Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Kosminski and Victim DNA Match on Shawl

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • MrBarnett
    replied
    Originally posted by lynn cates View Post
    Hello MrB.

    "So to add to his encyclopaedic knowledge of police beats and work routes we must add the bladder and bowel movements of 29 Hanbury Street?"

    Whilst next door, Albert nearly tripped him up.

    Cheers.
    LC
    Hi Lynn,

    It would appear poor old Albert had prostrate problems. I can just about accept that Jack had his finger on the pulse or in every local pie, but for him to be able to anticipate Albert's nocturnal wandering would be taking things to the extreme.

    MrB

    Leave a comment:


  • lynn cates
    replied
    good

    Hello Mick.

    "He's not a good writer."

    Or researcher? Or criminologist?

    Cheers.
    LC

    Leave a comment:


  • lynn cates
    replied
    Cadosch

    Hello MrB.

    "So to add to his encyclopaedic knowledge of police beats and work routes we must add the bladder and bowel movements of 29 Hanbury Street?"

    Whilst next door, Albert nearly tripped him up.

    Cheers.
    LC

    Leave a comment:


  • Theagenes
    replied
    Originally posted by Amanda View Post
    Theagenes/Mick,

    I'm thick skinned, no harm done.

    Amanda


    And I'd love to hear your thoughts on what the shawl might be.
    Last edited by Theagenes; 09-24-2014, 02:04 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Jeff Leahy
    replied
    Originally posted by Chris View Post
    Well, it does say in the book:
    "The difference [in solubility] between the two [blue and brown] dyes also suggested that the shawl was not machine printed, but that the dye was hand-applied."

    And later on an absorption test using a spectrophotometer shows that there is only one pigment in the blue areas, from which they conclude that it was "definitely not screen printed".

    But looking at the pattern, it was surely machine printed in some way.
    Hi Chris

    Sorry to ask questions. But it does seem relevant if some sort of mechanical operation was undertaken who or what the material might be. Do you or anyone else know the potential variety of techniques that might have created the material?

    I'd also be most interested if the authors of the A to Z might be able to confirm the source of their claim that the shawl had been previously dated by experts?

    Yours Jeff

    Leave a comment:


  • Chris
    replied
    Originally posted by dropzone View Post
    Folks are arguing whether the pattern is painted or printed? Wood-block printing on cloth goes back millenia.
    Well, it does say in the book:
    "The difference [in solubility] between the two [blue and brown] dyes also suggested that the shawl was not machine printed, but that the dye was hand-applied."

    And later on an absorption test using a spectrophotometer shows that there is only one pigment in the blue areas, from which they conclude that it was "definitely not screen printed".

    But looking at the pattern, it was surely machine printed in some way.

    Leave a comment:


  • Amanda
    replied
    Theagenes/Mick,

    I'm thick skinned, no harm done.

    Amanda

    Leave a comment:


  • Gene Lewis
    replied
    Originally posted by RockySullivan View Post
    I like this post very much Tom!! When you say landlords do you mr McCarthy too?
    I like it too, specially when it comes to Mr McCarthy from Miller's Court… but this is out of the Kosminski/Edwards thread.

    Leave a comment:


  • wolfie1
    replied
    Self promotion

    Have to give the published Ripper authors on this thread a thumbs up for chutzpah.
    A cross selling opportunity on the back of Edwards book.

    Leave a comment:


  • RockySullivan
    replied
    Originally posted by Tom_Wescott View Post
    He was reported as talking about that spot in Buck's Row. Perhaps the stable gates were often left open? That would make it a great spot for thugs to lie in wait for passerby.

    I'm sure the women were all over the East End, I'm just going by the records.

    Yours truly,

    Tom Wescott
    I'll give the book a read tom, thanks! After I finish "naming Jack the Ripper"'! Lol just kidding I'll only be reading yours lol

    Leave a comment:


  • Tom_Wescott
    replied
    Originally posted by RockySullivan View Post
    I like this post very much Tom!! When you say landlords do you mr McCarthy too?
    Oh, absolutely. But this isn't the thread to talk about that stuff, because it has nothing to do with the shawl. There's a thread on my book under non-fiction. The Bank Holiday Murders.

    Yours truly,

    Tom Wescott

    Leave a comment:


  • Fisherman
    replied
    MrBarnett:

    Assuming Jack picked up Chapman in a major thoroughfare such as Commercial Street, was 29, Hanbury Street the best spot on offer? Or just one that Annie was used to using ?

    I don´t think we need to assume that Annie was picked up in any other spot than Hanbury Street. Prostitutes were flung out of the backyard by Richardson every now and then, as I remember, and Long said it was a usual sight to find couple along the street.

    All of the victims could well have been soliciting in or very close to the spots where they were found dead. The one that seemingly differs is Nichols, who would perhaps not use the empty Buck´s Row to look for punters, but the long stretch of time between her meeting Holland and being killed at around 3.40 may have meant that she took another customer to Buck´s Row prior to having the Ripper happen upon her. So she too MAY have been found by the Ripper in the street where she died.
    My money is on Whitechapel Road, though.

    But this too is a topic for another thread, methinks!

    All the best,
    Fisherman
    Last edited by Fisherman; 09-23-2014, 10:48 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • RockySullivan
    replied
    "Inspector Reid, Detective Sergeant Enright, Sergeant Goadby [sic. Godley] and other officers then worked on a slight clue given them by 'Pearly Poll.' It was not thought much of at the time; but what was gleaned from her and other statements given by Elizabeth Allen and Eliza Cooper of 35 Dorset Street, Spitalfields, certain of the authorities have had cause to suspect a man actually living not far from Buck's Row. At present, however, there is only suspicion against him."[5]

    From casebook. Wow if any suspect were good that would be the one!

    Leave a comment:


  • RockySullivan
    replied
    Originally posted by Tom_Wescott View Post
    Based on my research, Stride and Eddowes both likely worked as cleaner women for the tenants of the Rothchild buildings. Residents of F&D Street were also known to frequent the Jewish baths on Goulston Street. There were a lot of pubs in the vicinity. But Eddowes and Stride had lived on the same street since the early 1880s, so they must have known each other at least by sight. Not to say that has anything at all to do with their murders though.

    The best connection between most of the victims I've been able to find thus far is with Pearly Poll and the landlords. And Stride and Eddowes, oddly enough, are the two victims I don't have a firm connection with to Pearly Poll.

    Yours truly,

    Tom Wescott
    I like this post very much Tom!! When you say landlords do you mr McCarthy too?

    Leave a comment:


  • RockySullivan
    replied
    Edwards is counting on that before the real results are in he has already sold his bookz

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X