The Seaside Home: Could Schwartz or Lawende Have Put the Ripper's Neck in a Noose?

[Elamarna]

As per an 1895 article by Sir Robert Anderson, who was the Assistant Commissioner CID at Scotland Yard at the time of the murders, it becomes apparent that the killer was in fact identified by a witness. The witness, however, refused to come forward in an official capacity, leading Anderson to write “the only person who had ever had a good view of the murderer unhesitatingly identified the suspect the instant he was confronted with him; but he refused to give evidence against him."

Later, in his 1910 book ‘The Lighter Side of My Official Life’, Anderson published a memoir hand-written by ex-Superintendent Donald S. Swanson, in which he named Aaron Kosminski as the suspect who matched the description of a Polish Jew. The passage reads: “The suspect had , at the Seaside Home where he had been sent by us with difficulty in order to subject him to identification, and he knew he was identified....

Nathan Kaminsky is believed to have been David cohen’s real name....

The witness, who is likely to have been Joseph Lawende who was named during the investigation of the murder of Catherine Eddowes, is believed to have correctly identified Kaminsky – not Kosminski – adding more weight to the theory that the name was simply mixed up when Swanson named the suspect in his book.


https://thejacktherippertour.com/casebook/suspects/david-cohen/

The site you quote is hardly noted for its reliability, nor is the page you cite apparently available.

UPDATE, a manual search found the quote you gave, that the direct link does not work, may give one cause for concern as to how well maintained the site is.

Not withstanding that, this simply illustrates my point about many sites being unreliable.

I would always prefer to trust research by those who are experts in the area concerned, in this case Anderson's Suspect, than a general site.

I suggest you use more reliable sites, such as here or JTR Forums.
I could point you at the recent podcast by Richard Jones and myself on this very subject, on his website, https://www.jack-the-ripper.org/

You could of course read Martin Fido's article in Ripperologist #129- Rethinking Cohen and Kosminski.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

The fact that many websites quote the false information that Kaminsky was really Cohen simply demonstrates how unreliable many sites are.

Such repeating of misleading and incorrect information is one of the big issues with the study of this subject, along with selective quoting, presenting opinion as fact, talking in absolutes and pure invention.

We see it all the time, even on the better websites.

As per an 1895 article by Sir Robert Anderson, who was the Assistant Commissioner CID at Scotland Yard at the time of the murders, it becomes apparent that the killer was in fact identified by a witness. The witness, however, refused to come forward in an official capacity, leading Anderson to write “the only person who had ever had a good view of the murderer unhesitatingly identified the suspect the instant he was confronted with him; but he refused to give evidence against him."

Later, in his 1910 book ‘The Lighter Side of My Official Life’, Anderson published a memoir hand-written by ex-Superintendent Donald S. Swanson, in which he named Aaron Kosminski as the suspect who matched the description of a Polish Jew. The passage reads: “The suspect had , at the Seaside Home where he had been sent by us with difficulty in order to subject him to identification, and he knew he was identified....

Nathan Kaminsky is believed to have been David cohen’s real name....

The witness, who is likely to have been Joseph Lawende who was named during the investigation of the murder of Catherine Eddowes, is believed to have correctly identified Kaminsky – not Kosminski – adding more weight to the theory that the name was simply mixed up when Swanson named the suspect in his book.


https://thejacktherippertour.com/casebook/suspects/david-cohen/

[Elamarna]

It is a fact that Cohen and Kaminsky are misleadingly used interchangeably on most websites that mention one of them.

As I indicated, it makes no difference to the strength of my argument whether Cohen's real name was Kaminsky or whether they were two different people, except to the extent that if Cohen was not Kaminsky then Swanson could not have been confusing the names Kaminsky and Kosminski.

Looking forward to seeing your 'full rebuttal'.

The fact that many websites quote the false information that Kaminsky was really Cohen simply demonstrates how unreliable many sites are.

Such repeating of misleading and incorrect information is one of the big issues with the study of this subject, along with selective quoting, presenting opinion as fact, talking in absolutes and pure invention.

We see it all the time, even on the better websites.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

It's a mistake many make.
I am preparing a full rebuttal of the claims and arguments you have made the last few weeks.
However, such takes time if it's to be correct.

