A number of possible identifications have been proposed over the years.
An Adelaide newspaper, The Advertiser, on reporting the discovery of the body, gave the possible identification as "E.C. Johnson, about 45, of Arthur St, Payneham".
The following day, 3 December 1948, Johnson identified himself at a police station.
That same day, another Adelaide newspaper, The News, published a photograph of the dead man on its front page, leading to additional calls from members of the public about the possible identity of the dead man.
By 4 December, police had announced that the man's fingerprints were not on South Australian police records, forcing them to look further afield.
On 5 December, The Advertiser reported that police were searching through military records after a man claimed to have had a drink with a man resembling the dead man at a hotel in Glenelg on 13 November.
During their drinking session, the mystery man supposedly produced a military pension card bearing the name "Solomonson".

In early January 1949, two people identified the body as that of 63-year-old former wood cutter Robert Walsh.
A third person, James Mack, also viewed the body, initially could not identify it, but an hour later he contacted police to claim it was Walsh.
Mack stated that the reason he did not confirm this at the viewing was a difference in the colour of the hair.
Walsh had left Adelaide several months earlier to buy sheep in Queensland but had failed to return at Christmas as planned.
Police were skeptical, believing Walsh to be too old to be the dead man.
However, the police did state that the body was consistent with that of a man who had been a wood cutter, although the state of the man's hands indicated he had not cut wood for at least 18 months.
Any thoughts that a positive identification had been made were quashed, however, when Elizabeth Thompson, one of the people who had earlier positively identified the body as Walsh, retracted her statement after a second viewing of the body, where the absence of a particular scar on the body, as well as the size of the dead man's legs, led her to realise the body was not Walsh.

By early February 1949, there had been eight different "positive" identifications of the body, including two Darwin men who thought the body was of a friend of theirs, and others who thought it was a missing station worker, a worker on a steamship or a Swedish man.
Detectives from the state of Victoria initially believed the man was from there because of the similarity of the laundry marks to those used by several dry-cleaning firms in Melbourne.
Following publication of the man's photograph in Victoria, 28 people claimed to know his identity.
Victorian detectives disproved all the claims and said that "other investigations" indicated it was unlikely that he was a Victorian.

A seaman by the name of Tommy Reade from the SS Cycle, in port at the time, was thought to be the dead man, but after some of his shipmates viewed the body at the morgue, they stated categorically that the corpse was not that of Tommy Reade.

By November 1953, police announced they had recently received the 251st "solution" to the identity of the body from members of the public who claimed to have met or known him.
But, they said that the "only clue of any value" remained the clothing the man wore.

In 2011, an Adelaide woman contacted biological anthropologist Maciej Henneberg about an identification card of an H. C. Reynolds that she had found in her father's possessions.
The card, a document issued in the United States to foreign seamen during World War I, was given to Henneberg in October 2011 for comparison of the ID photograph to that of the Somerton man.
While Henneberg found anatomical similarities in features such as the nose, lips and eyes, he believed they were not as reliable as the close similarity of the ear.
The ear shapes shared by both men were a "very good" match, although Henneberg also found what he called a "unique identifier;" a mole on the cheek that was the same shape and in the same position in both photographs. "
Together wit
A number of possible identifications have been proposed over the years. An Adelaide newspaper, The Advertiser, on reporting the discovery of the body, gave the possible identification as "E.C. Johnson, about 45, of Arthur St, Payneham". The following day, 3 December 1948, Johnson identified himself at a police station. That same day, another Adelaide newspaper, The News, published a photograph of the dead man on its front page, leading to additional calls from members of the public about the possible identity of the dead man. By 4 December, police had announced that the man's fingerprints were not on South Australian police records, forcing them to look further afield. On 5 December, The Advertiser reported that police were searching through military records after a man claimed to have had a drink with a man resembling the dead man at a hotel in Glenelg on 13 November. During their drinking session, the mystery man supposedly produced a military pension card bearing the name "Solomonson".
In early January 1949, two people identified the body as that of 63-year-old former wood cutter Robert Walsh. A third person, James Mack, also viewed the body, initially could not identify it, but an hour later he contacted police to claim it was Walsh. Mack stated that the reason he did not confirm this at the viewing was a difference in the colour of the hair. Walsh had left Adelaide several months earlier to buy sheep in Queensland but had failed to return at Christmas as planned. Police were skeptical, believing Walsh to be too old to be the dead man. However, the police did state that the body was consistent with that of a man who had been a wood cutter, although the state of the man's hands indicated he had not cut wood for at least 18 months. Any thoughts that a positive identification had been made were quashed, however, when Elizabeth Thompson, one of the people who had earlier positively identified the body as Walsh, retracted her statement after a second viewing of the body, where the absence of a particular scar on the body, as well as the size of the dead man's legs, led her to realise the body was not Walsh.
By early February 1949, there had been eight different "positive" identifications of the body, including two Darwin men who thought the body was of a friend of theirs, and others who thought it was a missing station worker, a worker on a steamship or a Swedish man. Detectives from the state of Victoria initially believed the man was from there because of the similarity of the laundry marks to those used by several dry-cleaning firms in Melbourne. Following publication of the man's photograph in Victoria, 28 people claimed to know his identity. Victorian detectives disproved all the claims and said that "other investigations" indicated it was unlikely that he was a Victorian.
A seaman by the name of Tommy Reade from the SS Cycle, in port at the time, was thought to be the dead man, but after some of his shipmates viewed the body at the morgue, they stated categorically that the corpse was not that of Tommy Reade.
By November 1953, police announced they had recently received the 251st "solution" to the identity of the body from members of the public who claimed to have met or known him. But, they said that the "only clue of any value" remained the clothing the man wore.
In 2011, an Adelaide woman contacted biological anthropologist Maciej Henneberg about an identification card of an H. C. Reynolds that she had found in her father's possessions. The card, a document issued in the United States to foreign seamen during World War I, was given to Henneberg in October 2011 for comparison of the ID photograph to that of the Somerton man. While Henneberg found anatomical similarities in features such as the nose, lips and eyes, he believed they were not as reliable as the close similarity of the ear. The ear shapes shared by both men were a "very good" match, although Henneberg also found what he called a "unique identifier;" a mole on the cheek that was the same shape and in the same position in both photographs. "Together wit
Tamam Shud case