Kosminski and Victim DNA Match on Shawl

[Tom_Wescott]

I´m absolutely sure, Tom - Hufvudstadsbladet is in Swedish (many Fins speak Swedish since the Westernmost part of Finland, Österbotten, used to be Swedish). It says "Redan bakpärmen avslöjade att de vill utnyttja mig..." (Already the back cover revealed that they want to take advantage of me...) and "utnyttja" cannot mean anything else but "take advantage of" in this context.

The best,
Fisherman

Thanks for that, Fish.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Tom_Wescott]

Hello Tom,

email me the original and I shall make sure it gets transltated 100 per cent correctly :-)



Phil

I don't have the original and have just seen Fish's translation. He seems quite confident in it. Perhaps Dr. Jari has found himself in a very touchy situation.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Phil Carter]

The most relevant quote made at the time the 'shawl' was auctioned was -

"A shawl like this would normally go for about £100 without any story." - Lacy Scott spokesman. (East Anglian Daily Times, Monday, April 30, 2007)

Hello Stewart,

May I ask you, as you were there at the auction... was there specific mention or description of the pattern on the shawl being printed?


best wishes

Phil

[Phil Carter]

I don't have the original and have just seen Fish's translation. He seems quite confident in it. Perhaps Dr. Jari has found himself in a very touchy situation.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

Hello Tom,

Thanks, am checking out the precise wording on two Finnish articles about this..whether there is any specific wording here too.


best wishes

Phil

[Henry Flower]

One thing I love about this thread has been the widespread implicit assumption of utter incompetence on the part of Drs Louhelainen and Miller.

Oh, how do they know it's blood?
But how do they know it's OLD blood?
Have they even considered the problem of contamination?
Do they know that suspect DNA can magically appear if an item ever touches the floor?
How do we know Dr Louhelainen didn't accidentally rub Karen Miller all over the shawl before testing it?

and on and on.

We're told Dr Louhelainen is a scientist with much experience in the forensic analysis of cold cases.

I expect he kinda knows what he's doing - at least to the extent that he has heard of contamination and has seen blood stains of various ages on fabrics before. That kind of thing. The kind of expertise that we sort of trust when it doesn't concern the blessed Whitechapel Murders.

Just a hunch.

[Tom_Wescott]

I read the chapter in his book about the shawl. Is anyone else concerned about the changes in the family lore given to Edwards by the man who sold the shawl to him? At one point he suddenly stated it was 'family lore' that Simpson worked special duty investigated Fenians. Does the timing of this fit with the timing of similar theories posted her at the Casebook? My suggestion is that it's possible that not all the 'family lore' given to Edwards was in fact family lore.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Chris]

I read the chapter in his book about the shawl. Is anyone else concerned about the changes in the family lore given to Edwards by the man who sold the shawl to him? At one point he suddenly stated it was 'family lore' that Simpson worked special duty investigated Fenians. Does the timing of this fit with the timing of similar theories posted her at the Casebook? My suggestion is that it's possible that not all the 'family lore' given to Edwards was in fact family lore.

Indeed, Stewart Evans posted an excerpt from an interview with the vendor's mother previously, which indicated she had very little idea how Amos Simpson came by the "shawl".

[Phil Carter]

I read the chapter in his book about the shawl. Is anyone else concerned about the changes in the family lore given to Edwards by the man who sold the shawl to him?

....My suggestion is that it's possible that not all the 'family lore' given to Edwards was in fact family lore.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

Hello Tom,

I raised that point a few eons ago... nobody answered.

Silence of the lambs.




best wishes

Phil

[Phil Carter]

My suggestion is that it's possible that not all the 'family lore' given to Edwards was in fact family lore.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

Hello tom,

and connected to this... my post 2818 has two questions I'd like answering..



Seems like if Edwards couldn't get a money maker with Deeming........


nah... that's what a cynical old fart would think.


Guilty as charged.




Best wishes


Phil

[Simon Wood]

Hi Phil,

You may have confused me with someone who gives a rat's arse about the inconclusive DNA evidence on the "shawl."

Following on.

If you could pack into the same room all the retired policemen who have spouted various patent bollocks about the Ripper murders you'd be able to solve our current energy crisis.

It's about time Ripperology got a grip on reality.

