Kosminski and Victim DNA Match on Shawl

[Caligo Umbrator]

I can confirm that Russell Edwards's 'M' is indeed a descendant in the direct female line of Aaron's sister Matilda.

The Zena Shine mentioned in the thread you link to is clearly not a descendant of either of Aaron's brothers.

Thanks for that information, Chris.
You discerned precisely my thoughts and concerns regarding Z.S. as the source for the mDNA.
Without revealing any further information about 'M', can you tell me if they have directly confirmed to yourself or to Rob that they are indeed the source of the mDNA and that you are satisfied with that information?
I was wondering if, for the purposes of clarifying the timeline with regards to samples collected and the testing of the shawl, you were able to give an approximate date as to when the samples were obtained from 'M'?
Thank you,
Caligo

[mickreed]

I can't believe this myth persists that publisher's have any regard at all for factual accuracy. Maybe journals, but not book publishers. That hasn't been the case for at least as long as I've been a reader. They have good cover artists and good editors and that's it.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

Look all. This does get a bit circuitous. Read the book, or don't. I haven't because, as I've said, it ain't available here yet, but I have pre-ordered it. Had it not been for this forum discussion, I'd wouldn't have normally bought it under any circumstances for the following reason(s):

I dislike people saying 'definitely' or 'absolutely certainly' when they should say 'probably', or 'possibly, or 'just possibly', or 'someone told me this on the bus last week', or 'I dreamt this last night'.

I further dislike the notion that 'if you want to sell your book, then you have to say these sorts of things'.

Well, I'd rather not sell my book if that's what it takes. If Ripper Studies are to be considered more than a group of odd-balls like crop circle aficionados, UFO freaks, or those who think JFK was killed by Nazi zombies, then we need serious people like Fido, Begg, Sugden, Westcott, Skinner, and the many others who say 'perhaps' or 'it may be' when things are not certain.

[GUT]

Well, I'd rather not sell my book if that's what it takes. If Ripper Studies are to be considered more than a group of odd-balls like crop circle aficionados, UFO freaks, or those who think JFK was killed by Nazi zombies, then we need serious people like Fido, Begg, Sugden, Westcott, Skinner, and the many others who say 'perhaps' or 'it may be' when things are not certain.

To B700dy right!

[mickreed]

Hello Mick,

But then I personally DO NOT understand this Edwards chap and his comments at all.

This has ALWAYS been called Eddowes shawl. The Parlours called it that when Napper met them. HE asked the Parlours where the rest of the Eddowes shawl was and they told him Edwards had it. He bought it distinctly under the circumstances that he believed his purchase to be the Eddowes shawl! When Napper visited Edwards the owner showed Napper the rest of the Eddowes shawl. They took the shawl to Dr Jari who did swab tests that were inconclusive.

Then all of a sudden it is Kosminski's shawl. When was THAT proven? On what basis did the known ownersip change?

Then all of a sudden it isnt Kosminski's shawl nor Eddowes' shawl but it is Eddowes' skirt!! What changed the story? With what proof?

Call me daft but it appears to me like the famous cartoon of Bugs Bunny convincing Elmer Fudd it is duck Hunting Season not rabbit hunting season.

Exactly WHEN AND WHERE is the proof of Kosminski ownership? After "apparent" semen stains appeared or before? (UV light reveals other things as equally possible)

Exactly WHEN AND WHERE did this shawl of Kosminskis turn into Eddowes skirt?

The Kosminski suspect supporters have a few problems explaining this amazing set of metamorphic changes.



best wishes

Phil

Hi Phil,

I agree with you on this post. You may ask me any questions you wish. The (unread by me as yet) book appears from Edwards's own statements in the media to be largely a mixture of bull, horse, and poultry droppings. The only merit it may have, if any, will be in Jari Louhelainen's analysis, but from what we know of the presentation of them by Edwards, I'm not confident that I'll be much the wiser. If we ever see Jari's unmediated analysis, then that will likely be very different.

When the book finally hits my Kindle (I hope the author gets smaller royalties from the Kindle version) I shall read it, and give my views to the forum. If I am wrong in my pre-judgements, you can rest assured I will admit that - and unlike the national press, not in the small print on page 37.

[mickreed]

Aaron Kosnminski was after all suffering schizophrenia. A condition from which people are attacked in waves in the early onset.

If we say the first attack was 18 weeks covering the period known as the Autumn of terror…the next best guess for an attack would be….yes around March 1889.

Yours Jeff

Was he suffering from schizophrenia? Many have surmised that he was and they may well be right, but here's yet another case of 'was suffering from' being used instead of 'may have been suffering from'.

