Kosminski and Victim DNA Match on Shawl

[Krinoid]

big suprise on the confusion of the "item", as I said before all hearsay

1. The dating of the shawl -- he has made a strong case for the shawl dating to mid-19th century or thereabouts. This "conventional wisdom" of the Ripperology community that the shawl is an Edwardian table runner seems to be a chimera -- nobody can even give a straight answer as to where this idea came from. Edwards, on the other hand had it examined and tested by a number of different experts and the dates ranged from Regency to mid-19th century. THere seems to be little in the way of doubt here. The contention that the shawl is of Russian origin is purely anecdotal, however -- one of the experts said it looked some he had seen from the St. Petersburg area. But it does sound like there is some agreement that it wasn't made in England.
.

[GUT]

And, as has been noted several times in the forum, the shawl first got to Jari in an attempt to prove Deeming's involvement. There's video of the 45 minute show on line. Allegedly, it was 'too contaminated' to draw any conclusions.

There's a genuinely worthwhile book about Deeming. Criminal of the Century by Rachael Weaver

G'day Mick

I'm not sure that the same Dr tested for Deeming and Kozminski [I may be wrong again though].

[mickreed]

G'day Mick

I'm not sure that the same Dr tested for Deeming and Kozminski [I may be wrong again though].

I think you are wrong on this one, GUT. Jari is in the programme, as is Edwards. I saw it here:

http://yesterday.uktv.co.uk/shows/prime-suspect-jack-the-ripper/episodes/

But had to pretend I was in UK via a VPN

[lynn cates]

blood

Hello Theagenes, Wolfie. But did not Dr L claim that, of six who have recently handled the garment, at least two did not have Kate's mutation?

But, if accurate, are we to gather four did? If so, how can we be so sure this is Kate's blood--if indeed it IS blood?

Cheers.
LC

[Jeff Leahy]

These are claims. Not evidence.

We have Macnaghten and the red ink addition to the admission document. That's about it. Since the Victorians genuinely thought masturbation was linked to mental illness, this doesn't actually prove Kosminski was a compulsive masturbator. They may have assumed he was "self abusing" because he was insane.

Actually Anderson says it aswell

I've never heard onset periodicity used as criteria for these terms, rather number of symptoms falling under subtypes, but I bow to Dr Davidsson's expertise. However I find his hypothesis very weird. Hebephrenic is (or rather was) disorganised. Davidsson believed the Ripper was disorganised and was not concerned with being caught. I cannot understand why anyone would believe that, given how many police and private citizens were out hunting for the murderer at the time, and that he evaded them. JtR appears to deliberately arrange his victims in a tableau, he's deliberately trying to horrify and offend, he's fleeing the site when he's nearly caught ... but you don't accept that Stride was our man's victim.

Those old subtype classifications are now obsolete, in any case.

As you say Dr Davidson is a Harlley street expert. He used the old category terms as he was asked to explain in simple layman terms for a channel FIVE audience. He was aware of all of Aaron symptoms. But as I understood he made that conclusion based on the start of the illness and onset and his eventual burn out.

As you say these old categories are no longer used for a number of reasons. Not that there is much internation agreement on what should be used instead. At least they give us some general direction. But each individual has to be accessed individually and there is not enough to do so in Aarons case.

Hence a 'form' of schizophrenia.

If that reportage is accurate. We don't know the progress of his illness or if his family and friends recognised what was going on. He may have become ill much earlier. The admission form annotations confuse matters greatly as to what was perceived as the first major episode.

Yes we don't know his condition in 1888. Exactly. We have no idea. But its possible in the early on set for him to have been in a condition where he was capable of committing the murders. This is important as it is so often pointed out by people with little knowledge that a man eating from the gutter and in such a far gone condition would be capable…

As with most ripperology your going to discover we know very little as so little has survived and waving around a tooth brush and saying Archeologists have less to go on, aint going to hold much tooth paste.

