Kosminski and Victim DNA Match on Shawl

[christoper]

No, I've not read the book, not sure where you got that from? What I was saying was here's a resource on the T1a1 haplogroup, which is the only mtDNA haplogroup I've seen mentioned and discussed so far. If you are aware of other mtDNA related information, and know of resources that might be suitable for people to consider, please do provide. As I said by pointing out that T1 estimates would overestimate the numbers of T1a1 (for the obvious reason that some with T1 would not be T1a1), and you seem to agree since you point out that more information narrows the numbers more, then the more information we can put together, the more narrow things become. The number of possible matches has been a topic of discussion as various numbers have been tossed around. This is how one explains where those numbers come from.

- Jeff

Sorry, from what you said, I thought you were claiming to have read the book and were deliberately misleading people. It seems you haven't bothered with the book--and just picked a piece out of the news coverage and assumed that represented the full scientific effort?

Matching that haploid gives a general idea of the geographical origin of the suspect--many thousands of people would come from this area--so that is not very unique. HOWEVER, it is obvious that more than the one haplogroup was matched. Please look at what the scientist has said in interviews. Information such as hair color etc--shows that more than that one haplogroup (indicating geographic ancestry) was matched. Much more specific genetic information was obviously obtained (at least for AK) and has been referred to. Every piece that was obtained narrows it down further and further to fewer people.

Even though that particular Haploid has been mentioned in the tabloid--it is a gross mischaracterization of the research to act as though that was the only DNA characterized and that a match is based solely on its presence.

[GUT]

I think you're addressing a point I wasn't making. If a valid DNA match was proved the two most likely scenarios would be:

prostitute and client in a normal (for them) transaction

or

prostitute and bogus killer.

Either is possible but this particular prostitute ended up with her throat cut, and act of which this particular client was suspected at the time. I'm not being the drum for authenticity of the shawl here, nor am I dismissing out of hand the claimed DNA match. I merely point out that middle-aged prostitutes tend not to bleed onto clothing during a routine transaction with a client.

G'day Bridewell

Never heard of menstruation? Or having a cut somewhere, say the knee. Or even scraping the knee while providing the service that is most requested of prostitutes and according to some sources has been since at least the 1700's.

[Poch]

Sorry, from what you said, I thought you were claiming to have read the book and were deliberately misleading people. It seems you haven't bothered with the book--and just picked a piece out of the news coverage and assumed that represented the full scientific effort?

This whole thread has been pages and pages of this.

[pinkmoon]

My head hurts with all this my first day back at work today since this case was solved and after explaining to nine people the FACTS behind this they all agree that it is not really case solved as it has been claimed.

[Observer]

Multi killer brigade?

Even if this did all prove to be true, we only have one murderer connectrd to one victim only.
And at least the "crackpot" Diary has more legs than this one.

Regards

So if it can be proven that Kosminsk killed Eddowes, you would still require proof that he was responsible for the other murders?

And you put a question mark after "Multi killer brigade".

The crackpot dairy is legless, always has been, always will be.

[paul g]

Dropped pieces of apron

The pieces of discarded apron .
Say the killer of Eddowes was kominsky were the pieces dropped on a route that he would take if heading home from the murder site to where he is believed to be living ?

[Errata]

Not for nothing, but I've never seen that kind of shawl in Victorian dress. Every shawl I've ever seen, whatever material it was made of, was basically a triangle scarf. The "table runner" was a known style in India, but because of the peculiarities of native Indian dress it works in India, but doesn't really work in European clothing. It's actually a tough shape for a shawl, and does not at all lie he way we think shawls should. There was a big resurgence of those particular kinds of shawls around the turn of this century. Starting in the late nineties, done by 2010. Pashmina shawls they are called. Antiques were quite sought after. I have many my mother gave me from the 1950s. They look the same as the shawl in the picture.

