What evidence would persuade you that the mystery is solved?

[Trevor Marriott]

Emphasis on the word find there, Trevor! Even if you found such a person, or even a collection of persons, it would still take extraordinary evidence to get a consensus. After all this time, what would that be? Anything one came up with could be refuted.

Celesta
Everyhting new that anyone comes up with is automatically refuted it seems in any event

[Celesta]

Yes, doesn't it though. That's not going to keep me from having an open mind on some of the suspects, including some of the newer ones, who may not fit the traditional picture of JtR.

Have a good Sunday, Trevor and company.

[bolo]

Hi doris,

interesting question. It had to be something tangible, perhaps a series of authentic private documents from a former Whitechapel resident with specific details on the murders or the discovery of some sort of "secret stash"... etc.

Yet I doubt this would be enough to persuade each and every Ripper/true crime enthusiast. Some of them have spacious and very comfy rooms in The House That Jack Built so it would need something really big to drive them out.

Regards,

Boris

[Carrotty Nell]

Hi doris,

interesting question. It had to be something tangible, perhaps a series of authentic private documents from a former Whitechapel resident with specific details on the murders or the discovery of some sort of "secret stash"... etc.

Yet I doubt this would be enough to persuade each and every Ripper/true crime enthusiast.

Quite right. Any written confession, even carbon dated precisely to December 1888 (if it's possible to be that precise) will be dismissed as a forgery on some grounds or other.

But... if the victims' bodies could be exhumed and examined for DNA. They would each theoretically carry the DNA of anyone with whom they came into contact shortly before their deaths and anyone who handled their bodies post mortem.

All these DNA strands from all victims could then be compared. If an identical DNA fingerprint was found on all five (or six including Tabram) of them, then we could with reasonable certainty say this was the killer's DNA.

This could then be fed into the modern DNA database. The chance that Jack has a direct descendant or collateral descendant whose DNA is in the modern database is actually quite high. It would be theoretically possible therefore to identify his family at least.

[Trevor Marriott]

Quite right. Any written confession, even carbon dated precisely to December 1888 (if it's possible to be that precise) will be dismissed as a forgery on some grounds or other.

But... if the victims' bodies could be exhumed and examined for DNA. They would each theoretically carry the DNA of anyone with whom they came into contact shortly before their deaths and anyone who handled their bodies post mortem.

All these DNA strands from all victims could then be compared. If an identical DNA fingerprint was found on all five (or six including Tabram) of them, then we could with reasonable certainty say this was the killer's DNA.

This could then be fed into the modern DNA database. The chance that Jack has a direct descendant or collateral descendant whose DNA is in the modern database is actually quite high. It would be theoretically possible therefore to identify his family at least.

Just because you come in contact with someone doesnt automatically follow there will be a transference of dna. There may be a transference of fibres from clothing to clothing.

Any transference of dna at the time from killer to victim is likely to have de generated with the passage of time and the decomposure of the victims in the graves.

And if you did find any first you have to asceratin that its the victim then any secondary dna would have to be checked against another evidential sample. Again due to the passage of time there are no samples from any of the suspects to check it against.

[bolo]

Hi Nell,

Quite right. Any written confession, even carbon dated precisely to December 1888 (if it's possible to be that precise) will be dismissed as a forgery on some grounds or other.

yes, that is what would most probably happen, specially if the new evidence would point to a suspect who has been refused as a likely candidate time and again.

The turf war which would inevitably ensue on the casebook forums and other places would make a smashing reading, that's for sure.

But... if the victims' bodies could be exhumed and examined for DNA. They would each theoretically carry the DNA of anyone with whom they came into contact shortly before their deaths and anyone who handled their bodies post mortem.

All these DNA strands from all victims could then be compared. If an identical DNA fingerprint was found on all five (or six including Tabram) of them, then we could with reasonable certainty say this was the killer's DNA.

This could then be fed into the modern DNA database. The chance that Jack has a direct descendant or collateral descendant whose DNA is in the modern database is actually quite high. It would be theoretically possible therefore to identify his family at least.

From what I've read on DNA testing, obtaining nuclear DNA (read, the "good" DNA) from old remains such as bones or teeth or other very degraded evidence like bloodstained fabric is almost impossible, only mitochondrial DNA (if at all) can be found here. mDNA can be used for tracing the maternal lineage of a person and thus may be of interest for a genealogical approach to finding the culprit. However, I highly doubt wether it's possible to get permission to exhume the remains of the victims or use official DNA databases for the purpose of trying to solve a 122 years old case, as interesting as it may be.

Do the police or other authorities store mDNA evidence at all?

Regards,

Boris

[SaraCarter33]

Hi doris,

interesting question. It had to be something tangible, perhaps a series of authentic private documents from a former Whitechapel resident with specific details on the murders or the discovery of some sort of "secret stash"... etc.

Yet I doubt this would be enough to persuade each and every Ripper/true crime enthusiast. Some of them have spacious and very comfy rooms in The House That Jack Built so it would need something really big to drive them out.

Regards,

Boris

That was very well said and i very much agree with you.

[Slimsid2000]

If he made a televised confession on the Jeremy Kyle show.

[Kaz]

hullo,

I have, of late, been wondering what would be needed to persuade the world that JTR has been found?

If, for instance, a portmanteau was unearthed, which contained 2 brass rings, the missing organs bobbing about in jamjars full of vinegar, a 6 or 8 inch surgical knife, and some texts which matched the Lusk Letter.

Would ripperologists caper about, wild with joy that one of the world's most enduring puzzles was solved. Or would they argue about who faked it?

