Kosminski and Victim DNA Match on Shawl

[Debra A]

Hello Debs, after a long, long time!

How many times "there will be a scientific paper published", considering this case of ours?

All the best
jukka

Fingers crossed, Jukka and Lynn it will be soon! ..then I will email someone intelligent and see what it means.

[curious]

Egads- what is this thing after all?! A shawl, an apron, a table runner, or what?! It can't even be determined with any certainty exactly what the thing is.

The apron was something that is actually documented that Eddowes was wearing. The item being discussed now is completely different.

[robhouse]

This would be a very strange table runner, in my opinion... one half blue printed silk, the other half red silk. Also... isn't the point of a table runner to protect the table from dings and scratches? Would this extremely thin piece of silk even make sense as a table runner?

RH

[Fisherman]

Fingers crossed, Jukka and Lynn it will be soon! ..then I will email someone intelligent and see what it means.

Sounds promising, Debra!

The best,
Fisherman

[lynn cates]

choice

Hello Patrick.

"A leading contemporary Ripper suspect, named as the likely Ripper by a senior police official and an established Ripper victim - both of their DNA on one article of clothing."

Well, why do you think the author chose to test for Kosminski and not, say, Druitt?

Cheers.
LC

[Fisherman]

This would be a very strange table runner, in my opinion... one half blue printed silk, the other half red silk. Also... isn't the point of a table runner to protect the table from dings and scratches? Would this extremely thin piece of silk even make sense as a table runner?

RH

I have no comments to make on the pattern as such, but the table runners we use in Sweden are normally put on top of a table cloth that covers the whole table. The runner is just for decoration and can be silk or even lace.

If the runner itself was the only thing covering the table, the edges of it would be left bare if the table was wider than two feet.

The best,
Fisherman

[Svensson]

I've finished the book. I'll write my thoughts on it, but just to clear up some things, since I haven't really posted before (nearly, a few times), I don't count myself a ripperologist, research doesn't really interest me, nor do I have the means. I've simply read a fair few books about the subject and enjoy the mystery. I don't know a fraction of what a lot of people here know. I also don't really even have a 'suspect No.1', as I say, I just enjoy the mystery.

So, the book. Edwards makes no bones about being an amateur sleuth, albeit with the means to take amateur to a blurry level. The writing is fine, it's as good as many ripper books and better than many. The science talks were the most interesting for me and made compelling reading. His emotions get in the way of the writing at times, I don't really need to know about his 'cold shivers' when standing in certain places, but that's forgivable in my opinion, at least the guys passionate and this doesn't occur at an unhealthy rate in the text. He makes some mental leaps in some of his theories, which I'm not that comfortable with but for the most part they are superficial and can be discarded in the context of the greater core, which is to say the shawl and the DNA profiling that was done.

The science is well explained for a laymen and sounds on the face of it, credible. The work wasn't done by ol' jimmy labcoat in a mobile lab, but people in solid positions, with solid credentials. Of course it'd be great to have the work reviewed and more work done etc. but as I say, on the face of it, I don't see any glaring reasons to debunk it. What I will say is that a lot of the things being thrown around in this thread, I assume gleamed from the tabloid articles are explained in the book, the 1/400,000 number being one example.

Convincing? Yes and no. The science is interesting and to a laymen such as myself, believable. The mental leaps he makes in his theories are less so. There are a few things not really explained, for starters why the shawl was there in the first place, but if you're willing to go along with the science, you pretty much have to accept that it was, which is obviously going to be a big issue. It does try to explain some of these things and obviously there will always be things we just have to accept we'll never know, but I think these will just fuel the debate over the book for years to come.

I suppose in summary I'd say.. science was great, very interesting. Theory is ok, I've read a lot stronger. Overall, it's worth a read with an open mind and no agenda but I think to say CASE SOLVED! Is a little premature. Perhaps with a few more years and a few more tests, it'd be easier to forgive the mental leaps and seem a lot more convincing. Fascinating read all the same though.

Thank you for this unbiased and good review, Poch. I will now let the others try to smash the book to pieces with their more serious tools before I get my wallet out.

[curious]

This would be a very strange table runner, in my opinion... one half blue printed silk, the other half red silk. Also... isn't the point of a table runner to protect the table from dings and scratches? Would this extremely thin piece of silk even make sense as a table runner?

RH

I believe that runners go over a tablecloth that protects the table. Runners are for decoration.

curious

oops, see that Fisherman already answered

[Varqm]

So this whole thing is not true.Just was about to completely dismiss Hutchinson, LeGrande, Joseph Silver Fegeinbaum,etc as suspects but I guess not.These suspects are slippery.

[Simon Wood]

Hi Lynn,

This is just a thought.

Could it have been Kosher DNA?

Regards,

Simon

[Stewart P Evans]

Tale

On pages 49-50 of the book the many times repeated tale of Sergeant Stephen White and his 'undercover police' role 'watching the streets' during the murders is again rolled out. Need I say here, cynic that I am, that I believe this story to be totally apocryphal.

This is the story where White allegedly sighted a suspicious man with brilliant eyes and after the man left the scene a murder victim was found. The location of this murder was not given but in Ripperological circles many favour Mitre Square. The book later refers back to this incident (page 216) as, wait for it, a scenario allowing a Met officer to be off his area. Another oft-quoted 'surveillance' scenario is the fact that the Police kept watch on suspected Jewish anarchists and their meeting places.

Thus, the scene is set. It was at this time that the Parlours had purchased the two framed pieces of 'shawl' that the video shop owners had sold. They now had a vested interest in the 'shawl'.

[MrBarnett]

So, in trying to establish that his Ripperological 'first', the discovery of the 'shawl', Harrison needed to do some research and it was then he encountered his first major obstacle.

As everyone knows the body of Catherine Eddowes was discovered by PC Watkins of the City Police, and, deep in City ground, no Metropolitan officer would, or should, have been present. He thought that might be 'a case of mistaken identity'. As no one had apparently tried to make any financial gain from the 'shawl', Harrison felt that some credibility might attach to the problematical item and that the person who originated the claims about the shawl must have had 'some private information relating to the description of Catherine Eddowes' clothing [?] and 'that it is the real thing.'

Harrison stated, 'I make no false claims about the shawl's authenticity and leave it to those who feel sufficiently curious to have it forensically examined and tested. In reality, the locating of the shawl was an added bonus for my efforts over the years. It certainly proves that, although the case is over one hundred years old, it is still possible to locate and unearth new evidence, albeit rather controversial and unconnected with the direct evidence of the case...'

Stewart,

Surely Mitre Square was/is not 'deep' in City territory. It was/is only a few streets away from H division territory.

And where the two forces overlapped, would there not have been occasions where they pooled resources? During the WMs for instance?

I know of at least one example where a City PC and one from H division where patrolling together on Whitechapel High Street. Although as this was in 1904, perhaps it reflects changes made post he WM's.

MrB

[lynn cates]

claim

Hello Penny. I think the claim is that the shawl was Aaron's--not Kate's.

Cheers.
LC

[Penny_Dredfull]

Kosminski and Victim DNA Match on Shawl

Poch- Yes, well that's the other problem. And it's a big one.There is no proof it belonged Eddowes or that it was worn by her on the night she was murdered. I can't even entertain the rest of the story attached to this "shawl" after that.

[lynn cates]

agree

Hello Velma. Thanks.

OK, I agree.

Cheers.
LC