top of page
Search

Jack the Ripper: Solved by Science or Sold by Hype?

Abstract


The "Autumn of Terror" of 1888, characterized by the brutal slayings of five women in London’s East End, remains one of the most enduring mysteries in criminal history. In late 2024 and early 2025, a resurgence of media attention declared the case "solved" following the publication of Russell Edwards' Naming Jack the Ripper: The Definitive Reveal. This assertion rests on forensic evidence derived from a silk shawl allegedly recovered from the scene of Catherine Eddowes' murder, which purportedly links the crimes to Aaron Kosminski, a contemporary Polish-Jewish suspect. This article provides a comprehensive forensic and historical analysis of these claims. By synthesizing the 2019 peer-reviewed data by Dr. Jari Louhelainen and Dr. David Miller with the recent 2024 announcements, this report evaluates the validity of the mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) "match," the historical plausibility of the artifact's provenance, and the scientific limitations of the facial reconstruction technology employed. The analysis suggests that while the evidence offers a probabilistic inclusion of Kosminski, the claims of a "100% match" and a definitive resolution are undermined by contamination risks, statistical commonalities in the genetic profile, and breaks in the chain of custody.



Introduction: The "Definitive Reveal"


In the history of "Ripperology"—the study of the Whitechapel murders attributed to Jack the Ripper—few developments have generated as much polarized discourse as the investigations led by author and amateur researcher Russell Edwards. In October 2024, Edwards released an updated volume of his research, Naming Jack the Ripper: The Definitive Reveal, claiming to have finally unmasked the killer after 136 years.1 The central thesis of Edwards' work identifies the perpetrator as Aaron Kosminski, a 23-year-old Polish barber and immigrant who was known to police at the time of the murders.3

The announcement was accompanied by significant media fanfare, featuring a "cutting-edge" CGI facial reconstruction of Kosminski and calls from the descendants of both the victim and the suspect for a new coroner's inquest to officially close the case.1 Unlike previous theories based solely on circumstantial historical records, Edwards’ claim is predicated on hard science: molecular biology. Working with Dr. Jari Louhelainen, a senior lecturer in molecular biology at Liverpool John Moores University, and Dr. David Miller from the University of Leeds, Edwards posits that biological traces found on a shawl—allegedly left at the scene of the fourth murder—provide irrefutable proof of Kosminski's guilt.5

However, the transition from a commercial book release to accepted historical fact is fraught with scientific and evidentiary challenges. This article seeks to dissect the components of this "definitive reveal," separating the verified scientific data from the speculative narrative.



The Historical Suspect: Aaron Kosminski


To evaluate the forensic claims, one must first establish the historical viability of Aaron Kosminski as a suspect. Born Aron Mordke Kozmiński in Kłodawa, Poland, in 1865, he emigrated to England in the early 1880s, settling in the densely populated and impoverished district of Whitechapel.6


The Police Profile


Kosminski was not a retrospective discovery; he was an active person of interest during the original investigation. His name appears in the Macnaghten Memoranda, a confidential 1894 report by Sir Melville Macnaghten, Assistant Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police. Macnaghten listed Kosminski as one of three key suspects, describing him as a Polish Jew who had "become insane owing to many years indulgence in solitary vices" and possessed "a great hatred of women, specially of the prostitute class, & had strong homicidal tendencies".7

Further implicating Kosminski is the Swanson Marginalia—handwritten notes by Chief Inspector Donald Swanson found in a copy of Robert Anderson's memoirs. Swanson alleged that Kosminski was identified by a witness at a "Seaside Home" (a police convalescent home) but was never charged because the witness, also Jewish, refused to testify against a fellow Jew.9


Mental Health and Incarceration


The historical record confirms that Kosminski suffered from severe mental illness, likely paranoid schizophrenia. He experienced auditory hallucinations, a fear of being eaten by others, and a refusal to wash.3 In 1891, three years after the murders ceased, he was committed to Colney Hatch Lunatic Asylum and later transferred to Leavesden Asylum, where he died in 1919.3 While his profile fits the disorganized, psychotic typology often associated with the Ripper, no physical evidence linked him to the crimes in 1888. It is this void that Edwards claims to have filled.



