfather and grandmother always "made" their own. They bought the filters (not cigarette papers, but normal cigarettes, empty without tobacco, bought the tobacco and made their cigarettes with some kind of machine, gonna find a picture. I'm sorry about my bad English

 

[Kinbru]

Kinbru...I think your analysis really interesting and also appropriate for those times.
here's some of my backstory...In 1948 my father lived in Adelaide and was age 19. I wasn't born till 1955, however my memories are of my father constantly searching through a Dictionary and Encyclopedias, using their words and meanings to create his puzzles and stories by way those books. He'd often speak about his past relationship with 'a man'. They'd play board games...'the man' was his mentor / teacher and very skilled, and my father... his apprentice. He said the game was called Ego, because it was all about men's ego's. He'd always end by saying, 'that man's dead now'. Though I was a child and had no idea of what or who he was talking about, I was always told I had to remember what I'd been told, and how important it was. The stories were repetitive, and these grew longer and more complicated over time.
When my memory was later triggered as an adult, I began the process of slowly untangling what my father had told me, and this lead to the rediscovery of an I.D. card in the name of H.C. Reynolds. Thus in June 2010 I sent the I.D. to Prof. Maciej Henneberg Anatomical Science at Adelaide University. After he and his colleagues extensive comparative examination, I was informed that the I.D. photo was a match to the unidentified deceased man found on Somerton Beach in 1948.

Trying to understand what my father told me also lead to the game IGO (GO). My father said his 'mark' was MW representing both his parents names (McIntyre & Wright). I've no idea if what my father told me is true or nonsense though.
The first line of the Code if seen as an announcement of 2 players in a game of GO...does seem to fit his story though, and acts as a calculation of sorts (but done in a way to keep it secret). Thus for Mr. Reynolds (player 2) according to the I.D., born in 1900 and died in 1948 aged 48.
Using a dictionary for even 1978 shows abbreviation for Able Seamen as AB...also A for Age...B for Born...D for Died or Death. The I.D. is a US Dept. of Labour ...Seaman's Identification Card issue to H.C. Reynolds 28th. Feb. 1918...Nationality stated as British. Though we can't be certain the name is correct, the photo at age 18, does match SM. The Code could be similarly made from some of the examples you've demonstrated, and such abbreviations might help explain it. Some things are best kept simple and who knows..you may be on the right track.

Wow, this is interesting! Thank you so much for sharing Mycroft! Your story is fascinating and the fact that your father talked about his apprentice, but that he was dead, and this leading to you finding the I.D. card with H.C. Reynolds is really something. Did you find it at your fathers place? Have you ever researched this name after getting a positive Id from Adelaide University? Yeah, the name may not be correct as you're saying, but the fact that it matches the age and the story your father told you, makes it really worth looking into! I really want to give this man a name. No one claimed him, and that's why this case makes it such a mystery and people want to solve it. There's so many questions, but maybe the answer is simple like you replied and our minds make it a bigger puzzle/case than it is. Don't know.

I´m really into the abbreviations, and I think it would help to explain it also. I´ve never heard of that game though, do you have a link to how it's played? I´ve tried to google it, but I just get board games with the same name. Gonna ask around at the elders home I volunteer for, for this is interesting and kinda makes me wanna research the code more, without doing the whole cipher thingy. Bc that's already been done a lot.

 

[Gordon1552]

No crumbs upon his clothes,
No food particles stuck between the teeth.
No napkin and no toothbrush found upon him nor nearby.
Evidence of a meal though.
Inference by the Coroner that a meal, being a pie or pastie, had been eaten a few hours before time of death.

Time of death around midnight or later therefore becomes probelmatic if it's implied that the deceased was on Somerton Beach for the entire time from 7:30 pm, and in the same clothes all day until he was discovered deceased the next morning.

And what of the scratches on the back of the hands?
No evidence from witnesses of the deceased having these injuries by the bus conductor nor ticket seller prior to his arrival at Glenelg.



Sent from my SM-A305YN using Tapatalk

The food was consumed between 8pm and 11 pm according to the timelines, not sure how that puts him on the beach, I would have thought it suggested he had his food elsewhere unless he happened to have potatoes with him.

 

[Kinbru]

Given the diagram of the teeth or rather missing teeth, the man would have found difficulty in chewing some foods especially meats. The more missing teeth, the more difficulty. This from what I read, can lead to unpleasant digestion problems. That is possibly why no meat was mentioned, there likely wouldn't have been meat in his diet for that reason. If it was there it would have been mentioned even to qualify what was said.

My grandmother lost her teeth. She ate everything still, vegetables, potatoes, meat.... BUT when it came to meat and it was chewy, she had to spit it out after trying to chew for a while. Small pieces of meat though, she "chewed" without teeth and swallowed.

Maybe the SM chewed and spit?

When it comes to potatoes, you can ingest them mashed, in dices, mashed with a fork so on. You can do that with almost all food really, with no teeth or with teeth.

Agree though, with the fact that with more missing teeth, the more difficulty. It's not impossible though, as with my grandmother to learn to eat "normal" without teeth.