Was Jack the Ripper a Polish Barber?
Russell Edwards, a 48 year old businessman and self-professed ‘armchair detective’ from Barnet, North London, claims to have proven “beyond a reasonable doubt” the actual identity of Jack the Ripper. In his new book entitled, “Naming Jack the Ripper“, Edwards details how he was able to finally solve the 126 year old mystery . . . who was Jack the Ripper?
“I’ve spent 14 years working on it, and we have definitively solved the mystery of who Jack the Ripper was. 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.
The Suspect: Aaron Kosminski
Aaron Kosminski
Aaron Kosminski was a Polish born Jew who emigrated with his family to England in 1881. Born in 1865 in the Polish town of Klodawa, which was then part of the Russian Empire, Kosminski’s family fled to England to escape persecution by the Russian government.
Kosminski lived with his 2 brothers and 1 sister in the heart of Whitechapel, and was said to have worked as a hairdresser. His home, which was listed as being on Greenfield Street, was in the direct vicinity of where Elizabeth Stride was murdered in the early morning hours of September 30, 1888.
Kosminski, who would have been 23 years old during the time of the murders in 1888, had in 1885 been described as suffering from mental problems. For reasons unknown, Kosminski was detained by police for questioning and positive identification, but was later released due to lack of evidence needed for charges to be brought upon him. Shortly after his release, his family would have him admitted to a mental asylum.
In February of 1891, Kosminski was officially deemed of ‘unsound mind' and was committed to the insane asylum at Colney Hatch, north London. Despite a lack of evidence and eye witness testimony, police had still kept Kosminski under surveillance until the time he was institutionalized.
Records show Kosminski was later admitted to Leavesden Asylum in 1894 where he eventually died of gangrene in 1919. Case notes indicate that his insanity took the form of auditory hallucinations, a paranoid fear of being fed by other people that drove him to pick up and eat food that had been discarded on the floor, and a refusal to wash or bathe.
Early Suspicions
Kosminski has always been considered a prime suspect in the Ripper case. He was a favored suspect amongst a number of senior officers involved in the case, most notably, Sir Robert Anderson and Sir Donald Sutherland Swanson.
In 1910, Robert Anderson wrote his memoirs entitled, “The Lighter Side of My Official Life”, and in those memoirs he stated:
“Undiscovered murders are rare in London, and the Jack the Ripper crimes do not fall into this category. I am almost tempted to disclose the identity of the murderer but no public benefit would result from such a course. In saying that he was a polish jew I am merely stating a definitely ascertained fact. I will merely add that the only person who ever had a good view of the murderer unhesitatingly identified the suspect the instant he was confronted with him, but he refused to testify.”
Sir Robert Anderson
Anderson later gave a copy of his memoirs to former colleague and investigator on the Ripper case, Sir Donald Sutherland Swanson. This copy of the memoirs was later presented to The Daily Telegram by Swanson’s grandson. In the margin of the copy were hand-written notes by Swanson, among them the name ‘Kosminski'.
In Anderson's memoirs he indicates that police had interviewed a man who had identified the killer, but would not testify in court. There have been only two known individuals who had reportedly encountered Jack the Ripper.
One of them was a man by the name of Israel Schwartz, a Hungarian immigrant considered to be of Jewish descent. Schwartz had allegedly happened by when Elizabeth Stride was being physically attacked on Berner Street, startling her assailant who then shouted an anti-semitic remark at Schwartz. Fearing for his safety, and worried he was being pursued by who he believed to be the attacker's accomplice, Schwartz fled the scene.
Donald Swanson
The other man who had come forth with claims of seeing who many believed was Jack the Ripper, was cigarette salesman Joseph Lawende. Lawende, along with two of his friends, had seen a man talking with Catherine Eddowes near the entrance to Mitre Square at approximately 1:30am – shortly before her murder. Lawende gave police a rough description of the man, but said that he had not gotten more than a passing glance, and would not be able to later identify the suspect.