'If we say the first attack … ' then all else follows. Here's my slant:

'If we say that Kosminski was in Birmingham at the time of the murders then he couldn't have done it.

I mean -- WTF is this all about - fact or fiction or fantasy?

[Mabuse]

... But what I don't really get at all is the notion that the Ripper's semen could have been placed on a garment, any garment, in Mitre Square.

There just isn't time.

There wasn't time. Add to that the idea that the Whitechapel murderer had any sexual release during the crimes is unsupported by evidence.

The claim that the material on the shawl is semen is itself entirely presumptuous.

I have been talking with a forensic pathologist to try and get to the bottom of the techniques Dr Louhelainen and the Edwards book describe, and in particular fluorescence testing, how long a semen stain can remain viable for such a test, and so on.

A fluorescence test can not determine whether a stain is semen or not on its own.

It could be any number of chemicals that fluoresce under certain light wavelengths.

The pathologist I spoke to and the documentation available suggests that this sort of test can't distinguish the source of fluorescence so definitively.

Critics will say "oh, well, you're not an expert, Drs Louhelainen & Miller are, so what you are saying is pish." Well, they can say that, but the claims we've heard so far are simply not founded on good evidence. You can't tell that this is a semen stain from this test alone. This is a fact. End of story.

The material found in the matrix of the cloth in that area could have been put there in any number of ways. They did not find sperm cells, and the epithelial cells coming from the male reproductive ducts can be identical to those found in the trachea, mouth and nose.

Someone could have snotted on this shawl and left the same material.

Louhelainen's statements omit several fundamental issues concerning the shawl's history, suggest he is unaware that the Ripper masturbating at the crime scenes is fiction, and call into question whether he had all the information he needed to produce an accurate detemination.

Aaron Kosnminski was after all suffering schizophrenia. A condition from which people are attacked in waves in the early onset.

We don't know for sure what Aaron Kosminski suffered from.

From the scant evidence that we have, paranoid-type schizophrenia is likely, but that's the best we can venture.

As I said in my first post, I worked with schizophrenics and have some knowledge of the disease (it's actually a spectrum of disorders rather than just one, but be that as it may).

That Kosminski suffered from schizophrenia is in no way evidence that he was a violent murderer.

Using this as evidence for him being the Ripper is incredibly weak.

Most schizophrenics are withdrawn, not violent. Most violent crimes are not committed by schizophrenics.

It is possible that the Whitechapel murderer had a layered mental illness such as schizophrenia and some other condition like a personality disorder - he was surely a psychopath.

There have been schizophrenic serial killers, but they had other disorders as well.

Schizophrenia on its own is not enough to identify Kosminski as Jack the Ripper.

In fact, if the symptoms described for him are true, he seems less likely to be the Whitechapel murderer, because if he was having a psychotic episode he would be both obviously bonkers - alerting the target - and likely suffering from disordered thinking. Such a person seems unlikely to possess the planning and execution abilities we see in these murders.

The claim that schizophrenia comes in "waves" is also inaccurate. Psychotic episodes occur periodically where the person loses touch with reality, but they will experience symptoms to a greater or lesser degree from onset of the disorder. There may be periods of relative lucidity, but the illness doesn't go away as this terminology seems to suggest.

Macnaghten and Swanson apparently suspected Kosminski based on pretty spurious reasoning. I've already posted about the primitive Victorian ideas of mental illness and the lack of evidence for Kosminski's "compulsive masturbation" which looks like confirmation bias on the part of contemporaries.

[Krinoid]

Okay, I have been a lurker on this site, tried to post in the past but got killed on here..and will again

But I have some questions since all this started with this BOOK:

Why didn't all the so called experts on here who had access to the shroud ever think of getting it SCIENTIFICALLY tested for its date of origin, instead of taking hearsay from auction houses, museums, anyone else under the sun who had an opinion and basically didn't know what the hell they were talking about.

Two, without the above knowledge on here how can anyone dismiss its date??You may say there is no evidence HOW it got there, but I have read millions of quotes on here of its date of origin? Really?? Can anyone say that is a fact???You all mostly say you do. I would love to read your scientific credentials rather than your ability to understand fabric design and tell everyone when you know jack (LOL) **** unless you have a degree in that subject and factual proof.

Third, we have no idea what happened back then with so many items so called missing and they were not up to our standards on anything. I AM NOT SAYING I BELIEVE ANYTHING IN THIS BOOK, but I keep an open mind and don't pretend I know everything that happened back then. Something Could have slipped, maybe not. Too many unanswered mysteries with the whole Ripper story in general, somehow a lot was covered up by someone.

