Kosminski and Victim DNA Match on Shawl

[anna]

I think,I have an idea as to what the "shawl" may be...

Yesterday..it didn't occur to me what this item actually may be,because everyone was referring to it as a shawl. I thought it was a bit funny,as it is too long to be a woman's shawl. Then I realised what it actually may be...having seen tons of them at auction in the past.

I think it's a Victorian table runner.

It would have been placed down the centre of a table before glass wear housing fruit or flowers etc was put on top. In smaller houses it would have been used in the same way,but would have had a large houseplant in an ornate pot, on top of it.

[paul g]

It's is now less than 24 hours away from the book landing I the public domain.

So far we have the following claims made via the author through press releases, allegedly written by the author and not the press.
The claims are as follows. (Using the daily mail article as source).

1 DNA evidence has proved beyond reasonable doubt that kominsky was JTR.
2. A shawl found by the body of the victim miss Eddowes.
3. The dates linking the Michaelmas Daisy's coincided with murder dates.
4 The scientist is quoted as saying, when the stains were tested they were a perfect match to Eddowes relative Karen.


The counter claims on the forum are

1 The dna and the way it is tested can only narrow the result down to 1/40,000.
2. There is no mention of the shawl in any police records, not at the murder site which the inventory is well documented.
3. The dates linking the Michaelmas daisy are wrong.
4 the scientist according to the posts from people on here can,t prove there is a perfect match as that is against any scientific process known to us.

The book will either add more weight to the claims already made and destroy what we have thought and posted as counter claims or will have no further evidence which will render the tests and theory as unprovable and rank along side other theory's and claims regarding who was Jack and be no more than just another book , in time.

[Prosector]

Table runner

I think you're absolutely right. I too have seen the same items and there's no way a piece of cloth 8 feet by 2 could be used, or described, as a shawl. Victorian shawls were usually square and folded into a triangle when draped around the shoulders.
Prosector

[anna]

Considering Kate's size...there is no way this is her shawl...it would have swamped her. I don't think this has belonged to her at all..but probably from the house of the policeman or another member of their family's home.

It just puts us on a more realistic path..

[pinkmoon]

[QUOTE=anna;306463]Considering Kate's size...there is no way this is her shawl...it would have swamped her. I don't think this has belonged to her at all..but probably from the house of the policeman or another member of their family's home.

It just puts us on a more realistic path..[/QUOTE
Any idea of its value in 1888?

[Lechmere]

Another genius.
Is there any possibility, does anyone think, that the light material was doubled or even trebled over and then worn as a shawl?

[anna]

Difficult to say...depending on where it was purchased..but a quite a few pounds,especially if it were silk. Unless it was second hand from a second hand shop..like her jacket from Maidstone..but still,more than Kate could have afforded.

[Henry Flower]

Prosector, Anna: Are we really stating as a definite fact that there is no way on earth an 8ft x 2ft length of fabric could be, let's say, folded in half so it was 4ft by 2ft, and worn around the shoulders as a makeshift shawl by a woman who didn't happen to own an official shawl on a rainy and cold autumn evening in Victorian London?

Are we saying that because that wasn't usually the case we know for sure that it could never have been the case? That because shawls were usually worn triangularily (is that a word?) then Catherine Eddowes wouldn't have been caught dead (forgive me) wearing a non-triangular makeshift shawl on a damp evening?

And if scientists were to affirm that it had blood on it that with 99% probability came from Eddowes, would you still maintain that that couldn't be the case, because shawls are never fashioned from lengths of fabric exceeding 3ft in length?

I'm not saying I think that the table runner was used as a shawl, or that it belonged to Eddowes, that the dna results will be anything like that definitive, or that it was taken from the murder scene. I'm just saying, to dismiss it on the basis that it wasn't manufactured for use as a shawl might be rather premature. Folded in half it may very well have served as a rather effective shawl to someone who was not in the best financial situation.

[Henry Flower]

Lechmere - apologies, you made my point for me while I was typing.

[lynn cates]

Hello Prosector. Thanks. Be interesting to see.

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

success

Hello Norman. Welcome to the boards.

"And if Kosminski murdered Eddowes it doesn't prove he murdered any of the others."

Hmm, I predict a promising future for you.

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

date

Hello Jason.

"Any idea of its value in 1888?"

L0, since the shawl dates to ca 1902-04.

Cheers.
LC

[Bitsie]

Why cut cloth from Eddowes apron when he could have used the shawl to wipe his hands?

If he wiped his hands immediately after accidentally cutting through the bowel I think it would have been easier/quicker for him to cut fabric from the clothing that was to hand, while he was holding the knife, rather than scrabble about looking for a shawl that he may have tossed from her body on finding it.

Not that I think this shawl was ever anywhere near Eddowes or JTR or Kosminski.

[lynn cates]

wrong century

Hello Bitsie. Welcome to the boards.

Yes, indeed. This table runner did not exist until next century.

Cheers.
LC

[Jan666]

So far the only definite facts I have been able to confirm are that David Melville Hayes is the great grandson of Mary Simpson, sister of Amos Simpson.
I wonder how his parents came up with the middle name Melville? The name doesn't appear in the family tree.

Watch out for the conspiracy theories