Swanson goes on to note in the memoirs that the witness would not testify because he was also Jewish and did not want to carry the guilt of presenting evidence responsible for the execution of a fellow Jew.
There's been much debate over this, but it's widely considered that Isreal Schwartz, because of his Jewish descent, was the man whom Anderson was referring to in his memoirs.
The Macnaghten Report
Sir Melville Macnaghten
Although not directly involved with the investigation, Sir Melville Leslie Macnaghten was Chief Constable of the Metropolitan Police at the time of the killings, and thus had access to the police records. Like most officers at the time, Macnaghten had a huge interest in the case, and as a result, wrote a confidential report in 1894.
In the report, Macnaghten states that he believed only 5 of the Whitechapel murder victims (The Canonical Five) were slain by Jack the Ripper. He also listed his 3 prime suspects, among which was a ‘Kosminksi'.
In his memorandum, Macnaghten stated:
…there were strong reasons for suspecting “Kosminski” because he “had a great hatred of women … with strong homicidal tendencies”.
Lack of Evidence
Unfortunately, there is no substantial evidence backing the suspicions of Anderson and Swanson. Several of the case files had gone missing over the years – many feel as a result of those close to the investigation taking them as ‘souvenirs’. The rest were all but destroyed along with the majority of the other City of London Police files during the Blitzkrieg of WWII. Still others feel that files were removed by individuals on the inside who wished that the case remain a mystery, although that theory mainly serves to further romanticize the legend.
What we're left with are unverified claims, suspicions and allegations by Anderson, Swanson, Macnaghten and other senior officers – pointing to ‘Kosminski' as someone at or near the top of their Ripper suspects list.
New Evidence in 2007
The piece of evidence used to fuel this latest investigation was a shawl which Edwards purchased in 2007 at an auction in Bury St. Edmunds, Suffolk, England. The shawl had allegedly been found next to Catherine Eddowes's body on the night of her murder. The shawl, which had been cut into two pieces, still contained traces of of blood and . . . previously unbeknownst to Edwards . . . other genetic material.
The Shawl of Catherine Eddowes
It was this ‘genetic material' which would enable Edwards to push his investigation into territory not yet reached – either through contemporary investigation or previous attempts at modern forensic scientific analysis.
Origin of The Ripper Shawl
It was alleged that there was a shawl laying on the ground alongside the mutilated body of Catherine Eddowes when Police Constable Watkins discovered the scene in Mitre Square at 1:45am on the 30th of September. Later that morning, acting Sergeant Amos Simpson had accompanied Catherine Eddowes's body to the mortuary. He asked his senior officers if he might take the shawl that had been found next to her, as his wife was a dressmaker and would likely have a use for the large piece of silk. Apparently Simpson's wife had been horrified by the garment and hid it away inside a box for many years.
The shawl, which had been stored for years, and surprisingly . . . never washed, was kept in the family and handed down through generations. It eventually found its way to David Melville-Hayes, a descendant of acting Sergeant Amos Simpson.
Hayes gave the shawl to Scotland Yard's Crime Museum in 1991, where it was then placed in storage instead of on display due to lack of conclusive evidence proving that it did indeed belong to Eddowes or her killer. 10 years later, David reclaimed the shawl and exhibited it at the annual Jack the Ripper conference in 2001.
5 years later, in 2006, DNA testing was performed on the shawl for use in a TV documentary, but the cotton swab test was inconclusive.
Opportunity
When Edwards saw the advert for the shawl coming up for sale at auction, he felt he was onto something special – having noticed a clue which he thought may have slipped past other Ripperologists – proving that the shawl was connected with Jack the Ripper.
“The shawl is patterned with Michaelmas daisies. Today the Christian feast of Michaelmas is archaic, but in Victorian times it was familiar as a quarter day, when rents and debts were due.