It is a fact that Cohen and Kaminsky are misleadingly used interchangeably on most websites that mention one of them.

As I indicated, it makes no difference to the strength of my argument whether Cohen's real name was Kaminsky or whether they were two different people, except to the extent that if Cohen was not Kaminsky then Swanson could not have been confusing the names Kaminsky and Kosminski.

Looking forward to seeing your 'full rebuttal'.

[Elamarna]

Why not Hyams, Cohen or Levy ...?

(Darryl Kenyon, # 936)


As for Cohen, if you mean Nathan Kaminsky, he may well be part of the composite-Kosminski of Swanson's imagination.

(PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1 #937)


In deference to your correction, I have rewritten my # 943 as follows:


The suspect is Kosminski by name, but many details about him given by Anderson or Swanson match Cohen or Piser rather than Kosminski.

It was Piser, not Kosminski, who was unhesitatingly identified.

It was Piser, not Kosminski, who returned to his brother's house while still a suspect.

It was Cohen, not Kosminski, who was incarcerated weeks after the last murder.

It was Cohen, not Kosminski, who had to be placed under restraint in Colney Hatch.

It was Cohen, not Kosminski, who died within months of being incarcerated.

Swanson cannot be describing one historical person.

It's a mistake many make.
I am preparing a full rebuttal of the claims and arguments you have made the last few weeks.
However, such takes time if it's to be correct.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

Presenting the old theory that Kaminsky was really Cohen as established fact.

No evidence exists what so ever to support that idea.
Fido dropped the idea himself, yet it still gets wheeled out.

Cohen could well be "Kosminski", but he was not Kaminsky.

Why not Hyams, Cohen or Levy ...?

(Darryl Kenyon, # 936)


As for Cohen, if you mean Nathan Kaminsky, he may well be part of the composite-Kosminski of Swanson's imagination.

(PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1 #937)


In deference to your correction, I have rewritten my # 943 as follows:


The suspect is Kosminski by name, but many details about him given by Anderson or Swanson match Cohen or Piser rather than Kosminski.

It was Piser, not Kosminski, who was unhesitatingly identified.

It was Piser, not Kosminski, who returned to his brother's house while still a suspect.

It was Cohen, not Kosminski, who was incarcerated weeks after the last murder.

It was Cohen, not Kosminski, who had to be placed under restraint in Colney Hatch.

It was Cohen, not Kosminski, who died within months of being incarcerated.

Swanson cannot be describing one historical person.

[Elamarna]

The suspect is Kosminski by name, but many details about him given by Anderson or Swanson match Kaminsky or Piser rather than Kosminski.

It was Piser, not Kosminski, who was unhesitatingly identified.

It was Piser, not Kosminski, who returned to his brother's house while still a suspect.

It was Kaminsky, not Kosminski, who was incarcerated weeks after the last murder.

It was Kaminsky, not Kosminski, who had to be placed under restraint in Colney Hatch.

It was Kaminsky, not Kosminski, who died within months of being incarcerated.

Swanson cannot be describing one historical person.

Presenting the old theory that Kaminsky was really Cohen as established fact.

No evidence exists what so ever to support that idea.
Fido dropped the idea himself, yet it still gets wheeled out.

Cohen could well be "Kosminski", but he was not Kaminsky.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

That only strengthens my case that Swanson's Kosminski is not one person. So which people were he then ? And why did Swanson say Kosminski was the suspect , instead of Tom, Dick and Harry ?

The suspect is Kosminski by name, but many details about him given by Anderson or Swanson match Kaminsky or Piser rather than Kosminski.

It was Piser, not Kosminski, who was unhesitatingly identified.

It was Piser, not Kosminski, who returned to his brother's house while still a suspect.

It was Kaminsky, not Kosminski, who was incarcerated weeks after the last murder.

It was Kaminsky, not Kosminski, who had to be placed under restraint in Colney Hatch.

It was Kaminsky, not Kosminski, who died within months of being incarcerated.

Swanson cannot be describing one historical person.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

Please see my replies below.

Again Kosminski was never arrested and charged because the witness refused to swear to him .

I suggest that is hardly possible because not only would Kosminski have had to be arrested in order to get him to the Seaside Home, but the witness could not have learned that Kosminski was Jewish and announced his about-turn so quickly that there would not have been enough time to arrest (in the event he had not yet been arrested) and charge the suspect.


