The news of the moment is that Australian Attorney-General John Rau has refused Professor Derek Abbott’s request that the Somerton man’s body be exhumed for DNA / autosome testing, commenting that Abbott’s application wasn’t “compelling”. Well, I guess that means we’re going to have to do it the hard way, then… 🙂

So here (as long-promised) is Part One of my thoughts on the Unknown Man and his mysterious cipher note, perhaps they’ll open up some new research avenues. Overall, while I’m pretty sure my reasoning is basically sound, please feel free to disagree! (PS: I’ve included a few page references to Gerry Feltus’ book for Klaus Schmeh and other hardcore cipher mystery buffs).

[For background on the Somerton Man / Unknown Man / Taman Shud / Tamam Shud case, here’s a pair of links that should get you started]

(1) Why was the Unknown Man in Somerton? As with pretty much all historical mysteries, it is ‘within the realms of possibility’ that all the evidence that the police were (eventually) able to assemble had been consciously constructed and arranged to give a certain impression, and that the real story behind them all was entirely different. Yet while we should acknowledge that each individual piece of evidence might well have been influenced, finessed, modified or even faked, we should be trying to look through them to the overall narrative. So, I view as basically reliable the link between the Unknown Man and the copy of Taman Shud subsequently found nearby – and hence between the Unknown Man and the nurse ‘Jestyn’, whose private phone number was written in the back, and who lived close to Somerton Beach in Glenelg.

Given that a man was seen knocking at Jestyn’s door during the day before the Unknown Man’s appearance on the beach, it seems to me a wholly unremarkable conclusion that the Unknown Man almost certainly came to Glenelg specifically to visit her. Moreover, Jestyn had not long lived in Glenelg, so had had that phone number for only a short time: and must therefore have given the Unknown Man her phone number relatively recently.

(2) Where did the Unknown Man die? I think the answer – without a shadow of a doubt – is “not on the beach“. He was found propped up on Somerton beach yet with “lividity above the neck and ears” [p.204] – i.e blood pooled at the back of his head after death. If he had quietly died in the position in which he was subsequently found, gravity would have pushed his blood to his feet: hence I conclude that he died somewhere else entirely, where in fact his body was left for a while with his head below the rest of his body, before being carried to the beach and arranged in that oddly casual pose.

Moreover, Somerton Beach is sandy – so if the Unknown Man had lain on that beach for any period of time with his head at its lowest point before being physically rearranged by a random passer-by, there would surely have been sand in his hair… but there was none. As such, I disagree with the Coroner T.E.Erskine who concluded that “He died on the shore at Somerton on the 1st December, 1948.” [p.205] – rather, though the man was found dead there, I find it highly unlikely that it was the scene of his death.

No: to my mind, the only realistic scenario is the Unknown Man died somewhere else entirely and was carried to the beach – probably, from his weight, by a man. The report mentioned by Gerry Feltus [pp.143-144] of someone seen apparently doing exactly this around 10pm on the previous evening would seem to be entirely consistent with this scenario.

(3) How did the Unknown Man die? The first pathologist noted that the man was in good physical shape, and that his “heart was of normal size, and normal in every way”. There was blood in his stomach along with the remains of a pasty eaten roughly three hours before his death.

Though his spleen was significantly enlarged (3x times normal size) AKA splenomegaly, note that this is most likely a symptom of a different problem rather than the problem itself. As I understand it, your spleen can’t suddenly enlarge in a matter of a day: and given that the Unknown Man was apparently only in Somerton for less than a day, he must have arrived there with his spleen already enlarged. The lack of any obvious signs of another problem points to a problem that had just receded, quite probably a recent viral infection. So to me, the presence of an enlarged spleen implies that the Unknown Man had only just recovered from an significant illness, and that he was perhaps still in quite a fragile state. He would very probably have also had some lingering discomfort or back pain from his enlarged spleen.

(4) What was the cause of the Unknown Man’s death? It’s important to remember that coroners and pathologists repeatedly examined his body and screened his blood, looking for any faint clue that might help to narrow down the cause of his death, but with no success. Given the healthy state of his heart, the two best theories left standing (in my opinion) are (a) a deviously hard-to-pin-down poison deliberately administered either by himself or by someone else but which quickly disappeared from his system after death; or (b) an unexpectedly strong allergic reaction to something he had ingested, with the most notable candidate being excess sulphur dioxide used as a preservative in the pasty, which in 1948 was yet to be controlled [pp.202-203].

