A problem with the "Eddowes Shawl" DNA match

[Peter Griffith aka gryff]

Getting the Message out

Here’s what I hope will be my final words on this subject. It will likely be read in academic institutions all over the place.

Some dreadful editing that introduces typos and at least one error that wasn’t in the submission. I never mentioned ‘11 poor women', just 'poor women’. Still never mind.

http://theconversation.com/still-a-mystery-dna-hasnt-named-jack-the-ripper-after-all-33312

Cheers

Well done Mick!

I did wonder about the ‘11 poor women' though - but you can't trust them editors

Hope lots of academics read it!!!

cheers, gryff

[GUT]

"... am yet to see one suspect that would get past committal proceedings."

Could a descendant sue for defamation?

Not in Australia today, at one stage the answer may have been different.

[drstrange169]

"... am yet to see one suspect that would get past committal proceedings."

Could a descendant sue for defamation?

[mickreed]

G'day Mick

Well written, one small comment if I may, you say:

It seems that this applies right through the "Ripper" world, am yet to see one suspect that would get past committal proceedings. It seems that evidence and common sense mean nothing when someone latches onto a suspect.

G'day GUT. Of course, you're right. I do think this book is especially bad though, in that it never gets beyond the laughable, apart from, it seemed, the DNA, and as we now know, that is a comedy in its own right.

[Richard Dewar]

G'day Mick

Well written, one small comment if I may, you say:



It seems that this applies right through the "Ripper" world, am yet to see one suspect that would get past committal proceedings. It seems that evidence and common sense mean nothing when someone latches onto a suspect.

Excellent point. Virtually all books, articles naming suspects do so without evidence. Most books follow the same pattern: they mention a contemporary who thought the person was the murderer, the author hypothesizes that this is the kind of person who would have been the murderer, and that the suspect physically could have carried out the murders.

The only suspects for which any evidence has been propounded are Maybrick, Sickert and Kosminski. And in each of those cases, the evidence has been seriously challenged.

[GUT]

Here’s what I hope will be my final words on this subject. It will likely be read in academic institutions all over the place.

Some dreadful editing that introduces typos and at least one error that wasn’t in the submission. I never mentioned ‘11 poor women', just 'poor women’. Still never mind.

http://theconversation.com/still-a-mystery-dna-hasnt-named-jack-the-ripper-after-all-33312

Cheers

G'day Mick

Well written, one small comment if I may, you say:

There are so many examples of conclusions not following from the “evidence” that it seems astonishing that it was picked up by a publisher.

It seems that this applies right through the "Ripper" world, am yet to see one suspect that would get past committal proceedings. It seems that evidence and common sense mean nothing when someone latches onto a suspect.

[Richard Dewar]

The Press, for the Most Part, Didn't Get It Wrong

The mainstream establishment media, for the most part, have gotten the story correct. Almost everything I have read in the initial stages of the unveiling of Mr Edward's book, revealed his contentions about the shawl but also had caveats indicating that peer review and verification would be needed to confirm.

Even in the postings on this site, I have seen less than a handful of posters at any time saying the case was solved by Mr Edwards.

Let's put what happened in perspective. Yet another book was published accusing someone of being Jack the Ripper. The only difference was that this book claimed to have scientific proof.

Some of us initially were intrigued but wanted more information while others immediately dismissed the book's contentions. Few ever accepted the book's theories as facts.

[Amanda]

Well Done

Excellent article Mick.

Sums things up very well.

Amanda

[mickreed]

New site article

Here’s what I hope will be my final words on this subject. It will likely be read in academic institutions all over the place.

Some dreadful editing that introduces typos and at least one error that wasn’t in the submission. I never mentioned ‘11 poor women', just 'poor women’. Still never mind.

http://theconversation.com/still-a-mystery-dna-hasnt-named-jack-the-ripper-after-all-33312

Cheers

[mickreed]

Just an unrelated note... I think someone earlier posted some sales figures for Russell's book. I do not have access to that info, but if whoever posted that could look up sales figures for my book, I'd be very interested. I have no idea whatsoever how many copies have sold.

Rob H

I posted some sales rankings for Amazon only. They only cover this month and last, which was okay for RE's book. Normally the actual number sold is not shown, although in his case it was for UK, Germany, and Canada, but only for ebooks.

Have a look here

http://www.salesrankexpress.com

Links to similar sites are given a little way down.

[robhouse]

Just an unrelated note... I think someone earlier posted some sales figures for Russell's book. I do not have access to that info, but if whoever posted that could look up sales figures for my book, I'd be very interested. I have no idea whatsoever how many copies have sold.

Rob H

[Chris]

And here is another comment/blog on the RE book from

Jack the Ripper: The Ripping Yarn Goes On and On…

By Mark Wells, Lecturer-Broadcast/Multimedia Journalism at the University of East Anglia.

Unfortunately not a very in depth review. A lot about past theories with discussion of Edwards book confined to the last few paragraphs.

Thanks for this. Isn't it strange that he missed the correction of the 314.1C error, seeing that any sensible Google News Search on the story brings up multiple references to it? Good for Dusty Miller.

[GUT]

Do you know what you have GUT? Are you using a laptop? They can be a pain as they may use old Intel graphics

It is done with HTML5 and WebGL

Try to find a friend with more up-to-date graphics

cheers, gryff

Yeah mate she's a pretty old laptop, I bought one of those Toughbooks a few years ago and you can't kill it, I keep looking at new ones but I'm to tight to buy a new one.

[Peter Griffith aka gryff]

There's a time limit on editing Gryff.

I can't view it I'll have to borrow a newer computer.

Do you know what you have GUT? Are you using a laptop? They can be a pain as they may use old Intel graphics

It is done with HTML5 and WebGL - so your web browser must support them.

Try to find a friend with more up-to-date graphics

cheers, gryff

[GUT]

There's a time limit on editing Gryff.

I can't view it I'll have to borrow a newer computer.