# DNA evidence unmasks Jack the Ripper. **URL:** \ **Category:** Miscellaneous and Personal Stuff I Must Share\ **Created:** [September 7, 2014, 5:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dna-evidence-unmasks-jack-the-ripper/697783 "2014-09-07T17:33:19Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 7
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [September 10, 2014, 12:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dna-evidence-unmasks-jack-the-ripper/697783/121 "2014-09-10T00:27:25Z")
> [@Typo\_Negative](#): > > That made me chuckle. šŸ™‚ Me too. A great piece of writing. I canā€™t read it without smiling. But in all seriousness, why WOULD a police officer give his wife a ā€œgiftā€ that was so morbid? I would understand the story if he kept it for himself as a macabre treasure, but the story makes it seem like a romantic or loving thing for his wife. Even the most clueless husband wouldnā€™t do something like that. Not that I disbelieve the story, but that is a definite tally to the negative side for the veracity of it. ---
**Author:** ![buddy431](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/6a8cbe/32.png) [@buddy431](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/buddy431)\ **Post date:** [September 10, 2014, 12:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dna-evidence-unmasks-jack-the-ripper/697783/122 "2014-09-10T00:28:59Z")
I donā€™t buy the shawl. The officer who supposedly found it was in the wrong police force in the wrong area. My impression was that the evidence that it was ā€œsemenā€ was a epithelial cell was found. Yes, that could have come from the urethra, but also the mouth or skin. There are very few details of what the DNA tests showed, but certain mDNA types are shared by a large number of people. Even if the shawl was the victimā€™s (which I doubt), the ā€œsemenā€ DNA could have been from a large number of people (and there are certainly ways other than murder that someoneā€™s DNA might get onto a prostituteā€™s clothing). Weā€™re talking about a very small amount of DNA, with the potential to match a large number of people, from an article that has been handled by a great number of people, that almost certainly isnā€™t related to the crime. Thatā€™s not to say that Aaron Kosminski didnā€™t do it, and in fact, heā€™s probably one of the least unlikely suspects they have. But this ā€œnew revelationā€ is an just an attempt to sell a book, nothing more and nothing less. ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [September 10, 2014, 12:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dna-evidence-unmasks-jack-the-ripper/697783/123 "2014-09-10T00:33:23Z")
> [@carnivorousplant](#): > > Perhaps a legitimate customer gave it to her. From my understanding, she was pawning her shoes and anything else of value. It likely would have been a customer very soon prior to the Ripper. ---
**Author:** ![davidm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/davidm/32/225_2.png) [@davidm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/davidm)\ **Post date:** [September 10, 2014, 1:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dna-evidence-unmasks-jack-the-ripper/697783/124 "2014-09-10T01:33:11Z")
> [@jtgain](#): > > I donā€™t understand the arguments that ā€œshe couldnā€™t have owned such an expensive shawl.ā€ Couldnā€™t it have been brought by the killer? Perhaps as a (as it turned out pretend) gift? Thatā€™s the claim being made; that it must have been brought by the killer because she couldnā€™t have owned it. Therefore, no other customerā€™s DNA could be on it. Itā€™s plausible, but hardly ironclad. ---
**Author:** ![Cicero](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cicero/32/3594_2.png) [@Cicero](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cicero)\ **Post date:** [September 10, 2014, 10:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dna-evidence-unmasks-jack-the-ripper/697783/125 "2014-09-10T10:50:07Z")
> [@buddy431](#): > > I donā€™t buy the shawl. The officer who supposedly found it was in the wrong police force in the wrong area. > > My impression was that the evidence that it was ā€œsemenā€ was a epithelial cell was found. Yes, that could have come from the urethra, but also the mouth or skin. > > There are very few details of what the DNA tests showed, but certain mDNA types are shared by a large number of people. Even if the shawl was the victimā€™s (which I doubt), the ā€œsemenā€ DNA could have been from a large number of people (and there are certainly ways other than murder that someoneā€™s DNA might get onto a prostituteā€™s clothing). > > Weā€™re talking about a very small amount of DNA, with the potential to match a large number of people, from an article that has been handled by a great number of people, that almost certainly isnā€™t related to the crime. > > Thatā€™s not to say that Aaron Kosminski didnā€™t do it, and in fact, heā€™s probably one of the least unlikely suspects they have. But this ā€œnew revelationā€ is an just an attempt to sell a book, nothing more and nothing less. Iā€™d have to agree. Sheā€™s a $2 hooker. Or penny or farthing. Why give her an expensive shawl? And a shawl that survived a couple of World Wars - including the Blitz- etc etc and extreme periods of poverty was kept and never washed or hocked. I know Eclectic Wench made the valid point about hangmen selling pieces of rope etc but how many are still in existence? And hey were presumed to be connected with a criminal event, not a shawl some policeman seemed to have found and not submitted to the enquiry. ---