The Artifact: A Shawl in the Dark


The lynchpin of the entire investigation is a piece of physical evidence: a large, silk shawl patterned with Michaelmas daisies, measuring approximately eight feet in length.10


The Provenance Narrative


According to Edwards, the shawl was recovered from Mitre Square in the City of London on the night of September 30, 1888, where the body of Catherine Eddowes was found. The story, passed down through oral family history, alleges that Acting Sergeant Amos Simpson of the Metropolitan Police was at the scene and took the shawl—stained with blood—as a gift for his wife. His wife, understandably repulsed, stored it away without washing it. It remained in the Simpson family for over a century until it was auctioned by descendant David Melville-Hayes and purchased by Edwards in 2007.11


Historical Contradictions


Historians have raised substantial objections to this chain of custody, which Edwards’ scientific team must overcome:

  1. Jurisdictional Inconsistency: Mitre Square was under the jurisdiction of the City of London Police, not the Metropolitan Police. Amos Simpson was a Metropolitan officer stationed in N Division (Islington), miles away from the crime scene. There is no official record of his presence at Mitre Square, nor would he have had the authority to remove evidence from a City Police scene.11

  2. Inventory Discrepancies: The City Police were meticulous in recording the personal effects of the victims. The inventory for Catherine Eddowes lists a black straw bonnet, a cloth jacket, and a green skirt, but makes no mention of a large, expensive silk shawl.10

  3. Socio-Economic Incongruity: Eddowes was in dire poverty, having pawned her partner's boots for gin money shortly before her death. It is highly improbable she would possess a luxury item like a silk shawl. Edwards argues the shawl belonged to the killer, not the victim—a daring hypothesis that suggests the Ripper carried a shawl to the murder scene, perhaps to conceal his weapon or himself.13



The Forensic Investigation: Method and Result


Despite the provenance issues, Edwards proceeded with forensic testing, operating on the assumption that the shawl was genuine. The scientific analysis was spearheaded by Dr. Jari Louhelainen and Dr. David Miller, culminating in a paper published in the Journal of Forensic Sciences in 2019 and expanded upon in the 2024 book.5


Methodology: The "Vacuuming" Technique


To extract genetic material from the fragile, 130-year-old fabric without destroying it, Louhelainen utilized a novel method described as "vacuuming." This involved injecting a sterile buffer solution into the fabric weave to dissolve cellular material and then suctioning it back out.15 This technique aimed to harvest DNA trapped deep within the fibers, theoretically protected from surface cleaning or wear.

The team focused on mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA). Unlike nuclear DNA, which degrades rapidly and is unique to an individual, mtDNA is more robust and is inherited maternally. It is not unique to a person but to a maternal lineage.14


The Genetic Matches


The analysis yielded two distinct biological profiles:

  1. The Victim Match: Traces of blood on the shawl were tested against mtDNA provided by Karen Miller, a direct matrilineal descendant of Catherine Eddowes. Louhelainen reported a match, specifically citing a mutation in the hypervariable regions. This finding is used to validate the shawl’s presence at the crime scene.4

  2. The Suspect Match: Fluorescent staining revealed traces consistent with seminal fluid. Epithelial cells recovered from these stains were amplified using Whole Genome Amplification (WGA). The extracted mtDNA was compared to a sample from an anonymous living descendant of Aaron Kosminski’s sister. The 2024 report reiterates the 2014 claim of a "100% match" between the seminal traces and the Kosminski lineage.1



The 2024/2025 Developments: Facial Reconstruction and Legal Demands


The release of Naming Jack the Ripper: The Definitive Reveal in late 2024 introduced new elements to the narrative designed to finalize the case in the public imagination.


The CGI Face of the Ripper


Russell Edwards unveiled a black-and-white CGI image of Aaron Kosminski, described as a "cutting-edge facial reconstruction".1 While compelling, it is crucial to note that mtDNA does not carry the genetic information required for phenotypic prediction (such as eye color, hair texture, or facial structure). Nuclear DNA is required for such analysis (e.g., using Parabon NanoLabs technology). Consequently, this "reconstruction" is likely a composite based on historical descriptions and the general phenotypic traits of the suspect's demographic, rather than a direct genetic output.


