Kosminski and Victim DNA Match on Shawl

[dropzone]

"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."

Or anywhere. It was a global economy then, too, or else you would not have silk in St Petersburg. And which part of the fabric did he test?

Both the victims of the Hammersmith Nude murders and those of Jack the ripper were strangled leaving few bruises or marks on the victims.

Where do you get the idea that JtR's victims were all strangled?

Mary Ann Nichols' post mortem: “There was a bruise running along the lower part of the jaw on the right side of the face. That might have been caused by a blow from a fist or pressure from a thumb. There was a circular bruise on the left side of the face which also might have been inflicted by the pressure of the fingers.” Probably not from strangulation but from an attacker facing her, lifting her chin with his right hand, and cutting her throat with his left hand.

Annie Chapman: No sign of strangulation. Possible signs of suffocation (there's a difference) were swelling of her face and her protruding tongue, but no petechial hemorrhages on the face or eyes are mentioned.

Elizabeth Stride: No sign of strangulation.

Catherine Eddowes: No sign of strangulation. “The cause of death was haemorrhage from the left common carotid artery.”

Mary Jane Kelly: No sign of strangulation. Per Dr George Bagster Phillips, “The blood was produced by the severance of the carotid artery, which was the cause of death.”

Would a strip of material from his homeland have a specific connect in Aaron's mind to his Mother?

Cheap Freudian analyses are fun but not appropriate in serious investigations, especially since much of Freud has been tossed out by the psych people. OTOH, this isn't a serious investigation, so Freud away!

Surely a folded piece e of silk material would make an ideal garrotte leaving few marks.

Few, but not none. And why would Jack, of ALL people, be bothered if he left a mark?

I don't have an 8 foot and 2 foot silk piece of material to hand. But It should fold and twist be very light and very strong

No, for a garrote to be used in murder like that you want something thin and strong. Most special forces use piano wire with wooden handles, others use thin rope or cord. Suitable cords available to Jack would be packing twine and window sash cord. And eight feet is an awkward length to use. But it's moot because none of the victims were strangled!

Stride was pale as if she had fainted

Stride was pale because she was exsanguinated, for crying out loud! And Swedish—it goes with the territory.

Just a question to satisfy a newbie's curiosity: Given that Aaron Kosminski, according to this very website, was not even mentioned as a suspect until 1894, and then without a first name so there can be multiple claimants, why are you so invested in his guilt? From my limited exposure to you you seem unwilling to brook any gainsaying of your cherished belief, and are willing to force facts to make them support it.

[GUT]

G'day Dropzone

and are willing to force facts to make them support it.

I hate to have to be the one to tell you this, but what you say about Jeff apples to almost everyone here who has a pet suspect.

[dropzone]

Oh, I know that. It's the same with every mystery. I don't like any of the JtR suspects in particular, and in most cases the suspicions are laughable, but I'm thinking of ways to forcefit Dr HH Holmes into the lineup because us Chicagoans need to stick together.

(after research)

But it's been done: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...criminals.html

[GUT]

Oh, I know that. It's the same with every mystery. I don't like any of the JtR suspects in particular, and in most cases the suspicions are laughable, but I'm thinking of ways to forcefit Dr HH Holmes into the lineup because us Chicagoans need to stick together.

(after research)

But it's been done: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...criminals.html

HHH was put in the frame years ago.

[Monty]

Perhaps anyone who has profited from the misery and terror of so called legend of JTR, all the authors, tour guides, newspapers, etc et could cough up. But I know that won't happen as money comes first to most people. It will most likely take a like minded community of DNA experts, Criminologists, and a compassionate group of people who are not led primarily by their wallet and egos.

How much have you spent and shared with regards expanding this subject?

Monty

[wolfie1]

How much have you spent and shared with regards expanding this subject?

Monty

thanks Monty, I was hoping post no 2000 would draw out the negative, self serving comments , and you did not let me down,

[Trevor Marriott]

Yes, clearly, we don't grasp the "DNA thing." Maybe you could explain it to us since you're a real Ripperologist and you seem pretty sure about what it can and can't tell us.



You keep using this term "secondary DNA." Can you please explain what you mean by that? Also, you used the term "MTD" earlier, by which I assume you mean mtDNA. Can you please explain what this is and why it is different from other types of DNA? And can you please identify your source for your contention that the DNA recovered from the shawl could match 400,000 other people? And are you sure that those who match would not have "family ties"? Not even a common female ancestor?



So there is no chance to recover any other types of DNA from the shawl other than this "secondary" DNA you keep referring to? And you're sure that no other types of DNA have already been recovered? And that the DNA that has been recovered isn't enough to get a full profile even with modern amplification techniques and next generation sequencing?

Sorry to ask so many questions, but I know you're an expert and I just want to make sure I'm clear on this "DNA thing" so I can give up on this crazy "science" stuff because it's really hard.

Mtd is secondary DNA which means that in 1888 400.000 people would have the same MtD profile
Nuclear is primary DNA in today's world one in a billion would have an identical match excluding identical twins

Of course not forgetting all the people who have handled it and added their DNA to it over the years thus increasing the percentages way above the 400.000 likely to have the same profile,
.000

[RockySullivan]

This whole thing is clearly a pr stunt. But what's more astonishing to me than the baseless accusations made by the author is the willingness of the casebookers to buy & read the book!!

