Kosminski and Victim DNA Match on Shawl

[MrBarnett]

Hi Prosector,

In the Sunday Mail article the biologist claims the DNA has a particular ethnic and geographical origin. Is that possible?

MrB

[Damaso Marte]

Ethnic groups are just people who have been inbreeding with each other for a while. Many genes occur disproportionately within certain ethnic groups.

Regardless, next time the hoaxer should have a more believable story than "the shawl is not in the records because some officer decided that a blood-and-semen soaked piece of evidence was an excellent gift for his wife"

[Jan666]

I haven't been on here for years but this article has brought me back to the fold. I'm no expert in DNA but I do believe that DNA can point to a particular region. However, there were something like 100,000 Ashkanazi Jews in the East End at the time and as Judaism is a matriarchal religion, there's a fair chance that quite a lot of them would have shared the same mtDNA.

[Prosector]

Exactly - and the only thing that the so-called comparison will tell you is that the donors of the two samples may have shared a common ancestor in the maternal line. Highly likely in that fairly inbred society.

I would very much like to know how many control samples taken from randomly chosen individuals Dr Louhelainen used. If none, then it is impossible to draw the conclusions that are being put forward.

Prosectoir

[TheMacJew]

I read about this yesterday. I'm not buying it. Too many times there has been "new" evidence. Not to mention there's the problem that the chain of evidence is severely broken. How can we say, with 100% certainty, this is the same fabric? More importantly, there's the issue of degraded DNA. He claims it to be a 99.2% match, but DNA evidence from only 20 years ago has broken down to be completely unusable, but we're expected to believe there is that high of match? I don't think.

[moonbegger]

If the Shawl did belong to Kate .. then surely any DNA upon it , could have been put there by anyone requiring her services throughout the time she owned it .. including any of the Kosminski clan .. science cant tell us it was put there on the night of her murder .

moonbegger .

[pinkmoon]

One of two things have happend here number 1The shawl was at eddowes murder scene came into contact with her so her d.n.a and her murderers d.n.a are transferd to it .The shawl is then taken home by a policeman given to his wife who never washes it and it turns up years later.number 2 the shawl is not from the ripper murders and some one has placed d.n.a from eddowes and kosminski on it to set up a hoax.I have put it in very simple terms because over the next few years endless threads and posts will appear it's going to get complicated however it will always revert back to my 2 very simple observations.p.s welcome to SHAWLGATE.

[Mr. Candlebridge]

More importantly, there's the issue of degraded DNA. He claims it to be a 99.2% match, but DNA evidence from only 20 years ago has broken down to be completely unusable, but we're expected to believe there is that high of match? I don't think.

According to the latest article the first strand was 99.2% because of some missing fragment, but second strand tested was 100%. Ancestral DNA is how they identified Richard III's body.

[lynn cates]

descendants

Hello Prosector. Thanks.

Which makes one ask, Whom was Aaron's progeny?

Cheers.
LC

[TomTomKent]

Stewart, by the content of some of the posts you are so right they don't. It seems the word DNA is making some people lose sight of reality, despite several attempts to make the difference clear between Primary and Secondary DNA and the evidential value of both types.

Yes, the CSI effect is a well known psychological effect. This should surprise nobody. In recent years it has been seen in the coverage of the Maddie Mcgann investigation entering the spotlight once more.

[Phil Carter]

Hello Prosector. Thanks.

Which makes one ask, Whom was Aaron's progeny?

Cheers.
LC

Hello Lynn,

If the decendants have to be in an all female line... then surely this has to be shown to have been done in both Eddowes and Kosminski's cases?


best wishes

phil

[TomTomKent]

There has developed what can only be described as something akin to a feeding frenzy with regards to this article. But of course one shouldn't forget that this article and its revelations are academic and when put into the correct perspective one can see why.

The evidence to suggest a polish Jew named Aaron Kosminki was ever a Ripper suspect, prime or likely is non existent. Living in the same area as where the murders were committed is not evidence to categorize this man in either of those categories

Kosminski is named in the MM and the marginalia but in surname only and there is a major doubt about how that came about having regard for the content of the later Aberconway Version and questions marks hanging over the Marginalia, neither of which I intend to go over again.

This post is to highlight the additional flaws in the current report suggesting that a man named Aaron Kosminski has been identified as the ripper.

The reports are accurate. He has been identified as the Ripper.

Any contention should be with who by and on what grounds.

Were the testing an interpretation accurate the evidence would be the shawl, and his status as a contemporary suspect. How or why he came to be so, even as a mistake would be secondary to the hypothetical evidence.

To deny the evidence as flawed is one thing. To write the above post dismissing it purely because you dislike the suspect is quite another. It would, if we are to remain objective and evidence led, be possible that some hypothetical new evidence is the first and best evidence against making somebody a suspect. Regardless of if there was suspicion but no evidence, false accusations or no mention what so ever on them before.

[lynn cates]

genuine scientist

Hello Phil. Thanks.

Just so. When a genuine scientist comes to examine it, what will he say then?

Cheers.
LC

[Robert]

The papers keep talking of descendants but as far we we know, Aaron had no descendants. Of course, members of his family may have done. I think Chris Phillips has spoken to some of them. Naturally it's understandable that the Kosminski family member prefers to remain anonymous, especially if the Press are going to talk of Aaron's descendants.

[Beowulf]

Many good points regarding all of this but to address one; a thought occurred to me regarding the idea of the unlikelihood of the shawl never having been washed.

Kosminski was a prime suspect. People like to keep such trophies. Reminds me of another clothing article that was also not washed and kept as a trophy, the famous blue dress of Lewinsky's.