Face of the Ripper?

[Natalie Severn]

just for the record

Just to clarify re one or two queries that have been made on this thread:

Wednesday, 7th January 1903 ,Southwark Police Court

Wolff Levisohn ,cross-examined by Mr Syndey,George Chapman"s solicitor:

You saw him at Tottenham.What sort of a man was this Zagowski? [Chapman had several aliases Zagowski being one of them]

Levisohn: He was a "la di da" then,with black coat,patent boots,anda high hat. There he sits.He has not changed a bit; he has not a grey hair in his head........

Next Stanislaus Rauch:[Chapman"s brother in law]:
.....he stated he had not seen the accused for ten years.He stated that Chapman had not changed his appearance

[Ben]

Thanks, Norma.

Levishon was obviously responding to a direct question concerning Klosowski's appearance during his time in Tottenham High Road in 1895. By then, he had become "la di da" - possibly cultivated during his travels abroad - and hadn't changed his appearence since then. If Rauch's "ten years" is accurate, he had last met with Kloswoski around the time of his return from America.

Best regards,
Ben

[Natalie Severn]

Yes,I agree Ben that Levisohn seems to be suggesting that Chapman had made his way in the world by then and was all dressed up and feigning airs and graces.
This also implies that he didnt dress like Mr Astrakhan in 1888!

[Versa]

Hi all,
I watched the documentry recently, and thought the whole thing was a waste of time. The computer picture does resemble Chapman, but then so did 90% of men at that time.
Whilst on the subject of that documentry ( i guess it has been talked about on the boards before but I missed it ) Could anyone else make out what that police woman was trying to achieve?
I refere mainly to the getting of DNA from Eddowes shawl, even if succesfull, who was she going to try and match it with?

im guessing... if it were possible to get un-contaminated DNA they'd be looking for.....

1. DNA from CE, using maternal decendants for comparisons to confirm/conject that the shawl was indeed CE's

2. Other DNA (JTR's?) again using maternal decendants of suspects to compare?