Would Jack have been caught if he struck today?

[bolo]

There is a famous series of murders called "Döner Kebab killings" that started in my hometown Nuremberg in the year 2000, back then I lived only 100m away from the crime scene. All nine victims were shot in the head, all but one were Turkish businessmen (one was a Greek). The police took lots of fingerprints and DNA samples and started a Europe-wide investigation but still have no clue on the identity of the perpetrator(s). They even made a mass DNA test in our area, handed out tons of flyers, conducted house-to-house searches, etc.

I just mention this case because of the comment of a leading officer involved in it who told the press that "we have tons of clues and theories but still can't untie the knot", which reminded me of the comments of police officers during the autumn of 1888 - lots of hot air but no substance. In other words, DNA sampling, fingerprinting and similar scientific methods can be highly effective in one case and totally worthless in another.

In my opinion, there's no reason for me to think that a modern Jack couldn't be as successful at fooling the police as the LVP one. What's more, a modern Ripper would probably be aware of DNA testing and fingerprints and take reasonable precautions. The chance of a "cold-case" solution of the case would be higher though.

[sdreid]

Hi bolo,

Just curious. What DNA was left shooting someone?

[bolo]

Three of the victims had defensive wounds and were knocked out before they got killed with headshots. According to the police, they found enough DNA traces to be able to say that all three of them got killed by the same man.

All victims were killed point blank or close range with the same weapon (Ceska, cal. 7.65 type 83).

[sdreid]

Thanks Bolo. That rather small caliber sure sounds like an assassin's weapon.

[bolo]

At first, investigations took the mafia and paid assassin route but when they couldn't find the slightest trace of evidence to back it up, police expanded their focus on extremists, religious fanatics and also psychopaths. The last murder took place in Kassel on April 6th 2006 and they're none the wiser.

[plang]

Oh screw it. Started reading through the posts and jumped ahead. Jack would have been caught today in an instant. The s.o.b. did not have to worry about todays forensic science.Even 110 years later there is evidence to link 'Jack' as the murderer through DNA. Jack was actually very sloppy, the police were even sloppier.

[brummie]

Jack was actually very sloppy, the police were even sloppier.

No one doubts Jack left lots of dna all over the place, but the point has already been made that this is only useful if you already have a suspect to compare it to,and although plenty of people were suspected theres no guarantee the actual killer ever came into contact with the police. As for the police actions, with no forensics available its difficult to know what else they could have done.This was a time when if the killer wasn't caught in the act or at least seen in the act by a reliable witness there was very little chance of detecting a stranger killer.

[Sam Flynn]

At least DNA analysis would have a pretty good chance of showing whether the victims had been in contact with the same man.

[Dan Norder]

Even 110 years later there is evidence to link 'Jack' as the murderer through DNA.

Not unless you know of DNA evidence that nobody else knows about.

And, before you say it, the stuff that Patricia Cornwell claimed in her book doesn't count, because there's no "link" there at all, just some shoddy tests that don't rule Sickert out as the writer of a letter that almost certainly didn't even come from the killer. Not ruling something out isn't anywhere the same as showing a link, and a link to a hoax letter (even if there were a link, which there isn't) isn't the same as a link to a murderer.

[Barnaby]

If we transport forensic science and modern policing back to Victorian London, Jack gets caught. I believe that he must have left some physical evidence. If so, police wouldn't have had to rely on reluctant eyewitnesses.

Before I get chided again for the "CSI effect" again, let me try and be more clear. Most agree that although Jack did leave DNA, the problem is that there were no suspects to compare it to. But suppose you had a reluctant eyewitness (Lawende?) who refused to ID the Ripper out of a lineup. Obviously, DNA evidence would become very useful at this point. DNA evidence also could have cleared (or not) contemporary suspects such as Druitt, Chapman, etc. DNA also could have been collected from Joe Barnet, Hutch, all the major players. Of course DNA technology would have been helpful, if for nothing other than excluding "persons of interest."

[plang]

Maybe that's what Patricia Cornwell meant by 'case closed'. What police department or prosecutors are going to 'open' a 120 year old case?
The body's of suspects could be exhumed and tested for DNA samples.
Who's gonna do it?

[plang]

Hmm. Seems no one has a snappy comeback to that question.










(O, here we go)

Bring out the experts!!! And you can pay for the expenses!

[revpetero]

Dna

If in the case of many prostitutes of the day they had more than one "client" in a day. To have had lodging money a few times that day but to have spent it would suggest that.

The amount of DNA on these women would be immense. How often do they wash to a decent level? How many DNA samples would they be carrying? These weren't the most hygenic of ladies.

Peter

[diana]

I think it would have been at least harder for him. Look at this: http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/Gad...4872498&page=1

[Karmi-Sempai]

The problem with police is that they find it very difficult to catch a serial killer if he commits only a few murders. They wait until he slips up, or kills so many people that suspicion only starts to arise or a pattern can be found. I've seen this old case on television where a certain killer who poses as a doctor killed around 300 people before he even got suspected. His victims were old ladies, apparently.