Kosminski and Victim DNA Match on Shawl

[lynn cates]

photo

Hello Rob. Thanks for posting that photo.

Cheap and tacky? Perhaps like the research that went into this?

Cheers.
LC

[paul g]

Thanks

Many thanks prosecutor and wolfie for the reply,s. Appreciated.

Looks like the book will either offer more evidence or split opinions.

I sincerely hope it is proved beyond any doubt that kominsky was the killer via this book as I have never pinned myself to a particular suspect. I would like to know ,after 40 years of interest .

[lynn cates]

primary

Hello Wolfie. Thanks.

Of course, we need primary for the purported 100% match.

Cheers.
LC

[pinkmoon]

I am right in thinking this shawl has been verified as edwardian

[lynn cates]

jibe

Hello Jason. Thanks.

"It might have been discarded like the piece of apron and picked up shortly after and not handed in by the police man."

But how does that jibe with the Simpson tale?

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

market

Hello (again) Jason. Thanks.

"Maybe he thought he might be able to sell it one day. . . "

OK, but my point was that there should be little market--unless he foresaw ripperologists in 2014.

Cheers.
LC

[Rob Clack]

Hello Rob. Thanks for posting that photo.

Cheap and tacky? Perhaps like the research that went into this?

Cheers.
LC

The signage is just a rip off (no pun intended) of those tacky pub signs you can buy for a couple of quid.

[pinkmoon]

Only a guess I think there's more chance of someone buying a jack the ripper yoyo from Mr Edwards store then someone buying the shawl.

[lynn cates]

defies belief

Hello Prosector. Thanks.

"The Eddowes murder site was very well catalogued by the police and the police surgeons right down to the mustard tin containing the pawn ticket for her boyfriend's boots."

Absolutely.

"The idea that a policeman (who was not recorded as being present and belonged to the Mets not the City Police) could or would have made off with as important a bit of evidence as a blood stained shawl defies belief."

It does indeed.

Cheers.
LC

[Stewart P Evans]

Auction

Does anyone know how much he paid for the shawl? He has to recoup that before he orders the yacht.
Prosector

The 'shawl' was up for auction at the premises of Lacy Scott & Knight, Bury St Edmunds, Suffolk (in which town I was a police officer for many years), on Saturday 17th March 2007. Yes, for my sins I was there (with Neil Storey), and so were the Parlours, who were friends of the buyer.

The 'shawl' was lot 235 described as 'A late 19th century brown silk screen printed shawl' and the provenance given as 'According to vendors' family history this shawl is purported to have belonged to Jack the Ripper victim Catherine Eddowes, and was removed from her body by his great, great uncle Acting Sergeant Amos Simpson who was based near Mitre Square in the East End of London [sic, it was in the City as we know]. However, there is some controversy surrounding the authenticity of this story and interested parties are advised to do their own research before bidding. The shawl spent some time in The Metropolitan Crime (Black) Museum, and in 2006 was subject to inconclusive forensic testing for a programme on Channel 5.'

Apropos of the price it eventually sold for, the East Anglian Daily Times of Monday, April 30, 2007, reported 'In the original auction there had been a huge amount of interest in the item being sold...but bidding failed to meet the secret reserve price. The apparently mundane shawl reached £5,200 in open bidding - not enough for the owners to sell.
A spokesman for Lacy Scott and Knight said: "A shawl like this would normally go for about £100 without any story, but this has now sold for several thousands of pounds.
"It is impossible to say how much it is worth because it is the story behind the item which brought the interest and you can't put a price on that."
The shawl sold despite some experts admitting there was no definitive proof of the item's authenticity. Its history has been hotly debated and it grabbed the attention of people logging on to various Ripper enthusiast websites...'

[pinkmoon]

The 'shawl' was up for auction at the premises of Lacy Scott & Knight, Bury St Edmunds, Suffolk (in which town I was a police officer for many years), on Saturday 17th March 2007. Yes, for my sins I was there (with Neil Storey), and so were the Parlours, who were friends of the buyer.

The 'shawl' was lot 235 described as 'A late 19th century brown silk screen printed shawl' and the provenance given as 'According to vendors' family history this shawl is purported to have belonged to Jack the Ripper victim Catherine Eddowes, and was removed from her body by his great, great uncle Acting Sergeant Amos Simpson who was based near Mitre Square in the East End of London [sic, it was in the City as we know]. However, there is some controversy surrounding the authenticity of this story and interested parties are advised to do their own research before bidding. The shawl spent some time in The Metropolitan Crime (Black) Museum, and in 2006 was subject to inconclusive forensic testing for a programme on Channel 5.'

Apropos of the price it eventually sold for, the East Anglian Daily Times of Monday, April 30, 2007, reported 'In the original auction there had been a huge amount of interest in the item being sold...but bidding failed to meet the secret reserve price. The apparently mundane shawl reached £5,200 in open bidding - not enough for the owners to sell.
A spokesman for Lacy Scott and Knight said: "A shawl like this would normally go for about £100 without any story, but this has now sold for several thousands of pounds.
"It is impossible to say how much it is worth because it is the story behind the item which brought the interest and you can't put a price on that."
The shawl sold despite some experts admitting there was no definitive proof of the item's authenticity. Its history has been hotly debated and it grabbed the attention of people logging on to various Ripper enthusiast websites...'

Mr Edwards is going to have to sell a lot of jack the ripper yoyos to pay for this shawl.

[lynn cates]

good sense

Hello Prosector.

"Furthermore I would not be able to recognise a single cell as having come from a kidney and nor, I believe, would any other scientist with histological experience."

There you go, making good sense again.

Cheers.
LC

[wolfie1]

Hello Wolfie. Thanks.

Of course, we need primary for the purported 100% match.

Cheers.
LC

The Kosminski in Aus had 6 females, 3 died in London, surviving 3 emigrated to Aus 1898. All 3 surviving females married here and had subsequent issue. So yes, only secondary DNA to extract here.

If the latest theory gains traction within the Scientific and Policing communities, then a further request to examine the shawl and subsequent exhumation of Aaron will yield primary DNA and provision for Facial Reconstruction of the Kosminski suspect.

[SirJohnFalstaff]

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"

This gave me a good chuckle. Thanks.

[spyglass]

Oh dear!!!
The mail loves blaming everything on imigration at the mo.

Have just put JTR into google and it would seem every publication is running this story, one even gets Kosminski mixed up with Chapman.
Dreading going to work tomorrow because EVERY one is going to tell me " cased solved".