**Author:** ![bengangmo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/50afbb/32.png) [@bengangmo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bengangmo)\ **Post date:** [September 10, 2014, 11:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dna-evidence-unmasks-jack-the-ripper/697783/126 "2014-09-10T11:46:49Z")
> [@Cicero](#): > > Iā€™d have to agree. Sheā€™s a $2 hooker. Or penny or farthing. Why give her an expensive shawl? > > And a shawl that survived a couple of World Wars - including the Blitz- etc etc and extreme periods of poverty was kept and never washed or hocked. > > I know Eclectic Wench made the valid point about hangmen selling pieces of rope etc but how many are still in existence? And hey were presumed to be connected with a criminal event, not a shawl some policeman seemed to have found and not submitted to the enquiry. This pretty much reflects my take on it. Sure itā€™s possible, and Iā€™m sure stranger things have happened ā€” But it sure requires a very long string of coincidences and out of ordinary behaviour and some downright weirdness. Assuming that it was given to the victim, by the murderer, and that he did ā€œleave a sampleā€ on it, (which is already a bit strange) and it was dropped and picked up, and then not handed into the enquiry from someone that would know he should have, and then kept because it was connected to a famous murder - WHY SO LONG? If it was just thought to be a stained shawl - why would you not wash it? ---
**Author:** ![Fotheringay-Phipps](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/d9b06d/32.png) [@Fotheringay-Phipps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fotheringay-Phipps)\ **Post date:** [September 10, 2014, 1:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dna-evidence-unmasks-jack-the-ripper/697783/127 "2014-09-10T13:42:24Z")
The more I think about it the more Iā€™m leaning to the hoax (or something similar) scenario. Looking at Kosminskiā€™s other evidence, thereā€™s really very little that ties him to the case, as mentioned. So while heā€™s been a prominent suspect of late, itā€™s hard to imagine anyone having the certainty that it was him that would justify a 14 year effort to have this shawl tested for Kosminski and no one else. So I would speculate that the testers knew they would find his DNA by other means. > [@Knowed\_Out](#): > > If police records are accurate, Simpson found the shawl and Eddowes died in a five-minute window. Not just that but the killer would have had to have taken some time to get his DNA on the shawl, which itself could eat into the window considerably. ---
**Author:** ![Just\_Asking\_Questions](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/ba9def/32.png) [@Just\_Asking\_Questions](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Just_Asking_Questions)\ **Post date:** [September 10, 2014, 2:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dna-evidence-unmasks-jack-the-ripper/697783/128 "2014-09-10T14:45:34Z")
> [@jtgain](#): > > I donā€™t understand the arguments that ā€œshe couldnā€™t have owned such an expensive shawl.ā€ Couldnā€™t it have been brought by the killer? Perhaps as a (as it turned out pretend) gift? ā€œJust a poor cockney flower girl, thatā€™s all Ah is! But Ah owes _everything_ to Doctor Kosminski. 'E taught me to _walk_, and to _talk_, and to _dress_, like a regular LADY! 'E give me real cloth\*, 'e did!ā€ ā€œThe scoundrel!ā€ \*for years I thought she said ā€œclothā€, and then shows said cloth and blows her nose in it. Turns out the actual quote is ā€œclassā€. But my version fits this case betterā€¦ ---
**Author:** ![Teuton](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/teuton/32/3864_2.png) [@Teuton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Teuton)\ **Post date:** [September 10, 2014, 3:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dna-evidence-unmasks-jack-the-ripper/697783/129 "2014-09-10T15:23:06Z")
> [@Cicero](#): > > The peer review mentioned earlier on of the methods and results would satisfy a lot of my doubts. Is this actually likely to happen? ---
