A problem with the "Eddowes Shawl" DNA match

[Panderoona]

He was unmasked as the Ripper following an investigation by businessman Russell Edwards."


"Dr Louhelainen was able to extract 126-year-old DNA from the material. He compared it to DNA from a British descendant of Matilda, as well as DNA from a descendant of Eddowes, and both proved a perfect match." [/QUOTE]

I AM the Queen of Sheba.

[richardh]

Well, as far as the MoS is concerned it's case closed...

LINK

"It was the discovery that finally provided an answer to the greatest murder mystery of all time – the identity of Jack the Ripper.

Last year, The Mail on Sunday revealed the DNA evidence that proved beyond reasonable doubt that the serial killer was Polish immigrant Aaron Kosminski.

Now, exclusive photographs of the murderer’s family offer the strongest clues yet to what he looked like.

He was unmasked as the Ripper following an investigation by businessman Russell Edwards."


"Dr Louhelainen was able to extract 126-year-old DNA from the material. He compared it to DNA from a British descendant of Matilda, as well as DNA from a descendant of Eddowes, and both proved a perfect match."

[PaulB]

I can't remember. Why did they choose to test Kosminski's DNA and not one of the other suspects?

c.d.

It was because a former curator of the crime museum at Scotland Yard told Russell Edwards that Kosminski was Jack the Ripper.

[c.d.]

Hello CD. Because Kosminski is the current fashion.

Cheers.
LC

Thank you, Sir.

c.d.

[lynn cates]

fashion

Hello CD. Because Kosminski is the current fashion.

Cheers.
LC

[PaulB]

I'm sorry but a bit of cloth, shawl, table runner whatever, with a chunk cut out of it is nothing but a rag.

No it isn't. But have it your way, I can't be bothered to argue.

[Pcdunn]

Hi, Rosella, thanks for the info! I do think there is a lot of "cachet" about the JtR murders, and some people think there is possibly money to make if they claim a relationship to the killer. Or claim to have the evidence, such as "Jack's!" ties, gloves, boots, diary, or an important possession of the victim.
I know it is just psychology at the root of all this, but it seems very obnoxious, all the same.

[Panderoona]

PC Amos Simpson was based at Cheshunt at the time of the murders. Rather a long way from all the murder scenes.

Unfortunately the Daily Mail has revived the story today: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...us-killer.html

[Rosella]

Hi, pcdunn,
PC Amos Simpson existed, all right, and the shawl (or whatever it is) was in the possession of Simpsons' descendants, it seems. However, PC Simpson was a Met copper, (N Division) and it's never been proven that he was ever in or near Mitre Square on that particular night. City PC Watkins found Eddowes' body.

The silk shawl was never traced back to Eddowes or found in her possession. If she had owned it surely she would have tried to pawn it for a bed for the night? (She and John Kelly were 2d short of a night's lodging together when they parted earlier that day.)

IMO the 'Eddowes shawl' legend was a family story that perhaps started out generations before as a joke and then got completely changed out of all recognition over the years.

[Pcdunn]

Isn't the provenance questionable? I mean, we're not sure the policeman who supposedly kept it existed (or at least was on the scene at the time), nor are we sure it was ever listed in the list of Eddowes' possessions.
I've read about the shawl being given to Scotland Yard, but not displayed due to questions about what it really was. Many years later, the family asks for it back, and later it (or something purporting to be it) is obtained at auction by Mr. Edwards.
It seems to me that it has passed through so many hands that the stains could have occurred on it at any point in time.

[GUT]

GUT..as one of the resident barristers here, please correct me if I'm wrong. All you'd have to say, assuming Kosminski's mtDNA & Y haplogroup were both on the shawl, along with Eddowes' mtDNA, it would only show that the pair exchanged body fluids, not that he murdered her.

As you have all said: no provenance & there's back-tracking on Eddowes' mt DNA. Would they not have to fully sequence the genome to prove it truly was Kosminski's & not any of the other thousands of Eastern Europeans in London then? Just a thought. Shred if necessary. Back to lurking...

Not even that they exchanged fluids, we're the DNA correct the most it could prove is that at some stage they each had contact with it. It doesn't even show that it was at the same time.

[GUT]

It is not a rag.

I'm sorry but a bit of cloth, shawl, table runner whatever, with a chunk cut out of it is nothing but a rag.

[GUT]

I can't remember. Why did they choose to test Kosminski's DNA and not one of the other suspects?

c.d.

They initially tested for Demming as I recall.

[John G]

... or any location, for that matter, John. Either way, the number of potential "donors" are astronomical.

Hi Sam,

Absolutely. The genetic material, said to relate to Kosminksi, could have been deposited anywhere during the lifetime of the garment. It is also worth reiterating that only mitochondrial DNA was extracted. This simply means that you share a common anscester along the maternal line. As noted, it is far from unique and Kosminski's haplogroup (the group of people who share the same maternal common ancestor) accounts for around 1.8% of England's current population (genetic diversity), as well as about 1.6% of Western Europeans and 2.4% of Eastern Europeans.

[Sam Flynn]

Yes, and even the figure of, say, one in 95000 or 1 in 100000, presupposes that the genetic material was deposited in 1888 by a Londoner. However... it surely could have just as easily have been 1870, 1920, 1973 or any other year you might wish to pick out at random.

... or any location, for that matter, John. Either way, the number of potential "donors" are astronomical.