And it is not obvious at all that Lawende,s suspect was a gentile.

It is.

It was quite obvious that fair-moustached men with the appearance of sailors were almost certainly Gentiles.

You have only to read what people recorded at the time to see that Jews and Gentiles were distinguishable.


If it was he wouldn't have first thought the person he saw was Kosminski who according to you his family had Jewish appearances

There is no evidence that Lawende thought Aaron Kosminski was the fair-moustached man with the appearance of a sailor whom he saw in Duke Street.

The only photographic evidence we have suggests that Aaron Kosminski was of recognisably Jewish appearance.

[Sunny Delight]

It is interesting that MM writes that Kosminski strongly resembled the man seen by a City PC near Mitre Square. Anderson states that a witness unhesitatingly identified Kosminski as the Whitechapel Murderer. Swanson writes that suspect knew he had been identified. This is obviously all connected. I think though Sugden summed it up when he said that Anderson in particular contented himself with the knowledge that no matter what was said he had the Ripper bang to rights. This was wishful thinking.

I think from what we know about Kosminski he is not a very strong suspect.

[Darryl Kenyon]

Only one witness could have seen the Whitechapel Murderer and that was Joseph Lawende.

It is obvious that the suspect described by him as having a fair moustache and the appearance of a sailor was a Gentile.

There is no evidence that a Jewish witness ever saw a Jewish suspect, just as there has never been any evidence to support Anderson's allegation that Kosminski's relatives facilitated his alleged commission of the murders.

If it is true that the police asked Lawende to identify Sadler and Grainger, both of whom were Gentiles and one of whom was a sailor, then it is hardly possible that Lawende had already identified a Polish Jew as the murderer.

Neither Anderson nor Swanson mentions an ID parade and the only explanation is that the identification was supposed by Anderson to have taken place in an asylum, in which case it cannot be earlier than February 1891.

One is bound to ask what possible evidence against Kosminski could have come to light during the two and a half or more years since Lawende supposedly saw him in Duke Street that would have suggested to the police that Lawende should try to identify him - other than his arraignment for walking a dog in public without a muzzle.

Swanson's account of the identification is totally unbelievable.

The idea that anyone would have authorised the transportation of a London-based witness and London-based suspect to a convalescent home on the coast, thereby putting the welfare of convalescents at risk, and that the most infamous murderer in England would have consented to such a transfer without even having been arrested, is ludicrous.

If the identification had taken place as claimed, then the suspect would have been arrested.

The account given by Anderson/Swanson - that the witness learned that the suspect was Jewish following his identification of him, refused to testify against him, and that the suspect was therefore sent home - is not credible.

In reality, by the time the witness could have changed his mind, the suspect would have been arrested and charged.

Neither Anderson nor Swanson ever stated that he was arrested, let alone charged.

The identification of Kosminski / the Polish Jew never happened.

Again Kosminski was never arrested and charged because the witness refused to swear to him . And it is not obvious at all that Lawende,s suspect was a gentile. If it was he wouldn't have first thought the person he saw was Kosminski who according to you his family had Jewish appearances

[Darryl Kenyon]

Please see my replies below.

That only strengthens my case that Swanson's Kosminski is not one person. So which people were he then ? And why did Swanson say Kosminski was the suspect , instead of Tom, Dick and Harry ?

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

You said the ID parade was mythical so according to you there was no witness nor suspect . Do you still believe that ?

Only one witness could have seen the Whitechapel Murderer and that was Joseph Lawende.

It is obvious that the suspect described by him as having a fair moustache and the appearance of a sailor was a Gentile.

There is no evidence that a Jewish witness ever saw a Jewish suspect, just as there has never been any evidence to support Anderson's allegation that Kosminski's relatives facilitated his alleged commission of the murders.

If it is true that the police asked Lawende to identify Sadler and Grainger, both of whom were Gentiles and one of whom was a sailor, then it is hardly possible that Lawende had already identified a Polish Jew as the murderer.

Neither Anderson nor Swanson mentions an ID parade and the only explanation is that the identification was supposed by Anderson to have taken place in an asylum, in which case it cannot be earlier than February 1891.

