Kosminski and Victim DNA Match on Shawl

[pinkmoon]

No, I think there is no basis for accusing anyone of fraud.

In fact I don't think there's any basis for suggesting an explanation at all without more information about the scientific findings.

But what I suspect is that those findings will turn out to be not as conclusive as the author believes. Just as the historical research behind most "case closed" books has not been as conclusive as their authors have believed. Just because this one is based on DNA, rather than documents, is no reason to shout "fraud".

I don't think it's a good thing to make a lot of money by claiming case closed when it isn't.

[Chris]

I don't think it's a good thing to make a lot of money by claiming case closed when it isn't.

I don't think it's a good thing to suggest people are guilty of fraud without evidence.

[RockySullivan]

I don't think it's a good thing to suggest people are guilty of fraud without evidence.

but it's ok to claim you have proved someone is the most notorious serial killer of all time without evidence?

[RockySullivan]

Fisherman - Do you honestly believe that 'Jack the Ripper' managed to 'approach and leave the murder spots undetected', 'leave(ing) no trail, no trace, no clue..' due to his cunning, intellect, planning, etc.?

I think we can also debate the 'kills silently' part, as well, since many witnesses stated they heard cries of 'Oh, murder!' quite frequently throughout the East End, thus most of these disturbances were ignored, but the for purposes of this discussion, let's concede that he DID kill silently.

I think it's important not to look at RESULT so much as EXECUTION. I do not think one can argue this point: The Whitechapel murderer was incredibly fortunate not to have been observed, caught in the act...on multiple occassions.

In Bucks Row, Cross (we KNOW your thoughts here so spare us this go 'round) and Paul come upon the body moments after the murder. Bretton and Tomkins could have come upon him. Emma Green or anyone in her household had only to look out the window to have witnessed the murder.

In Hanbury street, Albert Cadosh had only to peer over the fence. John Davis could have gone into the yard a bit earlier. John Richardson could have walked upon the crime in progress. Any number of neighbors had only to look out a window. These are all random events that could not be planned around. Yet, you see a cunning, meticulously executed plan where none could possibly exist.

In Dutfield's Yard, Louis Diemschutz may have ridden upon the killer immediately after the murder. Israel Schwartz likely witnessed the killer attack Stride. Morris Eagle was about Dutfield's Yard and, but for random chance, could have witnessed the murder in progress. Joseph Lave, could have stayed for a bit more fresh air or simply gone out later. These things cannot be planned around.

In Mitre Square, George Clapp or his wife could have looked out a window. PC Harvey, but for random chance, could have witnessed the murder of Eddowes. Lawende, Harris, Levey likely saw the killer moments before the murder. George Morris could have stepped outside at any moment and witnessed the murder and the murderer.

'Jack the Ripper', in my view, PLANNED nothing. He benefited from the nature of his environment: the East End was a couldron of vice and crime. These things were not unusual. He seems to have sought only one thing: Darkness (in that he didn't kill during daylight hours). His victims, on the other hand, controlled the situation and the environment. THEY sought only enough privacy to conduct business and get their pay. Being interrupted meant being either ignored or run off. Thus they chose sports that offered minimal privacy.

The Whitechapel Murders were the work of an unorganized and mentally ill serial killer. Just as he was not a 'medical man' with anatomical knowledge, he was NOT a stealth killer who managed to avoid detection through his cunning and intellect.

How about the police beats? The ripper just happened to get lucky and committed the windows in the small time frame when no police passed? I disagree and think he must've timed the beats to calculate his window

[pinkmoon]

I don't think it's a good thing to suggest people are guilty of fraud without evidence.

How about the fact the shawl wasn't at any of the murder scenes.

[Theagenes]

but it's ok to claim you have proved someone is the most notorious serial killer of all time without evidence?

Well, to be fair he does have some evidence -- he's just greatly overstated how conclusive it is. Poor scholarship is not a good thing, but it doesn't necessarily rise to the level of fraud.

[pinkmoon]

How about the police beats? The ripper just happened to get lucky and committed the windows in the small time frame when no police passed? I disagree and think he must've timed the beats to calculate his window

If our killer had carried on his murder spree one day his luck would have run out .It is quite possible that someone who was out and about and probley up to no good themselves saw something but never came forward.

[Theagenes]

How about the fact the shawl wasn't at any of the murder scenes.

So absence of evidence equals evidence of absence now?

[Chris]

How about the fact the shawl wasn't at any of the murder scenes.

Just because there are strong arguments against the view advanced in the book, that doesn't mean the author of the book is guilty of fraud. Did you not read my post when you replied to it above?

[Peter Griffith aka gryff]

But as I mentioned earlier I've seen several natural dyed shawls as recent as the 1920s online (though not European).

TY for the info about the dye - a dye that has a lot of history.

One interesting comment from a book entitled The History of Woad and the Medieval Woad Vat by John Edmonds:

"It was said that it was the demand by the London Metropolitan Police for woaded cloth for their uniforms which kept the the woad industry going after 1900 albeit on a very reduced scale"

cheers, gryff

[Fisherman]

Patrick S it seems to me that you have just as much of an 'agenda' to prove everything doesn't fit with Lechmere. To a new comer the hypocrisy of the concerted campaign to dismiss the Lechmere theory is ridiculous.

For instance have you ever investigated what kind of work he might have been doing as a carman? I'm guessing not but you might find it enlightening.

And it is not a fact that the Ripper did take special care to avoid being splattered with blood? Sometimes he strangled his victim to death to stop her heart beating and he also cut their necks in such a way that if there was spray, it would point away from him.

So saying the killer, be it Lechmere or anyone else, might be relatively free of blood is not incorrect.

A good first post, Westbourne - and welcome to the boards, by the way.

You raise a salient point about the differing kinds of tasks Lechmere would have had as a carman. That is exactly how to go about the issue, and once you do, it IS very enlightening, just as you say! Ignorance is never a useful vantage point to critizise from.

As always, those who prefer not to inform themselves about the matter will remain in the dark.

All the best,
Fisherman

[MrBarnett]

How about the police beats? The ripper just happened to get lucky and committed the windows in the small time frame when no police passed? I disagree and think he must've timed the beats to calculate his window

Hi Rocky,

I think it's highly unlikely that Jack was acquainted with all the police beats in Whitechapel, Spitalfields, St George in The East and The City. It's much more likely that the women were the local experts. This would explain why the locations, while secluded enough for a quick transaction of business, were a bit risky from the killer's point of view.

MrB

[MrBarnett]

A good first post, Westbourne - and welcome to the boards, by the way.

You raise a salient point about the differing kinds of tasks Lechmere would have had as a carman. That is exactly how to go about the issue, and once you do, it IS very enlightening, just as you say! Ignorance is never a useful vantage point to critizise from.

As always, those who prefer not to inform themselves about the matter will remain in the dark.

All the best,
Fisherman

Fish/Wink,

Don't keep us in suspenders, what were these 'tasks'?

Wrong thread, I know, but I'm intrigued.

MrB

[RockySullivan]

Well, to be fair he does have some evidence -- he's just greatly overstated how conclusive it is. Poor scholarship is not a good thing, but it doesn't necessarily rise to the level of fraud.

in my opinion it is fraud to claim he conclusively absolutely positively without a doubt "solved the rippings" is bs and pure fraud. From what I've seen so far the questionably generic dna results prove in absolutely no way who the ripper was and it is fraud to claim they do.

[lynn cates]

bullseye

Hello Chris. I hope you know you know that you hit a bullseye with #3755.

Cheers.
LC