It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Jack The Ripper Finally Identified

page: 1
6

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 7 2014 @ 09:52 PM
link   
First let me say, Not My Title, Secondly, I used the Search Function, with Negative Results.
Now for the article.
I think you could actually call this the Title:

WORLD EXCLUSIVE: Jack the Ripper unmasked: How amateur sleuth used DNA breakthrough to identify Britain's most notorious criminal 126 years after string of terrible murders


A little much don't you think?
I was reading the Drudge Report when I came across this and I've been a follower of the Ripper for years.
I've always assumed the Ripper to be the sailor.
But This person seems to believe they have the Actual Ripper!
I'll let you be the judge.


It is the greatest murder mystery of all time, a puzzle that has perplexed criminologists for more than a century and spawned books, films and myriad theories ranging from the plausible to the utterly bizarre.
But now, thanks to modern forensic science, The Mail on Sunday can exclusively reveal the true identity of Jack the Ripper, the serial killer responsible for at least five grisly murders in Whitechapel in East London during the autumn of 1888.
DNA evidence has now shown beyond reasonable doubt which one of six key suspects commonly cited in connection with the Ripper’s reign of terror was the actual killer – and we reveal his identity.
A shawl found by the body of Catherine Eddowes, one of the Ripper’s victims, has been analysed and found to contain DNA from her blood as well as DNA from the killer.
The landmark discovery was made after businessman Russell Edwards, 48, bought the shawl at auction and enlisted the help of Dr Jari Louhelainen, a world-renowned expert in analysing genetic evidence from historical crime scenes.
Using cutting-edge techniques, Dr Louhelainen was able to extract 126-year-old DNA from the material and compare it to DNA from descendants of Eddowes and the suspect, with both proving a perfect match.
The revelation puts an end to the fevered speculation over the Ripper’s identity which has lasted since his murderous rampage in the most impoverished and dangerous streets of London.
In the intervening century, a Jack the Ripper industry has grown up, prompting a dizzying array of more than 100 suspects, including Queen Victoria’s grandson – Prince Albert Victor, the Duke of Clarence – the post-Impressionist painter Walter Sickert, and the former Liberal Prime Minister William Gladstone.

Link

I would think, from what I understand, that the Shawl mentioned in the article would have been So Contaminated with other peoples DNA, I would find it hard to believe that any one single DNA could of been found that use pure, Put, I'm No Doctor or anything Close to an Expert.

Please feel free to correct me, is it Possible that the Mystery of Jack the Ripper has Been Discovered?




posted on Sep, 7 2014 @ 09:57 PM
link   
Already posted.

www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Sep, 7 2014 @ 09:58 PM
link   
a reply to: guohua

Does the shawl contain anyone else's DNA?



posted on Sep, 8 2014 @ 01:26 AM
link   
a reply to: buster2010
That's why I gave the Disclaimer, I used the Dis-Functional Search Function and I looked around the different forums, not much else I can do.
Except Say I Did it!



posted on Sep, 8 2014 @ 01:28 AM
link   
a reply to: intrptr
It was at the site of the Crime, it had her blood on it and it was suppose to be her Shawl, it was picked up by the local police and who knows how many other people touched it over the years.
I'm under the understanding, just the touch of your hand can leave DNA.
Am i Wrong?



posted on Sep, 8 2014 @ 08:10 AM
link   
a reply to: guohua


I'm under the understanding, just the touch of your hand can leave DNA.
Am i Wrong?

No, you aren't mistaken. A drop of sweat, a few skin cells. We shed them all the time and each one contains our DNA. As time goes by technology improves to ferret it out. That DNA they got is over a hundred years old. Thats pretty awesome.

If the "suspect" is named any where in your research be sure to bring it, I am dying to know that.

regards,

intrptr



posted on Sep, 8 2014 @ 09:26 AM
link   

originally posted by: buster2010
Already posted.

www.abovetopsecret.com...