One is bound to ask what possible evidence against Kosminski could have come to light during the two and a half or more years since Lawende supposedly saw him in Duke Street that would have suggested to the police that Lawende should try to identify him - other than his arraignment for walking a dog in public without a muzzle.

Swanson's account of the identification is totally unbelievable.

The idea that anyone would have authorised the transportation of a London-based witness and London-based suspect to a convalescent home on the coast, thereby putting the welfare of convalescents at risk, and that the most infamous murderer in England would have consented to such a transfer without even having been arrested, is ludicrous.

If the identification had taken place as claimed, then the suspect would have been arrested.

The account given by Anderson/Swanson - that the witness learned that the suspect was Jewish following his identification of him, refused to testify against him, and that the suspect was therefore sent home - is not credible.

In reality, by the time the witness could have changed his mind, the suspect would have been arrested and charged.

Neither Anderson nor Swanson ever stated that he was arrested, let alone charged.

The identification of Kosminski / the Polish Jew never happened.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

Please see my replies below.

So how come MM names him as a strong suspect.


He does not!

He named him a strong 'suspect' (his inverted commas).

Moreover, he removed his reference to a possible sighting of him by a policeman and expressed his inclination to exonerate him.

He never mentions any arrest, nor any incriminating evidence, nor any eyewitness evidence against him.

He indicates that the only evidence against him was circumstantial.

Some suspect.



How come Anderson [ when he almost certainly means Kosminski ] names him as the killer as does Swanson in private notes and according to Swanson's family that he was pretty certain who the murderer was without naming him.


How come neither Anderson nor Swanson ever named the witness who supposedly identified him as the murderer, never mentioned any incriminating evidence, never mentioned any arrest, never mentioned any search of his home or belongings, never mentioned any interrogation of him, never mentioned any failure on his part to produce an alibi for any of the murders, never mentioned any charges brought against the suspect, and never explained how the witness could have learned that the suspect was Jewish following his identification but before the suspect could be arrested?



We also have Sagar mentioning a suspect who was put in an asylum who he felt was the killer , which could refer to Kosminski .


Sagar could not have been referring to Anderson's suspect because according to Sagar the suspect was of Jewish appearance, whereas Anderson indicated that he was not recognisably Jewish.

Furthermore, Sagar's suspect worked in Butcher's Row, whereas Aaron Kosminski was an unemployed hairdresser.

Moreover, Sagar's suspect was, so he claimed, put in an asylum by his friends, whereas Kosminski was put in an asylum by his relatives.


What did they do stick a pin in the asylum records and plump for him as the mad Jewish suspect ? Why not Hyams, Cohen or Levy for instance who prima facie are better qualified to be the mad Jewish suspect. ?


You omitted John Piser.

Like Anderson's suspect, he was unhesitatingly identified by a witness, but cleared after producing unimpeachable alibis.

As I have previously suggested, it is likely that Aaron Kosminski had at least one alibi for the murders.

According to Elamarna, that is pure invention.

It is nothing of the kind.

Kosminski was never arrested, never questioned, and never asked what he was doing at the times of any of the murders.

If Piser had never been accused, we would likely have posters claiming that he had no alibi.

Far from being pure invention, what I am writing is common sense.

It was possible for Kosminski to become a 'suspect' years after the murders precisely because he WAS NOT A SUSPECT at the time of the investigation.

As for Cohen, if you mean Nathan Kaminsky, he may well be part of the composite-Kosminski of Swanson's imagination.

If it is true that he was taken into care about a month after the last murder, was incarcerated in the same asylum as Kosminski, had to be placed under restraint because of violent behaviour, and died within months of being incarcerated, then it is plausible that some confusion between Kosminski and Kaminsky took place.

That only strengthens my case that Swanson's Kosminski is not one person.

[Darryl Kenyon]

There never was any case against Kosminski.

So how come MM names him as a strong suspect. How come Anderson [ when he almost certainly means Kosminski ] names him as the killer as does Swanson in private notes and according to Swanson's family that he was pretty certain who the murderer was without naming him. We also have Sagar mentioning a suspect who was put in an asylum who he felt was the killer , which could refer to Kosminski .

What did they do stick a pin in the asylum records and plump for him as the mad Jewish suspect ? Why not Hyams, Cohen or Levy for instance who prima facie are better qualified to be the mad Jewish suspect. ?