[Tom_Wescott]

Hi Krinoid. The answer is simple. The provenance of the shawl is horrible. We know it had nothing to do with Eddowes or the Ripper. So, naturally, none of us wanted to spend our money having it tested. Why would we?

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Krinoid]

Hi All,

Why are so many Ripperologists busting their nuts in an attempt to invest the Eddowes/Simpson shawl story with a semblance of respectability?

Regards,

Simon

Why do some people keep on coming back to a thread telling people they are wasting their time when said poster has nothing better to do, nothing to contribute to the discussion except crude jokes and then accuses others?

[Krinoid]

Hi Krinoid. The answer is simple. The provenance of the shawl is horrible. We know it had nothing to do with Eddowes or the Ripper. So, naturally, none of us wanted to spend our money having it tested. Why would we?

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

Because you CANNOT I don't care what it is dismiss something if you don't know the scientific facts of the item in question?? And you bash other scientists?? Think about what you said. You all are as guilty as Edwards, LOL

[Monty]

"Third, we have no idea what happened back then with police etc reports, documentation is not their strong point or anything else in law detection back then."

Whatt? In an age when Scotland Yard recorded everything, even down to coal consumption and which side the great coat should be buttoned?

You need to buy my book Krinoid, Capturing Jack the Ripper, available from Amberley Publishing, due out in November. ;-)

Monty

[Fisherman]

We don't know for sure what Aaron Kosminski suffered from.

From the scant evidence that we have, paranoid-type schizophrenia is likely, but that's the best we can venture.

As I said in my first post, I worked with schizophrenics and have some knowledge of the disease (it's actually a spectrum of disorders rather than just one, but be that as it may).

That Kosminski suffered from schizophrenia is in no way evidence that he was a violent murderer.

Using this as evidence for him being the Ripper is incredibly weak.

Most schizophrenics are withdrawn, not violent. Most violent crimes are not committed by schizophrenics.

It is possible that the Whitechapel murderer had a layered mental illness such as schizophrenia and some other condition like a personality disorder - he was surely a psychopath.

There have been schizophrenic serial killers, but they had other disorders as well.

Schizophrenia on its own is not enough to identify Kosminski as Jack the Ripper.

In fact, if the symptoms described for him are true, he seems less likely to be the Whitechapel murderer, because if he was having a psychotic episode he would be both obviously bonkers - alerting the target - and likely suffering from disordered thinking. Such a person seems unlikely to possess the planning and execution abilities we see in these murders.

The claim that schizophrenia comes in "waves" is also inaccurate. Psychotic episodes occur periodically where the person loses touch with reality, but they will experience symptoms to a greater or lesser degree from onset of the disorder. There may be periods of relative lucidity, but the illness doesn't go away as this terminology seems to suggest.

Macnaghten and Swanson apparently suspected Kosminski based on pretty spurious reasoning. I've already posted about the primitive Victorian ideas of mental illness and the lack of evidence for Kosminski's "compulsive masturbation" which looks like confirmation bias on the part of contemporaries.

This whole field of discussion concerns itself with people who act in unpredictable ways since they do not psychologically conform to most of us. It goes without saying that it is a risky field to try and be certain in.

Overall, though, I think you make very good points here, and points that must be made whenever discussing Aaron Kosminski.

Just like you seem to do, I also think that what we have points away from him having been the killer.

And just like you seem to do, I think that victorian misconceptions was what put Aaron in the frame.

The best,
Fisherman

[Krinoid]

we have an item, we know everything about it, no tests, we know, we are gods, we can't be wrong about anything, could be something missing, nope can't be we are always right LOL
Then Scientists should never test the date of anything if they have some guy say where it came form , yeah okay that's how the science/ history community operates, maybe in the JTR world on here of smug know it alls

[Krinoid]

"Third, we have no idea what happened back then with police etc reports, documentation is not their strong point or anything else in law detection back then."

Whatt? In an age when Scotland Yard recorded everything, even down to coal consumption and which side the great coat should be buttoned?

You need to buy my book Krinoid, Capturing Jack the Ripper, available from Amberley Publishing, due out in November. ;-)

Monty

Oh really, we have everything, how come they have reported OFFICIALLY much is missing, LOL this is a riot.

[Krinoid]

"Third, we have no idea what happened back then with police etc reports, documentation is not their strong point or anything else in law detection back then."

Whatt? In an age when Scotland Yard recorded everything, even down to coal consumption and which side the great coat should be buttoned?

You need to buy my book Krinoid, Capturing Jack the Ripper, available from Amberley Publishing, due out in November. ;-)

Monty

I not buying anything from anyone on here..