Kosminski and Victim DNA Match on Shawl

[Chris]

[/FONT][/COLOR]
You’re clutching at straws, Chris. I did not misrepresent Dr Jari. He clearly stated his belief that the bloodstains on the shawl establish a connection with the Mitre Square crime scene. But here’s something that you omitted. According to Dr Jari: ‘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.’

We think that we have the most plausible scene that has happened.

Spin it any way you like, Chris. But if you want Dr Jari’s opinion as to the ‘proof’ that the shawl was at the crime scene, you need only refer to the claims contained within Mr Edwards’ book.

I had missed this.

What Garry Wroe said originally was that Dr Louhelainen "used this mtDNA match as the basis for assuming that the shawl had been present at the Mitre Square crime scene".

Yes - he did initially say that, during the interview. But then he went on to explain explicitly that there were other possibilities, and that he only considered the suggested scenario the most plausible.

People can argue with that - I would argue with it myself. But what people shouldn't do is misrepresent Dr Louhelainen's views by omitting all mention of his statement that - from a scientific point of view - there were other possible explanations of the evidence.

Since then Garry Wroe has similarly omitted Dr Lohelainen's statement that his estimate of the age of the stains could only be a vague one.

I'm not quite sure why he should be making Dr Louhelainen the target of this kind of tactics, but I don't think it's particularly fair, as he's not here to respond.

[Chris]

Now..The room is absolutely packed..but nobody puts a bid on it...not even dealers ?.....nobody at all.

This is covered, I believe, by the free preview of the book at Google Books.

People did bid for the shawl, but it didn't sell because it failed to reach its reserve price.

[John G]

Hi Peter,

Thanks for this highly informative reply, much appreciated. I got my information from the Leeds University website http://www.leeds.ac.uk/news/article/...ack_the_ripper, which stated that the blue dye on the shawl was tested using the magnetic nuclear resonance technique and that this determined that the shawl predated the murders.

I must say, although I am a natural skeptic myself I am becoming increasingly impressed with the weight of circumstantial evidence, especially if it is correct that Kosminski's haplogroup was shared by only 7200 Londonders at the time, and presumably therefore only a few hundred Whitechapel residents, many of whom can be easily dismissed as serious suspects: too old, wrong gender, too young, infirmity. In fact, I'm now seriously considering demoting Robert Mann from my number one to my number 2 suspect!

[anna]

AH,ok...thanks Chris,I did wonder if that was the reason.

[Stewart P Evans]

Provenance

The auctioneers were aware of the dubious nature of the 'shawl' hence they deemed it necessary to add a note on provenance to the catalogue entry, which ran -

'Provenance: According to the vendors' [sic] 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. 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 Police Crime (Black) Museum, and in 2006 was subject to inconclusive forensic testing for a programme on Channel 5.

The story of the shawl is discussed at length in Appendix One of Kevin O'Donnell's book The Jack the Ripper Whitechapel Murders based on research by Andy & Sue Parlour; a copy is available on demand in the office.'

[Chris]

Thanks for this highly informative reply, much appreciated. I got my information from the Leeds University website http://www.leeds.ac.uk/news/article/...ack_the_ripper, which stated that the blue dye on the shawl was tested using the magnetic nuclear resonance technique and that this determined that the shawl predated the murders.

There was no direct dating by NMR. The book says that the NMR measurements indicated that the dye molecules were very complex and therefore likely to be natural rather than synthetic. On that basis it was argued that the shawl was likely to predate the 1870s, by which time natural dyes had been superseded by synthetic ones.

[anna]

Hi Stewart..

I found a picture of Andy & Sue Parlour and the guy who owned the shawl at the time.

It was taken in the 10 Bells pub,and all three have their hands on the shawl,without gloves on.

The picture was posted back on this thread.

[Veritas]

It sure don't pass the smell test.

[John G]

There was no direct dating by NMR. The book says that the NMR measurements indicated that the dye molecules were very complex and therefore likely to be natural rather than synthetic. On that basis it was argued that the shawl was likely to predate the 1870s, by which time natural dyes had been superseded by synthetic ones.

Thanks for this Chris, I really must get round to reading the book! It appears, then, that it is not completely conclusive that the shawl predates the murders but likely.

[pinkmoon]

Simple solution place these events in the correct order.
1,shawl stains tested for d.n.a
2,d.n.a found to match Kosminski and eddowes
3,d.n.a samples given by Kosminski and eddowes descendents
Which order?

[Stewart P Evans]

Yes

Hi Stewart..
I found a picture of Andy & Sue Parlour and the guy who owned the shawl at the time.
It was taken in the 10 Bells pub,and all three have their hands on the shawl,without gloves on.
The picture was posted back on this thread.

Yes the shawl has 'done the rounds' over the years and has been handled many, many times by many different people, none wearing gloves. It was never regarded as any sort of evidence, which it is not of course.

[Chris]

There was no direct dating by NMR. The book says that the NMR measurements indicated that the dye molecules were very complex and therefore likely to be natural rather than synthetic. On that basis it was argued that the shawl was likely to predate the 1870s, by which time natural dyes had been superseded by synthetic ones.

Judging from the description of this recently developed technique, it might not be hard to date the "shawl" directly:

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2011-09/s-sct091311.php

The calibration samples used for its development included one from the 1840s.

[Simon Wood]

Hi All,

Does anyone know why Amos Simpson remained an Acting Sergeant for seven years?

Regards,

Simon

[Chris]

Simple solution place these events in the correct order.
1,shawl stains tested for d.n.a
2,d.n.a found to match Kosminski and eddowes
3,d.n.a samples given by Kosminski and eddowes descendents
Which order?

I've posted the answer to this several times now.

According to the book, the material was extracted from the shawl first, and then the descendants were located and provided samples.

[Peter Griffith aka gryff]

There was no direct dating by NMR. The book says that the NMR measurements indicated that the dye molecules were very complex and therefore likely to be natural rather than synthetic. On that basis it was argued that the shawl was likely to predate the 1870s, by which time natural dyes had been superseded by synthetic ones.

Correct Chris on the no direct dating. And certainly synthetic dyes came in around 1860. However, natural dyes are still promoted today (by the arts/crafts folk). But in a place like Whitechapel around 1890 could immigrant tailors/seamstresses still be using natural dyes? (Cheaper?)

cheers, gryff