Kosminski and Victim DNA Match on Shawl

[Jeff Leahy]

Silk and Mothers

"Edwards has long theorized that the shawl was of too fine a quality to have been worn by a London prostitute and belonged to Jack the Ripper, not Eddowes. Using nuclear magnetic resonance, another Liverpool John Moores University scientist, Dr. Fyaz Ismail, determined that the fabric’s age predated the 1888 murders and was likely made near St. Petersburg, Russia. The region of Poland where Kosminski was born was under Russian control, and it would not have been unusual for Russian goods to have been traded there."

Ok I'm going to take a leap of faith here but a strange coincidence has just struck me. I've been researching another serial killer lately who had a fetich for handkerchiefs. Harrold Jones had a mouth fetish and kept ladies handkerchiefs in his pocket. Presumably the fetish was connected to his mother who he adored. He murdered two young girls when he was 15 but was released from Jail in 1942. It has been suggested he later became the Hammersmith Nude murder collecting the victims teeth as a extension of that fetish…

A strip of Silk clothe strikes me as a somewhat strange article for a killer to carry but consider this… Both the victims of the Hammersmith Nude murders and those of Jack the ripper were strangled leaving few bruises or marks on the victims. Jack the Stripper probably used the victims silk stockings as a garrotte…

Schwartz described Strides murder to Swanson as follows: 'He pulled her onto the street and throw her to the ground"

Could this be a description of someone being garrotted from behind?

Could the Shawl actually be the murder weapon? Would a strip of material from his homeland have a specific connect in Aaron's mind to his Mother?

Yours Jeff

[Stewart P Evans]

Another...

Another Kosminski-ite no doubt.

[Stewart P Evans]

Could...?

...
Could this be a description of someone being garrotted from behind?
Could the Shawl actually be the murder weapon? Would a strip of material from his homeland have a specific connect in Aaron's mind to his Mother?
Yours Jeff

Could black be white, could pigs fly, could....???

[Jeff Leahy]

A sudden very literate post Jeff. I wonder who wrote this for you?

Tis the nature of Dyslexia that they deteriate when I write at speed. Thats why I prefer Ripperology using a camera. Yours Jeff

[Stewart P Evans]

It didn't take long...

It didn't take long for the Anderson/Kosminski brigade to latch onto this latest nonsense.

[Stewart P Evans]

Material

Tis the nature of Dyslexia that they deteriate when I write at speed. Thats why I prefer Ripperology using a camera. Yours Jeff

'tis the nature of being fed material by others.

[Jeff Leahy]

Could black be white, could pigs fly, could....???

Fair enough its speculation. It just stuck me that there would appear to be some similarities to this possibility to Harold Jones. Thought it interesting speculation.

Yours Jeff

[NRTomasheski]

<snip>But basically the Shawl was taken to an expert (I beleive at Victoria and Albert Museum) They dated the pattern as a screen Print and thus Edwardian as this process didn't start until then.<snip>
What ... Edwards appears to have discovered is that the daisies are not screen printed but hand painted. <snip>
If Adam or Andy Aliffe are reading this it might by useful to know who exactly made that original examination and call on the screen printing.

Agreed! What kind of an expert confuses hand-painting for screen-printing? There has to be more to this disconnect. One or the other of the experts was misled or incompetent; or they were assessing different objects.

<snip> But if the "chintz dress" was the same as the "chintz skirt", which I think it clearly was, all that is academic.

I don't recall seeing anywhere the "scarf" described as chintz. I may have missed it, to be sure. Which isn't to say that people less familiar with the specifics of fabric type might not have at some or any point identified a fabric in an alternate or less than completely accurate manner; but still it's a flag, if the scarfble runner is never described as chintz. This makes me scratch my head. Not saying that I don't think the misperception could have happened, even down to the 'waistband' (though removing clothing items from a dead person is clearly different from, say, describing the outfit of some gyrating girl at the local club). But it's a theory that begs more exposition [cf below where I say I'm going to read the book.}

'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.