For me, I have to say that there is only one likely scenario I’m at all comfortable with: that while at Jestyn’s house late that afternoon, he had an unexpectedly strong allergic reaction to something in the pasty he had had for lunch (for why else would there be blood in his stomach?) In my mind, he must have laid down on a bed suffering from acute stomach cramps; but because he was so weakened by his recent illness, he unfortunately died as a result of his reaction, slumping with his head falling backwards over the edge of the bed – not upside down, but with his neck supported at an angle by the edge of the bed, leading to the distinctive lividity observed by the pathologist.

Even though Jestyn had worked as a nurse (and more on that later), I suspect she was not physically strong enough to move him from that position, so left him just as he was until her husband arrived home in the evening. I believe the Unknown Man remained on the bed until later that evening, when they carried him to the beach to pose him there, to be found in the morning.

(5) What was the Unknown Man’s personal situation? In his modest suitcase, there were stencilling tools for making signs such as Third Officers use on ships to mark baggage and crates, along with the princely sum of sixpence. It was December (the middle of the Australian summer), and his body had the remains of the kind of outdoor tan you’d expect from someone who had worked outside the previous summer, but not that summer. His clothes came from a variety of places, and in a variety of sizes (his slippers were smaller than his shoes), and most had their labels removed. The items that did have a label were marked “T. Kean” or “T. Keane”.

This has led to a lot of spy theories (“an international man of mystery who didn’t want to be identified“, etc) and conspiracy theories (“his killers removed the labels from his clothes in order to conceal his identity“, etc), none of which rings true at all to me. For me, however, the simplest explanation by a mile was simply that he was poor (if not actually destitute), and had been given these clothes by a charity. The original owners’ name tags would have been removed by the charity before being given to the needy.

Furthermore, given the probable connection with sea-faring implied by the stencilling tools in his case, my prediction is that he was given these clothes by a local Mission to Seafarers or Stella Maris branch.

So: as far as I can see, the most likely overall scenario is that the Unknown Man had recently had a serious viral infection, travelled to see Jestyn in Glenelg, had a pasty for lunch, was taken ill with an allergic reaction, died on her bed, but was posed on Somerton beach that night. But… why was he there at all, and what of his mysterious enciphered note? More on that in Part Two…

26 thoughts on “Nick’s thoughts on the Somerton Man, Part One…

  1. Tarquin Rees on November 18, 2011 at 2:09 pm said:

    The idea in your #1 of things being arranged to cause a certain impression strikes a chord with me.

    Could it be that SM died somewhere of natural causes but in a place that a death and consequent associated formalities would bring unwelcome attention to a third party who was perhaps engaged in some form of activity they wanted to keep out of the spotlight?

    So they divert attention in high style with the ‘Tamam Shud’ cypher which is nonsensical and remove ID of SM so he is untraceable and no connection can be formed to the third party whose house he maybe died in?

    Could work…

  2. Tarquin: hopefully it’ll become clear when I post Part Two… but I had to draw the line somewhere. 🙂

  3. Very interesting. As a skeptic I like unspectacular theories, because they are often more plausible than the spectacular ones. I am looking forward to part 2.

  4. Klaus: as for me, I prefer plausibly testable theories. 🙂 By the way, Part Two is here.

  5. I am with Jim Gillogly on this one, Nick – the code is quite possibly the first letter of every word in a verse (not from the Rubaiyat though), a device perhaps SM used to memorize the poem.
    One point against the theory is that Jestyn had had the baby by then (July 1947) and it is unlikely she would have let him in the house. Also, he probably did die on the beach since a couple saw him raise his right hand while laying there and not looking good. Great job, I look forward to the 2nd part.

