A problem with the "Eddowes Shawl" DNA match

[richardh]

"Until the work led by Dr Jari Louhelainen from 2011, the shawl had never been examined for DNA or subjected to chemical testing for proof of age and geographical provenance."

and yet:

"In 2006 the shawl was subject to inconclusive forensic testing for a programme on Channel 5"

[GUT]

"Until the work led by Dr Jari Louhelainen from 2011, the shawl had never been examined for DNA or subjected to chemical testing for proof of age and geographical provenance."

and yet:

"In 2006 the shawl was subject to inconclusive forensic testing for a programme on Channel 5"

Truth the 1st victim.

I think the 2006 one was when they were after Deeming.

[pinkmoon]

I so hope the police get involved in this and make some arrests and then hopefully we can go back to discussing some sane and sensible theories.

[robhouse]

I have recently, after looking again at RE's book, come to the conclusion that his chapter on Kozminski seems to be largely plagiarized from my own book. I have not done a direct line-by-line comparison, but it seems to be largely copied, with some minor changes here and there. Pretty disgusting all in all.

Rob House

[Abby Normal]

I have recently, after looking again at RE's book, come to the conclusion that his chapter on Kozminski seems to be largely plagiarized from my own book. I have not done a direct line-by-line comparison, but it seems to be largely copied, with some minor changes here and there. Pretty disgusting all in all.

Rob House

That really sucks Rob. having purchased and read your excellent book I can only say that its really too bad that this field is seemingly beset with parasites and losers that are only out for a buck, the truth be damned.

Their true colors usually come out in the end, but unfortunately not before they muddy the waters for the uninformed and general public.

[GUT]

I have recently, after looking again at RE's book, come to the conclusion that his chapter on Kozminski seems to be largely plagiarized from my own book. I have not done a direct line-by-line comparison, but it seems to be largely copied, with some minor changes here and there. Pretty disgusting all in all.

Rob House

That stinks.

I'd take a screen shot of all the posts he has made on FaceBook about how many he has sold, and see a good lawyer, could be a good little money maker.

[pinkmoon]

That stinks.

I'd take a screen shot of all the posts he has made on FaceBook about how many he has sold, and see a good lawyer, could be a good little money maker.

Watch this space gut I've got something on the go.

[drstrange169]

"I have recently, after looking again at RE's book, come to the conclusion that his chapter on Kozminski seems to be largely plagiarized from my own book."

That stuck me as so blatantly obvious when I read his book, I assumed you'd come to some agreement with Edwards before hand.

I can see why you'd be upset.

[Aldebaran]

I am still working on the provenance of the shawl. If this is how it happened

http://www.casebook.org/dissertations/dst-amos.html

then talk about removing evidence from the scene of a crime! Although nobody anticipated DNA in those days, I feel sure police officers were not supposed to remove items found on murder victims and take them home. But, really, this has a strange side. Why would a man think his wife would want a bloodied shawl? "'Ere, dearie, ain't it lovely? Took it off a murdered whore today."

[MsWeatherwax]

I am still working on the provenance of the shawl. If this is how it happened

http://www.casebook.org/dissertations/dst-amos.html

then talk about removing evidence from the scene of a crime! Although nobody anticipated DNA in those days, I feel sure police officers were not supposed to remove items found on murder victims and take them home. But, really, this has a strange side. Why would a man think his wife would want a bloodied shawl? "'Ere, dearie, ain't it lovely? Took it off a murdered whore today."

And then, his wife having been given this lovely shawl, opted not to wash and use it for anything, but instead packed it up bloodstains and all and kept it for posterity?

I'm clueless as to chain of custody arrangements in the 1880's, but I would be very surprised if this wasn't classed as theft. Actually, imagine if we were having this discussion and instead of a shawl we were talking about rings or other jewellery? It's theft from a dead body and it's extremely distasteful, and that's not even touching on the fact that this woman was brutally murdered by a notorious serial killer - she wasn't just someone who passed away on the street. I'd would be beyond amazed if this is how it happened. I just don't see it myself.

I'm not trying to insinuate that merely wearing a Police uniform makes you an angel, but I'd be very surprised if a serving officer at that time would pilfer a shawl from a corpse for any reason, let alone as a 'gift' for his wife.

[Aldebaran]

And then, his wife having been given this lovely shawl, opted not to wash and use it for anything, but instead packed it up bloodstains and all and kept it for posterity?

I'm clueless as to chain of custody arrangements in the 1880's, but I would be very surprised if this wasn't classed as theft. Actually, imagine if we were having this discussion and instead of a shawl we were talking about rings or other jewellery? It's theft from a dead body and it's extremely distasteful, and that's not even touching on the fact that this woman was brutally murdered by a notorious serial killer - she wasn't just someone who passed away on the street. I'd would be beyond amazed if this is how it happened. I just don't see it myself.

I'm not trying to insinuate that merely wearing a Police uniform makes you an angel, but I'd be very surprised if a serving officer at that time would pilfer a shawl from a corpse for any reason, let alone as a 'gift' for his wife.

Anyone would find it strange but, on the other hand, how often would one discover both blood and semen on an old shawl? That's the strangest part of all. But those are the very factors that actually serve to connect the item to the JTR case [outside of family lore]. Here are the DNA facts as I gave gathered them: Mitochondrial DNA from the blood on the shawl proved a match to that of a relative of Catherine Eddowes. Mitochondrial DNA is haploid, comes only from the maternal side, and has what is known as a haplogroup attached to it. The DNA expert involved thought the haplogroup to be an uncommon one--but someone else later decided there was an error and the group was quite common. Well, that may be, but matching DNA is still matching DNA. Even though mitochondrial DNA may belong to a woman or a man, there are other haplogroups in existence and if the Eddowes modern relative was connected on the maternal side for certain--then Catherine would have had the same mtDNA as that person. Point in favor.

