(September 12, 2014 at 1:16 pm)vorlon13 Wrote: Um, at the risk of being indelicate;
the physical location of the blood and seminal stains and the degree of commingling and precedence of deposition might be discernable to modern forensic analysis. (and I don't think that level of scrutiny has been attempted yet)
[snip]
A seminal discharge onto a dried blood stain won't put you in prison, but might get you labeled a 'deve'.
Except that the article doesn't discuss whether the seminal fluid was found to be deposited after the blood, before the blood, or comingled with the blood. All it says is that the blood was matched to a blood descendant of Catherine Eddowes', and that seminal fluid was also found, and matched to Kosminski.
If further analyses reveal that the seminal fluid was deposited after the blood stain, or is indeed comingled with the blood, I agree that that would be interesting, but that's not the case as presented here. What is presented in this article is only sufficient to conclude that Kosminski was likely a customer of Eddowes shortly before her murder, NOT that he was the Ripper.
Teenaged X-Files obsession + Bermuda Triangle episode + Self-led school research project = Atheist.
