3 ms·

> The story goes that [the shawl] came from the murder scene of the Ripper's fourth victim, Catherine Eddowes, on September 30, 1888. With a provenance like th

• the_af 12y ago
  But... but... I thought Patricia Cornwell had proved the Ripper was British painter Walter Sickert in her book "Case Closed"! Well, at least now the case is truly closed!
  • lutusp 12y ago
    Not really -- all the article says is that a person claims to have identified the "real" Jack the Ripper, using what sounds like pretty persuasive evidence. But would that evidence convict him today, in Britain? Or would it only show that he had a contact with the victim? He was known to patronize prostitutes.
• Symmetry 12y ago
  Proving the provenance by testing the blood on the shawl against the victim was the first thing they did.
  • apaprocki 12y ago
    Well, more like proved the possibility that the shawl was in fact from the victim, given the material, design, and the fact that the mtDNA matched a descendent. There are still many, many other peoples' blood from that time period that would yield the same match, but coupled with the story of the background of the shawl, they would like you to believe it a 100% match for their purposes. (A cynic would say... to sell the book.)
  • m0nty 12y ago
    But it was also kept in a "crime museum" where it might have become contaminated, and DNA samples will degrade over time, so a cautious representation of this finding would be "might show the identity" rather than “Jack the Ripper has been identified." > "An interesting but remarkable claim that needs to be subjected to peer review, with detailed analysis of the provenance of the shawl and the nature of the claimed DNA match with the perpetrator's descendants and its power of discrimination; no actual evidence has yet been provided," Jeffreys told The Independent newspaper.