The Call for a New Inquest


Emboldened by the "definitive" nature of the DNA findings, the descendants of both Eddowes (Karen Miller) and Kosminski have publicly called for the reopening of the coroner's inquest.4 Their argument is that the DNA evidence provides the "form of justice" denied to the victims in 1888. Miller stated, "The name Jack the Ripper has become sensationalized... People have forgotten about the victims... Now we need this inquest to legally name the killer".4



Critical Analysis: The Limits of the "Definitive Reveal"


While the narrative of a solved cold case is attractive, the scientific reality is far more nuanced. The Edwards/Louhelainen findings have faced significant scrutiny from the genetic and forensic communities.


The Statistical Fallacy and "Nomenclature Error"


The most significant scientific critique centers on the statistical weight of the DNA match. In 2014, when the findings were first previewed, geneticists identified an "error of nomenclature" in Louhelainen's analysis regarding a specific genetic marker, 314.1C.16 The team allegedly misidentified this mutation as a rare genetic anomaly, whereas it is a relatively common variation in the European population.

If the genetic profile found on the shawl is shared by thousands of people, the "match" does not uniquely identify Kosminski; it merely fails to exclude him. As geneticist Turi King noted, the evidence "wouldn't be conclusive in a modern court" because mtDNA cannot differentiate between Aaron Kosminski, his brothers, his maternal cousins, or any unrelated individual sharing the same maternal haplogroup.17


The Contamination "Time Bomb"


The reliability of the DNA is heavily compromised by the shawl's history. For over a century, the item was handled without gloves by the Simpson family, their descendants, potentially the Crime Museum staff, and Edwards himself.12 The "vacuuming" technique, while non-destructive, is indiscriminate; it collects all DNA present in the weave. Distinguishing between "ancient" DNA deposited in 1888 and "modern" contamination from 1950 or 2010 is chemically difficult, if not impossible, with the methods described. The presence of Kosminski's lineage's DNA could theoretically be a result of cross-contamination if the descendant or a relative ever came into contact with the shawl or the testing environment.5


The "CSI Effect" on History


The presentation of this case exemplifies the "CSI Effect," where complex, probabilistic scientific results are presented to the public as binary "matches." The phrasing "100% match" is scientifically misleading in this context; it implies identity, whereas in forensic science, it implies consistency. The leap from "consistent with" to "identified as" is a rhetorical one, not a scientific one.



Conclusion


The 2024/2025 investigation into the Jack the Ripper murders, spearheaded by Russell Edwards, represents a fascinating intersection of Victorian history and modern molecular biology. The identification of Aaron Kosminski is supported by contemporary police suspicions, a compatible psychological profile, and now, a disputed forensic link.

However, to accept this as the "definitive reveal" requires a suspension of skepticism regarding several critical flaws: the unproven and historically contradictory provenance of the shawl, the high probability of contamination over 136 years, and the lack of discriminatory power inherent in mitochondrial DNA. The evidence suggests that Aaron Kosminski is a plausible candidate—perhaps even a probable one—but the "100% certainty" claimed by the authors remains scientifically unattainable. The fog of Whitechapel has thinned, but the face of the Ripper remains, for now, obscured by the limitations of retrospective forensics.


Summary of Evidence and Rebuttal


Claim

Edwards/Louhelainen Evidence

Scientific/Historical Critique

Suspect ID

Aaron Kosminski

Fits Macnaghten's 1894 suspect profile; plausible candidate.

The Artifact

"Eddowes Shawl" from Mitre Square

No police inventory record; Metropolitan officer unlikely at City scene.

Forensics

mtDNA match to Kosminski descendant

mtDNA is not unique; "314.1C" marker may be common; contamination risk is high.

Probability

"100% Match"

Scientifically means "failure to exclude"; implies false certainty.