  6. Luis: thanks! Here’s a link to Part Two, but it’s Part Three you’ll be looking forward to most… 🙂

  7. Hi, great theories! Has part three been posted yet? I’d love to read it.

    The theory of charity clothes I like very much. It always struck me as odd that if SM was indeed reasonably well off, wearing smart new clothes, why would he bother repairing them with the brown thread instead of buying new ones? It’s already been discussed elsewhere that he probably visited the public baths after getting off the train (he’d recently had a shave, and a lot was made of the cleanliness of his toenails etc). It’s quite possible he arrived in a destitute state, with a dirt and beard and cleaned himself up then.

    A couple of questions for you, as I’m by now means an expert in these matters but am becoming quite obsessed with this case…

    1) If you think he was placed on the beach after his death, along with an abundance of fake evidence, do you think the half smoked cigarette found between his cheek and his shoulder was placed there too? The placement of it does sound very much like he was part way through smoking a cigarette and his head slumped to the side. And as far as setting up a scene and placing evidence goes, a half smoked cigarette placed under the cheek, an unsmoked cigarette behind the ear AND half a packet of cigarettes in the pocket seems a little incongrous. it certainly doesn’t sound like something a panicking couple disposing of an unwelcome guest who died at their house would do. It sounds like something a chain smoker would do.

    2) Does anyone know if the two cigarettes (half smoked one and one behind the ear) were Kensitas, the same as the cigarettes in the packet? Or didn’t anyone bother to check that at the time? Were the cigarettes ever looked at?

    3) I love the theory on the allergic reaction to the pasty. The pasty troubles me. With the problems he had, poisoned or a massive allergic reaction, surely he’d have been sick prior to his death? But he obviously wasn’t sick, as the HALF DIGESTED pasty was still in his stomach.

    4) As an aside, I seem to recall SM DID have sand in his hair. I think it was mentioned in the evidence of the pathologist at the inquest. He had sand in his hair, but not in his nose or mouth.

    5) WHY OH WHY won’t they allow him to be exhumed. Surely his soft tissue might contain DNA?

  8. Jez: if he was posed, he was posed with the cigarettes. There’s a nice bit about the cigarettes in Gerry Feltus’ book, you really ought to read it. 🙂 I’ll go over the autopsy stuff again, perhaps you’re right about the sand… not sure though. They won’t exhume the Unknown Man because all the theories about him are too speculative to satisfy a judge. Here’s a link to Part Three and some other more recent posts for you… 🙂

    http://ciphermysteries.com/2011/12/02/nicks-thoughts-on-the-somerton-man-part-three
    http://ciphermysteries.com/2011/12/10/amazing-news-on-the-unknown-man
    http://ciphermysteries.com/2011/12/15/update-on-the-elusive-h-c-reynolds
    http://ciphermysteries.com/2011/12/15/h-c-reynolds-family
    http://ciphermysteries.com/2011/12/27/h-c-reynolds-possibly-in-auckland-hospital
    http://ciphermysteries.com/2012/01/01/h-c-reynolds-where-next-well
    http://ciphermysteries.com/2012/01/06/the-elusive-reynolds-from-hc-to-c
    http://ciphermysteries.com/2012/01/20/well-its-a-start-h-c-reynolds-middle-name-was-charles

  9. Many thanks for your reply and the links Nick! Fascinating stuff 🙂 The more I read, the more I’m drawn in. I’m not convinced by HC Reynolds, it’s mostly the shape of his face and his chin that I don’t think match with the SM photos… hmmm. Interesting though.

    I might have a little trawl through the UK BMD site and see if anything comes up, though like you say, that might not even be the man in the photos real name.

    Out of interest, how rare are first edition copies of The Rubiyat?

  10. PS. I am absolutely going to order Gerry Feltus’ book!

  11. Jez: tell Gerry I sent you! 🙂

  12. Jez: Gerry Feltus went to a lot of trouble tracking them down… read his book for the details! 🙂

  13. Bridget G. on June 5, 2012 at 12:26 pm said:

    Okay, so I’m coming to this article very late and I may be asking a dumb question. I haven’t read Mr. Feltus’ book– although I certainly intend to! Regarding your theory that SM died elsewhere and was placed on the beach: Are you discounting the witnesses who stated they had seen SM the night before in that very spot and saw him move his arm? Was that discredited?

