Kosminski and Victim DNA Match on Shawl

[GUT]

Thank you both - Neil, thanks very much for taking the time to do that, it's always fascinating to see source material, much appreciated.

In fact, I'd go so far as to say I can now happily dismiss the shawl with its sauce material.

Sorry.

And even if it is shown that the DNA is spot on and it is blood and semen, and to have been made pre 1888, with it having no connection to the murder scene I can think of a number of explanations as to how they came to be there.

[Henry Flower]

Hob-Knock???

What?! Why don't we have these wonderful nicknames anymore?

[Rob Clack]

And that quote is from?

Monty

Knowing Robert I would say he is being a bit mischievous.

[Jeff Leahy]

Hi Jeff, no worries I've got the book on me now, so can detail what they did a bit more. The thing with all this is I'm no expert so I'm 'blinded by science', as it were.

As the book goes: They established that the blue dye was likely hand painted, not screen printed, which initially led them to believe its age. They used fancy cameras to do abosption tests, which had ridiculous names like spectrophotometer (?!) which from what I understand, test to see which spectrums of light would absorb and which would reflect, in turn telling you the base colours of the dyes used. They found it to be in the indigo spectrum and that only one compound was used, meaning it couldn't have been screen printed (which came in around 1910). Nothing else could be told from this, so from here they went with the NMR (nuclear magnetic resonance) which apparently determines the actual structure of the compounds. These tests showed that it was very likely natural dyes, not synthetic which were created in 1856 and replaced natural dyes by 1870. From here they say that all this strongly suggests it was created before 1870 and is backed up by the people he contacted from sothebys. They also found that the compound resembled dyes used in Russia, apparently most common in st petersburg.

Thats about the long and the short of it. The book provides more detail and I think it's these parts of the book that I enjoyed the most. As I mentioned before, I don't believe the book to be watertight by any means but I found the science fascinating.

Thanks POCH

The best ripperologists are amateur soothes so don't knock yourself.

Actually what you appear to be saying here is most interesting. That the original dating was in error and that they now believe it to pre-date the murders.

It only seems reasonable for them to make that case and for everyone to make an informed opinion. But it would certainly change the game in my opinion if they are correct.

Most intriguing

Many Thanks Jeff

[Monty]

Hob-Knock???

What?! Why don't we have these wonderful nicknames anymore?

Hob knocking was, apparently, a Victorian mode of where a gentleman was assaulted with a punch or kick, most commonly in to the genitals.

So we can guess how Levy got his name.

Monty

[Monty]

Knowing Robert I would say he is being a bit mischievous.

I see.

Monty

[Henry Flower]

Thanks Monty, so hob-knocking was not dissimilar to the 'knock-out game' so popular among the males of one particular American community.

Nice.

[Jeff Leahy]

Is this the cloth in question?

http://wpmedia.news.nationalpost.com/2014/09/ripper_-_shawl.jpg?w=620&h=464

If so then you seem to have your units of measurement confused. That looks more like it's 2 feet by 8 feet, the other floral print endpiece having been removed at some point. This is the size for an 8 foot table, with the printed ends hanging. With the other end gone it is both a manageable length for an apparently lightweight shawl and worth a lot less at a pawnshop. Eddowes could have owned it, if the dating works. I'll dig out what a similar product would cost back then. Not that I believe for a second that any of that hogwash is true.

I joined here for the classic reason: Somebody was wrong on the internet. And, as a Yank, it's my patriotic duty to support Tumblety.

It would make more sense it was cut in the old emperial measurement I agree. Jeff

[Robert]

MORRIS : ....one of the officers found an old cloth and he spread it on the ground and we all had a picnic. I don't know what happened to the cloth. He packed up the picnic basket so maybe he's got it.

[Jeff Leahy]

Wow! Not only is it solved but there is a picture of Aaron Kosminski too!

He looks older, perhaps before he died, even healthy and dapper?

http://www.smh.com.au/comment/it8217...10-10et93.html

Hi Jonathon

There are know pictures of Aaron. Which is probably why they usually use a news paper sketch that has nothing to do with Kosminski..

However I understand Rob House presented picture of his sister and cousin at a recent conference.. and I have seen on these boards a photograph of another distant american cousin.

Yours jeff

[wolfie1]

Edit to add.
Reported 15 December 1882 Eliza Conway of George Lane charged and sentenced to 14 days hard labour, with theft of petticoat from the clothesline property of Mrs Turner.

Attempting to post link, or document, into this post to prove that it was claimed by Kelly that Conwway, aka Eddowes was a hawker and cleaner in Jewish homes.
Article published in The Cornishman, 11 October 1888. Also Eddowes went by the name of Eliza Conway, and yes I am aware that her sister was also named Eliza.

Any Eddowes/Conway experts on the board ?

[Monty]

MORRIS : ....one of the officers found an old cloth and he spread it on the ground and we all had a picnic. I don't know what happened to the cloth. He packed up the picnic basket so maybe he's got it.

Well done Robert...hook, line and mustard tin.

Monty

[lynn cates]

mistake

Hello GUT.

'Personally I suspect he said something like

"That shawl [or table runner] is the same [pattern] as the dress worn by Jack the Rippers victim"

And over the years the story mutated."

Perfectly sound.

I like this--when a mistake is made, it is helpful to attempt to ascertain the NATURE of the mistake.

Cheers,
LC

[GUT]

Hello GUT.

'Personally I suspect he said something like

"That shawl [or table runner] is the same [pattern] as the dress worn by Jack the Rippers victim"

And over the years the story mutated."

Perfectly sound.

I like this--when a mistake is made, it is helpful to attempt to ascertain the NATURE of the mistake.

Cheers,
LC

G'day Lynn

Thanks for that.

I try to see if there is a sensible explanation and having heard some humdingers passed down in families I know better than to take ant family folk lore seriously without first looking to the facts.

[lynn cates]

secure

Hello Pontius.

"WHY would the shawl have been considered an "important piece of evidence"?'

Well, if it had blood stains and a fluid showing signs of "connection" and it were near the body . . .

"Is there any clue whatsoever that could have been taken from this "shawl"?"

Well, just like the apron. And don't forget, procedure DEMANDED a full inventory.

"I just don't see it as a huge leap of faith to think, in 1888, some superior officer saying, "hey, your wife sews fancy things. Take this fancy fabric, this lady won't be needing it.""

Actually, miracle, more like. And superior? H Division had NO business in Mitre sq.

"Of course, I could be way off. I just don't see the "strict securing of crime scenes and evidence" back in those days as compared to what you'd see now."

Have you read Neil Bell's thread?

Cheers.
LC