Visuals

CGI Facial Reconstruction

Based on artistic interpretation, not genomic phenotyping (nuclear DNA required).

Works cited

  1. Jack the Ripper 'finally unmasked after 136 years' as DNA breakthrough identifies serial killer - Daily Star, accessed November 30, 2025, https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/jack-ripper-finally-unmasked-after-33837381

  2. Naming Jack the Ripper: The Definitive Reveal | Buffalo Street Books, accessed November 30, 2025, https://buffalostreetbooks.com/book/9781493090075

  3. Jack the Ripper unmasked with new DNA breakthrough as killer identified - Daily Star, accessed November 30, 2025, https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/jack-ripper-unmasked-new-dna-36318868

  4. Jack the Ripper victim's relative demands new inquest after possible DNA breakthrough: "A form of justice" - CBS News, accessed November 30, 2025, https://www.cbsnews.com/news/jack-the-ripper-victim-relative-new-inquest-dna-evidence/

  5. DNA Analysis Reveals Identity of Jack the Ripper | Forensic DNA - Sequencing.com, accessed November 30, 2025, https://sequencing.com/blog/post/dna-analysis-forensics-identity-jack-ripper

  6. Aaron Kosminski - Wikipedia, accessed November 30, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aaron_Kosminski

  7. The Macnaghten Memoranda - Casebook: Jack the Ripper, accessed November 30, 2025, https://www.casebook.org/official_documents/memo.html

  8. Sir Melville Leslie Macnaghten. - Jack the Ripper, accessed November 30, 2025, https://www.jack-the-ripper.org/macnaghten.htm

  9. DNA evidence from an old shawl which was supposedly found next to Catherine Eddowes was tested a while back for DNA and apparently Jack the Ripper was a man named Aaron Kosminski. Is there any truth to this? - Reddit, accessed November 30, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueCrimeDiscussion/comments/16bj8py/dna_evidence_from_an_old_shawl_which_was/

  10. Naming Jack The Ripper! Catherine Eddowes' Shawl – The Turin Shroud, accessed November 30, 2025, https://thejacktherippertour.com/blog/naming-jack-the-ripper-cathrine-eddowes/

  11. DNA analysis almost certainly hasn't just solved the mystery of Jack the Ripper - The Skeptic, accessed November 30, 2025, https://www.skeptic.org.uk/2025/03/dna-analysis-almost-certainly-hasnt-just-solved-the-mystery-of-jack-the-ripper/

  12. Could DNA evidence suggest Aaron Kosminski was Jack the Ripper?, accessed November 30, 2025, http://www.jackripper.co.uk/could-Aaron-Kosminski-be-guilty-by-DNA-evidence.php

  13. Research may have identified Jack the Ripper | University of Leeds, accessed November 30, 2025, https://www.leeds.ac.uk/news-science/news/article/3580/research-may-have-identified-jack-the-ripper

  14. Forensic Investigation of a Shawl Linked to the "Jack the Ripper" Murders - PubMed, accessed November 30, 2025, https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30859587/

  15. Shawl that nailed Polish Lunatic Aaron Kosminski and the Forensic expert that made the critical match - Jack the Ripper Tour London, accessed November 30, 2025, https://www.thejacktherippertour.co.uk/shawl-that-nailed-polish-lunatic-aaron-kosminski-and-the-forensic-expert-that-made-the-critical-match/

  16. Misinformation has been spreading online that Jack the Ripper's name is Aaron Kosminski… | by Moors Murders: A True Crime Deep Dive | Medium, accessed November 30, 2025, https://medium.com/@moorsmurdersinfo/misinformation-has-been-spreading-online-that-jack-the-rippers-name-is-aaron-kosminski-f512ab4a9032

  17. 'Jack the Ripper' Meets DNA Analysis | Criminal Legal News, accessed November 30, 2025, https://www.criminallegalnews.org/news/2025/mar/15/jack-ripper-meets-dna-analysis/

  18. Jack the Ripper, accessed November 30, 2025, https://docs.gato.txst.edu/744419/Jack%20the%20Ripper_Accessible.pdf

Comments

bottom of page