  14. Bridget: another witness came forward in 1959, but the statement didn’t get picked up until 2003 – see Chapter 14 (“A Final Twist”) of Gerry Feltus’ book. I think you’ll like it! 🙂

  15. Jestyn on July 7, 2012 at 2:49 am said:

    Nothing like joining the conversation late, or before reading the other two parts, but I have a couple of thoughts — but first a disclaimer that I want the book badly but can’t afford it right now ($55 to the US, yikes), so I’m going on what’s on the internet (and almost all of it, I’m obsessed, for my own reasons) and what I’ve read here so far (THANK YOU, by the way).

    While I agree that the least sensationalistic solution is the likeliest, I also think FROM WHAT I KNOW (see disclaimer), I think 1: the idea that he was poor comes from the sad little sixpence in the case. I’ve assumed all along, however, that he would have had a wallet (purse, whatever one might call it) on him before he died. I think most of us agree he wasn’t there to commit suicide. So why buy a train ticket and not use it when you don’t even have the cash left to get “home?” I assume he had some kind of monies on him which was stolen a) as a motive for his murder, b) as a bonus by someone who had other motives for the murder, or c) by someone on the beach after he died or was dumped there.

    Also, this is me being lazy (normally I look all this up, even if it takes me days), but do you have knowledge of a kind of allergic reaction that could be so quickly fatal yet ONLY result in the blood in the stomach? No hives, swollen face or airway, nothing notably wrong with the liver or kidneys? I DON’T know this, that’s why I ask, but from my very minimal knowledge, it just doesn’t sound right…

    Thanks, and off I go to part 2 of Nick’s Thoughts! (PS, I’ve read most of the rest of what’s here, except the minute details about HC Reynolds, so I’m not coming at this all blind!)

  16. I have enjoyed reading all the comments in this on-line forum & elsewhere. One thing which seems to come up is people insisting the Tamam Shud scrap of paper was “sewn into” a “secret” compartment in the man’s pants. From everything else I’ve read, it wasn’t sewn in at all, just tucked into the fob-pocket – which original searches of the clothing failed to notice. Fob-pockets are not “secret” at all, made to hold a fob-watch & are STILL a feature in Australian mens’ trousers made to this day (I have just checked this!) Since wristwatches came into use, men used their fob-pocket to secure small articles which they didn’t want to lose & which may have fallen out of the normal pocket (which lies behind it.) The other thing – if the man was a sailor, which seems likely, he may not have been missed by anyone, leading a transient lifestyle & being away for months at a time. At 48 years of age, his parents may have been dead (mine were when I was younger than this) & any siblings may have lost contact or been dead also. Anyone else who had contact with him may have just assumed he had gone off on some other adventure & hadn’t kept in touch. One of my uncles, despite being twice married with 4 children, led a gypsy lifestyle & no one knew where he was for years on end. I only found out he had died, & where, through the wonders of the internet. It’s quite possible distant relatives exist, but don’t realize he belongs to them.

  17. @Nick: Good article, but if she and her husband were involved in bringing Somerton’s body up to the beach, why did she had the ” reaction upon seeing the cast as “completely taken aback, to the point of giving the appearance that she was about to faint”. Seems she was surprised enough learning of his death. If she knew already he was dead, her reaction might be different…

  18. annalyn earley on August 6, 2013 at 8:36 pm said:

    hi, hate to blow everything out of the water but if you read the original inquest, and people’s comments, it states he was alive when 2 people saw him first. they thought he was drunk, and left him alone. he was trying to light a cigarette and couldn’t. what if he had like hepc or something, and gotten drunk. they his liver just exploded. so he was not killed somewhere else. he was alive, then he died. and as for not having relatives, i agree. if he was a merchant marine, and only child, no one would of stepped up. on other hand, the wierd letters on page. was it drunken scribbling? did the nurse know both the men who died on the beach. i live in a retirement center. the lady across was a code breaker. when she was told don’t say anything, she didn’t nor has she for 80 plus years, she is 92. i love this mystery.

  19. annalyn: so much of what is written about the Somerton Man online is unreliable that it can make it hard to make progress.

    If, like me, you nonetheless find it fascinating, I strongly recommend buying yourself a copy of Gerry Feltus’ book The Unknown Man – http://www.theunknownman.com/ – all the way from Australia.

