Jack the Ripper case solved, Ripper now identified

Sorry for posting my thread, I searched for it but didn't see this one, I must be tired.

For me this might be good evidence of this one murder, but it doesn't show that Kosminski was Jack the Ripper, there are still doubts that the 'Canonical Five' murders were even linked. Plus I can't get over the sensational way the article is written and the fact this guy is plugging his book.

a reply to: Yeahkeepwatchingme

Hardly a masonic quote....even though it has been distorted as such..."The Juwes [sic] are the men that will not be blamed for nothing."

a reply to: ShayneJUK

Of course it doesnt prove anything. The blood may match to hers, but as she's a prostitute, who knows who's semen is on the shawl. Possibly a client from the last few days.

He lived 200 yards from the location of the third victim?

So.. 200 yards >= 1 Scotland Yard?

The DNA was from his semen? How on earth does that prove he was the murderer? Am I missing something here?

And I don’t understand how the acting police sergeant was allowed to take the shawl home to his wife… Ok they didn’t have forensic testing in those days but you’d think they would have hung onto it. And can you imagine his wife ‘’wow, thanks hubby, a blood and semen covered shawl, just what I always wanted…’’!

Hmm, this is all very odd, I’m not sure what to make of it to be honest…

a reply to: OpenEars123

Very intriguing! Kind of figured that this would be one of those cases that would never be solved, the question though, has it really been solved?

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.

Could the DNA on the shawl have come from another customer and not Jack the Ripper? Hygiene wasn't the best back then. How often did she wash her clothes and herself?

Then there's this (*emphasis added by me*)

It was said to have been found next to the body of one of the Ripper’s victims, Catherine Eddowes, and soaked in her blood. There was no evidence for its provenance although after the auction I obtained a letter from its previous owner who claimed his ancestor had been a police officer present at the murder scene and had taken it from there.

So it's possible that it may not even be the victims shawl, it's based on hearsay by someone claiming that an ancestor was a police officer at the murder scene and found the blood soaked shawl there. Hmmm...

Finally, isn't the Daily Mail a rag mag? Thought it was pretty comparable to the celebrity gossip magazines you find in the grocery store check out line. Considering the source and the questionable blood soaked shawl, I'm not convinced.

Still interesting nonetheless.

a reply to: Jennyfrenzy

I concur with everything you say, thanks for commenting.

a reply to: OpenEars123

Scotland Yard wants to keep its' Jack the Ripper Profiles secret even today

Four thick ledgers compiled by Special Branch officers have been kept under lock and key since the Whitechapel murders in 1888.
Jack the Ripper murders reported by the Police News
Scotland Yard is battling to keep 123-year-old files on Jack the Ripper secret.
Trevor Marriott, a Ripper investigator and former murder squad detective, has spent three years attempting to obtain uncensored versions of the documents.
But he has been repeatedly refused because the ledgers contain the identities of police informants – and the Metropolitan Police insist that revealing the information could compromise their attempts to gather information from “supergrasses” and other modern-day informants.
Last week, Mr Marriott took Scotland Yard to a tribunal in a last-ditch attempt to see the journals – containing 36,000 entries – which he believes contain evidence which could finally unmask the world’s most famous serial killer.
The legal case has cost the taxpayer thousands of pounds and has even involved a senior Scotland Yard officer giving evidence anonymously from behind a screen.

www.telegraph.co.uk...

Also thread about them

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Yeah doesn't prove anything... and also isn't this about the 10th time that they've "Confirmed" the killer?
Also this guy has been named before, a few years ago... this isn't actually new.

Interesting all the same.

a reply to: FlySolo

They sure disliked masturbation or any combination of things or activities while masturbating. (tobacco and masturbation..lol)

I dont know if this is open and shut.

I saw a documentary once where it was said that the ripper just got away on a trolley or something. It was a well dressed man of stature.

So the search for Jack The Ripper continues, eh? No way does this prove that this guy was the Ripper. No way. A pervert, yes, but Jack The Ripper? Noop.

originally posted by: paradisepurple
The DNA was from his semen? How on earth does that prove he was the murderer? Am I missing something here?

And I don’t understand how the acting police sergeant was allowed to take the shawl home to his wife… Ok they didn’t have forensic testing in those days but you’d think they would have hung onto it. And can you imagine his wife ‘’wow, thanks hubby, a blood and semen covered shawl, just what I always wanted…’’!

Hmm, this is all very odd, I’m not sure what to make of it to be honest…

Maybe the Sargent was the " ripper" and bringing the shawl home to his wife was a trophy and not a gift to his wife. It would be easy for a policeman , in those days, to get away with it.

originally posted by: Meldionne1

originally posted by: paradisepurple
The DNA was from his semen? How on earth does that prove he was the murderer? Am I missing something here?

And I don’t understand how the acting police sergeant was allowed to take the shawl home to his wife… Ok they didn’t have forensic testing in those days but you’d think they would have hung onto it. And can you imagine his wife ‘’wow, thanks hubby, a blood and semen covered shawl, just what I always wanted…’’!

Hmm, this is all very odd, I’m not sure what to make of it to be honest…

Maybe the Sargent was the " ripper" and bringing the shawl home to his wife was a trophy and not a gift to his wife. It would be easy for a policeman , in those days, to get away with it.

No it wouldn't.

It drives me nuts that people think 100 years or so ago everyone was a simpleton and things were incredibly lax.

They were probably more stringent than they are now, and I have no doubt at all that the education system for coroners etc was just as good, if not better than it is now.

