Casebook: Jack the Ripper - Main
   

Introduction
Victims
Suspects
Witnesses
Ripper Letters
Police Officials
Official Documents
Press Reports
Victorian London
Message Boards
Ripper Media
Authors
Dissertations
Timelines
Games & Diversions
Photo Archive
Ripper Wiki
Casebook Examiner
Ripper Podcast
About the Casebook

Most Recent Posts:
Motive, Method and Madness: Same motive = same killer - by Fisherman 1 minute ago.
Motive, Method and Madness: Same motive = same killer - by Fisherman 32 minutes ago.
Motive, Method and Madness: Same motive = same killer - by Fisherman 34 minutes ago.
General Letters or Communications: Two authentic comms from the Ripper? - by Darryl Kenyon 39 minutes ago.
General Letters or Communications: Two authentic comms from the Ripper? - by cnr 2 hours ago.
General Letters or Communications: Two authentic comms from the Ripper? - by Damaso Marte 2 hours ago.

Most Popular Threads:
Motive, Method and Madness: Same motive = same killer - (24 posts)
General Letters or Communications: Two authentic comms from the Ripper? - (15 posts)
Maybrick, James: One Incontrovertible, Unequivocal, Undeniable Fact Which Refutes the Diary - (12 posts)
A6 Murders: A6 Rebooted - (2 posts)
Conferences and Meetings: American Jack the Ripper - True Crime Conference, Baltimore, April 7-8, 2018 - (2 posts)
General Police Discussion: Death From The Frog’s March - (1 posts)

Wiki Updates:
Robert Sagar
Edit: Chris
May 9, 2015, 12:32 am
Online newspaper archives
Edit: Chris
Nov 26, 2014, 10:25 am
Joseph Lawende
Edit: Chris
Mar 9, 2014, 10:12 am
Miscellaneous research resources
Edit: Chris
Feb 13, 2014, 9:28 am
Charles Cross
Edit: John Bennett
Sep 4, 2013, 8:20 pm

Most Recent Blogs:
Mike Covell: A DECADE IN THE MAKING.
February 19, 2016, 11:12 am.
Chris George: RipperCon in Baltimore, April 8-10, 2016
February 10, 2016, 2:55 pm.
Mike Covell: Hull Prison Visit
October 10, 2015, 8:04 am.
Mike Covell: NEW ADVENTURES IN RESEARCH
August 9, 2015, 3:10 am.
Mike Covell: UPDDATES FOR THE PAST 11 MONTHS
November 14, 2014, 10:02 am.
Mike Covell: Mike’s Book Releases
March 17, 2014, 3:18 am.

Go Back   Casebook Forums > Ripper Discussions > Suspects > Kosminski, Aaron

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #181  
Old 03-17-2018, 11:48 AM
c.d. c.d. is offline
Assistant Commissioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 3,508
Default

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.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #182  
Old 03-17-2018, 04:15 PM
Dr. John Watson Dr. John Watson is offline
Detective
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 302
Default Didn't see Kosminski kill anybody!

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
__________________
"We reach. We grasp. And what is left at the end? A shadow."
Sherlock Holmes, The Retired Colourman
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #183  
Old 03-18-2018, 06:30 AM
c.d. c.d. is offline
Assistant Commissioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 3,508
Default

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.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #184  
Old 03-18-2018, 06:41 AM
c.d. c.d. is offline
Assistant Commissioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 3,508
Default

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.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #185  
Old 03-18-2018, 06:43 AM
Darryl Kenyon Darryl Kenyon is offline
Detective
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 124
Default

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.

Last edited by Darryl Kenyon : 03-18-2018 at 06:52 AM.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #186  
Old 03-18-2018, 07:08 AM
Abby Normal Abby Normal is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 5,899
Default

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.
__________________
"Is all that we see or seem
but a dream within a dream?"

-Edgar Allan Poe


"...the man and the peaked cap he is said to have worn
quite tallies with the descriptions I got of him."

-Frederick G. Abberline
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #187  
Old 03-18-2018, 07:21 AM
Wickerman Wickerman is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 9,027
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by c.d. View Post
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.
__________________
Regards, Jon S.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #188  
Old 03-18-2018, 07:31 AM
c.d. c.d. is offline
Assistant Commissioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 3,508
Default

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.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #189  
Old 03-18-2018, 07:37 AM
Joshua Rogan Joshua Rogan is offline
Chief Inspector
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 1,593
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Abby Normal View Post
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?
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #190  
Old 03-18-2018, 08:11 AM
Trevor Marriott Trevor Marriott is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 4,841
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Abby Normal View Post
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
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 10:40 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.