There is no evidence for Kosminski being homicidal or having a hatred of women. His threatening his sister and throwing a chair are quite in line with schizophrenia and don't necessarily indicate homicidal tendencies. When people with schizophrenia are violent it is most often towards people in their family.

Right were just going to ignore the sources and make it all up as we go along are we? Given a choice between what McNaughten says and what you claim, guess who my money is on?

Believe so? Have we got any police documentation with his name on it? Where is he listed as a suspect in 1888?

I don't know what to make of the bloody shirt.

As I've said we don't know when Kosminski first came to police attention but it seems likely, given Kosminski was placed in an asylum that it did so before then..

There are several reported incidents in 1888 of suspects. One being the Batty Street lodger which you might like to check out, and has been speculated by credible ripperologists that it may have been connected to the Kosminski family. There is also a news report of a woman being chased through the streets with a knife and a man arrested in brick lane…

I've speculated that Aron came to the police early on but was placed in an asylum in March 1889. He was later release and when his condition worsened his sister, who had previously been threatened by a man with a knife in Brick Lane..went to Anderson (Crawford letter) and asked for help. Anderson being a gentleman kept his word and put his top man on the case with strict instructions to keep it quiet.. as they didn't want riots in the East End.

Of course its speculation but at least it can be backed up with news reports and events known to have happened, its not wild speculation outside any known reports or evidence.

Yours Jeff

[lynn cates]

fine review

Hello Bunny. Fine review. Thanks for posting.

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

coda

Hello Mick. Your post #3248 serves as an excellent coda to all this nonsense.

Cheers.
LC

[mickreed]

Right were just going to ignore the sources and make it all up as we go along are we? Given a choice between what McNaughten says and what you claim, guess who my money is on?f

Hi Jeff

Well, I for one wouldn't accept anything anyone said at the time as gospel evidence of what actually happened. People make mistakes, they lie, they assume ... Historical research requires us to corroborate, question, challenge, etc etc. That's how we learn.

But, if you're going to accept McNaghten on one thing - the masturbation, then why ignore the other bit where he 'exonerated' Kosminski?

[mickreed]

Hello Mick. Your post #3248 serves as an excellent coda to all this nonsense.

Cheers.
LC

Thanks Lynn. I had to check to see what I'd said.

[wolfie1]

Actually Anderson says it aswell



As you say Dr Davidson is a Harlley street expert. He used the old category terms as he was asked to explain in simple layman terms for a channel FIVE audience. He was aware of all of Aaron symptoms. But as I understood he made that conclusion based on the start of the illness and onset and his eventual burn out.

As you say these old categories are no longer used for a number of reasons. Not that there is much internation agreement on what should be used instead. At least they give us some general direction. But each individual has to be accessed individually and there is not enough to do so in Aarons case.

Hence a 'form' of schizophrenia.



Yes we don't know his condition in 1888. Exactly. We have no idea. But its possible in the early on set for him to have been in a condition where he was capable of committing the murders. This is important as it is so often pointed out by people with little knowledge that a man eating from the gutter and in such a far gone condition would be capable…

As with most ripperology your going to discover we know very little as so little has survived and waving around a tooth brush and saying Archeologists have less to go on, aint going to hold much tooth paste.



Right were just going to ignore the sources and make it all up as we go along are we? Given a choice between what McNaughten says and what you claim, guess who my money is on?



As I've said we don't know when Kosminski first came to police attention but it seems likely, given Kosminski was placed in an asylum that it did so before then..

There are several reported incidents in 1888 of suspects. One being the Batty Street lodger which you might like to check out, and has been speculated by credible ripperologists that it may have been connected to the Kosminski family. There is also a news report of a woman being chased through the streets with a knife and a man arrested in brick lane…

I've speculated that Aron came to the police early on but was placed in an asylum in March 1889. He was later release and when his condition worsened his sister, who had previously been threatened by a man with a knife in Brick Lane..went to Anderson (Crawford letter) and asked for help. Anderson being a gentleman kept his word and put his top man on the case with strict instructions to keep it quite.. as they didn't want riots in the East End.