Some of these people were incredibly intelligent, all you have to do is look at what was achieved without all of the technology we have today to see just how clever they were.

People today kid themselves that they are far more advanced than people back then because they have mobile phones, computers, TV, etc, but the reality is that 99.999999% of people don't have a clue how any of it works, or would have a clue how to fix it if it broke.

All people today are skilled at is pressing buttons, but they kid themselves that they are technologically and intellectually superior.

I can guarantee you that if you could travel back in time with your mobile phone or laptop that anyone back then would be able to press the buttons just as competently, and play angry birds or minecraft just as well as anyone from our own time.

originally posted by: buster2010

originally posted by: Qumulys

The killings stopped before he was put into the mental hospital. According to an FBI profiler there was no way he did the murders.

[

yeah, the killings stopped a whole month before he went in the asylum.
he has been a suspect for more than 100 years.
i think people just want to keep the myth going

It was my impression Jack The Ripper
was thought to have the
training of a doctor/surgeon.

Wiki H.H. Holmes

Huffington Post H.H. Holmes handwriting 97%match to Jack

this Gentleman, was said
to have traveled to London
during the time of the Murders.
He is Americas 1st documented serial killer
& has everything needed to be Jack.

He would be my candidate

originally posted by: spoonbender
It was my impression Jack The Ripper
was thought to have the
training of a doctor/surgeon.

Wiki H.H. Holmes

Huffington Post H.H. Holmes handwriting 97%match to Jack

this Gentleman, was said
to have traveled to London
during the time of the Murders.
He is Americas 1st documented serial killer
& has everything needed to be Jack.

He would be my candidate

thats awesome... i am a serial killer freak. always reading about them and i never even thought to link holmes to those murders.....
damn man.... nice...... crazy thumbs up

What you have to remember is that the shawl did not belong to the murdered woman. Therefore saying that this man's DNA came from her line of work does not really add up imo. It seems highly coincidental for this man's, and ONLY this man's, DNA to be on the shawl if it were the result of her line of work. It seems likely that the killer left this shawl behind, for whatever reason. But it is quite clear that the item was too expensive to have been owned by the murdered woman. Seems unlikely anyway. IF the shawl does not belong to the woman, it is much more probable that the suspect was at the crime scene, either during the murder, or within minutes of it, depending on how quickly the police showed up, because his DNA was on it and it and the shawl was not the woman's.

But if you take the other evidence of this man's guilt, including the fact that an eyewitness identified him as the killer, it seems highly likely that, if the article's claims are accurate, they've got the right man. This was the best suspect throughout the investigation, and many of the police were convinced of his guilt. That is not proof, but DNA IS proof, especially when only his DNA and that of the murdered woman were on the shawl.

originally posted by: peter vlar
a reply to: buster2010

The guy they are trying to pin this on was known for having some odd sexual proclivities that eventually landed him in asylums for the rest of his life, including obsessively masturbating so not only does your point stand, it only ties him to one ripper victim. He was a paranoid schizophrenic and notorious pervert sure, but this in no way conclusively convicts him of being the ripper. It ties a Victorian sexual deviant to a single prostitute, not anywhere near as open and shut as they try to make it out to be.

This is true, but considering the method of operation, the way in which the women were killed, would it be wrong to assume that all of these murders were perpetrated by the same individual? Sure, it could have been a copycat killer or something of that nature, but as is known today in criminology, rarely do crimes of this nature happen only once. Meaning that someone who kills in this way usually does not stop at a single victim. This point could be argued of course, but generally it holds true. And the murders did seem to stop after this man was locked away in an asylum. Then there was the evidence against him at the time, and the fact that he was the best suspect, being picked out by an eyewitness. This is a whole lot of circumstantial evidence, but I do not think the DNA is circumstantial. It directly links the dead woman and the man, and his was the only DNA on the shawl, aside from the victims.

So a great case could definitely be made that he killer her, but the tying to the other murders seems to be the way in which they were killed, and the fact that he was identified as the killer by one of the rare eyewitnesses.

a reply to: OpenEars123

How are we certain that the epithelial cells were provided during the crime and not during some sort of other dalliance or encounter? Not to disparage the victim, but wasn't she a "lady of the evening?"

originally posted by: kelbtalfenek
a reply to: OpenEars123

How are we certain that the epithelial cells were provided during the crime and not during some sort of other dalliance or encounter? Not to disparage the victim, but wasn't she a "lady of the evening?"

Exactly, how do we know that it wasn't from just right before she was murdered.

I went through two links to get to this one and had to look at the date of your reply.

I think the time frames of the police patrols would have made it a little difficult for him to have sex (or rape) her then mutilate her body. It seems the police managed to find her just immediately after. And I don't think a Polish immigrant would have written in English with the slang used. The writing in the letters are too Anglicized. I really have trouble thinking that a Polish immigrant would have been that fluent in English at that time.

I'm sorry, but to me, the writing is indicative of an educated English speaking person, because in Whitechapel during the Victorian Era, the Eastenders weren't really that educated.

Then the letters progress to sloppy handwriting, one that expresses more of the Eastender twang. What's that called again?

I think they should look for an educated opium smoker, one well knowledgeable about anatomy. This would have been done by someone who knows what a kidney looks like in the human body and who had time in the dark to fish around for the kidneys. A dark alley....no light...and yet time to murder someone and then dig around in the dark for kidneys?

What makes it incredible (not in a good sense) is that he was able to pull this off in the dark, between police patrols.