It's also interesting that the description of the scarf in the letter does not match the scarf in the pictures. Half floral and half brown does not translate into floral with a brown border. Borders are supposed to... border. But maybe I'm being picky.

Archaic should weigh in on this. She is the mistress of all things sartorial.

[Stewart P Evans]

Embedded deep in the cloth...?

...
Edwards reply was they have paid no attention to what was on top of the shawl they have just taken samples from what has seeped in to the cloth and is inbededed deep in the cloth. I have no idea if this makes a difference but if it does. It ends another possible argument against it

'Embedded deep I the cloth'? It can't be that deep if the material is as thin and flimsy as it has been described. I am sure that a very small amount of fluid dropped on it would soon seep through to the other side.

[robhouse]

I do not believe that you are subscribing to this nonsense. Must be something to do with the fact that the selected suspect is Kosminski.

Perhaps. But I am not subscribing to this exactly. I do not know enough about it to come to a conclusion either way. We shall see what develops, but I admit I am a bit surprised that the result has been generally dismissed out of hand by people who have neither read the book, nor know anything about the science behind this.

My position is quite simple... Either the science is flawed, or it is an elaborate hoax perpetrated by both Edwards and louhelainen, or its case closed. I don't see any other options. I will be happy when it becomes clear what the truth is. But if the science is validated, then the provenance becomes a secondary consideration in my opinion. Whatever the result (and I am equally open to any of the three) it will not change my theories regarding kozminski, which I am aware you disagree with.

RH

[GUT]

My head hurts with all this my first day back at work today since this case was solved and after explaining to nine people the FACTS behind this they all agree that it is not really case solved as it has been claimed.

G'day Pink

So the people you work with are smarter than some who post here.

To be fair I hope he can solve it, but a lot more is needed, just like I hoped Ms Cornwell had solved it and I hoped the Diary had solved it and I hoped ... [insert author of choice] had solved it.

But to be frank so far they have all had holes you could drive a truck through, when you looked at them seriously. I am waiting for the book but based on what we have there are just too many gaps in the stories to say "Case Solved" yet.

There are, unless the shawl can be placed at the murder scene too many other innocent explanations.

But I know that others will disagree. That's their prerogative.

[Stewart P Evans]

So why...?

If the science checks out then there are only two options, as far as I see it:
1. The shawl was at the crime scene in Mitre Square, and Kozminski was the Ripper.
2. Willful and deliberate fraud by both the author and Dr. Louhelainen.
So at this point, I don't really see any sense in continuing to debate until the scientific results are reviewed and either verified or shown to be in error.
RH

So why have you continued to debate?

[christoper]

G'day Bridewell

Never heard of menstruation? Or having a cut somewhere, say the knee. Or even scraping the knee while providing the service that is most requested of prostitutes and according to some sources has been since at least the 1700's.

Menstrual blood can be differentiated from non-Menstrual blood. It's purpose is to clean out the uterus of unused cells--so it contains cells that other blood does not. Interestingly--it is chock full of stem-cells--check this out--

http://healthland.time.com/2011/03/09/stem-cells-from-menstrual-blood-strange-but-true/

[lynn cates]

another thread

Hello Jeff. Thanks.

"I was just trying to point out that there are those of use who believe there is every reason to suspect Aaron Kosminski long before the Shawl."

Just as there are those of us who don't suspect him for ANY reason. But that's for another thread.

Cheers.
LC

[spyglass]

So if it can be proven that Kosminsk killed Eddowes, you would still require proof that he was responsible for the other murders?

And you put a question mark after "Multi killer brigade".

The crackpot dairy is legless, always has been, always will be.

Ofcourse proof would be required, doubt already hangs over whether Stride was a victim, and there are those who put a question mark over Kelly.

What ever we think about the Diary, Its has held up for twenty odd years and still unproven to be fake. I dont see this latest theory holding out that long.

I have and proberbly always will keep an open mind about this case.

Regards.

[robhouse]

So why have you continued to debate?

Why have you?