I discovered there were two dates for it: one, September 29, in the Western Christian church and the other, November 8, in the Eastern Orthodox church. With a jolt, I realised the two dates coincided precisely with the nights of the last two murder dates. September 29 was the night on which Elizabeth Stride and Catherine Eddowes were killed, and November 8 was the night of the final, most horrific of the murders, that of Mary Jane Kelly.
I reasoned that it made no sense for Eddowes to have owned the expensive shawl herself; this was a woman so poor she had pawned her shoes the day before her murder. But could the Ripper have brought the shawl with him and left it as an obscure clue about when he was planning to strike next? It was just a hunch, and far from proof of anything, but it set me off on my journey.”
It was that discovery that compelled Edwards to become the new owner of the shawl and to embark on his investigation.
Next Steps…
Edwards claims that months of research on the shawl, and a close analysis of the dyes used on the fabric, revealed that it was originally crafted in Eastern Europe sometime in the early 19th century.
“I’ve got the only piece of forensic evidence in the whole history of the case.” -Russell Edwards
With what Edwards believed to be the Ripper's shawl now in his possession, his next task was to recruit a scientist who could help him with his investigation. After a bit of hit and miss with other researchers, Edwards eventually connected with molecular biologist and historic DNA expert Dr. Jari Louhelainen – a lecturer at Liverpool John Moores University. Louhelainen, an authority on historic genetic evidence, also lends his expertise to Interpol cold case files among other similar projects.
Armed with Dr. Louhelainen's knowledge and expertise, Edwards claims he was able to tie both Eddowes's and Kosminski's DNA to the shawl. So . . . how did he do this..?!
SCIENCE!
The Analysis
The shawl contained some stains and discoloration, so the first step was to determine what those dark stains actually were. Dr. Louhelainen used an infrared camera to examine what appeared to be blood stains, revealing that they were not simply ordinary blood stains, but arterial blood spatter, which would have been consistent with how Eddowes had been slashed.
Click here to see mortuary photos of Catherine Eddowes
(not for the squeamish)
Upon further examination, Dr. Louhelainen discovered fluorescent stains which appeared to be semen.
The Ripper's Load Rag?
In addition to the arterial blood and semen, Louhelainen also found evidence of what he believed to be spilt body parts – most notably what appeared to be a kidney cell. Given that Eddowes's killer had removed her kidney, this bit of evidence was quite a find, helping to further the legitimacy of the shawl and its background.
Louhelainen identified this as fluid from spilt body parts.
To extract the genetic materials from the 126+ year old shawl, Louhelainen used a pioneering technique he developed himself, which he calls “vacuuming”. He knew that the traditional ‘cotton swab' method would not work on evidence this old, so he needed to use an alternative method which he described as such…
“I filled a sterile pipette with a liquid ‘buffer’, a solution known to stabilise the cells and DNA, and injected it into the cloth to dissolve the material trapped in the weave of the fabric without damaging the cells, then sucked it out.”
According to Louhelainin, his method for extracting and preserving the DNA would not have been possible 5 years ago.
When analyzing the semen traces found on the shawl, Louhelainen enlisted the help of another expert – Dr. David Miller. With the help of Dr. Miller, they discovered what they believed were epithelium tissue cells, which likely would have been deposited through ejaculation.
At some point during the 3 1/2 year investigation, Edwards tracked down descendants of both Eddowes and Kosminski, each of whom agreed to provide cotton swab DNA samples of their mouth tissue. Next, it was up to Louhelainen to examine the DNA removed from the shawl – comparing it to the samples provided by the descendants of Eddowes and Kosminski.
To form a connection between the distant Eddowes and Kosminski descendants with that of the DNA found on the shawl, Louhelainen needed to establish a mitochondrial DNA match. Mitochondrial DNA, which is passed down exclusively through the female line, is much more able to stand the test of time and would be far less fragmented than genomic DNA.
The subjects used in the DNA analysis were: Karen Miller, the 3 times great-granddaughter of Catherine Eddowes, and a British descendant of Kominski's sister Matilda – who wishes to remain anonymous.
