Kosminski and Victim DNA Match on Shawl

[Outlaw]

Adam wood is your man..

He did post about this yesterday but good luck trawling back through all the posts.. Actually I can't even remember which forum it was on…dooh

Jeff

Thank you

[Fisherman]

Yes. I know that. I've just posted two quotations from the book, in response to your question.

I've also explained (twice) what is puzzling me.

The method of whole genome amplification is used with mtDNA too, if that is what you are after.

This is how it was worded in the original article:

As a non-scientist, I found myself in a new world as Jari warned that it would also be impossible to use genomic DNA, which is used in fresh cases and contains a human’s entire genetic data, because over time it would have become fragmented.
But he explained it would be possible to use mitochondrial DNA instead. It is passed down exclusively through the female line, is much more abundant than genomic DNA, and survives far better.
This meant that in order to give us something to test against, I had to trace a direct descendant through the female line of Catherine Eddowes. Luckily, a woman named Karen Miller, the three-times great-granddaughter of Eddowes, had featured in a documentary about the Ripper’s victims, and agreed to provide a sample of her DNA.
Jari managed to get six complete DNA profiles from the shawl, and when he tested them against Karen’s they were a perfect match.

All the best,
Fisherman

[Fisherman]

This is from a medical experiment paper, cited on the net:

Whole genome amplification (WGA) methods allow diagnostic laboratories to overcome the common problem of insufficient DNA in patient specimens. Further, body fluid samples useful for cancer early detection are often difficult to amplify with traditional PCR methods. In this first application of WGA on the entire human mitochondrial genome, we compared the accuracy of mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) sequence analysis after WGA to that performed without genome amplification. We applied the method to a small group of cancer cases and controls and demonstrated that WGA is capable of increasing the yield of starting DNA material with identical genetic sequence.

All the best,
Fisherman

[Chris]

The method of whole genome amplification is used with mtDNA too, if that is what you are after.

No, it's not.

[NRTomasheski]

Edit: And I see I've crossposted, but will just leave this here all the same.

Yes. I know that. I've just posted two quotations from the book, in response to your question.

I've also explained (twice) what is puzzling me.

Genomic DNA is specifically chromosomal DNA, comprising both mtDNA and nDNA. From the quotes you have posted, it looks like the book, or at least this section, is poorly worded, perhaps due to a misunderstanding of the interchangeability of the terms.
So I'd say you're confusion is not unwarranted, and also that we can't say for sure what was meant, but the fact that the bulk of the text refers to mtDNA suggests that that's what's intended here (and I haven't read the book, so I'm making an assumption, which I probably shouldn't do!)

[Chris]

Genomic DNA is specifically chromosomal DNA, comprising both mtDNA and nDNA.

As I said, genomic seems to be used elsewhere in the book to mean nuclear as opposed to mitochondrial DNA. But the passage I referred to is (I think) the only use of the term which is in a direct quotation from Dr Louhelainen. It sounds as though the author has misused the term when he's not quoting Louhelainen, in which case there's no contradiction in that quotation!

[NRTomasheski]

As I said, genomic seems to be used elsewhere in the book to mean nuclear as opposed to mitochondrial DNA. But the passage I referred to is (I think) the only use of the term which is in a direct quotation from Dr Louhelainen. It sounds as though the author has misused the term when he's not quoting Louhelainen, in which case there's no contradiction in that quotation!

Sounds like!

[Simon Wood]

Hi All,

No amount of argument or wishful thinking will turn the shawl story into anything other than a farrago of nonsense.

You can't polish a turd.

Regards,

Simon

[Jeff Leahy]

The method of whole genome amplification is used with mtDNA too, if that is what you are after.

This is how it was worded in the original article:

As a non-scientist, I found myself in a new world as Jari warned that it would also be impossible to use genomic DNA, which is used in fresh cases and contains a human’s entire genetic data, because over time it would have become fragmented.
But he explained it would be possible to use mitochondrial DNA instead. It is passed down exclusively through the female line, is much more abundant than genomic DNA, and survives far better.
This meant that in order to give us something to test against, I had to trace a direct descendant through the female line of Catherine Eddowes. Luckily, a woman named Karen Miller, the three-times great-granddaughter of Eddowes, had featured in a documentary about the Ripper’s victims, and agreed to provide a sample of her DNA.
Jari managed to get six complete DNA profiles from the shawl, and when he tested them against Karen’s they were a perfect match.