[Monty]

thanks Monty, I was hoping post no 2000 would draw out the negative, self serving comments , and you did not let me down,

Nah, nah son, that don't fly. Your attempt to flip this around with a cute comment may impress others, but not this old dog.

Many people have traveled many miles and spent a lot of money to provide you with information on this subject. Rob House travel from the US to a remote part of Poland just so he could find out as much as he could on the Kosminski family, and then tell us about it.

Stewart Evans has spent thousands, many thousands, identifying and buying documents which otherwise would be lost to us forever, and shared them either via his work or by allowing them to be used in the work of others.

I have spent a fair bit traveling and researching my book, and if we are to look at the figures, I shall not re-coup that money because, despite popular myth, authors percentage is minimal. Not that it matters to me.

The majority of authors in this field write because they wish to share, and expand on the known facts of the case, not because they want to make money.

If you don't like it, don't buy it. Hanging around these boards and passing damning comment simply smacks of hypocrisy.

And that is your contribution to the field....so who is negative?

Monty

[Chris]

Any artifact out there, however tenuously linked to the murders that could possibly produce DNA should be tested if possible and like wise any prominent suspects and victims whose descendants or relatives could provide mtDNA or Y-chromosome DNA for comparison should be sampled. The goal should be to start building a Whitechapel murders DNA database if possible. There have to be other "trophies" from the murders out there in collections, right?

That's an interesting idea that will no doubt appeal to those (like me) with a genealogical bent. But I really can't think of any other physical artefacts associated with the murders that are asking to be tested (apart from the letters, for which some DNA comparisons have been done).

If the "shawl" DNA matches to the Eddowes and Kozminski relations were disproved, I'm not sure anyone would suggest comparisons with other victims or suspects, because of the problems with the provenance.

[wolfie1]

Nah, nah son, that don't fly. Your attempt to flip this around with a cute comment may impress others, but not this old dog.

Many people have traveled many miles and spent a lot of money to provide you with information on this subject. Rob House travel from the US to a remote part of Poland just so he could find out as much as he could on the Kosminski family, and then tell us about it.

Stewart Evans has spent thousands, many thousands, identifying and buying documents which otherwise would be lost to us forever, and shared them either via his work or by allowing them to be used in the work of others.

I have spent a fair bit traveling and researching my book, and if we are to look at the figures, I shall not re-coup that money because, despite popular myth, authors percentage is minimal. Not that it matters to me.

The majority of authors in this field write because they wish to share, and expand on the known facts of the case, not because they want to make money.

If you don't like it, don't buy it. Hanging around these boards and passing damning comment simply smacks of hypocrisy.

And that is your contribution to the field....so who is negative?

Monty

Monty, you have assumed I am male , however I speak from a victims of violence point of view here, when self interests come to the fore on forums, when men of shall we say a certain age, express a superiority to newbies on the board, it does get my goat. As a female am happy to debate with all comers, new or old.

[Trevor Marriott]

Hello Theagenes.

". . . the DNA results that have been presented (in a completely unprofessional and sensationalist manner I might add). . . "

That is correct.

Cheers.
LC

And not forgetting the fact that Edwards claims that Kosminski was the killer based on these results.

That is as about as far from reality as you could expect to go. With what is known there would not even be enough evidence to bring a charge against anyone let alone secure a conviction.

The shawl is what is termed as a "Moveable object" which means it can be owned, touched and thus contaminated by all and sundry. making any DNA even evidence unsafe even primary DNA. Even more so with this shawl as there is a mish mash of dna from many sources from many generations

Looking at things from a hypothetical view point if there were any descendants of other suspects traced and their dna obtained and also turned out to be Mtd on the shawl what would be the reaction then?

[Monty]

Monty, you have assumed I am male , however I speak from a victims of violence point of view here, when self interests come to the fore on forums, when men of shall we say a certain age, express a superiority to newbies on the board, it does get my goat. As a female am happy to debate with all comers, new or old.

Firstly apologies for assumng, I shouldn't have.

I agree with you, completely, however I felt the jibe inferring that authors are in this subject for money insulting.

For me it was a cheap shot.

Monty

[Tom_Wescott]

I was rooting for Monty. But then Wolfie called Monty old. So now I'm kind of rooting for Wolfie.

But wait...this is a Ripper forum. Monty is a Ripperologist who has contributed greatly to my knowledge over the years and, in fact, contributed research to my book (i.e. campaign of profiteering off the pain and misery of women, as it's known to uppity feminists), whereas Wolfie is...I don't know who Wolfie is, because she won't tell me. All I know is she seems to like reading Ripper books, but hates the people who author them. Strange that. I often like the Ripperologist but hate his book.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

P.S. Of course authors should make money for their work. It's stupid to suggest otherwise. And I would gladly help pay for DNA tests on the Lusk kidney, should it be discovered. But a random prop with zero historical provenance? You're nuts.

[wolfie1]

Firstly apologies for assumng, I shouldn't have.

I agree with you, completely, however I felt the jibe inferring that authors are in this subject for money insulting.

For me it was a cheap shot.

Monty

It was not intended to be a jibe, I am sure the general public have no clue how much effort, blood sweat and tears is behind all research, published or not.
Surely it is time now for all researchers to work together for a common goal, to honor the memory of the poor dead women. Instead of sniping at each other, like children in a playground,