Next comes the semen found on the shawl. Mitochondrial DNA was obtained from that by another expert. The haplogroup associated with that DNA was T1a1, not common among Eastern European [or any] Jews. Evidently, the body fluid was suspected as having originated with Aaron Kosminski, as a relative of his was sought for modern mitochondrial DNA. There was a match there, as well. As only about 5% of EE Jews carry T1a1, the fact that it was found in a Kosminski relative is quite meaningful. It is a rare haplogroup for the Jews of the Whitechapel district for sure--and since the source was semen, that makes it twice as rare, as it can have come only from a male. Point in favor.

But the rest is mysterious. I need to do a bit more research on T1a1.

[Aldebaran]

Anyone would find it strange but, on the other hand, how often would one discover both blood and semen on an old shawl? That's the strangest part of all. But those are the very factors that actually serve to connect the item to the JTR case [outside of family lore]. Here are the DNA facts as I gave gathered them: Mitochondrial DNA from the blood on the shawl proved a match to that of a relative of Catherine Eddowes. Mitochondrial DNA is haploid, comes only from the maternal side, and has what is known as a haplogroup attached to it. The DNA expert involved thought the haplogroup to be an uncommon one--but someone else later decided there was an error and the group was quite common. Well, that may be, but matching DNA is still matching DNA. Even though mitochondrial DNA may belong to a woman or a man, there are other haplogroups in existence and if the Eddowes modern relative was connected on the maternal side for certain--then Catherine would have had the same mtDNA as that person. Point in favor.

Next comes the semen found on the shawl. Mitochondrial DNA was obtained from that by another expert. The haplogroup associated with that DNA was T1a1, not common among Eastern European [or any] Jews. Evidently, the body fluid was suspected as having originated with Aaron Kosminski, as a relative of his was sought for modern mitochondrial DNA. There was a match there, as well. As only about 5% of EE Jews carry T1a1, the fact that it was found in a Kosminski relative is quite meaningful. It is a rare haplogroup for the Jews of the Whitechapel district for sure--and since the source was semen, that makes it twice as rare, as it can have come only from a male. Point in favor.

But the rest is mysterious. I need to do a bit more research on T1a1.

I'll have to talk to myself here for a moment, as not everyone is willing to the research on the subject. The next logical question to ask is--how common is T1a1 in the non-Jewish population? By the 19th Century, London, the capital, had already become a considerable melting pot, so one could ask "How common in Europe, generally?" and that is the best one can do. This 2012 paper addresses the haplogroup T and some of its subgroups:

"Haplogroup T makes up almost 10% of mtDNAs in Europe and ∼8% in the Near East. Like J1 and J2, T1 and T2 most likely originated in the Near East, and both date to ∼21 ka ago, although the origin of T2 is the least clear and an ancient presence in Europe is possible. T1 represents ∼2% of overall genetic variability in western Europe and ∼3% in eastern Europe and the Near East, whereas T2 reaches ∼8% in western Europe and ∼5% in the Near East.

T1 (Figure S2) divides into the major T1a and the minor T1b subclades, dating to ∼17 ka and ∼11 ka ago, respectively. There is also a single paraphyletic T1∗ lineage, sampled in Iran, and a possible additional one from Iraq (although the latter in particular could be a revertant). Possible HVS-I matches to the former occur in Iran, Greece, Macedonia, Armenia, and a number of locations across central Asia, as far northeast as Siberia.

T1a represents ∼90% of total T1, and our new data have prompted substantial revision of its tree structure and nomenclature..."

So T1a is not that great in Western Europe, according to that study--and I don't quite know where that puts T1a1, the subgroup. I would just hazard a guess that the T1a1 taken from the shawl stands not much better chance of having come from a non-Jewish male than from a Jew.


Mitochondrial DNA Signals of Late Glacial Recolonization of Europe from Near Eastern Refugia [2012]

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3376494/

[lynn cates]

semen

Hello Aldebaran. Please be aware that it was NEVER definitely established that semen was on the "shawl" (or table runner). The "positive" was also consistent with other fluids.

Cheers.
LC

[MsWeatherwax]

Hi Aldebaran.

Even without the (very) dubious provenance of the shawl, I understand that even Professor Sir Alec Jeffreys, the inventor of genetic fingerprinting has chimed in to say that the analysis of the DNA was highly questionable. The scientist who conducted the original tests has stated that he now admits that the recovered DNA 'could belong to anyone'. More than 99% of people of Eastern European descent share the mutation in the sample.

The last I heard, the shawl in question was being auctioned for nearly £3 million, so mission accomplished and ethics be damned, eh?

I do wonder what poor Catherine would make of that figure - it would certainly have covered her doss for a while, wouldn't it?

[GUT]

Hi Aldebaran.

Even without the (very) dubious provenance of the shawl, I understand that even Professor Sir Alec Jeffreys, the inventor of genetic fingerprinting has chimed in to say that the analysis of the DNA was highly questionable. The scientist who conducted the original tests has stated that he now admits that the recovered DNA 'could belong to anyone'. More than 99% of people of Eastern European descent share the mutation in the sample.

The last I heard, the shawl in question was being auctioned for nearly £3 million, so mission accomplished and ethics be damned, eh?

I do wonder what poor Catherine would make of that figure - it would certainly have covered her doss for a while, wouldn't it?

Didn't sell at auction, what a shock that was, I was certain they'd be lined up all over the place to pay 3 million quid for a table clothe that wasn't even listed among her merge possessions, that a copper knocked off (and if he'd been caught out would have lost his job) that his missus kept, unwashed, and never put to use in any way.

Yep real strange.