True Crime
Related: About this forumJack the Ripper's identity revealed after DNA match, 137 years later - NewsNation
The infamous killer who terrorized London women has largely been referred to as simply “Jack the Ripper” until now.

Bernardo de La Paz
(54,767 posts)Lunabell
(7,309 posts)The DNA amplification was finally able to provide enough for a comparison to one of his descendents.
TexasTowelie
(120,192 posts)I took care of some housework and was pampered the cat for awhile.
Bernardo de La Paz
(54,767 posts)Bernardo de La Paz
(54,767 posts)Lunabell
(7,309 posts)Bernardo de La Paz
(54,767 posts)ShazzieB
(20,251 posts)Not new news, as you say!
EDITED TO ADD: The age restriction on the video is appropriate, as photos of the murdered women were included. I watched long enough to find out the Ripper's name but noped out early.
RockRaven
(17,145 posts)Here is the Wikipedia page of the suspect:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aaron_Kosminski
[admittedly I didn't watch the video, but I saw a spate of Jack the Ripper articles pop up on news websites the past couple of days -- about Kosminski and the author Russell Edwards -- so I assume that is what the video is also about]
Lunabell
(7,309 posts)But, due to new DNA technology, it's been proven just recently.
https://www.2oceansvibe.com/2025/02/14/jack-the-ripper-finally-identified-with-a-100-dna-match/
RockRaven
(17,145 posts)over a quarter century. One would expect a serious person to have developed some relevant expertise in that time, and yet using the phrase "100% DNA match" is an enormous red flag. That is not a correct or useful descriptor of the type of evidence supposedly on offer.
And the article you linked provides nothing but Russell Edwards saying it is so. Which he's been saying for a long time.
Maybe he's got good evidence. Maybe the evidence he's got is legit and correct. That would be very interesting. But only examining the evidence itself will provide that insight, this guy's say so is basically worthless at this point.
Lunabell
(7,309 posts)
It amazes me how other posters greet another’s contribution with such negativity. I had one yesterday that involved some very complex reading but it was quite valuable because it showed a Constitutional way we could get Kamala into the White House. The first poster wrote “yawn” as the subject heading.
Based on the amount of time elapsed between the posting and the response, I knew the poster could not have read the article. It took me 15” and I’m a skilled reader of legal arguments. I posted that he needed to read the post, and I got a hide from it!
Personally, my attitude is that if I get that kind of response I’ll go elsewhere. I’ve made no secret that I am disgusted with the negativity here. There are a couple other forums where people aren’t so negative and to me are a lot more fun.
NJCher
(39,803 posts)Does say that:
Snip
Not all DNA experts agree with Edwards’ finding though, with many pointing to the fact that mitochondrial DNA can only exclude suspects and not confirm them with 100% accuracy. The ‘chain of custody’ of the bloody shawl has also made some forensic experts doubt the ‘proof’ of Kosminski’s guilt.
Snip
I couldn’t watch the video either but I’m glad it was posted because I didn’t know about this at all.
Figarosmom
(5,248 posts)And just couldn't get him for lack of evidence
NJCher
(39,803 posts)And at that time, mental institutions were pretty horrible.