Kosminski and Victim DNA Match on Shawl

[GUT]

G'day Garry

And for anyone who believes otherwise, I have some magic beans for sale.

What’s more, they’ve been authenticated by a scientist.

But were the magic beans authenticated using that magic term Deoxyribonucleic acid?

[mickreed]

On jtrforums, Mick Reed posted a Google-translated version of a Dutch review which ended "Gun a tuxedo."

I still haven't worked that one out!

Hi Chris,

Your post gave me an idea. I doubt many English journalists read Finnish, so I wondered what the Finnish press might be saying. Here's one (courtesy Google Translate)

The researcher Jari Louhelainen says he was surprised over medieuppståndelsen after their investigations of Jack the Ripper.


On Tuesday published the British businessman Russell Edwards book which argues that Jack the Ripper (Jack the Ripper) identity secured by a hundred years old scarf. According to the book to DNA samples taken from the scarf Louhelainen have determined that Jack in real life must have been the Polish barber Aaron Kosminski, who was one of the suspects already at the time of the murders in 1880s London.

After the book was published, there were many media who claimed that Louhelainen solved the over hundred year old murder mystery. Himself, he tries to subdue the resurrection.

- I was surprised by how the author, publisher and PR agencies wanted to take everything out of this. Even the back cover revealed that they want to take advantage of me by claiming that the mystery has now been solved with scientific methods, says Louhelainen working with molecular biology at John Moores University in Liverpool.

- I've said in several interviews that the evidence would not be sufficient to Jack the Ripper could be produced before the court.

From Louhelainens examination revealed mainly that there was DNA from both a Jack the Ripper victim and of Kosminski on the scarf. It is not enough that the offense will be considered resolved. Nor can certainly say something about scarfens origin.

- People forget that I concentrate on DNA. However, I have no idea scarfens origin, says Louhelainen.

Jack than fascination
Louhelainen has not yet decided whether he will try to get their research peer-reviewed, for example, in a scientific journal. Despite the media circus, he says he mostly received positive feedback for the research. More than his methods have scarfens origin questioned.

- The criticism has mainly been directed against the book's writers and not against me, says Louhelainen.

Louhelainen surprised by how interested people are still of Jack the Ripper.

- There is a whole industry based on Jack and the people who daily come with the newest around a case that is over a century old. Edwards could hardly sleep while he waited for the results of DNA analysis.

Although Kosminski would prove to be guilty, it never gets any trial in the case. So what do you get then ultimately out of the new findings?

- We have used a couple of methods that the criminal may have much use for. At least this is certainly the most accurate DNA investigations made about the

[Henry Flower]

Helena, I'm very much enjoying your wonderful book at the moment.

Generally, I think this thread has taken several thousand posts of argument and fallings-out in order to arrive exhausted at the position laid out from the outset, clearly and concisely, in the primer provided by Casebook, linked to on the home page.

A wasted journey, to some extent, but it was fun.

[GUT]

G'day Mick

That seems a long way from the slant Mr Edwards puts on it.

[Garry Wroe]

But were the magic beans authenticated using that magic term Deoxyribonucleic acid?

Does it up the price if they were?

[mickreed]

G'day Mick

That seems a long way from the slant Mr Edwards puts on it.

It does. He feels 'taken advantage of'!!

[Mabuse]

Shawl Lay on Floor of Crime Museum

I have found the post where I heard that the shawl lay on the floor of the Crime Museum to be photographed. It was Stewart P. Evans who said "I have photographs of it lying on the floor of the Crime Museum for photography back in May 1997..."

I assume there was something between it and the floor, but that it still pretty bad.

This is ignoring the decades of storage it had endured with other pieces of unremarkable family clothing items in the seachest, according to the family source, although they claim little actual handling during this long period. And we don't know what those other clothing items where, or what they had on them.

[Chris]

I assume there was something between it and the floor, but that it still pretty bad.

Surely it would only be bad if it was in contact with the floor?

[Chris]

Louhelainen has not yet decided whether he will try to get their research peer-reviewed, for example, in a scientific journal.

That's bad news.

[Mabuse]

Contamination

Surely it would only be bad if it was in contact with the floor?

Lots of dust and particles being kicked around in a miasma in the zone above a floor. Plenty of chances for stray crap to fall onto such an item, someone might cough or sneeze, the particles drift down, containing epithelial cells from unknown donors ...

While the factoid that 70% of dust is made up of skin particles is probably a myth, it certainly is a potpourri of everything that has been in the room; soil, pollen, insect dirt, ash, other biological materials, whatnot.

And what other items are stored in this environment that might have DNA material connected to victims and suspects? I don't know, I haven't been there since the late '80s and don't remember.