    It’s a little bit pricy (mainly because of Australian book taxes rather anything else), but it tackles the whole story in a proper way. Tell Gerry I sent you! 😉

  20. annalyn earley on August 6, 2013 at 8:50 pm said:

    the other theory i had was he was gay. and in those days it was a dangerous way to be. poor gay, ballet dancer, now merchant marines. russian, maybe spy. went to bath house to meet someone, they said follow me, he did, beat him up…no wait, no bruising. had a disease like hepc. or been in a car accident, enlarged spleen. somehow he got in trouble with whoever he was with. or not, went to beach drunk. illness made him die. or someone killed him after he said he would tell his family about his being with him. this is my first hypothesis.

  21. annalyn earley on August 6, 2013 at 8:52 pm said:

    thank you but i read all 5 pages of inquest from australian papers, to the globe. it was very precise. i thank you for letting me post all the way from austin texas.

  22. Hi Nick,

    I’m fascinated by this mystery and I appreciate the work you put in to provide accurate information regarding the Somerton Man.

    One question: if the SM was indeed destitute, why then would he waste money he didn’t have to buy a train ticket that he didn’t use? I’d be interested to hear your theory on that detail.

  23. Joe: having no money in his pockets doesn’t make him destitute – in fact, I’d say that wasting money on a ticket he didn’t use was more likely to be a sign that he wasn’t destitute at all, as someone who was genuinely destitute wouldn’t have done something that wasteful.

  24. Hi Nick,

    Interesting ideas. I love how this mystery is like one of those pictures that transforms itself as you change perspectives.

    Can I ask why you’re adamant it wasn’t a suicide?

    For me, it seems a very possible scenario. It seems highly probable that Jestyn and SM had history. Probably romantic history, and just possibly history in some sort of espionage capacity. That always seemed far fetched to me (Spies? Please! In little old Adelaide? Who’d bother spying on us?) but then read recently about Annette Wagner spying for the nazis while at the ABC. Suddenly seemed more plausible.

    This guy seemed to show up on a bit of a mission, personal or otherwise. I think maybe he and J had a thing at one time. She had a baby. Maybe he knew, maybe he didn’t. He comes over to look her up, maybe win her back from Thomson. But he knows he might not succeed. And maybe in his mind, it’s “do or die” for him.

    He visits and is rejected. Maybe he finds out for the first time about the baby and his mind is blown. Maybe he knew about the baby and not being a part of that life just kills him.

    So he rips out the end passage of the book to send a message to Jestyn. It’s a private message to her, “Look what you made me do.” The fact that he put something that says basically “this is the end” that came from her into his pocket seems pointed.

    The book in the car puzzles me. Love to know if there was a bin nearby or not. And the drug or whatever he took…wonder if they looked at purchases in the chemist there.

    I do wonder if he threw his wallet in that or another car, too, and maybe the guy had kept the cash so didn’t admit to that.

    He seems like a bit of a poetic type, really, what with the note. The type that might decide to end his life watching the beautiful sunset, with no name on him but a token from his love in his pocket.

    By the way, surely he’d have had a receipt for the suitcase? Perhaps it was in the missing wallet.
    Marie

  25. Livor mortis/ lividity is only fixed after 6-12 hours post mortem. Before that it can be altered by moving the body. In case of SM the estimated time of death is around 2 am and (if i recall correctly) he was in ambulance at 645), which is less than 6 hours. If he was taken to hospital horizontal position, the blood is expected to pool on his back and neck.

  26. milongal on May 8, 2018 at 10:05 pm said:

    While the comments were out of action, I came across an article about the Bajau ‘sea nomads’ in SouthEast Asia (the articles appear to have done the rounds mid-April, and are easily googlable). Basically it was about this race of people have evolved with enlarged spleens which assists in holding their breath for prolonged periods of time.
    Of course, I’m not suggesting SM was one of the Bajau. Nor am I suggesting he swam to Somerton from a submarine (possibly the same one that came for Holt 20 years later). But it’s an interesting thought that frequently holding your breath (eg for diving) can apparently enlarge the spleen – and this is a side-effect that probably would not have been known/understood by the forensics guys at the time.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Post navigation