Jack The Ripper case finally solved!
-
Archived from the IMDb Discussion Forums — From Hell
Leveticus — 11 years ago(September 07, 2014 03:08 AM)
After 126 years, they finally found out who history's most infamous slasher was (responsible for the grisly murders of 5 English prostitutes) through DNA. Ironically, he was locked away the whole time until his death afterwards without anybody knowing it was him until now. Jack The Ripper was
Aaron Kosminski!
Survey saysone more for the good guys!
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/jack-ripper-world-renowned-dna-ex pert-4177665 -
micmac99 — 11 years ago(September 07, 2014 04:22 AM)
I took the Jack The Ripper tour at London and at the end of the tour the guide showed picture of the man they thought is the killer, and it was picture of
Montague John Druitt
. But I thought then and I think now that the Ripper was Kosminski more likely, and that DNA nails it.
In Finland we have this thing called "reilu meininki" -
TermlnatriX — 11 years ago(September 07, 2014 10:01 PM)
well i guess there's no reason for anyone to watch this movie ever again
For decades people though Titanic sank in one piece. They even made a film
A Night to Remember
based on those "facts" at the time. Yet despite that detail being wrong it's still a great film.
::
filmschoolthrucommentaries
::
http://bit.ly/11DHMHW -
grapplernz — 11 years ago(September 07, 2014 09:32 PM)
I can't believe they got the DNA from a bloodied coat that a police officer took from a victim to give to his wife. What a stupid thing to do the evidence could have easily been destroyed.
I would like to know more about the killer. I wonder if there any case notes from when he was institutionalized? -
viewpertuis — 11 years ago(September 10, 2014 01:22 AM)
Maybe not. Keep reading.
The author of a book for sale says 100% match in DNA. Lots of reasons this probably isn't true, beginning with the fabric supposedly splashed with a Ripper victim's blood not being available until the early 1900s.
Plus there's no evidence the fabric, a 20-foot table runner, was ever near the body. Police made a detailed list of what was found at the scene. No mention of this "shawl."
There's a lot of Ripperologists out there right now tearing the announcement the perpetrator had been ID'ed apart.
Keep reading. -
stitchesaresore — 11 years ago(September 12, 2014 04:57 PM)
This shawl was never entered into evidence and its been over one hundred years since the murders. Even if it's the real thing, the chain of custody is severally flawed. No others have been allowed to test it and this guy is trying to sell a book, so that's another negative in his column. Plus, a touch of DNA on one item that may or may not have belonged to the victim is hardly substantial proof, especially if Kosminski frequented prostitutes. I'm all for the murder finally being solved, but I'm not convinced that's what's happened here.
-
SunCanyonRoad — 11 years ago(September 26, 2014 03:11 PM)
I have seen this but it still isn't 100% conclusive and wouldn't hold up in a court of law anyway. I guess we will never truly know.
"I don't want your watch, man. I want your friendship!" - Lightfoot -
poopfock — 11 years ago(September 28, 2014 10:58 PM)
Based on the evidence in this movie, namely the use of grapes to lure victims. I believe it was this man: https://s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com:443/data.filmboards/images/upload/br4kB67.gif
-
Bergman_Fellini87 — 11 years ago(October 18, 2014 08:17 PM)
No, it is not solved. The DNA that they used was Mitochondrial DNA. I don't know much about it (too complicated for me), but it isn't conclusive. It only matches a sample of about 1 population of 400k, or something like that. I'd suggest people read up on it. People on the Casebook.org forums can explain it better than I can.
MtDNA is also the same type that Patricia Cornwell used against Walter Sicket. Her accusations have been debunked long since then.
As for the shawl itself, it is a load of nonsense. Its been around for years. The police inventory of Catherine Eddowes's belongings did not list a shawl. They would have been very thorough as it was an extremely high profile case, & they were being heavily criticised in the press.
To explain this, one story is that Amos Simpson found the body first, stole the shawl, & then went away. It was then passed down generations. Mitre Square was not in Simpson's jurisdiction, so he wouldn't be there.
Now, if he found the body first, it'd have had to have been before PC Watkins did at 1:45. PC Harvey went through Church Passage & stopped at the edge of the square at 1:40. He saw nothing (even with his lantern, it was still poorly lit). It is possible that the murder had been committed, & the Ripper was hiding in the darkest corner close by. If not, then he had less than 5 minutes to get there with Eddowes, kill her, & then inflict all the mutilations.
There is no way he'd have been able to do this & get away, while Simpson would come in, take the shawl away without seeing him, & then Watkins finding the body.
