real vampires, vampire games and tv shows, movies or films, and vampire books

Jack the Ripper Identified Again

I recall reading all about this a few years back. As I recall, the Science behind it was sketchy. Why is it in the news again? Because the book is coming out. Has the Science become any more credible? Probably the news sites are just reporting it as it is fed to them, sans any sort of skepticism or critical analysis.

They have a scarf that supposedly belonged to one of the Ripper’s victims. They supposedly determined this by taking DNA samples from some of her supposed descendants. The scarf also supposedly contained DNA from one of the primary suspects in the Ripper killings. They supposedly determined this by taking DNA from some of *his* supposed descendants.

Does it sound like I’m a tad skeptical, here?

At best, if the Science is airtight, they will have proven that this shawl contains DNA from both the victim—Catherine Eddowes—and one of the suspects in the Jack the Ripper murders—Aaron Kosminski. Does that prove he killed her? No. It’s circumstantial evidence at most. Does it prove he was Jack the Ripper, and that he killed all the other victims? Not in a million miles of it.

If everything comes out fresh in the wash and the results are legitimate, it will be compelling suggestive evidence, but that’s all. It is certainly not a smoking gun. Or, in this case, a bloody knife.

TheCheezman • March 19, 2019


Previous Post

Next Post

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: