Since a few of you have asked what I think of the article making the rounds that claims to prove the identity of Jack the Ripper, the short answer is: Not much. First, the Daily Mail is a tawdry tabloid, basically the UKs equivalent of the National Enquirer (with extra added race-bating), and the article itself comes across as not much more than an advertisement for Russell Edwards forthcoming book, Naming Jack the Ripper. The provenance of the shawl at the center of the article is questionable at best, and such a shawl is not mentioned in the official police inventory of Catherine Eddowes possessions. Furthermore, without examinable, peer-reviewed scientific data, the articles conclusions based on 126-year-old DNA evidence are not particularly convincing. I believe this latest solution to the case will ultimately prove to be just another accusation pointed at one of the usual suspects. So instead of buying into fiction masquerading as true crime, I instead recommend you dig into something unabashedly fictional, and far more entertaining: Tales of Jack the Ripper.
Posted on: Sun, 07 Sep 2014 19:53:32 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015