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.
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.
I'm under the understanding, just the touch of your hand can leave DNA.
Am i Wrong?
originally posted by: buster2010
Already posted.
www.abovetopsecret.com...
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
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.
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.
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:
There's No So If, I did as I stated
The Search Function is not the best.