Concerning the process of establishing the mitochondrial DNA matches, Louhelainen had this to say…
“I needed to sequence the DNA found in the stains on the shawl, which means mapping the DNA by determining the exact order of the bases in a strand. I used polymerase chain reaction, a technique which allows millions of exact copies of the DNA to be made, enough for sequencing.
When I tested the resulting DNA profiles against the DNA taken from swabs from Catherine Eddowes’s descendant, they were a match.
I used the same extraction method on the stains which had characteristics of seminal fluid. Dr David Miller found epithelial cells – which line cavities and organs – much to our surprise, as we were not expecting to find anything usable after 126 years.
Then I used a new process called whole genome amplification to copy the DNA 500 million-fold and allow it to be profiled.
Once I had the profile, I could compare it to that of the female descendant of Kosminski’s sister, who had given us a sample of her DNA swabbed from inside her mouth.
The first strand of DNA showed a 99.2 per cent match, as the analysis instrument could not determine the sequence of the missing 0.8 per cent fragment of DNA. On testing the second strand, we achieved a perfect 100 per cent match.”
Needless to say, Edwards was beside himself over the findings.
“When the email finally arrived telling me Jari had found a perfect match, I was overwhelmed. Seven years after I bought the shawl, we had nailed Aaron Kosminski.”
Russell Edwards Interview
Doubters
Ripperologists who dispute Edwards's claims and doubt the credibility of the investigation have been very outspoken – providing their own evidence against why they feel we are no closer now to knowing the true identity of the killer than we were 126 years ago.
Richard Cobb, a Ripperologist who runs conventions and conducts guided ‘Ripper Tours', questions the integrity of the DNA evidence found on the shawl.
“The shawl has been openly handled by loads of people and been touched, breathed on, spat upon,” Mr Cobb explained. “My DNA is probably on there. What’s more, Kosminski is likely to have frequented prostitutes in the East End of London. If I examined that shawl, I’d probably find links to 150 other men from the area.”
Peter Gill, a pioneer of DNA profiling, said:
“The shawl is of dubious origin and has been handled by several people who could have shared that mitochondrial DNA profile.”
He also pointed out that Mr Edwards has been seen handling the shawl without gloves, as evidenced in various photographs.
He also went on to say…
“Normally you go for peer-review before going to the press,” he said. “This hasn’t been reviewed by the scientific community.”
Conclusion
Mr. Edwards and Dr. Louhelainen feel there is absolutely no doubt that they have found their man, but until careful peer examination has been performed on the investigation, the validity of the findings are in question. Plain and simple.
Rather than presenting his investigative methods and resulting evidence to members of the scientific community for scrutiny and evaluation, Edwards went straight to authoring his new book, then to media sources for promotion of said book. Russell is a businessman, and a very opportunistic one.
The ‘Official' Ripper Store
It's also worth noting that Edwards runs a notable Ripper Tour and Gift Shop, which no doubt will benefit from all of this publicity – controversial or otherwise.
Regardless of what may be concluded from the evidence provided in Naming Jack the Ripper . . . one thing is for certain . . . Edwards will be profiting substantially from all of this.
Hell . . . I'll likely be one of the individuals he will enjoy royalties from. 😉 I admit, I am curious to find out more about the shawl and the cutting-edge processes used to establish the DNA connections.
Before we wrap this up, let's close with a few more quotes from Edwards to inspire you to delve into his new book.
“Only non-believers that want to perpetuate the myth will doubt. This is it now – we have unmasked him.”
Oh really . . ?
And let's not leave this one out…
“I’m overwhelmed that 126 years on, I have solved the mystery.”
Easy there, Sherlock . . .
It shall be interesting to see what comes of all this once the reviews start getting posted. I'm obviously a bit skeptical about the validity of Edwards's claims, but I am intrigued by the story behind the alleged scarf, and the methods used to ascertain the evidence. I'll likely give his book a read.
If you're interested, Naming Jack the Ripper is available on Amazon.com.