Regards,

Simon

[Peter Griffith aka gryff]

The Retesting

He re-tested the shawl afterwards using a different method and found all manner of things that didn't /would not have shown up with the swab tests.

Phil

The retesting is also another question that has crossed my mind. The results for the Deeming/Napper case were inconclusive. So how did this second set of testing take place. Two possible scenarios:

1. Edwards contacts Dr. Louhelainen asking him to try again even knowing the earlier results were negative - perhaps with Kominski samples.
2. Dr. Louhelainen having developed new methods of extraction contacts Edwards informing him of his new extraction techniques and he would like to retest the "shawl"..

I'm not sure I would use the term "fluke" to describe this second encounter.

cheers, gryff

[Phil Carter]

Hi Phil,

You may have confused me with someone who gives a rat's arse about the inconclusive DNA evidence on the "shawl."

Following on.

If you could pack into the same room all the retired policemen who have spouted various patent bollocks about the Ripper murders you'd be able to solve our current energy crisis.

It's about time Ripperology got a grip on reality.

Regards,

Simon

Hello Simon,

Oh don't get me wrong my friend... Hamilton Academicals interest me more than this ;-) ... but in the wake of the Diary... if there is ANY jiggery pokery going on... I don't want to see it last very long... unlike said Diary diatribe. So pull the shawl from under the feet asap I say.

Oh...and expose those who have been party to if it is a con job.

Unlike the Diary where everyone either keeps Mum or blames each other.

Whatever happened to the watch anyway?



best regards


Phil

[Chris]

The retesting is also another question that has crossed my mind. The results for the Deeming/Napper case were inconclusive. So how did this second set of testing take place. Two possible scenarios:

1. Edwards contacts Dr. Louhelainen asking him to try again even knowing the earlier results were negative - perhaps with Kominski samples.
2. Dr. Louhelainen having developed new methods of extraction contacts Edwards informing him of his new extraction techniques and he would like to retest the "shawl"..

I'm not sure I would use the term "fluke" to describe this second encounter.

Briefly - according to the book, Russell Edwards asked Dr Louhelainen how much it would cost to test the "shawl" thoroughly, but was put off by the expense, and Louhelainen then offered to do it for free (i.e. not charging for his time) provided he could write a scientific paper on it.

[John G]

Dr Jari stated in the BBC radio interview, John, that he illuminated the stains with forensic lighting and gained the impression that they weren't of recent origin. The blood, he thought, looked like it might have been contemporaneous with the murders.

Hi Garry,

Yes, I listened to the radio interview although I'm not sure that the claim that the stains were probably not of recent origin narrows down the age very much! In fact, they could possibly predate 1888: I believe it is also stated that nuclear magnetic resonance techniques demonstrated that the shawl is old and predates the murders.

Unfortunately, Dr Jari has not yet submitted his conclusions to a scientific journal for peer review and, until such time, I believe many of his conclusions will be open to some degree of uncertainty.

[DRoy]

You can say that again!

Not only did the DNA team find mtDNA along the Eddowes bllodline - it was a also a mutated mtDNA meaning that we may exclude any other people than those very closely related to Catherine.

And not only did the team find mtDNA for the Kosmisnki bloodline - they also managed to extract genomic DNA here, so that we may move very close to Aaron Kosminski, and close unwanted side alleys.

Not only did the team find blood on the shawl - it was also distributed in a pattern that spoke clearly about blood spatter having come about as a result of a knife attack.

Not only did they find semen on the shawl - when they gave it a go and tested one randomly chosen suspect, they hit gold immediately and got a match.

Not only did the shawl hold all these treasures, it also provided a single cell that seemed to have come from a kidney - the precise organ that Eddowes had cut out of her body along with the uterus.

That´s one lucky crew, wouldn´t you say? They couldn´t have asked for more. The only thing they didn´t find was a shoeprint of George Morris, running over the shawl, whistle in mouth. But maybe that comes along when they test for mud, who knows?
Otherwise, the shawl tells the whole story, missing out on absolutely nothing.

For a shawl that cannot be proven to have been anywhere near Mitre Square on the murder night, that´s not half bad.

All the best,
Fisherman

Well said Fish, best post i've read on the topic so far.

Cheers
DRoy