Kosminski and Victim DNA Match on Shawl

[Phil Carter]

As we're not certain about what it was, can we call it the 'unshawl'?

Hello Henry,

"Oh shawly not! "


Phil

[Rob Clack]

What makes it unlikely, in your opinion, if I might ask?



RH

Nothing, I just wanted to wind Jeff up

To be honest I think Kosminski is in the top three suspects. I'm just a bit concerned that this so called 'DNA' evidence might devalue him as a suspect.

Rob

[Donpayasos]

Just to clarify something some people were asking about. In the Daily Fail article, Russell Edwards says he became convinced that Kosminski was the Ripper after talking to Alan McCormack at the Crime Museum. This was before he bought the "shawl" and before anybody had alleged it contained a sperm sample. So the DNA tests were done to confirm something Edwards already believed: "I became convinced Kosminski was our man, and became excited at the prospect of proving it." Not a very scientific approach: you should form a theory and test it to see whether it is worth being convinced by, rather than looking for evidence to support something you're already made up your mind about. The danger is you ignore all the evidence pointing in different directions. This was the point in the article where that I began to suspect Edwards was either an opportunist or a well-meaning idiot.

[Tecs]

Hi Jeff,I was watching one of thoughs antique Show things the other month and a nice sweet old couple turned up with this glass that had been passed down through the family and it was meant to be the glass queen Victoria took her first alcoholic drink out of they were convinced they were going to make thousands it was in fact a glass dating from the 1920s should have seen look on their faces priceless!

To quote Bernard Manning,

"You know what my ambition is? To go live on the antiques roadshow and say to some old dear, 'You know what that's worth? F**k all!'"

[DRoy]

The only logical thing for the author to do is join Casebook and open himself up to the scrutiny so that he can answer many of our questions. I'm sure he'd say buy the book but if he can't answer some of the basic questions that have been put forth then there is no need to buy the book. I say to the author: stand by your book, your findings, your science, and sell your book by convincing those that matter most... us.

Cheers
DRoy

[Jeff Leahy]

As we're not certain about what it was, can we call it the 'unshawl'?

Absolutely not..its not a shawl…it's an 8 m by 2 metre Edwardian table Runner…that is simply fact…which for various reasons…books etc…someone is trying to pervert

That doesn't change the fact that Aron Kosminski is the only credible ripper suspect..

Given they only tested the kosminski DNA…I'd suggest they new exactly what they were doing

Don't hold know water with me however

Yours Jeff

[Tecs]

Phew!

What a marathon session, catching up with 300+ posts in a couple of days. And I still haven't finished!

For my money, speaking as a scientist, I think that the intention of the whole thing is to hoodwink the general public with those magical letters, D.N.A.

As soon as most people hear "D.N.A." they think "Oh well that's it then, case closed." Most people (and I'm not trying to sound condascending) don't understand what D.N.A. is, how the tests work, how reliable the results are and just what they actually prove.

There are people I hear on phone in's saying things like "I used to be against the death penalty, but as we now have D.N.A. there won't be any miscarriages of justice any more, so we can bring it back." This shows in a nutshell how the public can be fooled into believing a story, just because it has some sort of D.N.A. element to it.


regards

[bladen7273.]

Then it must have been one helluva crime. Care to tell us which crime?

Regarding the Ripper crimes, I can safely say that the police officials of the time realised that they were working on something very very different. The crimes were a sensation in their own lifetime, so to speak, with worldwide interest.

If Dew is anything to go by he bragged years later that he was one of the first officers on the scene at the Mary Kelly murder. Abberrline, Anderson, Smith et al, commented years later about their involvement in the crimes.

Just because you would deem it inappropriate to acquire a crime scene relic, it doesn't follow that officer's at the time had such scruples. Would the bloodstains have been apparent in the dimly lit Mitre Square?

Sure Obs. The case was the Green River Killer-Gary Ridgway.

I understand that the constables of that time realized that there was something unique about the case, and you are probably correct that the blood stains on the shawl could not be visible in the dim light of Mitre Square, however, why would an officer keep a piece of evidence that would incriminate him in one of the biggest cases of the day? And why was there no mention of any shawl in any report that was made? So if we assume that it was taken prior to any reports being made, where did the officer keep it during the initial investigation. I find it hard to believe that he just stuffed it behind a dumpster somewhere and waited for everyone to leave before retrieving it.

[Chadwick]

It doesn't seem as though Edwards or those who did the testing are open to scrutiny. In the article I read today on this subject, it appears that they will not publish their findings in any scientific peer review. This leaves their result as suspect.

Jack the Ripper identified through DNA traces: sleuth
AFP 5 hr ago | By AFP
Jack the Ripper, one of the most notorious serial killers in history, has been identified through DNA traces found on a shawl, claims a sleuth.

The true identity of Jack the Ripper, whose grisly murders terrorised the murky slums of Whitechapel in east London in 1888, has been a mystery ever since, with dozens of suspects that include royalty and prime ministers down to bootmakers.

But after extracting DNA from a shawl recovered from the scene of one of the killings, which matched relatives of both the victim and one of the suspects, Jack the Ripper sleuth Russell Edwards claims the identity of the murderer is now beyond doubt.

He says the infamous killer is Aaron Kosminski, a Jewish emigre from Poland, who worked as a barber.

Edwards, a businessman interested in the Ripper story, bought a bloodstained Victorian shawl at auction in 2007.

A fanciful 1889 engraving showing 'Jack The Ripper', the East End Murderer of prostitutes in the 19th century.Getty Images: Hulton Archive

A fanciful 1889 engraving showing 'Jack The Ripper', the East End Murderer of prostitutes in the 19th century.