I’m surprised that nobody has yet pointed out how busy a lad Jack was that night. It was the night of the double event. That means that:
1. He had the shawl, which from pictures appears to be a substantial chunk of material, with him at Berner street where he killed Liz Stride.
2. Despite almost being caught by Mr. Diemschultz and his wonder-pony Fredo, he remembered to pick up the shawl–which he had to have put down to dispose of Liz–and take it with him.
3. He then carried it over a mile cross-town to Mitre Square where he met up with Catherine Eddowes (who didn’t notice the blob of material he was carrying) and killed her, then he made his, er, deposit (here alone, I add, as no semen was found at other sites, particularly Mary Jane Kelly’s where the time and privacy to add such a deposit was abundant), then he left, all within five minutes. As I say, busy busy busy!
There’s nothing that says Catherine couldn’t have picked up the shabby, patched thing herself somewhere. Jack didn’t necessarily carry it around and why would he? Michaelmass be damned. Like it would mean anything to him.
I agree Cecilia, it was my immediate thought after reading it all. However, it seems a gimmie for severe DNA testing to be done by a completely neutral party/forensics lab, run by law enforcement.. like the labs in Langley Virginia USA. Or perhaps the University of Washington near Seattle.
The fact that they point to someone who’s career stems around their use of knives or blades is convincing. Both Butchers as-well Barbers are extremely accurate with their blades. But the Butcher is especially talented where it comes to “Slashing and Chopping”. Anyone can “Slice” well enough.
Butchers also understand Organs, but then so do truly skilled Hunters.
I’ll have to get the book to read as well. Always interested in Sleuthing. . . “Holmes… Sherlock Holmes!” *smiles!*
Kindly,
Nick
The book was a great read. Perhaps at some time in the future, Mr. Edwards will allow a 2nd source to run a DNA study. The DNA technoloy continues to advance at light speed and new cutting edge methods are being developed allvthe timea. Since he appears to have a very close match, why doesn’t someone rule out the other Ripper suspects since Russell has the DNA blueprints. I am still curious as to exactly where the shawl originated? Obviously, it was meant to be used inside (soluble in water). And finally, Kosminski had to have some basic knowledge of the human body to be cutting things out..where did he learn this stuff being only 23 years old.
Perhaps, more information could be garnered if Aaron Kosminski’s remains were exhumed.
I read the book and while I am not a DNA expert, there are many out there. It appears that if the victim’s blood and DNA was on the shawl, and the Dna of the Ripper’s which matched that of the direct descendent’s of both….well then I think if it “Walks and Quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck”. Seems pretty much closed. As far as money being made…well, why not if he solved the world’s greatest detective mystery. All the others are making money with their books? etc.
This is a patently opportunistic effort to sell Edwards’ book and to attempt to sell more tat from his shop. It reminds me strongly of the ‘authentic’ photograph of the Loch Ness monster that turned out to have been taken by a local hotel owner. Only a total mug would believe a word of it.
shut the fuk hes still the best suspect and hes not trying to make money. his theory is better than randy williams that mother f just has a bunch of poppy cock not good evidence people are alwqys gonna dought ao u shut the hell up moron
you did it aaron you scammer
Yep, the kike did it
Facts it was the shekel grabber.
Thought it was a convincing read. Thought Patricia Cornwall’s book was convincing too. I’ve read it twice! Suppose someone will write a new one proving the ripper was under everyone’s nose as a totally new suspect.DOUBT…….. That eternal ? It’s a fascinating subject the old jack. It’s also a good little earner for writers, movie makers, singers, actors, tour guides, etc, etc, etc. Loved Jack Palance in The Lodger. My dad used to talk about Hanover Square with Laird Kriegar, haven’t seen that. There’s even an old twilight zone episode where Jack is a time traveler.
Have the squeals of ANTI-SEMIIIIIIIIIIIIIIITIICCCC started yet?
