Kosminski and Victim DNA Match on Shawl

[mickreed]

Hello,

This is my first post, so please be gentle!

Gently Does It, John (Now George Gently IS a detective)

Yes, I saw that piece. It's not quite the way you state. At least, I didn't think so. For a start the author used her own haplogroup and not Kate's (because we don't know Kate's), and even if I believed her maths (I'm hopeless at maths) I'd find a big hole straight away. The figure 1.2 billion MIGHT be right in a real global sense, (or it might not), but if those two people lived in the same house, the likelihood would be virtually 100% certain.

Kate and Aaron lived very close to each other, admittedly in a crowded neighbourhood. They no doubt frequented the same places, whether it be shops, pubs, beds, or whatever. They may even have known each other in some way.

Nah! The closer they were geographically, the shorter the odds of their DNA being on the same item become.

[Robert]

"I have three further photographs (taken on the same occasion) of the 'shawl' hanging over the side of a four-drawer filing cabinet with a potted plant (apparently standing on the 'shawl' itself) on top to prevent it falling off the cabinet."

Was the plant a Michaelmas daisy?

[Stewart P Evans]

Very...

"I have three further photographs (taken on the same occasion) of the 'shawl' hanging over the side of a four-drawer filing cabinet with a potted plant (apparently standing on the 'shawl' itself) on top to prevent it falling off the cabinet."
Was the plant a Michaelmas daisy?

Very droll...!

[HelenaWojtczak]

There are zero sperm heads, but there are, apparently, epithelial cells:

Epithelia are formed of cells that line the cavities in the body and also cover flat surfaces. Of the four major tissue types found in the human body, epithelial cells are by far the most prolific.

These could come from the lining of the uretha in an ejaculation, but, presumably that could also come via urine. They can come from perspiration, saliva, and almost anywhere.

I don't know whether the scientists could distinguish between epithelia from this different sources.

Thanks for that. So, does anyone else know. I just wondered why Edwards is so sure that it's semen.

[Mabuse]

These could come from the lining of the uretha in an ejaculation, but, presumably that could also come via urine. They can come from perspiration, saliva, and almost anywhere.

Also the mouth and throat. If someone sneezed or coughed on the shawl, that could deposit this kind of tissue.

But, there are different classes of epithelial cells. It should in fact be possible to distinguish these types from one another if there's a good sample. However, trachea cells, for instance, and those from reproductive ducts can be the same types.

I'm sure these scientists have done a very good job of identifying these things, I'm just not so sure they realise how many vectors for contamination there are for this shawl.

[HelenaWojtczak]

Also the mouth and throat. If someone sneezed or coughed on the shawl, that could deposit this kind of tissue.

So the truth is, one of the millions of people whose DNA matches those of the many thousands of people living in the East End at that time, may have sneezed or coughed on this shawl/table runner?

The more I read the less convinced I am that there is ANY worth in the Edwards/Jari findings.

[Garry Wroe]

To my mind, it's what Jari is saying to the press NOW that carries more weight than what is attributed to him within the book. Most especially radio interviews so we can hear it "straight from the horse's mouth."

Earlier, Helena, in Post 2713, I quoted Dr Jari directly from his BBC radio interview. At one point he stated that ‘Russell is showing the circumstantial evidence which is linked to this case. So everything is possible. You can break down any case like this. But we think that we have the most plausible scene that has happened presented in the book.’

It seems that he was pretty much in agreement with Mr Edwards at that stage.

Kate and Aaron lived very close to each other, admittedly in a crowded neighbourhood. They no doubt frequented the same places, whether it be shops, pubs, beds, or whatever. They may even have known each other in some way.

The issue, though, Mick, is that Kate’s mtDNA was claimed to have been derived from arterial bloodspray found on the shawl. This would eliminate the possibility of casual cross-transference, and appears to be the one of the factors which convinced Dr Jari that the shawl must have been at the crime scene. The problem, however, is that we have no proof that the stain is arterial.

I just wondered why Edwards is so sure that it's semen.

The issue is covered in the BBC radio interview, Helena. The key is the way in which the stain fluoresces under forensic lighting. The one under scrutiny was consistent with semen.

[Mabuse]

So the truth is, one of the millions of people whose DNA matches those of the many thousands of people living in the East End at that time, may have sneezed or coughed on this shawl/table runner?

Yeah, that appears to be possible. And this could be at any time while the shawl was being shown around during the business with the Parlours' research, the loan to the museum (pot plant, etc), attempts at selling it, and so on. While relatively few vectors for contamination exist while it is in David Melville Hayes' mother's seachest, during this modern period there's a lot more.

Dr Louhelainen seems to be indicating that the DNA match is going to be smaller, though. I'm still actually a bit confused about how big of a segment of the population have these markers.

And the contamination isn't just superficial; it should be some kind of fluid seepage into the matrix of the shawl, if what Dr Louhelainen says is accurate.

[ajcol]

Quite!!

So the truth is, one of the millions of people whose DNA matches those of the many thousands of people living in the East End at that time, may have sneezed or coughed on this shawl/table runner?

The more I read the less convinced I am that there is ANY worth in the Edwards/Jari findings.

Me too!
Only an observation as I know nothing about DNA testing - mt or nuclear - (well, maybe a little bit more than I did before ) ..... but the question of provenance doesn't do much to help either, does it?


Alan

[Henry Flower]

Helena Wojtczak:

I just wondered why Edwards is so sure that it's semen.

Perhaps Mr Edwards is familiar with semen stains? Just a guess.

[copenhagen]

Hi all!
Vis a vis the red ink/pencil. I was looking in Richard Jones casebook and in the facsimile report of the Liz Stride report there is underligning made in red...

Kind regards

Lasse

[mickreed]

The issue, though, Mick, is that Kate’s mtDNA was claimed to have been derived from arterial bloodspray found on the shawl. This would eliminate the possibility of casual cross-transference, and appears to be the one of the factors which convinced Dr Jari that the shawl must have been at the crime scene. The problem, however, is that we have no proof that the stain is arterial.

No Gary, the issue I was discussing was the claim that the chances of Kate's and Aaron's DNA being on the shawl were so remote (1 in 1.2 billion) that, since they are (if they are ?), then it can only realistically be the way Edwards describes. I was arguing that the likelihood of an innocent explanation is much greater when you're only dealing with a small proportion of the world's population, i.e, a small section of East London.

Even if it is Kate's DNA in some of her blood, it doesn't follow that Kosminski was there murdering her. too.

[Henry Flower]

Let's ask Trevor Marriott about the semen. Wasn't it Trevor who thought that a particular merchant's semen was the key to the whole Ripper mystery?

(That might be slightly garbled - I must admit I haven't read his book, but he shouldn't hold that against me, as Trevor himself is an old hand at not reading Ripper books.)

[Fisherman]

"I have three further photographs (taken on the same occasion) of the 'shawl' hanging over the side of a four-drawer filing cabinet with a potted plant (apparently standing on the 'shawl' itself) on top to prevent it falling off the cabinet."

Was the plant a Michaelmas daisy?

Could well have been a guilded lily too, I suspect...

Fisherman

[Amanda]

Aahh my coffee...

Let's ask Trevor Marriott about the semen. Wasn't it Trevor who thought that a particular merchant's semen was the key to the whole Ripper mystery?

(That might be slightly garbled - I must admit I haven't read his book, but he shouldn't hold that against me, as Trevor himself is an old hand at not reading Ripper books.)

Hi Henry,
Just logged in & read this.....you made me splutter coffee all over my computer!

Anyone have an old shawl I could mop the stains up with?

Amanda