The story goes that it came from the murder scene of the Ripper's fourth victim, Catherine Eddowes, on September 30, 1888.

Police acting sergeant Amos Simpson, who had been at the scene, got permission from his superiors to take it for his dressmaker wife -- who was subsequently aghast at the thought of using a bloodstained shawl.

It had hitherto been passed down through the policeman's direct descendants, who had stored it unwashed in a box. It briefly spent a few years on loan to Scotland Yard's crime museum.

Edwards sought to find out if DNA technology could conclusively link the shawl to the murder scene.

Working on the blood stains, Doctor Jari Louhelainen, senior lecturer in molecular at Liverpool John Moores University, isolated seven small segments of mitochondrial DNA, which is passed down through the female line.

They were matched with the DNA of Karen Miller, a direct descendant of Eddowes, confirming her blood was on the shawl.

Meanwhile stains exposed under ultra-violet light suggested the presence of seminal fluid.

Doctor David Miller, reader in molecular andrology at the University of Leeds, managed to find cells from which DNA was isolated.

With the help of genealogists, Edwards found a descendant of Kosminski through the female line, who offered samples of her DNA.

Louhelainen was then able to match DNA from the semen stains to Kosminski's descendant.

For Edwards, this places Kosminski at the scene of Eddowes' gruesome murder.

Eddowes, 46, was killed on the same night as the Ripper's third victim. An orphan with a daughter and two sons, she worked as a casual prostitute.

She was found brutally murdered at 1:45am. Her throat was cut and she was disembowelled. Her face was also mutilated.

The belief is that the shawl was left at the crime scene by the killer, not Eddowes.

Kosminski was born in Klodawa in central Poland on September 11, 1865. His family fled the imperial Russian anti-Jewish pogroms and emigrated to east London in the early 1880s. He lived close to the murder scenes.

Some reports say he was taken in by the police to be identified by a witness who had seen him with one of the victims, and though a positive identification was made, the witness refused to give incriminating evidence, meaning the police had little option but to release him.

He entered a workhouse in 1889, where he was described on admission as "destitute". He was discharged later that year but soon ended up in an insane asylum.

He died from gangrene in an asylum on March 24, 1919 and was buried three days later at East Ham Cemetery in east London.

Some have cast doubt on Edwards' findings.

The research has not been published in a peer-reviewed scientific journal, meaning the claims cannot be independently verified or the methodology scrutinised.

Professor Alec Jeffreys, who invented the DNA fingerprinting technique 30 years ago this week, called for further verification.

"An interesting but remarkable claim that needs to be subjected to peer review, with detailed analysis of the provenance of the shawl and the nature of the claimed DNA match with the perpetrator's descendants and its power of discrimination; no actual evidence has yet been provided," Jeffreys told The Independent newspaper.

[Jeff Leahy]

Nothing, I just wanted to wind Jeff up

To be honest I think Kosminski is in the top three suspects. I'm just a bit concerned that this so called 'DNA' evidence might devalue him as a suspect.

Rob

Right thats it you bastard down the ally NOW!! (only joking)

XXX

[Jeff Leahy]

What makes it unlikely, in your opinion, if I might ask?

Also, I will just say that I can confirm that there is a valid matrilineal connection between Matilda Lubnowski-Cohen and the woman who gave a DNA sample.

RH

Actually Rob I find it rather annoying, that serious studies on Aron..which clearly place him as the most … Quote "High up on the tree as Ripper suspects'

Appears to be …being high Jacked on a cheap publicity scam..

Personally I'd rather take on 'idiots' with their Sailor/Tumbelty theories on their merit…

Their is only the Aron Argument

I wish i'd been a fly on the wall to see some faces today

But the Shawl is a Hoax

Jeff

[Tecs]

[QUOTE=Chadwick;306564]It doesn't seem as though Edwards or those who did the testing are open to scrutiny. In the article I read today on this subject, it appears that they will not publish their findings in any scientific peer review. This leaves their result as suspect.

Hi Chadwick.

In my day anybody who refused to allow their results to be peer reviewed was instantly discredited and even accused of faking them.
No scientific theory ever has any credibility until other scientists can replicate their results, or at least allow the results to be analysed independantly.

It's one of the absolute cornerstones of science.

regards,

[Tecs]

Right thats it you bastard down the ally NOW!! (only joking)

XXX

Is Ally prepared for this?

[spyglass]

Phew!

What a marathon session, catching up with 300+ posts in a couple of days. And I still haven't finished!

For my money, speaking as a scientist, I think that the intention of the whole thing is to hoodwink the general public with those magical letters, D.N.A.

As soon as most people hear "D.N.A." they think "Oh well that's it then, case closed." Most people (and I'm not trying to sound condascending) don't understand what D.N.A. is, how the tests work, how reliable the results are and just what they actually prove.

There are people I hear on phone in's saying things like "I used to be against the death penalty, but as we now have D.N.A. there won't be any miscarriages of justice any more, so we can bring it back." This shows in a nutshell how the public can be fooled into believing a story, just because it has some sort of D.N.A. element to it.







regards

Hi,
Your quite right, I have trouble understanding all the differing opinions concerning DNA on these threads alone.
But I do know that there has been miscarriages of justice concerning DNA evidence and even top Judges and jury's have fallen for it in the past.

Regards.

[Chadwick]

Hi Tecs,

Yes. I agree. Absolutely!

Anyone can make claims about making a discovery. But, when science is not open to outside, independent testing, it leads to the thought that they have something to hide.

When there is much more proof from outside their inner circle, then this whole issue can be put to bed. Until then, this story, these claims, only add to the Ripper lore. It solves nothing.