**Author:** ![eclectic\_wench](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/ac91a4/32.png) [@eclectic\_wench](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/eclectic_wench)\ **Post date:** [September 10, 2014, 4:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dna-evidence-unmasks-jack-the-ripper/697783/130 "2014-09-10T16:38:22Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#): > > Not just that but the killer would have had to have taken some time to get his DNA on the shawl, which itself could eat into the window considerably. Not necessarily. If it was semen, it could have got there hours or weeks earlier. And if it wasnā€™t actual semen, just epithelials, it could have got there in any number of ways - if the killer at some point held the shawl between his teeth to free up a hand, for example. It still doesnā€™t add up to me, though. Like, if there were Michaelmas daisies on her dress and the killer brought the shawl as a matching present, how did he know what sheā€™d be wearing (and find a matching shawl)? Thereā€™s never been any implication that Jack the Ripper pre-selected victims - and surely one of them would have mentioned having an appointment. Also, the whole ā€˜It was a clue because the next murders happened on dates that have a connection to Michaelmasā€™ thing is just plain silly - especially given that Kosminski was Jewish. Itā€™s like one of those numerology things where if you try hard enough you can make the letters in anyoneā€™s name add up to some number that was found at some crime scene. ---
**Author:** ![Cicero](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cicero/32/3594_2.png) [@Cicero](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cicero)\ **Post date:** [September 11, 2014, 11:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dna-evidence-unmasks-jack-the-ripper/697783/131 "2014-09-11T11:25:46Z")
I doubt if any peer revue will ever happen. And I agree again with eclectic wench regarding setting patterns and dates. These people were so poor and in most cases illiterate that being able to purchase anything or even know what date it was stretches the imagination. Iā€™d like to see the case solved but given something far more recent such as Zodiac with all the resources available and poured into that it would seem similar to winning lotto for this to be a game breaker. ---
**Author:** ![Fotheringay-Phipps](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/d9b06d/32.png) [@Fotheringay-Phipps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fotheringay-Phipps)\ **Post date:** [September 11, 2014, 12:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dna-evidence-unmasks-jack-the-ripper/697783/132 "2014-09-11T12:32:32Z")
> [@eclectic\_wench](#): > > Not necessarily. If it was semen, it could have got there hours or weeks earlier. I had thought the whole idea it was semen had to do with his encounter with the victim. I guess maybe not. [One aspect possibly worth comment is the idea that Kosminski was prone to ā€œself abuseā€, as documented at the time. Iā€™m uncertain as to whether this was based on actual knowledge or was simply a matter of his insanity being attributed to this likely cause, as would have been thought plausible at that time.] ---
**Author:** ![davidm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/davidm/32/225_2.png) [@davidm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/davidm)\ **Post date:** [September 11, 2014, 12:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dna-evidence-unmasks-jack-the-ripper/697783/133 "2014-09-11T12:52:15Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#): > > ā€¦ > > So while heā€™s been a prominent suspect of late, itā€™s hard to imagine anyone having the certainty that it was him that would justify a 14 year effort to have this shawl tested for Kosminski and no one else. > > ā€¦ This thread has me leaning towards it being a hoax, but I have to question this. Do we know that it was only tested for Kosminski and no one else? ---
**Author:** ![Fuzzy\_wuzzy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/a8b319/32.png) [@Fuzzy\_wuzzy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fuzzy_wuzzy)\ **Post date:** [September 11, 2014, 2:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dna-evidence-unmasks-jack-the-ripper/697783/134 "2014-09-11T14:13:04Z")
> [@davidm](#): > > This thread has me leaning towards it being a hoax, but I have to question this. Do we know that it was only tested for Kosminski and no one else? I think the author would have told us if they had tested for anyone else, especially if that test came back negative. It would marginally improve his case. I assume such tests do not come cheap. I also assume the number of descendants of plausible suspects willing to be tested is fairly limited. ---
**Author:** ![dropzone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dropzone/32/7515_2.png) [@dropzone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dropzone)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2014, 3:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dna-evidence-unmasks-jack-the-ripper/697783/135 "2014-09-13T03:36:03Z")
> [@Johnny\_L.A](#): > > Iā€™ll have to read the stuff posted from last night forward after I get home. You have problems keeping up with this thread? I had to register at Casebook because there was somebody wrong on the internet (and he still keeps being wrong!), so I have to continue to follow that thread, which has grown to 200 (short) pages! The level of discourse does not compare favorably with here, and thereā€™s a lot of repetition, so itā€™s a slog. And itā€™s not a shawl. Itā€™s 5/6ths of a table runner for an 8ā€™ table, with the other 2ā€™x2ā€™ printed/painted end removed at some time. It could be worn as a shawl, though. ---
