Kosminski and Victim DNA Match on Shawl

[lynn cates]

serial killers

Hello Errata.

"Bobby Joe McCauley is absolutely schizophrenic, and is not a serial killer. He killed one woman. I had the occasion to interview him twice by phone. He is not okay. When he was arrested he talked about killing other women, so there was very real reason to think he was a serial killer. However those women turned out to be the victims of another serial killer"

A one off amidst a serial killing spree? Zounds, what are the odd? (heh-heh)

Cheers.
LC

[PaulB]

As Adam said, the publisher used Four Colman Getty to handle press requests for review copies, rights requests and to schedule interview and so on. It is a very common practise.

[mickreed]

Jack the ripper gift shop opens then book is published then doctor who produces d.n.a evidence gets himself p.r agent !!!! and we are asked to believe this is not just a money making exercise .

Well, I'm a cynic as some may have already divined, but I don't necessarily go along with the above.

If, as Adam and Paul have stated, it was done from day 1 for Jari, Russell, and Karen, then that seems to me to be okay, presumably the publishers put this together in anticipation of the ensuing furore.

I am far from convinced that RE and his publisher are not just in it for the dough (well the publisher certainly will be, that's his job), but I cannot see what would be in it for Karen and Jari to be caught up in this.

Karen is a descendant of Eddowes and, for a while, will get caught up in the debate. I cannot see she will get much out of this, apart from a lot of hassle.

Jari has everything to lose in a reputational sense. His research is either going to be subjected to the most rigorous scrutiny, and if found seriously flawed, it will do him no good at all; or it will sink without trace and all be forgotten, except by those whose job it is to remember - his academic peers.

I have little doubt that RE is playing fast and loose with the evidence. From what I can gather he doesn't really understand it, and is obviously very good at beating up a story.

In short, I would not include Jari and Karen in any criticisms that I may have of RE and the publisher - certainly not at the moment.

[pinkmoon]

Well, I'm a cynic as some may have already divined, but I don't necessarily go along with the above.

If, as Adam and Paul have stated, it was done from day 1 for Jari, Russell, and Karen, then that seems to me to be okay, presumably the publishers put this together in anticipation of the ensuing furore.

I am far from convinced that RE and his publisher are not just in it for the dough (well the publisher certainly will be, that's his job), but I cannot see what would be in it for Karen and Jari to be caught up in this.

Karen is a descendant of Eddowes and, for a while, will get caught up in the debate. I cannot see she will get much out of this, apart from a lot of hassle.

Jari has everything to lose in a reputational sense. His research is either going to be subjected to the most rigorous scrutiny, and if found seriously flawed, it will do him no good at all; or it will sink without trace and all be forgotten, except by those whose job it is to remember - his academic peers.

I have little doubt that RE is playing fast and loose with the evidence. From what I can gather he doesn't really understand it, and is obviously very good at beating up a story.

In short, I would not include Jari and Karen in any criticisms that I may have of RE and the publisher - certainly not at the moment.

I think the whole thing stinks

[mickreed]

Dr Jari has a PR agent.

Now that is interesting...surely

Monty

Here's the link, thanks to Adam and Paul:

https://www.fourcommunications.com/news/naming-jack-ripper

[Toofew]

"Third, we have no idea what happened back then with police etc reports, documentation is not their strong point or anything else in law detection back then."

Whatt? In an age when Scotland Yard recorded everything, even down to coal consumption and which side the great coat should be buttoned?

You need to buy my book Krinoid, Capturing Jack the Ripper, available from Amberley Publishing, due out in November. ;-)

Monty

Thanks for the heads-up! I just pre-ordered it. Now, to decide which of Paul's books to get (I've already ordered Tom's books since this thread started!)

[Toofew]

Have consulted a few Geneo books to assist with deciphering old scrip .
Initially I could make out the letters dec, Is it possibly 'seen decd', shorthand for deceased?

Wolfie, if you're speaking of the word below "seen", it looks to me like "Tue" which I presume is short for Tuesday.

Don't you love deciphering old handwriting?

Billy

[dropzone]

I've read the entire thread and you're right, people have been saying this quite a bit. But that's not evidence -- that's just saying words.

You state that the dimensions are wrong. Do you have any particular expertise in historic clothing or textiles that should give us reason to lend weight to your opinion over that of the experts at the University of Liverpool who identified it as an early to mid 19th century shawl?

Researchers need broad knowledge, even if most of it is shallow. A little bit of knowledge about one thing may be dangerous, but a little bit of knowledge about a whole bunch of stuff can allow you to spout off about just about anything, to a limited extent.