God it Really annoys me when members take it on themselves to do the job of a Moderator. He searched, he didn't fnd, he posted - What Buster gives you the right to come along and burst the op's bubble? Nothing, you're Not a MOD.
It's not you Buster per se it's just your post pushed me over the top. Seeing these really get to me. I would not want to be called out for a TOS violation or double post by a "mere" member, it's very demeaning. I wish all you "quick to point out guys" would just stop it and let the Mods do the job. If and until the Mods have anything to say about it, you shouldn't either.

As far as the Opening Post goes, good stuff but somehow I think this will fall to the wayside and other theories will state this fellow is wrong on his conclusions. There has to be something more credible than the info in this guys new book.. the English Government or Scotland Yard for instance needs to declare this case solved - they haven't done that yet have they?
edit on 8-9-2014 by JohnPhoenix because: sp



posted on Sep, 8 2014 @ 09:45 AM
link   
a reply to: JohnPhoenix

The search feature may not be perfect but just type in "Jack the ripper identified" and the older thread shows up as does this one... so if the OP actually "did" a search, he/she would have seen the thread that was posted first and wouldn't have needed to post this.

I think Buster was merely saving the OP a lot of extra hassle by pointing out that this has already been posted, there was nothing rude or snotty about his post, just merely letting the OP that it's being discussed already.

It's not about being a mod it's about letting people know that the topic is already being discussed.


edit on 8/9/14 by blupblup because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 8 2014 @ 12:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: guohua


I'm under the understanding, just the touch of your hand can leave DNA.
Am i Wrong?

No, you aren't mistaken. A drop of sweat, a few skin cells. We shed them all the time and each one contains our DNA. As time goes by technology improves to ferret it out. That DNA they got is over a hundred years old. Thats pretty awesome.

If the "suspect" is named any where in your research be sure to bring it, I am dying to know that.

regards,

intrptr


Their saying,,,, The Ripper is:
A DNA sample has proven Polish immigrant Aaron Kosminski was Jack the Ripper.



posted on Sep, 8 2014 @ 12:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: blupblup
a reply to: JohnPhoenix

The search feature may not be perfect but just type in "Jack the ripper identified" and the older thread shows up as does this one... so if the OP actually "did" a search, he/she would have seen the thread that was posted first and wouldn't have needed to post this.

I think Buster was merely saving the OP a lot of extra hassle by pointing out that this has already been posted, there was nothing rude or snotty about his post, just merely letting the OP that it's being discussed already.

It's not about being a mod it's about letting people know that the topic is already being discussed.



Strangely Enough it Does Today But as I Stated In My Opening Post, It Did Not!
please Re-frame from making a Statement:


so if the OP actually "did" a search, he/she would have seen the thread that was posted first and wouldn't have needed to post this.


There's No So If, I did as I stated
The Search Function is not the best.



posted on Sep, 8 2014 @ 01:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: guohua


Strangely Enough it Does Today But as I Stated In My Opening Post, It Did Not!
please Re-frame from making a Statement:



I shall Refrain from no such thing...verily my statement was most accurate and most assuredly described what transpired.




There's No So If, I did as I stated
The Search Function is not the best.


While the search feature is not entirely without fault, it does work and the keywords you use are important.

Good day.

*doffs cap*





edit on 8/9/14 by blupblup because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 8 2014 @ 01:48 PM
link   
a reply to: blupblup

I didn't know you knew every thing and you were now on MOD status.
Not only were you at my shoulder watching over my every key stroke, you have to insist I did not use the correct wording
in the Search Function just because it works today.

Sorry to Burst Your Perfect World Bubble But it didn't Work The Day I Posted this and made an Honest Attempt to use The Search Function using three different Titles.
But. you know Best, You're a MOD and can go back and look at my key strokes.



edit on 8-9-2014 by guohua because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 8 2014 @ 01:53 PM
link   
a reply to: guohua

Thank you. I finally read it. Sounds entirely plausible. I won't go into details about why I believe that, just so.

They finally got their man. We finally have a confirmed madman.



posted on Sep, 8 2014 @ 02:16 PM
link   
a reply to: guohua


Thank you for your most kind and cherished words.


All my love,

Sir Reginald Pettigrew.




top topics



 
6

log in

join