Frances Coles who was the Ripper’s last victim died on February 13, 1891, there is a document, UK, Lunacy Patients Admission Registers, 1846-1912 that states that Kozminski was admitted on February 7, 1891 and was discharged April 19, 1894. So it appears he was in an asylum when the last woman was killed on February 13, 1891, unless he escaped to commit a murder? It had also been noted by a relieving officer for the Western District of Mile End Old Town Workhouse, Maurice Whitfield that Kozminski was not “suicidal or dangerous to other people.” The one thing that was mentioned was that he did threaten his sister once with a knife but that was it.
Except Frances Coles clearly wasn’t a Ripper victim. The MO was completely different.
I’m approaching this from ‘left of field’; not many of you, I’m sure, will give much credence to the testimony of an astrologer. But I have half a century’s experience in a type of finely-tuned astrological analysis which comes as close to forensic as possible, and a close examination of Aaron Kozminski’s patterns shows him to be just the type of man described in the various media. In the recent BBC documentary it is suggested that he came across to his victims as harmless at first, and only revealed his true nature when they had allowed him to come close. The patterns I am looking at confirm this absolutely – nondescript at first sight, but inwardly vicious. I had originally pinned down the Pickfords’ employee Charles Lechmere using the same techniques, so when I found Kozminski’s patterns I was surprised and disconcerted. But the thought occurred to me – and I know I’m not alone in this – that two men might have been acting in collusion; as the patterns of Lechmere (‘Charles Cross’) and Kozminski have some strong connections, perhaps ‘Jack’ was both of them?
I’d be interested to read what particular astrological locations tell you about K’s personality. I don’t discount anything I don’t understand very well.
I have not read this book,,,,YET ! Possibly will buy in the future ? Meanwhile I am one of the sceptics ? Mr Edwards has apparently gone through masses of evidence and all remaining paperwork and much additional evidence etc…. That said even unread by me
I have many unanswered questions. One thing is for certain., as has been said, Mr Edwardes is definitely a business man and is
very successfully perpetuating his RIPPER BUSINESS to great financial effect. Well good luck to him !
As to the KOSMINSKI family keeping quiet for so many years, I can confirm the culture and legitimate reasoning for that !
Quite simply Jewish folk have a deep set psyche that one never ever reveals anything negative pertaining to another person,
even if that person is not of the faith ! And if the person is a Jew against whom they reveal any bad stuff, they risk perpetuating
bad KARMA ! I have personally been involved in a negative outcome, ( from Jews, actually my parents ) and we are a non orthodox family )
The Orthodox Jews practise non disclosures without compromise, similarly to folk of the Amish faith.
you did it aaron you scammer
as god would say pineapples dont eat them selfs its like once i took my horse to the old town road and a pineapple was there he wasnt eating himself so my horse ate anyway as jabidah said in1349 hold my beer you juice box also subscribe to my youtube chance whitemandances45
as god would say pineapples dont eat them selfs its like once i took my horse to the old town road and a pineapple was there he wasnt eating himself so my horse ate anyway as jabidah said in1349 hold my beer you juice box also subscribe to my youtube chance whitemandances45
You, Mr. Junghandel, wrote an article critical of Edwards’ and Louhelainen’s work, and only at the end of your piece do we learn you never read their book. If the readers go beyond the advertisments to the beginning of the comments section do they learn that you are one of those who profits monetarily from the Ripper mystery’s unsolved status. As a coroner’s investigator, at the very least I find their work interesting; and at the very least I find your article lingusitically well written–and ethically appalling.
Hello R.C., My article had been written in response to their press release prior to the book’s release. A subjective review of the book can be read here.
I made $19.67 last year through my Amazon links. Considering our time invested along with the website costs, that’s far from profiting. I try to keep the adverts to a minimum, but I apologize if they seem invasive to you.
This site’s sole purpose for existing is to provide valid information and substantiated theorycraft concerning the Whitechapel Murders and JTR. This is by no means a profit engine.
You poor man.
