Kosminski and Victim DNA Match on Shawl

[pinkmoon]

update!!!!

Experts have just confirmed that the primark label on shawl dates to the 1870s.

[lynn cates]

European

Hello Don. Welcome to the boards.

"400.000" is written in "European." Just think of the decimal as a comma.

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

source

Hello Jason. Source?

Cheers.
LC

[pinkmoon]

BRAWL OVER SHAWL!! Brilliant. Even better than DEBATE TURNS FIERY OVER DIARY.

What about what was on the shawl TRYING TO DEBUNK THE S####....

[pinkmoon]

Hello Jason. Source?

Cheers.
LC

No source just made it up like a lot of people have done over the years.

[Henry Flower]

Can someone in the know clarify the figures being cited though? Someone says the DNA match gives us odds of 1 in 400,000, someone else says one in 400.000 (which means 1 in 400) someone else says 1 in 40,000. Some people interpret this to mean there were 400,000 other people with the same DNA, some say it means the DNA is proven 400,000 to one to be Kominski's and Eddowes'. That's quite a broad variety of readings.

Agreed. (And this is one reason why the cavalier attitude to punctuation sometimes evident on the boards can be problematic... Mentioning no names.... #koff#trevormarriott#koff#)

[Henry Flower]

What about what was on the shawl TRYING TO DEBUNK THE SPU##

Speechless. Simply speechless.

[Prosector]

One thing is puzzling me or am I missing something.

Mr Edwards buys the shawl from auction and in good faith believes the historical story connecting the shawl to miss Eddowes.
He decides to pass it over to Mr D.N.A scientist man who comes back and I informs him that he has done extensive tests and has discovered stains identified as blood and semen.

Mr Edwards is so excited

Mr scientists says ok what do you want me to do now

Mr Edwards says get a sample from a living descendant of miss Eddowes see if it matches.

Months pass Mr scientist comes back yeahhhhhh result it matches

Mr Edwards is over the moon.

Mr scientist asks what do you want me to do now

Mr Edwards says test the semen to see if we can match it to a suspect.

Which suspect asks the scientist we have Tumbelty, chapman, kominsky, Barnett, maybruck, sickert, druit well to be honest there's over 40 of them there suspects.

Mmm difficult to chose, we could pick the easiest one to trace possibly MAybrick I'm sure there descendants would be easy to trace.
Or pick one

Ok we will go down the pick one out of the hat way.

Said hat appears and it is Kominsky.


Years of expensive research later as his traceable D.N.A is in Australia mr scientist has a result it matches but only secondary D.N.A.

Mr Edwards is ecstatic and thanks his lucky stars that the first suspect he picked out at random just so happens to match.

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

[lynn cates]

made up

Hello Jason. Thanks.

Yes, a GOOD bit has been made up.

Cheers.
LC

[paul g]

Hello Paul G. But other than that, the evidence is OVERWHELMING. (heh-heh)

Cheers.
LC

Lol Lynn so correct. He he

[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

That is a very good point and one needs to bear it mind when thinking and drawing conclusions , thanks for pointing that out.

[Prosector]

Hello Neil.

Bingo. Whatever happened to the scientific notion of a control?

Cheers.
LC

I emailed the scientist, Dr Louhelainen (who contrary to many press reports is a respected molecular biologist working chiefly in the fields of muscle metabolism and cancer, not a 'world renowned DNA expert' as many of the papers have claimed) yesterday to ask him how many control subjects he took mtDNA samples from but he has not yet replied. I will let you know when he does.
Prosector

[sepiae]

exclusive BS

Hi everyone,

think everything of importance has already been said.
Same shawl that had been tested before, right?
And the same problem with mDNA as before, e.g. Patricia Cornwell, right?
Only difference is we're now to believe that on top of everything else He was able to, pardon me, t*** off within those 10 minutes. Even if there was sperm present, we're back to nowhere; who's in the end, and still it's mDNA.

Nothing at all has changed.

Including over-confident papers.
The Daily Mail...?

I mean, really...?!

If such a rag combines its sensational found with the word 'exclusively', warning lamps should be flashing up presently.

[DeltaXi65]

It is ultimately only cold hard scientific facts that will solve the case, with technological and scientific advances moving forward every day, at the very least the Ripper community will continue to expand and debate ,with each additional piece of evidence, credible or not.

Out of curiosity , what is the material at the Kew Archives that the author of the book, claim no other researcher has yet to date examined? Or is it a hook to entice sales of the book?
I find it very difficult that serious researcher would not have unearthed every skerrick of credible evidence to be found in every archive in England.

The shopkeeper, turned author, is simply trying to earn a living. I can appreciate his devotion to his side of the story, in as much as I can understand all Ripperologists sticking in a dogged fashion to their own favoured suspect, despite all hard evidence demonstrating guilt away from their preferred Suspect.

As much as I hate to say it, the only technological advance that has an chance at cracking this case is a time machine.

[twnorman]

What does it prove?

I don't think it proves that much. If Kosminski's DNA is on that material as well as the DNA of Eddowes, that might link them to each other, which could mean Kosminski murdered Eddowes or at least had contact with Eddowes earlier that day. But we don't even know the provenance of the material! And if Kosminski murdered Eddowes it doesn't prove he murdered any of the others. This is far from naming Kosminski as "Jack." We can't even agree amongst ourselves who Jack's victims were! Let's not jump to conclusions. The evidence needs to be peer-reviewed and the provenance of the material needs to be solid otherwise this is just some more speculation.