Tweet
So, what do you guys think? They get the right guy? The DNA angle sounds compelling.
-
So, what do you guys think? They get the right guy? The DNA angle sounds compelling. -
It's interesting. But all it really proves, if anything at all, is that the victim and this suspect both left their DNA on the scarf.
Since the guy was a suspect, though, it would lead one to believe he was at the very least responsible for this one lady's death. -
looks like it is a legit story. guess that will mean a movie in the near future finally revealing the "true" storyComment
-
Peer consensus, and connection to another canonical victim would be the only way to prove it conclusively.Comment
-
It proves that the guy had been in contact with the victim, a prostitute.
Does that make him the killer?
I like what one person said about this article:
"Monica Lewinsky is murdered, 100 years later a dress is brought in for testing, and it appears Bill Clinton was the murderer all along because his DNA was found on a dress that was in her closet at the time of her murder. Clinton was one of the top 5 suspects in her death and now we know with out a doubt it to be the 42nd and 63rd president of the United States Mr. Bill Clinton.....case closed."
Also, the way they got the scarf is pretty weird, right?
A policeman at the scene of the stomach-churning murder says "that's a nice scarf for the wife, I'm taking that. Just a ton of blood and gore on it, no problem. Valentine's Day gift sorted!"
So the wife says "no thanks", but they decide to keep it and take good care of it, making sure all the blood and stuff stays on it?
Hmmm.
If you noticed, they're publishing a book about it.
The sweet smell of money....
.
.
"When things are at their darkest, it's a brave man that can kick back and party."Comment
-
I've been a Ripper hobbyist since the mid 90's. This Polish guy, Kaminsky has been suspect one for the past two decades. Years ago, the guy who started profiling for the FBI was given all the info and he said Kaminsky made sense but when he was locked in an asylum, he would have talked openly about it since he was delusional. I still tend to believe it was an American named James Kelly. He fits everything.Comment
-
It just feels like there was a preconceived bias in order to sell a book.Comment
-
I think it is total b.s. that they could find the killer with an item like that...Comment
-
Here's a bloody scarf fresh off the "lady of the evenings" corpse! Happy Valentines day, honey.
What kind of idiots do they think we are? I don't just believe anything told to me. I really think about stuff, and most doesn't make sense nowadays.Last edited by LonnieFisher; Sep 8, '14, 6:54 PM.Comment
-
I'd imagine there would be a whole lot of different DNA samples on a 19th century prostitute's scarf....Comment
-
But the speculation is that it wasn't HER scarf, but the Ripper's (if true).
The Victim, Catherine Eddowes was so poor that she had to sell her shoes. Something this nice would have more value than the shoes, so if she had this, why didn't she sell it instead?
I still believe that the only people who knew the true identity of Jack the Ripper are as follows:
Mary Ann Nichols
Annie Chapman
Elisabeth Stride
Catherine Eddowes
Mary Kelley
And
Jack the Ripper himself.Last edited by Toy Timelord; Sep 8, '14, 8:51 PM.Comment
-
Indeed, that makes sense.
A prostitute wouldn't have had a nice quality scarf, so if it was the Ripper's, that would be better evidence.
I guess we'll have to read the book after all!.
.
.
"When things are at their darkest, it's a brave man that can kick back and party."Comment
Comment