The Ripper had already incredible stoke of luck that night. If he murdered Liz Stride at Dutfield's Yard, he was able to get away without being seen. It is possible that he was hiding in the dark when he heard Louis Diemschutz arrive on his pony & cart. If so, that makes him even more lucky that he went to alert the people in the Imperial Club rather than look closer around him.
He then went & picked up Eddowes, then killed her at Mitre Square. The police were already after him for the Stride murder. Then, after the Mitre Square murder, he proceeded to drop the piece of torn apron at Goulston Street, as well as writing (if he did), the graffiti on the wall, & then getting away after all this. I also find it hard to believe that if Simpson did find the body first, that he would only take a shawl without sounding the alarm & calling for backup. And if the Ripper was hiding in the dark corner when Harvey came, it'd have been likely he'd have been hiding when Simpson came. That would make his luck even more greater. Its just impossible.
The other story apparently is Simpson obtained permission from his superior officers to take the shawl home as a gift for his wife. No way would he have been allowed to do this. It was an extremely high profile case where the police were being criticised heavily in the press. If they had gotten word of that, they would have torn them to pieces. Especially if they let him take it home without cataloging it.
Both these stories are bogus, & the MtDNA isn't reliable. On top of all this, the man who made these claims runs a Jack the Ripper store in Whitechapel where he sells tacky junk like yoyos & pencils, which I find offensive considering the extreme nature of these murders. Its one thing to profit off a highly researched book with honest intentions, but selling junk is quite sleazy. He also advertises his Ripper tours as done by the man that "solved" the murders.
Apparently, he even has either a dummy, or someone, dressed up in the typical Jack the Ripper costume (top hat & cape), so that customers can pay to get a photo with him/it. His motivations are clear with his sleazy store.
I'm not against Kosminski as a suspect, as the police at the time had their eye on him, they obviously had their reasons. I just find this guy making the claims to be quite dubious. -
theburrus1 — 11 years ago(November 01, 2014 02:04 PM)
Like you, "proved by DNA" at first made me exited and glad that a historical loose-end was tied up finally. But consider how that like, the Telegraph article still says in the headline "
claims author
" Now DNA evidence is used to end all indisputable theories, or claims, theories, etc., am I right? I mean his argument and case is compelling, but the damn news story only garnered attention from the press for a day or two. This is big beep news, the kind books, press articles, historians would eat up, talk about over tea for a long ass time. I'll buy the claim with a grain of salt.
But still I think the story in "from Hell" is correct and accurate, especially considering the state of the Monarch's thinking of its place in the world back then, but also, some damn polish immigrant would have been arrested in two days tops, especially in Whitechapel . All the poor or corrupt would sold him out for a bounty, which I have to believe one was put out for the Ripper by then, thus making the case closed, mystery solved. It didn't. That alone is enough to doubt this dude's claims.
"Don't believe everything you read"
, is the old adage I believe they say? -
BedHeadTalks — 10 years ago(June 26, 2015 08:25 AM)
How can it be accurate? Firstly, even if there was a child (and there wasn't) the child had no claim to the throne and the wedding would not have been legal! That is a huge plothole. Moreover, this 'theory' has been widely rejected by serious reserchers and there is no evidence that suggests the prince ever visited those brothels, all is rumours that do not necessarily make sense. Furthermore, some people speculate that the prince may have been homosexual. How is the movie 'accurate'? You definitely don't know what is the difference between facts and gossip, do you? Some people just love their conspiracy theories! Authors of novels know that people love to believe their cliche fiction is 'real' and that means money in return. People can be so gullible! Sensationalist works sell which doesn't make those works 'accurate' or factual at all.
Alas, I am beyond impropriety -Violet, Dowager Countess of Grantham (Downton Abbey) -
taran-rod — 9 years ago(August 14, 2016 09:38 AM)
"Mr Edwards claims Aaron Kosminski, a 23 year-old Polish immigrant who ended up dying in an asylum, was "definitely, categorically and absolutely" the man behind the grisly killing spree in 1888 in London's East End."
Yeah, this sure is an ultimate proof that we have here Nah, just kidding, this looks more like a guy who wants to sell his book and make millions out of it. Come on, if he has to use this kind of childish sentences to value his assumptions:
"Only non-believers that want to perpetuate the myth will doubt. This is it now - we have unmasked him."
I honestly have a hard time to take an author who express himself that way hard to believe.
Guys we have to accept it as it is, we'll know the real identity of Jack the Ripper!