Depends on how clean the environment was, the nature of the separator, and the activity in the room. Doesn't take much to contaminate something.

And don't call me Shirley.

[mickreed]

Surely it would only be bad if it was in contact with the floor?

Not sure about that, Chris. If they could put it on the floor, even, say, with a sheet under it, then whose to say the sheet was sterile; that it was handled with spacesuits on to avoid contamination. I'd be pretty confident no such thoughts entered anyone's head back then

We've even seen Edwards holding it without protection. Maybe he thought the tests were completed so it didn't matter. Kind of inhibits second opinions though. Perhaps he doesn't want them.

There is bound to be all sorts of contamination ever since the shawl first came into this world (even before when it was just silk, or whatever).

Jari will have been hugely aware about contamination but until we know how the problem was handled, then we simply don't know how relevant it is.

[Chris]

Lots of dust and particles being kicked around in a miasma in the zone above a floor. Plenty of chances for stray crap to fall onto such an item, someone might cough or sneeze, the particles drift down, containing epithelial cells from unknown donors ...

OK, but most of that would also apply if it had been put on a table. I just think saying it was "put on the floor" makes it sound rather worse than it (probably) was.

And what other items are stored in this environment that might have DNA material connected to victims and suspects? I don't know, I haven't been there since the late '80s and don't remember.

I certainly can't think of any, unless people believe in the Ripper letters.

[Mabuse]

Dr Louhelainen spoke of pretty strict control methodology in the BBC interview. I forget the details. I may go back and make a transcript of the interview for the sake of accuracy, I think, but I haven't got time right now.

In any case, that's not necessarily the end of it. Louhelainen appears to not entirely be in the loop about the wanderings of the shawl, in which case the techniques used might not be up to snuff.

I am entirely skeptical of the solvent-suction method, which is new. You have to go through the deposits on the surface to get to the stuff in the matrix. But Dr Louhelainen says his control methods account for this.

[Patrick S]

I have found the post where I heard that the shawl lay on the floor of the Crime Museum to be photographed. It was Stewart P. Evans who said "I have photographs of it lying on the floor of the Crime Museum for photography back in May 1997..."

I assume there was something between it and the floor, but that it still pretty bad.

This is ignoring the decades of storage it had endured with other pieces of unremarkable family clothing items in the seachest, according to the family source, although they claim little actual handling during this long period. And we don't know what those other clothing items where, or what they had on them.

Obviously, the history of the shawl, the way it's been handled - publicly and privately - is troubling to say the least. Jari Louhelainen stated in his BBC interview (posted somewhere within this now massive thread) that he was able to isolate the DNA associated with the liquids (seminal fluids/blood) that had soaked into the fabrics. As I recall, the interviewer asked some rather pointed questions and had extensive knowledge of the subject matter himself, as he's also a molecular biologist. Louhelainen describes the techniques used (vaccuming, etc.) to identify the relevant (for lack of a better term) DNA, and I didn't get the sense that the interviewer felt this was all completely out of bounds and absurd on its face. And this seems to be the course most of the debate has taken: Plenty of skepticism, no outright refutation of techniques of findings. I've seen a few articles that claim that prespective, but they're more of the same: opinion. Just as Jari Louhelainen and Edwards have an opinion of the results, those on the other side of the issue have theirs. Eventually, the science will be fully vetted and we'll have a much clearer picture, but, I think, we'll always have those who believe in Louhelainen's results and those who do not.

In any event, it is all good for the Jack the Ripper "industry" as a whole. I'm finding that those who've been aware of my interest have started contacting me for my thoughts, which is fun. It's interesting to discuss the case with those just becoming exposed it. It's also nice that many who have scratched their heads at my fixation on JtR over years are now beginning to have some understanding of it, possibly even beginning to share it.

I think it's fairly obvious at this point that the shawl and Edwards' book will become a part of the tapestry of the case. It will not resolve it. It will be another avenue of study, discussion, debate, argument.

I recall my first exposure to the case came about 30 years ago amid a spate of articles proclaiming that the case had been solved and the killer was Montague John Druitt. After that uptick in interest, those bitten by the bug dug deeper into it and learned that the case was far from solved. The rest went on their way and forgot about it. The same thing will happen here.

[robhouse]

I notice that, in their books, Phillip Sugden, Paul Begg, inter alia, say the amendments are in red ink. They look like pencil in the image that Rob House posted, but I daresay they may be in red ink. Perhaps Rob could help us.

Here are close-ups of the details you were discussing. I believe the amendments were in red ink... at least it looks that way to me. As to the writing next to his name, it looks like "seen" with initials next to it, but I can't make out the initials.

RH