All the best,

This is from a medical experiment paper, cited on the net:

Whole genome amplification (WGA) methods allow diagnostic laboratories to overcome the common problem of insufficient DNA in patient specimens. Further, body fluid samples useful for cancer early detection are often difficult to amplify with traditional PCR methods. In this first application of WGA on the entire human mitochondrial genome, we compared the accuracy of mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) sequence analysis after WGA to that performed without genome amplification. We applied the method to a small group of cancer cases and controls and demonstrated that WGA is capable of increasing the yield of starting DNA material with identical genetic sequence.

All the best,
Fisherman

Hi Fisherman

Are you saying that there is a fairly good chance that the blood on the Material is Cathrine Eddows?

It would certainly make the possibility of the shawl at least having some connection far more probable would it not..Quite interesting really

Yours Jeff

[JadenCollins]

Hi All,

No amount of argument or wishful thinking will turn the shawl story into anything other than a farrago of nonsense.

You can't polish a turd.

Regards,

Simon

Well said, sir.
Instead of aruging we can start by what we already got so far and maybe have a serious research on that?


Jaden

[Pontius2000]

Pompous2000 - See above posts that show that you are, apparently, less knowledgeable than us.

You resort to namecalling, and I'm the pompous one. Loads of logic in that statement.

And whether you read it or not, I corrected my mistake about the location of graffiti.

I don't need anyone to explain police jurisdiction to me. I work for State Police. The specific area I cover is on a jurisdiction line with City police on one side, County police on the other. Two days ago, we had a shooting on the County side. Within 3 minutes of the shooting, cops from all 3 jurisdictions (city, county, and state) were on scene. How could this be? You and others act as though there is the magical jurisdictional force field that keeps officers from entering into another jurisdiction.

There were murders in two jurisdictions, less than a mile apart on the same night. Evidence from a crime in one jurisdiction was then left in the other jurisdiction. So, to me, it is utterly ridiculous to assume that many officers from both jurisdictions didn't cross paths that night.

I have read several of your books and agree that you are a foremost expert on the JtR subject. However, your expertise and knowledge is based on the KNOWN FACTS of the case. Which officers came into contact with other officers, except where specifically recorded, are NOT KNOWN FACTS. So to say that you are more knowledgeable than me on which officers saw/contacted each other that night is rubbish. That's like saying you're more knowledgeable on what the officer ate for supper that night.

And for the umpteenth time, I agree that this shawl story sounds like it is 'probably' a fantasy/hoax. But no true scholar who is interested in finding the truth would dismiss it outright without further research. And THAT is the problem I have with many of the posters on this thread.

[TizerisT]

Regarding the blood type of the semen: It should be remembered that lots of Jews in Europe and North America resemble the native Europeans rather than someone from Israeli background. They are probably the descendants of converts, and hence would have local blood rather than a particularly Jewish one. The Rothschilds are apparently descendants of converts. They have almost no characteristics of Middle-Eastern stock, and there are photo's aplenty of them around. Likewise Roman Abramovich, owner of Chelsea, looks every inch the native Russian.

[Pontius2000]

I wish him all the best, but the strongest argument for considering Kozminski as the Ripper remains Rob House's book. I would say that in the long run this DNA nonsense will hamper the Koz cause instead of help it.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

That much, I totally agree with. Kosminski is a strong enough suspect on his own, with or without a shawl. And I also have considered, if this is a hoax, that it could hurt the case for Kosminski. But not really. Most of the people who post here are so set in their beliefs that they couldn't be pursuaded or dissuaded one way or another.

I would love to know Rob House's indepth view on this new book as I agree that he is the foremost Kosminski expert. There's enough in his book, with or without a shawl, to convince me JtR was either Kosminski or someone with a very similar set of circumstances and life experiences.

[Fisherman]

As I said, genomic seems to be used elsewhere in the book to mean nuclear as opposed to mitochondrial DNA. But the passage I referred to is (I think) the only use of the term which is in a direct quotation from Dr Louhelainen. It sounds as though the author has misused the term when he's not quoting Louhelainen, in which case there's no contradiction in that quotation!

I see what you are after now, Chris, and yes, it is quite confusing. It seems however, that mtDNA is what they have worked with, and that tallies with the original article.
... but it is by no means clearly worded!

The best,
Fisherman

[Phil Carter]

I may have just worked out how Kosminski evaded detection in murders 1-3.


With 8ft table runner in hand, he stopped running, went down on all fours, covered himself and pretended to be a table.

No one would ever notice.



Phil