IMG_0569
Blog powered by Typepad

« A ghost post | Main | »

Comments

Remember the blood writing on the wall that said something like, "The Jewes will not be blamed..". That's quite a give away, don't you think?

There's always been a lively controversy about those words, which were written in chalk, not blood. They were scrawled on a wall near a scrap of cloth from Eddowes' body. The murderer might have written them, or maybe they just happened to be there - a bit of random graffiti.

Since Kosminski was Jewish, I'm not sure why he would be complaining that "the Jewes are the men who will not be blamed for nothing." OTOH, he was crazy, so his actions need not make sense.

http://wiki.casebook.org/index.php/Goulston_Street_Graffito

I would consider it a coincidence that the Eddowes' shawl was under the graffiti about jews then! I mean, it's like God is point at that guy and saying, "case closed".

I don't think you understand the levels of madness quite correctly, Michael. Genius is a form of madness too.

A good summary of Ripperologists' "critical thinking" skills. Too bad those who are big promoters of critical thinking, the scoftics, too often fail to demonstrate similar skills.

I'm sure folks who closely follow the Daily Grail have seen this by now, but for the record:
http://www.nbcnews.com/science/science-news/was-it-aaron-kosminski-jack-ripper-dna-claims-get-ripped-n198506

Thanks for the link, RD. That sums it up pretty well, though I'm slightly less skeptical than the Casebook people - *if* it's really true that mitochondrial DNA possibly matching both Eddowes and Kosminski is on the shawl. Two possible matches (even if the pools of potential matches are large) would be fairly convincing, I think.

"I would consider it a coincidence that the Eddowes' shawl was under the graffiti about jews then!"

It was part of her apron, not a shawl. (The shawl is a separate item, not proven to have belonged to Eddowes at all.) And yes, it could be a coincidence. It was a very bad neighborhood, and there may have been all sorts of graffiti everywhere, just as there are in slums today.

"I don't think you understand the levels of madness quite correctly, Michael. Genius is a form of madness too."

I doubt the Ripper was any kind of genius, mad or otherwise. Kosminski certainly wasn't. He was a drooling wreck, best known (aside from his speculative connection to the Ripper case) for publicly engaging in what the Victorians delicately termed "self-abuse."

Very few murderers are geniuses, or even modestly intelligent.

I've read off and on about the Ripper case over the years.

I don't think that there is much evidence against any of the suspects. There are some people who can be ruled out, but no one who can be ruled in "more likely than not."

What do you think of the claim that the murders are unrelated?

I think the five "canonical" murders were all the work of the same person. Some of the earlier and later killings probably were unrelated. I agree that no suspect really stands out, though many can be safely eliminated. Kosminski is probably as good a bet as any, which isn't saying a lot.

If Kosminski was a neighbor or an habitual visitor to the area, why shouldn't he have hired Eddowes for some sort of sexual contact, if he happened to have the money one day/evening? What proof the semen on a prostitute came from her murderer? Did it overlay her blood?

The comments to this entry are closed.