Kosminski and Victim DNA Match on Shawl

[spyglass]

[QUOTE=pinkmoon;306291]The diary was different there was always a small chance it was true.[/QUOTE
My point is, nearly everyone on here thinks its rubbish and wont hold up, but we will all buy it and read it.

[Dr. John Watson]

I'm sorry, I haven't read all the posts on this thread, but I did read the Daily Mail article. Putting aside the "scientific" stuff, can someone with a better memory (hopefully some of the veteran members of this board) answer these questions for me:

1. Is there any definitive evidence connecting the so-called shawl with Catherine Eddowes, or any other Ripper victim? (Definitive meaning proven)

2. Is there any definitive evidence showing that either of the subjects who submitted DNA samples for comparison were related by blood to either Eddowes or Kosminski? (Definitive meaning proven)

3. Is there any definitive evidence showing that Aaron Kosminski ever sexually assaulted anyone, or ever attacked anyone (male or female) with a knife or any other weapon? (The isolated incident with his sister was a threat)

4. Is there any definitive evidence that the Ripper sexually assaulted any of his victims, either before or after killing them?

I'm not looking for detailed answers, just Y or N will suffice.

Dr. John

[John Wheat]

It all sounds a bit suspect excuse the pun.

[wolfie1]

I'm sorry, I haven't read all the posts on this thread, but I did read the Daily Mail article. Putting aside the "scientific" stuff, can someone with a better memory (hopefully some of the veteran members of this board) answer these questions for me:

1. Is there any definitive evidence connecting the so-called shawl with Catherine Eddowes, or any other Ripper victim? (Definitive meaning proven)

2. Is there any definitive evidence showing that either of the subjects who submitted DNA samples for comparison were related by blood to either Eddowes or Kosminski? (Definitive meaning proven)

3. Is there any definitive evidence showing that Aaron Kosminski ever sexually assaulted anyone, or ever attacked anyone (male or female) with a knife or any other weapon? (The isolated incident with his sister was a threat)

4. Is there any definitive evidence that the Ripper sexually assaulted any of his victims, either before or after killing them?

I'm not looking for detailed answers, just Y or N will suffice.

Dr. John

As a genealogist and Historian, I would hope that point 2: would be proven in the book with a published genealogical chart and copies of Birth, Death records (all certified) with parental and sibling lineage proven beyond doubt,

For the other points I leave it to the esteemed and experienced, and some who are published, Ripperologists on casebook to comment.

[Sand87]

An amazing example of false (or mistaken) reasoning. You wouldn't be about to market a Ripper book yourself, would you? As they say, no publicity is bad publicity.

I was struggling for the right phrase there but you hit it perfectly; false reasoning.

[Sand87]

Interesting that he just opened a shop, isn't it.

Yes I've never seen so much activity, I regularly check the whose on line tab and have NEVER seen so many members at the one time.

This thread has been linked on Reddit, amongst other places.

[paul g]

Book

Weather the book brings financial riches to the author is of no concern to me.

The first book I read on Jack the Ripper I can't tell you the author, the title I would even struggle to recall who the suspect fingered in the book.
But what that book bought me was a interest in the murders that has outlasted many a hobby and interest.
So if the book brings new people into the subject then all well and done.

There is not a book written on jack that has not had profit margins scrutinised by publishers, the current one is no different.

In my opinion after reading the book it will be classified in one of three departments.
1 completely unbelievable but very enjoyable read.
2 completely unbelievable and not a good read.
3 very good book but suspect suggested has not convinced me.


Most if not nearly all the books I have read I have enjoyed. The suspect may get dis proven by others but that does not make it a bad book.

One of the books on the royal conspiracy theory remains one of my favourite Jack the Ripper books, I may not be convinced by the arguments forwarded in the book, however that does not mean the book has been a unenjoyable read.
Maybe the fact that I have never pinned myself to a particular suspect helps me enjoy the book for what it is.

[lynn cates]

close

Hello Jason. Thanks.

I keep my copy only a few feet from me at home.

Cheers.
LC

[GUT]

Unfortunately there are those, even some sensible authors, who see that any Ripper publicity is great to revive a flagging subject. The result of the publicity being, of course, that it will create more interest in the subject amongst Joe Public and they will sell more of their own Ripper books as a result.

And I find it hard to fault them for that.

[RockySullivan]

This article says the author claims that Koz gave her the shawl and then left it at the scene.
A. Would the ripper leave a shawl that could be traced back to him at the scene of the crime?
B. if he did.... would the police give the most crucial piece of evidence away?

[mklhawley]

Hi all,

A 100% perfect mDNA match proves only one thing, the sample on the shawl is the descendent's mDNA, not the ancestor's. A set mDNA mutation rate of 3 X 10 (to the -5) guarantees that a mom's mDNA is slightly different than gramma's, and so on. So.... A 100% perfect match proves deception.

Or was the statement in the article 'perfect match' not really?

Sincerely,

Mike

[GUT]

Hi all,

A 100% perfect mDNA match proves only one thing, the sample on the shawl is the descendent's mDNA, not the ancestor's. A set mDNA mutation rate of 3 X 10 (to the -5) guarantees that a mom's mDNA is slightly different than gramma's, and so on. So.... A 100% perfect match proves deception.

Or was the statement in the article 'perfect match' not really?

Sincerely,

Mike

And if not a "perfect match" what was it?

DNA matches are usually expressed as a %

[Beowulf]

Hello Barbara. If Kosminski kept the shawl as a trophy, surely Simpson could not have picked it up that night?

Cheers.
LC

Lynn, didn't mean Kosminski kept it as a trophy, but that the policeman picking it up at the scene, did. In that case, he would not wash it. Or anyone else who ever owned it thereafter if knowing what it was.

What are the specifics to determine if that shawl is Edwardian vs Victorian. I have seen shawls similar and they have been determined to be as early as 1860.

And to Pinkmoon...I would kill for a Jack the Ripper yoyo.

[NRTomasheski]

Damn it, you guys! You're keeping me from finishing the horror* story I'm supposed to be working on tonight. Stop being so interesting and prolific!!

*non-Ripper based

[Kevin Martin]

Always good to see Jack in the news. Sad that like 90% of the fluff out there this will lead to nothing more than some $$$ in a shady characters pocket. The whole shawl story is unbelievable in every way. On the bright side in about 2 years when this story is forgotten. We will get a new story about the shawl. This time about how it was in fact dropped by the "Real" Killer Jill The Ripper. Now to people actually interested in solving this case. Back to work please. There is always a chance that there is still some real evidence out there that will solve this mystery.