Of course its speculation but at least it can be backed up with news reports and events known to have happened, its not wild speculation outside any known reports or evidence.

Yours Jeff

Original newspaper articles re Deeming in Aus 1892 and Batty St Lodger are to be found via TROVE.

[lynn cates]

lodger

Hello Jeff. But it has also been argued--successfully I think--that there was NO such lodger.

Cheers.
LC

[Theagenes]

What what what????? Edwards collected the samples???




WHAT????

I had at least expected there to be independent scientists performing this function. By all the gods.

This torpedoes Louhelainen's findings. Completely. Final straw.

He will have little hope in getting a paper through peer review. I'll bet you a pint he doesn't even try.

I shall see if I can cancel my pre-order of this book.

This is a massive balls up. This is pish!

No, this NOT accurate. The Amazon reviewer did not read closely enough apparently. According to the book the samples were taken from the relatives AFTER the DNA was recovered from the shawl.

Of course now that it's been stated here it will be repeated ad nauseum, this post will be ignored, and the new "conventional wisdom" will be that Edwards had the relatives' DNA and the shawl together before giving it all to Jari. That seems to be how it works.

[Jeff Leahy]

Hi Jeff

Well, I for one wouldn't accept anything anyone said at the time as gospel evidence of what actually happened. People make mistakes, they lie, they assume ... Historical research requires us to corroborate, question, challenge, etc etc. That's how we learn.

But, if you're going to accept McNaghten on one thing - the masturbation, then why ignore the other bit where he 'exonerated' Kosminski?

I dont ignore anything. And as the sources often contradict each other obviously they must be balanced against each other and given due consideration.

The sources is what ripperologist have to form their theories on. We don't necessarily think they are correct or incorrect we try and understand them.

MacNaughten was clear that Kosminski was a suspect and he had a great hatred of women. We don't know how or why he thought that but its possible he had read a file that no longer exists as he was 'On the ground ' so to speak..

The sources tell us Kosminski 'Masturbated' so they are not to be ignored.

I've already said that the experts I spoke to said this was unusual to schizophrenics per ce. But none of them claimed it was impossible.

Yours Jeff

[Henry Flower]

No, this NOT accurate. The Amazon reviewer did not read closely enough apparently. According to the book the samples were taken from the relatives AFTER the DNA was recovered from the shawl.

Of course now that it's been stated here it will be repeated ad nauseum, this post will be ignored, and the new "conventional wisdom" will be that Edwards had the relatives' DNA and the shawl together before giving it all to Jari. That seems to be how it works.

Theage, if Edwards himself took the samples from relatives, it hardly matters whether they were taken before or after the samples from the shawl were taken. As someone who is prepared to give any idea a fair crack of the whip until it collapses, I have to say the more we hear about this one the more it falls apart. Edwards himself took DNA samples from the relatives? Is that true? If so....

And re Kosminski, we have merely failed to eliminate Kosminski, along with any one (or more) of over seven thousand other Londoners? Meaningless.

We would be left with tests that had demonstrated the likely presence of Eddowes' blood on a shawl. That would, in its own way, be highly interesting to Ripperologists I suppose. If any of them could get over their repulsion at the fact that Mr Edwards was responsible for the discovery.

And I fully expect that even that very limited 'discovery' will soon fall apart under its own weight.

Gauguin was Jack the Ripper. Watch this space.

[Jeff Leahy]

Hello Jeff. But it has also been argued--successfully I think--that there was NO such lodger.

Cheers.
LC

Yes Yes yes.. you know I know that..there was a bloody shirt

I don't see why I should have to do other peoples ripperology for them..

Incidently the address at Batty street is interestingly between Greenfield Street and Provenance?

Yours Jeff