H. Drake Posted September 6, 2014 #1 Share Posted September 6, 2014 Apparently DNA taken from a shawl belonging to victim Catherine Eddowes has confirmed that the killer was indeed Aaron Kosminski: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2746321/Jack-Ripper-unmasked-How-amateur-sleuth-used-DNA-breakthrough-identify-Britains-notorious-criminal-126-years-string-terrible-murders.html 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CatFromHell Posted September 6, 2014 #2 Share Posted September 6, 2014 (edited) Spooky, Was just talking about Jack the ripper before. Don't they have a new suspect every week though? Great pic btw, Love the IT crowd. Edited September 6, 2014 by SheWomanCatTypeThing 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crabby Kitten Posted September 6, 2014 #3 Share Posted September 6, 2014 Interesting, really cool but why the coverups regarding this case for two centuries? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neognosis Posted September 7, 2014 #4 Share Posted September 7, 2014 (edited) I don't think there were any coverups. I am SHOCKED to learn that those imaginary Rorschach blobs in the Sickert paintings mean nothing.... IF this is real, it's a little sad that the mystery is solved... Edited September 7, 2014 by Neognosis 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Imaginarynumber1 Posted September 7, 2014 #5 Share Posted September 7, 2014 Very interesting. I am eager to see if this evidence holds up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Likely Guy Posted September 7, 2014 #6 Share Posted September 7, 2014 Really? DNA taken from the shawl of a murder victim in the 1880's is still viable? Okay, I'm going to click on the source. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Likely Guy Posted September 7, 2014 #7 Share Posted September 7, 2014 (edited) As someone in the comments section stated, The most bothering statement is: "I became convinced Kosminski was our man, and I was excited at the prospect of proving it." That, and Kosminski's descendant's identity is 'protected'. Edited September 7, 2014 by Likely Guy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arkitecht Posted September 7, 2014 #8 Share Posted September 7, 2014 Very cool they found the killer...unlike the movie,From Hell,it turns out it was not some surgeon who was the Royals personal physician. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Likely Guy Posted September 7, 2014 #9 Share Posted September 7, 2014 Very cool they found the killer...unlike the movie,From Hell,it turns out it was not some surgeon who was the Royals personal physician. [media=] [/media] It's a great shock to no one that life is unlike the movies. "From Hell" was a great movie (albeit, with many plot holes), but it was fiction based on true events. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H. Drake Posted September 7, 2014 Author #10 Share Posted September 7, 2014 As someone in the comments section stated, The most bothering statement is: "I became convinced Kosminski was our man, and I was excited at the prospect of proving it." That, and Kosminski's descendant's identity is 'protected'. Those were red flags for me, also. And of course, the guy's peddling a book out of it. That, and the story breaking in the Daily Mail of all newspapers. How accurate is mitochondrial DNA testing? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Atuke Posted September 7, 2014 #11 Share Posted September 7, 2014 Interesting. Though not 100% solved. But good enough til the next person solves it. Now onto Emeila Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghostdancer Posted September 7, 2014 #12 Share Posted September 7, 2014 Just saw this on Facebook, interesting, but how convincing? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lioness_Heart Posted September 7, 2014 #13 Share Posted September 7, 2014 Very interesting. I am eager to see if this evidence holds up. My opinion exactly... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikenator Posted September 7, 2014 #14 Share Posted September 7, 2014 I don't think he solved anything I just think he wants a little credit for something many people over the years have claimed to solve it but in the end nobody is ever for sure who it was there was even a old guy a few years ago who was dying and claimed that he was Jack the Ripper but it was proven to be a lie because the guy was way too old to be Jack the Ripper no one will ever really know until someone makes a time machine go back and see the person do the killings himself this guy is just like all the other people claiming to have solved it he just thinks he solved it but the truth is he will never know for sure Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silent Trinity Posted September 7, 2014 #15 Share Posted September 7, 2014 An interesting development and a clever piece of detective work, however I want to see if this evidence holds up after such a long time. I would like to see if there has been any degradation in the DNA sample given the age etc. All seems a long time ago to be REALLY sure. But who am I , nothing more than an armchair observer myself so we shall see! