My theory on Kosminski

[c.d.]

Hello Dr. John,

I was simply pointing out that a strong argument for Schwartz being the witness (which you make) does not make it an established fact. That's it.

I can certainly see how a Jewish person would feel a sense of loyalty to a fellow Jew but would that loyalty extend to a fellow Jew who killed women and cut them up? That does not make sense to me.

c.d.

[Dr. John Watson]

c.d.

I agree, it wouldn't make sense, but Swanson clarified that the witness's refusal wasn't because the suspect was a fellow Jew, but because his testimony would cause the suspect to be hanged and he didn't want that on his conscience. Why would identifying Kosminski as the man he saw commit simple assault and battery lead to his hanging? It shouldn't, which makes it obvious that Schwartz knew police had Kosminski tagged as the Ripper and would use his testimony to hang Kosminski for killing Stride and, by implication, for the other Ripper murders. That wouldn't have bothered police at all, but I can well understand why it would have weighed heavily on Mr. Schwartz's conscience since he didn't see Kosminski kill anybody!

Dr. John

[c.d.]

Hello Dr. John,

Not trying to be a jerk here but you keep referring to the unidentified witness as being Schwartz when we do not know that for a fact.

In 1910, Sir Robert Anderson published his memoirs, entitled "The Lighter Side of My Official Life," first as a series of articles in Blackwood's Edinburgh Magazine, and soon after in a book of its own. Both versions were more or less verbatim, though slight differences in word-usage and connotation pop up from time to time.

From Blackwoods:

I will only add that when the individual whom we suspected was caged in an asylum, the only person who had ever had a good view of the murderer at once identified him; but when he learned that the suspect was a fellow-Jew he declined to swear to him.

Are you citing some clarification that Anderson made at a later point?

c.d.

[c.d.]

Hello again, Dr. John,

Stewart Evans, with whom I am sure you are familiar and who is someone for whom I have the most respect, thinks the witness was Lawende.

Stewart does talk about your point that the witness realized the impact of his identification and refused to provide a positive identification but that it likely had to do with him not being sure as opposed to giving evidence against a fellow Jew.

c.d.

[Darryl Kenyon]

Police considered Schwartz an important witness, and there is some indication Schwartz actually testified at Stride's inquest, although no record of this has been found.
What indication is there that Schwartz appeared at Elizabeth Stride's inquest ? Sorry if i have missed something but i thought there was just conjecture that he might have done.

[Abby Normal]

there is no evidence Schwartz appeared at the inquest. the main speculation was why not? I think stewart evans has evidence of why not, but not sure if its been publically disclosed. IMHO I think it may have to do with Schwartz not being to speak English, or maybe simply didn't show up.

I think the witness at the koz ID was probably lawende. Sugden makes a good case for it in his book.

Lawende was at the inquest, and was used later possibly twice, with sadler and possibly granger. Police valued him a credible and dependable witness so it was probably him.

any other discrepencies can probably be chalked up to Andersons wishful thinking and or faulty memory.

[Wickerman]

Originally Posted by c.d.

Hello again, Dr. John,

Stewart Evans, with whom I am sure you are familiar and who is someone for whom I have the most respect, thinks the witness was Lawende.

Stewart does talk about your point that the witness realized the impact of his identification and refused to provide a positive identification but that it likely had to do with him not being sure as opposed to giving evidence against a fellow Jew.

c.d.

The last time the question of who was Anderson's Witness was pursued in any depth, if I recall correctly, as you say Stewart Evans proposed Lawende, but Paul Begg proposed Schwartz.
Both proposals have their respective strength's & weaknesses. I dont' think the question has moved towards any resolution since their exchanges on these boards.

[c.d.]

Hello Jon,

I personally think it is a moot point in that the witness (be it Schwartz or Lawende) could simply not make a positive identification and that the whole fellow Jew thing was greatly exaggerated by Anderson.

c.d.

[Joshua Rogan]

Originally Posted by Abby Normal

there is no evidence Schwartz appeared at the inquest....
...any other discrepencies can probably be chalked up to Andersons wishful thinking and or faulty memory.

There is actually one piece of evidence that I can think of, but it is usually put down to Anderson's faulty memory. In an exchange between the police and Home Office about the Lipski cry, he writes;

"I have to state that the opinion arrived at in this Dept. upon the evidence of Schwartz at the inquest in Eliz. Stride's case..."

Perhaps this is what Dr John is referring to?

[Trevor Marriott]

Originally Posted by Abby Normal

there is no evidence Schwartz appeared at the inquest. the main speculation was why not? I think stewart evans has evidence of why not, but not sure if its been publically disclosed. IMHO I think it may have to do with Schwartz not being to speak English, or maybe simply didn't show up.

I think the witness at the koz ID was probably lawende. Sugden makes a good case for it in his book.

Lawende was at the inquest, and was used later possibly twice, with sadler and possibly granger. Police valued him a credible and dependable witness so it was probably him.

any other discrepancies can probably be chalked up to Andersons wishful thinking and or faulty memory.

This whole seaside ID has more holes in it than a cullender and I dont think it ever took place as described, if at all.

Playing devils advocate here, If any ID parade was going to take place I would have expected all witnesses that had a possible sighting of the killer with any of the victims to have participated, but only one is mentioned.

If it were Lawende you have to remember he would have been a City witness and I would have expected there to have been some reference by someone recorded somewhere from the City Police about such an important ID issue as it is there is absolutely nothing, which goes to corroborate it didnt happen in the way suggested by Anderson and Swanson.

The parade it seems was initiated by the Met and I have to ask why would they have done all the organizing for a City witness, and not bother to take along Schwartz, there own witness, who again I dont believe ever saw the killer.

www.trevormarriott.co.uk