Certainly, the question of surface v. embedded v. seeped is ... I'm thinking that this is a scientist being forced to respond to an unscientifically phrased question in such a way as to be intelligible to laypeople; fair enough, but leading to awkward imprecision in language.
It is my understanding that the recovery of DNA from textiles is done, using solvents, so as to maximize recovery from the 'middle ground' of the material, i.e. "the center" (and again, though I deal with forensic technique, recovery of DNA/fluids from material is something I am only familiar with through reading and continuing education, not daily practice).

There is much more existing evidence to implicate Borden and Simpson than there is anyone implicated in the Whitechapel murders.

Somewhat OT, but I am convinced that Borden is innocent. (Simpson: guilty, more or less)

<snip> What is not so funny is the exchange between Stewart, Chris, and House. No sense of any of us falling out over this business.

TruDat!

I feel like much of the friction - as happens on so many boards - is due to our (yes, all of us; as much as I pride myself on using neutral language, I know I'm at times guilty of the converse) tendency to use hyperbole, semi-hyperbole, and other 'strong' language in what is essentially casual discussion, as opposed to strict academics. I even think that some of us may be excused for feeling that a loosening of the tie and a casting off of the blazer are fully acceptable in this place. And then there are the jokes that are misconstrued. Online fora. Yep.

Seem to have quoted a different post than I intended, so I've removed it, but: RE: Eddowes descendents handling the table-shawler. Legally, this is cause for questions about cross-contamination; clinically, extremely unlikely, assuming testing has been carried out according to protocols and standards. But in the end, it's that legal issue that is the chink in the armor. (I'm preparing for an audit later this month at my forensic facility; I am effing neck deep in this stuff, 2014-style.)

<snip>http://www.bbc.co.uk/podcasts/series/inscience<snip>

Thank you (and others - this was the one I happened to finally click on!) for the link; it actually works for those of us in The Colonies, hurrah.

p.s. At this point, I do feel I have to read Edwards's book (and I was always planning to, but for a time there I was on the 'should I give this guy my money' train); not available for Kindle in the US, for whatever reason, so I guess I'll have to depend on snail mail ... or ... are there still any of those shops where one can go and purchase a volume? What were they called again ... ?

[Jeff Leahy]

'tis the nature of being fed material by others.

Absolutely NOT The info on the testing was posted by Mike Reed on JtRforums and I quoted that..

[Stewart P Evans]

I know...

Absolutely NOT

I know someone else who loves to use rhetorical questions.

[Stewart P Evans]

PS

Absolutely NOT The info on the testing was posted by Mike Reed on JtRforums and I quoted that..

That was just the PS.

[Jeff Leahy]

That was just the PS.

If your trying to imply Paul Begg had anything to do with my post I can categorically deny this. I haven't spoken to Paul for a while and gather that he has not been well. I am however flattered that you would think my posts any where near that standard of expertise. Obviously I hold Paul Begg in the highest esteem on all matters relating to JtR but in particular on Anderson, the marginalia and Aron Kosminski. His contribution to the case is immeasurable. However, all the information in that post has been deamed by actually listening to the arguments being put forward on this thread by a number of excellent posters.

Hopefully what I said is a fair appraisal of the current position.

Yours Jeff

[AdamNeilWood]

Where did that "portrait" of Kosminski come from? He looks more like a rich, 40 year old Snidely Whiplash contemplating foreclosing on a widow than a poor, 23 year old schizo best known for beating off in public.

I'm pretty sure it was drawn for a map published in the 1990s called 'Jack the Ripper's London'.

The sketch below of Ostrog/Pizer (I can't remember who it's supposed to be) is from the same map.

I bet the person who produced it wishes they were earning royalties.

Adam

[Stewart P Evans]

Why...?

If your trying to imply Paul Begg had anything to do with my post I can categorically deny this. I haven't spoken to Paul for a while and gather that he has not been well. I am however flattered that you would think my posts any where near that standard of expertise.
...
Yours Jeff

Why on earth would you say that? I mentioned no name.

[Stewart P Evans]

I think...

I'm pretty sure it was drawn for a map published in the 1990s called 'Jack the Ripper's London'.
The sketch below of Ostrog/Pizer (I can't remember who it's supposed to be) is from the same map.
I bet the person who produced it wishes they were earning royalties.
Adam

I think you are right Adam.