A shawl that has not been proven to truly even belong to Catherine Eddowes and a shawl that has also not at all been proven to be "found" at the crime scene, but has DNA of a man on it? Surprise(if it did belong to her-She was a Hooker and lord knows how many men's DNA has been and still is all over that shawl! Sure DNA proved that a hookers shawl has DNA from some crazy guy in the 1880's who was more then likely maybe a customer of hers..............Amazing that Modern science can do this, but dident it also prove that King Tut was murdered and pretty much who the murder was? And that was thousands of years ago!!!!!!!!!
Anyway this breathes new light on the Ripper case, but certainly does not solve it and the flimsy evidence would be debunked easily in modern courts by any good lawyer.
Last edited by Volks; 09-11-2014 at 12:54 AM.
|