Hacker News Reader

Comment by glynjackson | Hacker News Reader

Having read some of the research the whole theory is based around a shawl found around the fourth victim belonging to Aaron Kosminski.

Now It could well be him but this "evidence" does not prove this. All it does prove is that the shawl belonged to Aaron (DNA from semen). Aaron Kosminski who by the way had a history with prostitutes. At best this merely confirms that he was acquainted with Eddowes, a prostitute.

View on HN

He was also already a suspect in the murders. The assistant chief constable wrote that Kosminski was a suspect because he "had a great hatred of women ... with strong homicidal tendencies." In one of the murders, Kosminski was identified but apparently the witness refused to testify against him.

Do you think a shawl with semen stains found on a murder scene would not be pretty heavy evidence today?

Oh I'm sure it would, but without multiple pieces of evidence linking him to multiple scenes, it wouldn't be enough. Even if multiples were found, it wouldn't be enough if he had any alibis. Finding a piece of clothing with semen stains on a prostitute isn't exactly surprising, after all.

Well, one would assume that the police work of the time was done to the most reasonable extent possible and if the outcome of that police work was him as a suspect, being able to confirm DNA at the murder scene would only serve to affirm that suspicion. It all depends on what other evidence police based their suspicion at the time. The person who bought the shawl said he consulted the original written police reports in the archives. I suppose anyone could do the same, or... buy the book. ;)

It would only be circumstantial evidence. A man's semen could get on a prostitute's shawl because he raped and murdered her. But it could also get there because he was one of her johns.

I heard this detail on the radio story of the same topic: The shawl did not belong to the victim, but I forget the details of how they could know that. They also traced the fibers of the shawl to polish or russian origins, which would be consistent with belonging to the polish emigrant.

It was enough to convict Steve Wright: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ipswich_serial_murders#Court_a...

They found DNA evidence on 3 of the victims, that is completely different then finding DNA evidence on one victim.

A similar case is actually taking place now in Italy. They found a few droplets of blood from a middle-aged family man on the underwear of a 13 year old girl that was killed. Even though it's blood, all this proves is that he had some kind of (inappropriate) contact with the child. On its own, it's not enough evidence to convict him of murder. Now imagine a much more explainable scenario like semen on a prostitute, and you realize how weak the evidence is if not corroborated by further evidence.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com