What Iam trying to say is what would the average casebook reader need to be convinced of JTR's identity?

toodle-oo

doris

I suppose DNA evidence. James Maybricks would be a damn good start.

There will always be 'doubters' no matter what IMO.

[andy.s]

I suppose DNA evidence. James Maybricks would be a damn good start.

There will always be 'doubters' no matter what IMO.

I have honestly come to the conclusion that nowt bar video evidence would convince me.
Every bit of subject matter ive read on the case, at first convinces me "so and so" did it...then i log on here and find irrefutable proof "so and so" did not, and it was in fact...."so and so".
i attach no blame of the obviously well researched and annoyingly well argumented facts the posters on here put forth..its simply my fault.
Until reading this site i had simply watched the T.V documentaries..the Barlow and Watt series, the Royal conspiracy Michael Caine thingy and a couple of others that have now more or less been dismissed out of hand, and more recently read the Patricia Cornwell novel, which had me convinced it was Sickert...case closed ..so to speak.
I have no arguement about buying the many books that are available about this morbid but fascinating subject, thats my decision, but i do take umbrage when authors present details as "Facts" when in no way they are actual facts, and this does a disservice to both the subject itself, and the poor sod who bought the book.
Authors who present even the most tenous thread, that can attach itself to a suspect i have no problem with, it gives me the choice of making my own mind up and jumping to a conclusion, that is probably wrong, but i can see why i jumped to it.
Authors who make up facts to suit suit their own arguements..i do have a problem with ..after all, there is a science fiction section in most bookshops..and if i want to buy one from there..i know what i'm getting.
Having said all this..i have now listened to all of the rippercasts, and find them enthralling...trawled through this site and find it fascinating and better than any book ive read on the subject...but Christ Almighty!...theres a lot of info to take in...
Everytime i think of what i believe is a pertinent question....i use the search thingy and find its already been asked, and most times answered...thats why i only post once a year..but i read it avidly

Andy

[sbanker31]

Quite right. Any written confession, even carbon dated precisely to December 1888 (if it's possible to be that precise) will be dismissed as a forgery on some grounds or other.

But... if the victims' bodies could be exhumed and examined for DNA. They would each theoretically carry the DNA of anyone with whom they came into contact shortly before their deaths and anyone who handled their bodies post mortem.

All these DNA strands from all victims could then be compared. If an identical DNA fingerprint was found on all five (or six including Tabram) of them, then we could with reasonable certainty say this was the killer's DNA.

This could then be fed into the modern DNA database. The chance that Jack has a direct descendant or collateral descendant whose DNA is in the modern database is actually quite high. It would be theoretically possible therefore to identify his family at least.

I was thinking along these lines myself. If possible,it would be a good idea to try to extract DNA from all victims(if any still exists after such a long time+finding the actual bodies could be problematic)before the DNA degrades any further.Plus saving it in the database would leave it available if new technologies develop in the future. As for Kate with a road over her,I saw a special about Dr.Mengele where they use a "sonic gun" to image underground so they don't have to disturb any more than they have to.

[spyglass]

Hi all,

Ok so lets say we find the same DNA on all the victims which could likely be the killers, so then who do we try to compare this with ?
Lets just assume for the moment that JTR wasnt one of the many suspects, and even if he was...who would you start with?

[jason_c]

Any further evidence against Druitt or Kosminski would be more substantial (and more likely) than any evidence against a modern day suspect.

[Pontius2000]

there's probably nothing that could be turned up now to convince me.

but if I could've seen all the evidence and all the documents that have now gone missing or destroyed. and Macnaghten's "evidence" on MJD, and the other known circumstances surrounding Kosminski, etc, then yes, I could probably form an opinion that would satisfy me personally that the case was *probably* solved.

I also wish the authorities had exhumed Eddowes and compared the "From Hell" kidney to the one that was left in her body, had taken photos of the GSG, and photos of the other crimescenes. but I guess all that is another topic entirely.

[Defective Detective]

The Jack the Ripper case is one that cannot be solved according to modern standards. While I applaud the efforts of those like Patricia Cornwell (while still bearing in mind the utter falsity of most of her claims) to apply modern forensic evidence to the case, the fact remains that the last widely accepted Whitechapel victim was discovered one hundred and twenty-two years ago to this very day. It is almost impossible that any evidence which would hold up in a modern court has survived.

That said, I do think the canonical five need to be exhumed. I do think they need to be examined, not because I expect that they could point the way to our man, nor even that I hope they could - but because it's the right thing to do, because these women were butchered and justice demands that even today we treat those crimes like the absence of it.

Ultimately, to 'solve' this crime in any reasonable sense will be to apply the logic of its day to our current-day investigations: deduction and inference will be a greater asset than any forensic work. Unlike most Ripperologists I do believe it's possible to 'know' who did it to the satisfaction of most everyone, provided most everyone can set aside their own agendas and theories; while it will never be 'proven' to modern standards, we can, if fortune allows it, come to a workable consensus on the crimes. And that would be enough.

Someone alive today knew or knew of Jack the Ripper. At the least they know his real name; they possibly know of his crimes. There are still thousands of individuals alive in England alone who were born before the First World War and to parents who were generational cohorts of the Whitechapel murderer. Of these, someone knows more than they've revealed publicly. The most successful avenue of exploration now will be talking to these people who lived in the first few decades after the killings and listening to what they have to tell us. I think it would be profitable if some English Ripperologist would begin asking questions to those who may have lived at the same time as the Ripper. Doubtless you'll get many cranks who hazily remember some shadowy suspicion passed down in their family. And these tall tales alone will be just as valuable as any piece of forensic evidence.