This is a modern table runner, but they've been around forever:

http://www.hm.com/us/product/23184?article=23184-A&cm_mmc=pla-_-us-_-home_kitchen_tablecloths-_-23184&gclid=CPC9xoz-9cACFccRMwodRmAAUA

Note the way the panels are arranged, with matching ends that are strongly patterned and a center section that is more subdued so it does not detract from the centerpiece. That one is smaller, for a smaller table. The fully-assembled "shawl" was sized for an 8' table, with the patterned ends hanging over the table like this:

http://www.ziva-needlepoint-designs.com/images/chestnut-runner-on-table.jpg

Did the people at Liverpool actually call it a shawl, or was that word put in their mouths? Table runners don't need to be washed so color-non-fastness would not be a problem. Over-the-shoulder evening shawls are usually a foot* or two shorter than the complete "shawl" was, and the symmetrical layout is more diagnostic of a table runner. However, this is not to say that Ms Eddowes, or someone else, could not have used it as a shawl to dress up some, and it's a handsome cloth.


* - Remember that this was 1888, the height of the British Empire, and the units used were Imperial, by God! Not that damned French system.

[dropzone]

Dr Jari has a PR agent.

Now that is interesting...surely

PR agents are like lawyers for people of sudden fame who do not know how the media works. There to keep you from saying anything stupid. Not particularly interesting, especially if handled by the publisher.

[Tom_Wescott]

Thanks for the heads-up! I just pre-ordered it. Now, to decide which of Paul's books to get (I've already ordered Tom's books since this thread started!)

Just what Monty likes to hear.

Thanks, Toofew!

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Tom_Wescott]

As Adam said, the publisher used Four Colman Getty to handle press requests for review copies, rights requests and to schedule interview and so on. It is a very common practise.

It's also absolutely necessary when in every interview so far the good doctor has pointed out that Edwards (and the publisher) have exaggerated the claims that science has proved the Ripper's identity 100%.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[The Good Michael]

And is this kind of killer a man who kills silently, who tilts the bodies of his victims to avoid getting blood on him, who approaches and leaves the murder spots undetected, who leaves no trail, no trace, no clue...?

Pretty simple and without much thought to avoid blood and leave the scene quickly. It doesn't take a huge amount of ordered thinking.

Mike

[mickreed]

Did the people at Liverpool actually call it a shawl, or was that word put in their mouths? Table runners don't need to be washed so color-non-fastness would not be a problem. Over-the-shoulder evening shawls are usually a foot* or two shorter than the complete "shawl" was, and the symmetrical layout is more diagnostic of a table runner. However, this is not to say that Ms Eddowes, or someone else, could not have used it as a shawl to dress up some, and it's a handsome cloth.

I'm a bit of a pedant, but even I draw the line at getting too fraught about whether it's a shawl, a stole, a table runner, or a potato sack. Who cares really? It could easily be any of these - well, maybe not a potato sack. As dropzone says, it could have been used for a purpose other than what it was intended for, by anyone.

The important thing is whether the DNA demonstrates what it is claimed that it does.

Me, I don't really expect it to.

[Fisherman]

Pretty simple and without much thought to avoid blood and leave the scene quickly. It doesn't take a huge amount of ordered thinking.

Mike

Perhaps not in a single case, no. But when we are looking at a number of deeds, all carried out in the middle of a large metropolis with sleeping people - or sometimes people very much awake - lining the murder sites, where the killer manages to slip in and out, where he kills without a sound, where he leaves no traces, where he tilts the bodies to avoid getting blood on him, where there are no bloodied footprints, where he always takes care to take the murder weapon along with him, then I would argue with some heat that we are NOT dealing with a psychotic killer.
Have look at Eddowes, Mike - not a speck of blood on her jacket, not a drop of it on the front of her clothes, a kidney carefully removed from the front, the uterus taken away, very few minutes to work in, quite possibly a PC looking into the dark square as the killer was there with the body ...

A psychotic? Not very likely, no!

All the best,
Fisherman

[The Good Michael]

Have look at Eddowes, Mike - not a speck of blood on her jacket, not a drop of it on the front of her clothes, a kidney carefully removed from the front, the uterus taken away, very few minutes to work in, quite possibly a PC looking into the dark square as the killer was there with the body ...

A psychotic? Not very likely, no!

I disagree. For the few victims that were killed by the same hand (if one believes such a thing), even the nuttiest of people could have had enough of a simple plan to do the intitial portion of the crime. Then, what comes next would be done in a less frenetic state, even if psychotic or psychopath or whatever. What we don't have is a shape-shifting were-creature that must kill and butcher when the sun sets. We have someone, probably a psychopath, who has enough control usually to keep his murders to a minimum and to probably have a job at times and to make family and friends (if friends) know he's nuts, but not know HOW nuts he is. This is my take, and I really don't want to continue this dicussion.


Mike