CLOSE
Hulton Archive/Getty Images
Hulton Archive/Getty Images

Why Police Started Wearing Gloves at Crime Scenes

Hulton Archive/Getty Images
Hulton Archive/Getty Images

Wearing gloves at a crime scene seems like a no-brainer. Not only does it help prevent the contamination of evidence, it also keeps police and investigators from getting bodily fluids on themselves. But believe it or not, officials were going into grisly crime scenes bare-handed until 1924. The Emily Kaye case changed all of that.

The case kicked off when a British woman named Jessie Mahon found a suspicious left-luggage ticket in the pocket of her husband Patrick’s jacket. Knowing that he had been acting strangely recently, Jessie sent a friend, who happened to be a former railway policeman, to investigate. When the friend turned in the left-luggage ticket at Waterloo Station, he received a bag containing women’s undergarments and a bloody knife. Though he must have been shocked, he put the bag back, and told Jessie to return the ticket to her husband’s pocket. Meanwhile, he informed police, who kept the locker under surveillance. When Mahon came to get his bag on May 2, 1924, they nabbed him. After being taken to Scotland Yard, he eventually confessed to a horrific crime.

Mahon claimed that he and his mistress, Emily Kaye, had gotten into a fight. During the argument, she fell and hit her head on a coal bucket and died. Fearing that he would be charged for murder, Mahon went to elaborate lengths to dispose of her body.

Police would eventually discover that Mahon’s version of events was a lie. In the Sussex bungalow Mahon had shared with Kaye, there was no sign of the quarrel he had described. The coal bucket was flimsy and undamaged. Police also discovered that Mahon had purchased the murder weapon three days prior to meeting Kaye. Furthermore, Kaye had been pregnant.

What Mahon didn’t lie about was the extreme methods he took in an attempt to hide the evidence. After dismembering Kaye in the bungalow they’d shared, he’d stuffed much of her headless body into a large trunk marked “EBK.” He removed some organs and hid them around her bungalow in biscuit tins and hat boxes. He boiled other body parts in a pot.

Needless to say, the crime scene was utterly horrifying.

Sir Bernard Spilsbury, a famous British pathologist, was called in as the chief medical examiner on the case. Spilsbury asked officers to collect the remains for further examination. Officers rolled up their sleeves and started tossing body parts into buckets, “as if they were sorting fish on a quayside.” Shocked, Spilsbury asked them if no rubber gloves were available, and they responded that they never wore protective gear of any kind.

By the next big murder case, Spilsbury had created the “Murder Bag,” a kit for police officers to carry that included rubber gloves, a magnifying glass, a tape measure, a ruler, swabs, sample bags, forceps, scissors, a scalpel, and other instruments. Suiting up with gloves before entering an active crime scene has been standard procedure ever since. The glove method isn’t the only thing the Mahon/Kaye case inspired, by the way—Alfred Hitchcock used details from the sensational story when he was making Rear Window.

And just in case you thought a contaminated crime scene might have gotten Patrick Mahon off the hook: He was found guilty and executed five months after his arrest.

nextArticle.image_alt|e
Public Domain, Wikimedia Commons // Nigel Parry, USA Network
arrow
crime
Meghan Markle Is Related to H.H. Holmes, America’s First Serial Killer, According to New Documentary
Public Domain, Wikimedia Commons // Nigel Parry, USA Network
Public Domain, Wikimedia Commons // Nigel Parry, USA Network

Between staging paparazzi photos and writing open letters to Prince Harry advising him to call off his wedding, Meghan Markle’s family has been keeping the media pretty busy lately. But it turns out that her bloodline's talent for grabbing headlines dates back much further than the announcement that Markle and Prince Harry were getting hitched—and for much more sinister reasons. According to Meet the Markles, a new television documentary produced for England’s Channel Four, the former Suits star has a distant relation to H.H. Holmes, America’s first serial killer.

The claim comes from Holmes’s great-great-grandson, American lawyer Jeff Mudgett, who recently discovered that he and Markle are eighth cousins. If that connection is correct, then it would mean that Markle, too, is related to Holmes.

While finding out that you’re related—however distantly—to a man believed to have murdered 27 people isn’t something you’d probably want to share with Queen Elizabeth II when asking her to pass the Yorkshire pudding at Christmas dinner, what makes the story even more interesting is that Mudgett believes that his great-great-grandpa was also Jack the Ripper!

Mudgett came to this conclusion based on Holmes’s personal diaries, which he inherited. In 2017, American Ripper—an eight-part History Channel series—investigated Mudgett’s belief that Holmes and Jack were indeed one and the same.

When asked about his connection to Markle, and their shared connection to Holmes—and, possibly, Jack the Ripper—Mudgett replied:

“We did a study with the FBI and CIA and Scotland Yard regarding handwriting analysis. It turns out [H. H. Holmes] was Jack the Ripper. This means Meghan is related to Jack the Ripper. I don’t think the Queen knows. I am not proud he is my ancestor. Meghan won’t be either.”

Shortly thereafter he clarified his comments via his personal Facebook page:

In the 130 years since Jack the Ripper terrorized London’s Whitechapel neighborhood, hundreds of names have been put forth as possible suspects, but authorities have never been able to definitively conclude who committed the infamous murders. So if Alice's Adventures in Wonderland author Lewis Carroll could have done it, why not the distant relative of the royal family's newest member?

[h/t: ID CrimeFeed]

nextArticle.image_alt|e
FBI
arrow
crime
A New D.B. Cooper Suspect Has Emerged
FBI
FBI

The identity of skyjacker D.B. Cooper—a well-mannered passenger on Northwest Orient Airlines Flight 305 who parachuted out of the skyjacked plane heading to Seattle in November 1971 with $200,000 in cash—has long intrigued both law enforcement and amateur sleuths. One theory posited that Cooper may have even been a woman in disguise.

In July 2017, the FBI officially closed the case. This week, they might take another look at their archival material. An 84-year-old pet sitter from DeLand, Florida named Carl Laurin has made a public proclamation that a deceased friend of his, Walter R. Reca, once admitted he was the country’s most notorious airborne thief.

The announcement is tied to the publication of Laurin’s book, D.B. Cooper & Me: A Criminal, a Spy, and a Best Friend. And while some may discount the admission as an attempt to sell books, the book's publisher—Principia Media—claims it vetted Laurin’s claims via a third-party investigator.

According to Laurin, he and Reca met while both were skydivers in the 1950s and kept in touch over the years. Reca was a military paratrooper and received an Honorable Discharge from the Air Force in 1965. Laurin suspected his friend immediately following the skyjacking since he had previously broken the law, including an attempted robbery at a Bob’s Big Boy restaurant as well as several banks. But Reca didn’t admit guilt until shortly before his death in 2014, when he handed over audiotapes of his confession and made Laurin promise not to reveal them until after he had passed away.

Principia Media publisher/CEO Vern Jones says he expects skeptics to challenge the book’s claims, but says that the evidence provided by Laurin was “overwhelming.” The FBI has yet to comment on any of the specifics of Laurin’s story, but an agency spokesperson told The Washington Post that “plausible theories” have yet to convey “necessary proof of culpability.” Nonetheless, someone at the Bureau probably has a weekend of reading ahead of them.

[h/t MSN]

SECTIONS

arrow
LIVE SMARTER
More from mental floss studios