**Author:** ![Johnny\_L.A](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/johnny_l.a/32/1084_2.png) [@Johnny\_L.A](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Johnny_L.A)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2014, 3:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dna-evidence-unmasks-jack-the-ripper/697783/136 "2014-09-13T03:41:06Z")
> [@dropzone](#): > > You have problems keeping up with this thread? Yeah, the first four weeks of the month have been extremely busy lately. And the SO had surgery recently, so Iā€™m busy when Iā€™m not at work. ---
**Author:** ![dropzone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dropzone/32/7515_2.png) [@dropzone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dropzone)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2014, 3:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dna-evidence-unmasks-jack-the-ripper/697783/137 "2014-09-13T03:49:30Z")
Iā€™m sorry to hear that. Is SO feeling better yet? ---
**Author:** ![Colibri](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/colibri/32/1841_2.png) [@Colibri](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Colibri)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2014, 4:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dna-evidence-unmasks-jack-the-ripper/697783/138 "2014-09-13T04:12:55Z")
> [@Fuzzy\_wuzzy](#): > > It would marginally improve his case. I assume such tests do not come cheap. Actually, they are not very expensive at all. [A full mtDNA analysis costs anywhere from $199 to $339 at commercial labs.](http://www.isogg.org/wiki/MtDNA_testing_comparison_chart) (The $999 price includes the full genome.) The cost would not be a consideration for a lab like Louhelainen would have. > [@](#): > > I also assume the number of descendants of plausible suspects willing to be tested is fairly limited. I would assume this would be the major limitation. I suspect, for example, the Royal Family is not eager to be tested. ---
**Author:** ![Colibri](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/colibri/32/1841_2.png) [@Colibri](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Colibri)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2014, 4:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dna-evidence-unmasks-jack-the-ripper/697783/139 "2014-09-13T04:14:32Z")
> [@Fuzzy\_wuzzy](#): > > It would marginally improve his case. I assume such tests do not come cheap. Actually, they are not terribly expensive. [A full mtDNA analysis costs anywhere from $199 to $339 at commercial labs.](http://www.isogg.org/wiki/MtDNA_testing_comparison_chart) (The $999 price includes the full genome.) The cost would not be a consideration for a lab like Louhelainen would have. > [@](#): > > I also assume the number of descendants of plausible suspects willing to be tested is fairly limited. I would assume this would be the major limitation. I suspect, for example, the Royal Family is not eager to be tested. ---
**Author:** ![dropzone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dropzone/32/7515_2.png) [@dropzone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dropzone)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2014, 4:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dna-evidence-unmasks-jack-the-ripper/697783/140 "2014-09-13T04:26:05Z")
> [@Teuton](#): > > This is a little unfair, to be honest. Of course heā€™s writing a book, heā€™s a Ripper enthusiast whoā€™s found some extra evidence, what else is he going to do? And the fact that he runs a shop devoted to the crimes just shows that heā€™s always been interested in them Only since he saw Johnny Depp in that masterpiece of criminology, _From Hell._ > [@](#): > > The actual DNA expert involved, as other people have pointed out, seems totally bona fide and unrelated to previous Jack investigations. I donā€™t have a link at the moment, but he has backstepped in an interview to the view that Kosminski ā€œcannot be excluded.ā€ My experience with mtDNA guys has been that ā€œcannot be excludedā€ is far from a ringing endorsement and gives them wiggle room in case further testing doesnā€™t support them. Itā€™s not Maury Povich saying,ā€œYou ARE the father,ā€ and I think itā€™s what he really told Edwards, who ran with it to get the book on the shelves in time for the anniversary. > [@](#): > > To others pointing out itā€™s come from the Daily Mail - itā€™s actually coming out as publicity for the book, and other news sources are carrying it (I first saw it on the BBC website), and itā€™s not a ā€œDaily Mail Investigationā€ in any way. True, itā€™s a press release, written by the owner of the cloth and author of the book. That means itā€™s not even good enough to be a _Daily Mail_ investigation! [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dna-evidence-unmasks-jack-the-ripper/697783.md?page=6) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dna-evidence-unmasks-jack-the-ripper/697783.md?page=8)