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A rather obscure Bassoon Posted September 7, 2014 #16 Share Posted September 7, 2014 Personally not convinced,is this 100 per cent evidence that would stand up in a criminal investigation? Would an unprotected source of DNA this old still be viable ? Sounds like he's out to make money.. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Wearer of Hats Posted September 7, 2014 #17 Share Posted September 7, 2014 Semen on a prostitute's clothing? Well that MUST mean he's Jack, what other explanation could there be? 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Myles Posted September 7, 2014 #18 Share Posted September 7, 2014 Personally not convinced,is this 100 per cent evidence that would stand up in a criminal investigation? Would an unprotected source of DNA this old still be viable ? Sounds like he's out to make money.. hopefully someone answers this questions. There are many qualified members here. Unfortunately, i'm not one of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghostdancer Posted September 7, 2014 #19 Share Posted September 7, 2014 Guessing a book will come out... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pallidin Posted September 7, 2014 #20 Share Posted September 7, 2014 Semen on a prostitute's clothing? Well that MUST mean he's Jack, what other explanation could there be? My thoughts exactly. I haven't fully read the article yet, so maybe something else is there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mbrn30000 Posted September 8, 2014 #21 Share Posted September 8, 2014 If some independent lab or Scotland Yard says it seals the deal, then I will believe it. It would be cool if this case could be closed, but consider the source. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+susieice Posted September 8, 2014 #22 Share Posted September 8, 2014 (edited) Odd that this would be the only crime scene article of clothing left from the scenes of the Jack the Ripper murders. I would think the clothing of the other victims would also be locked away somewhere in an evidence box at Scotland Yard, along with other items found at the scenes. Was physical evidence not kept in 1888? If viable DNA was found on this, that increases the chance that it exists on other pieces of evidence collected by police. I know this was mentioned before, but why check the DNA of just one suspect and not the top 3 or 4? Does seem a bit convenient a hit was made on the first test. Just saying. Edited September 8, 2014 by susieice 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Likely Guy Posted September 8, 2014 #23 Share Posted September 8, 2014 Odd that this would be the only crime scene article of clothing left from the scenes of the Jack the Ripper murders. I would think the clothing of the other victims would also be locked away somewhere in an evidence box at Scotland Yard, along with other items found at the scenes. Was physical evidence not kept in 1888? I doubt very much if any physical evidence (except the alleged letters) had been kept this long by the officials. It was fairly common at the time that some police kept some evidence as souvenirs, as purportedly in this case as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+susieice Posted September 8, 2014 #24 Share Posted September 8, 2014 (edited) Here's what Wiki's added about the find. Experts are asking for third party examination and collaboration. http://en.wikipedia....Aaron_Kosminski I don't know. Man watches movie. Man finds only piece of evidence available 126 years later, at an auction no less. Man gets DNA evidence on first shot. Actor inspires author. I'd like to see validation done on this also by other scientific researchers. http://www.smh.com.au/world/johnny-depp-inspired-the-hunt-for-the-real-jack-the-ripper-20140908-10dpay.html#ixzz3Cf47s7oK Edited September 8, 2014 by susieice 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+susieice Posted September 8, 2014 #25 Share Posted September 8, 2014 I just realized the link I posted above about how the movie influenced this writer to look into the Ripper case...it says the policeman that took it wanted it for his wife. She never wore it. I would guess not if it was covered with blood. Unless it was washed. Looking at the pic of the shawl, it doesn't appear to have a lot of obvious blood stains on it. The author says it is badly stained but it doesn't seem so in the pic. Maybe it's just my eyes. I really am just thinking about different things that are said in the article. Could be my bad. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now