Mr. Edwards work was very helpful assisting and helping me concluding my research and work on my book titled The Schizophrenic Voices and Mind of The Real Jack The Ripper, Aaron Kosminski As “The Devil Behind The Prostitution and Instrumental Rape of Whitechapel.”
All My Best to Mr. Edwards with thanks America’s Schizoaffective Writer of Works
Jared William Carter (jw)
It’s clear that many commenters don’t understand the basics of forensically determined DNA material. If it was Kosminski who left DNA on the shawl it doesn’t matter if 10, 100 or 100, 000 people ALSO touched the shawl.
If Kosminski’s mtDNA, as matched conclusively to the mtDNA of a FEMALE descendant, descended FROM FEMALES, exists on the shawl, that conclusively indicates he was the murderer. It doesn’t matter how many other people touched it before or after the murder. His DNA CAN’T be on the shawl unless he came in contact with it.
The only exception to this would be the claim made by some writers who say that the descendants of both Eddowes and Kosminski were PRESENT and hovering over the shawl. Yes, they could have breathed their DNA onto it.
But is this true? To test the validity of this claim that it nullifies the DNA tests on the fabric, tests should be done to see if OTHER people’s DNA can be located on it, namely the DNA of collectors, scientists, kids of collectors, wives of such etc. If that is located then you can throw out the Eddowes/Kosminski descendants’ DNA findings. If not, you know it was K.
Tests could also be done with the Kosminski DNA material to determine what the male DNA line is in the sample. If it’s the dad of the living relative you know the shawl was contaminated, because it means that the DESCENDANT left the DNA accidentally. If the male DNA doesn’t match the dad you can conclude that it is Aaron Kosminski’s DNA on the shawl and no other.
Agreed. As I say, only if the descendants breathed onto the shawl, which is claimed by some, the Kos/Eddowes DNA makes it proven.
BTW REPLIES are not appearing under the designated comments, something wrong with this site.
I know people are very anxious and eager to solve this, but I don’t think we’ll ever know for sure. Even if the killer was a “Polish Jew” or a “Kosminski” that Anderson and Swanson identified, we don’t if was the same Aaron Kosminski of this article. The “Kosminski” they identify had a hatred of women, was violent and died soon after being committed to the asylum. These are facts and traits that do not line up with the Aaron Kosminski who in fact died in 1919. I say this shall remain a mystery.
I believe it. Aaron Kosminski it is….and, it really doesn’t matter. Obviously, people love this character who hated women.
If as shown in the Michael Caine film collaboration by an American and a British production companies that Sir William Gull
was apprehended in a coach which I am not sure was displaying the Royal Coat of Arms , albeit the producers state they believe their facts to be true , and Sir William Gull was insane, as Queen Victorias physician, it seems very likely to be accurate .
Clearly these facts had to be kept from any public scrutiny, at least until a few later generations had past on ?
As convincing as the shawl story may seem, like numerous others, i personally feel the 2 part well made commercial depiction, including numerous mentioned altered facts , to be of serious significance and very believable as accurate.! As for anyone disputing this depiction of events will have to be very convincing in order to squash this television production. ?
My guess is that Joseph Merrick is the serial killer but not the killer of all victims in Whitechapel.
Mitochondrial DNA for starters cannot be used to ID someone, it can only prove they weren’t the killer and using it would allow for hundreds of others to also match it so that alone proves this is BS. Another part of the evidence everyone seems to be ignoring is the eye witness accounts of Jack, he was a man in his 40’s and short, Kosminski was 23 years old at the time and his build was nothing like the eye witness accounts so this isn’t rocket science people and lastly nobody can actually prove that the shawl was anywhere near any victims of the Ripper so it by itself is useless. I would love to believe that the mystery is finally solved but it isn’t and probably never will be.
I have been interested in jack the ripper for over 40 years I have read and seen so much stuff on the case I disagree with Edwards because of this he banned me of his Facebook group, I also thought we had right to have our say in this country, I have had debates with other people who have written books on the murders and not once have they band me from there group, if you put your self out there you should take the rough with the smooth