Kosminski and Victim DNA Match on Shawl

[Bridewell]

The provenance of the shawl is dubious to say the least. Amos Simpson was a Met officer who had no business going to Mitre Square, so almost certainly didn't. Furthermore "his superiors" would have no say in what happened to clothing belonging to a murder victim who met her end in another Force area.

[lynn cates]

boxing gloves

Hello Stewart. Perhaps boxing gloves would have served for that purpose? (heh-heh)

Cheers.
LC

[Jeff Leahy]

No , because such a table runner was bulky..very valuable..and utterly useless while trying to hack prostitutes guts out..Yours Jeff[/QUOTE

I was joking!...honest.

I only ever took your post as 'Jest' They do have a habit of gettihjng serious around here..

One of the main problems is that Casebook is an American site. And Americans simply don't comprehend British humour..

Much better slapping them on the head with a wet ice-cream..will probably be ban again

Yours Jeff

[paul g]

Does anyone think there might be evidence in the book that at this point has not been revealed by the author or associates.

It book may well reveal that there tests associated with the D.N.A have been reproduced independently and verify the authors claims.


Also can anyone answer me this please.

When the table runner was previously examined for the Sickert investigation was any traces of semen found, or did the technology exist at that time to locate semen on the table runner.

If I was a author wanting to bring out a book naming a suspect ( Highly unlikely as I can,t post on here with the correct grammar) one thing I would consider is are my peers in this case the experts going to counteract my claims and if so with what.
I would then back up my case with evidence to satisfy the doubters.

The author in this case in my opinion thought of all the ammunition to be fired back at him and kept his ace card up his sleeve, I.e not released the fact that secondary duplicate tests have already been done .

It is true he might know that he can,t verify anything and publish anyway .

[Jeff Leahy]

Hello Sir Francis. Welcome to the boards.

"To my mind the issue isn't in the potential number of matches. It's that there's no proof both sets of DNA were on the cloth in 1888."

Correct. And since this did not exist in 1888. . .

Cheers.
LC

Oh Come on get real ??

[Jeff Leahy]

Does anyone think there might be evidence in the book that at this point has not been revealed by the author or associates.

It book may well reveal that there tests associated with the D.N.A have been reproduced independently and verify the authors claims.


Also can anyone answer me this please.

When the table runner was previously examined for the Sickert investigation was any traces of semen found, or did the technology exist at that time to locate semen on the table runner.

If I was a author wanting to bring out a book naming a suspect ( Highly unlikely as I can,t post on here with the correct grammar) one thing I would consider is are my peers in this case the experts going to counteract my claims and if so with what.
I would then back up my case with evidence to satisfy the doubters.

The author in this case in my opinion thought of all the ammunition to be fired back at him and kept his ace card up his sleeve, I.e not released the fact that secondary duplicate tests have already been done .

It is true he might know that he can,t verify anything and publish anyway .

It was examined at the Victoria and Albret Museum by Andy Aliffe…its Edwarian probably 1902-04

So it weren't at the ripper murder scene..thats pretty simple? Jeff

[Stewart P Evans]

That's fine...

I am thick skinned and as I'm new here I haven't seen what goes on in here. I wasn't upset just maybe would have worded a response differently. I'm also not starting a fight. I've been interested in jtr for about 15 years and nemember of this site for a while but only just got the confidence to post. Sorry if I ask some stupid questions its how we learn

That's fine, and I know what you mean. "...and pigs might fly" is quite a common response to someone who makes a suggestion that another might find unlikely or far fetched. There was no intention to be obnoxious, so, again, sorry if I offended you.

[spyglass]

I am thick skinned and as I'm new here I haven't seen what goes on in here. I wasn't upset just maybe would have worded a response differently. I'm also not starting a fight. I've been interested in jtr for about 15 years and nemember of this site for a while but only just got the confidence to post. Sorry if I ask some stupid questions its how we learn

Dont worry to much, its normally forgotten a couple of posts later.
Most of us have been put in our place at one point and posted what others regard as stupid....I have.
Even the great Simon Woods has regretted some of his posts.
I think we all have at one point realised weve said something dum just as we press the send button.

Regards.

[paul g]

Don't forget that there has been no evidence that the stains are either blood or semen (and as I understand it, previous attempts to identify them failed) only that mtDNA was extracted from cloth near (or in) the stains. You can't tell from mtDNA the nature of the organic material that it came from.
Prosector

I am thick skinned and as I'm new here I haven't seen what goes on in here. I wasn't upset just maybe would have worded a response differently. I'm also not starting a fight. I've been interested in jtr for about 15 years and nemember of this site for a while but only just got the confidence to post. Sorry if I ask some stupid questions its how we learn

I am like yourself rarely posted on here until the news broke. It can be a bit intimidating as the wealth of knowledge by most on here is awe inspiring.
But what the heck , I can spell just my grammar is dreadful my knowledge is minimum but sometimes the sword beats the pen .
I would urge anyone to post on here after all academics and the likes are only those who paid attention at school.
Me I was chasing girls and playing football just seemed like more fun at the time.

[Phil Carter]

'Lavender could not identify her face: most of her features had been sliced away by the killer. But he was eager to help - he had given evidence in a murder trial before, and was aware of the respectability an immigrant businessman could gain by helping the authorities.
Examining Eddowes's clothes, he confirmed this was the woman he had seen a few hours earlier. It would be months afterwards that Lavender was summoned to identify a man under guard at the Convalescent Police Seaside Home at Clarendon Villas, Brighton.'

Who invents this stuff?

Hello Stewart,

Eerily McCormickesque isn't it?

best regards


Phil

[lynn cates]

empirical item

Hello Jeff. Thanks.

It's an empirical item, hence not amenable to proof.

Cheers.
LC

[richardh]

This shawl/table-runner is the new bolster/bedding argie-bargie.

[Stewart P Evans]

I find...

Hello Stewart,
Eerily McCormickesque isn't it?
best regards
Phil

Yes, quite eerie.

[eddie1]

Does anyone think there might be evidence in the book that at this point has not been revealed by the author or associates.

It book may well reveal that there tests associated with the D.N.A have been reproduced independently and verify the authors claims.


Also can anyone answer me this please.

When the table runner was previously examined for the Sickert investigation was any traces of semen found, or did the technology exist at that time to locate semen on the table runner.

If I was a author wanting to bring out a book naming a suspect ( Highly unlikely as I can,t post on here with the correct grammar) one thing I would consider is are my peers in this case the experts going to counteract my claims and if so with what.
I would then back up my case with evidence to satisfy the doubters.

The author in this case in my opinion thought of all the ammunition to be fired back at him and kept his ace card up his sleeve, I.e not released the fact that secondary duplicate tests have already been done .

It is true he might know that he can,t verify anything and publish anyway .

As I understand it the original investigation on the shawl only swabbed in one random spot to test for any DNA so may not have been as thoroughly tested as perhaps it now has been. I've read the first two chapters of this new boobook and the author hints that he knew something about the sha mwl before he bought it at auction so maybe there is more to be revealed. I have ordererd it so eager to find out

[GUT]

I am like yourself rarely posted on here until the news broke. It can be a bit intimidating as the wealth of knowledge by most on here is awe inspiring.
But what the heck , I can spell just my grammar is dreadful my knowledge is minimum but sometimes the sword beats the pen .
I would urge anyone to post on here after all academics and the likes are only those who paid attention at school.
Me I was chasing girls and playing football just seemed like more fun at the time.

G'day Paul

You mean it doesn't still?