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

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

Hmmm somebody bangs on for post after post citing that the man Lawende saw was of a sailor appearance so could not have been a Jew [ fair mustache and all that ]. Now lo and behold he is saying that and I quote Anderson was quite definite that the suspect was not of Jewish appearance.

Regards Darryl

Of course.

Anderson had to imply that the suspect was not of Jewish appearance because, at the same time, he claimed that the witness would not testify against someone whom he knew to be a fellow Jew.

Had Anderson indicated, as Sagar did, that the suspect was of Jewish appearance, then he would have been at a complete loss to explain why the witness would have come forward in the first place.

In reality, the man seen by Lawende was obviously not Jewish.

We have photographs of Kosminski's brothers and sister.

They all had dark hair, none had a fair moustache, and none looked anything like a sailor.

[c.d.]

But, P.I., you will agree that having a Jewish appearance is not a requirement for being Jewish will you not?

c.d.

[Darryl Kenyon]

Hmmm somebody bangs on for post after post citing that the man Lawende saw was of a sailor appearance so could not have been a Jew [ fair mustache and all that ]. Now lo and behold he is saying that and I quote Anderson was quite definite that the suspect was not of Jewish appearance.

Regards Darryl

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

That could hardly have happened because Anderson was quite definite that the suspect was not of Jewish appearance.

But having a Jewish appearance is not a requirement for being Jewish.

c.d.

Well if the suspect had a Jewish appearance I don't see what would have prevented the witness from asking the police if he was in fact Jewish. Would the police have a reason to lie in their response?

(c.d. # 897)


That could hardly have happened because Anderson was quite definite that the suspect was not of Jewish appearance.

(PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR # 899)


But having a Jewish appearance is not a requirement for being Jewish.

(c.d. # 901)


It was you who suggested that the suspect may have been of Jewish appearance.

[c.d.]

That could hardly have happened because Anderson was quite definite that the suspect was not of Jewish appearance.

But having a Jewish appearance is not a requirement for being Jewish.

c.d.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

Please see my replies below.

You are right CD. I don't see why the police would keep that sort of info from the witness, if he asked.


Maybe you should ask Trevor Marriott the probability of the police giving the witness such confidential information so speedily following his identification of the suspect that they did not even have time to charge the suspect.

This is the only case in British criminal history in which it is alleged that an unnamed witness identified a man who had not even been arrested as an infamous murderer and yet the suspect was not even charged.



And the suspect could have spoke in the Jewish tongue as he was being identified as well.


That is hardly possible.

Anderson wrote: but when he learned that the suspect was a fellow-Jew he declined to swear to him.

He did not write: but when the suspect indicated to him that he was a fellow-Jew he declined to swear to him.



Perhaps throwing expletives out at the police/witness .


Where is the record of that happening?

Where is there any mention of the suspect saying anything?



Swanson does allude to difficulties, and if the suspect was Kosminski he was near the end of his mental rope.


In that case, why transport a lunatic psychopathic serial murderer to Brighton rather than stage the identification in London?

And if Kosminski was so difficult to handle, why is there no mention in three decades of asylum records of any need to restrain him?

And why, if he was so difficult, was he described as harmless and as not dangerous?

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

Well if the suspect had a Jewish appearance I don't see what would have prevented the witness from asking the police if he was in fact Jewish. Would the police have a reason to lie in their response?

c.d.

That could hardly have happened because Anderson was quite definite that the suspect was not of Jewish appearance.

He wrote: the only person who had ever had a good view of the murderer unhesitatingly identified the suspect the instant he was confronted with him

That means that he would have known whether the suspect was of Jewish appearance when he saw him in London.

He wrote also:

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.

That means that the suspect could not have been recognisably Jewish.

If he had been, the witness would not have come forward in the first place.

And that is why, as I have pointed out about half a dozen times so far, without so much as an acknowledgement from him, Scott Nelson's suggestion that the witness recognised the suspect as a fellow Jew when he saw him in Duke Street is a non-starter.

[Darryl Kenyon]

Well if the suspect had a Jewish appearance I don't see what would have prevented the witness from asking the police if he was in fact Jewish. Would the police have a reason to lie in their response?

c.d.

You are right CD. I don't see why the police would keep that sort of info from the witness, if he asked. And the suspect could have spoke in the Jewish tongue as he was being identified as well. Perhaps throwing expletives out at the police/witness . Swanson does allude to difficulties, and if the suspect was Kosminski he was near the end of his mental rope.

Regards Darryl

[c.d.]

Well if the suspect had a Jewish appearance I don't see what would have prevented the witness from asking the police if he was in fact Jewish. Would the police have a reason to lie in their response?

c.d.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

But we have only Anderson's word for it that the witness learned that the suspect was Jewish and refused to testify.

In reality, he would not have found out till the trial and Kosminski would have been charged with murder.

(PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR # 888)


Can anyone cite another murder case in which a witness identified a suspect but refused to testify against him?

[erobitha]

Well, since you asked...

That Aaron Kosminski threatened his sister with a knife is well-known to serious students of the case.

It comes from an account given by Jacob Cohen of 51 Carter Lane, St. Paul's, and can be found in Kosminki's records at Colney Hatch.

"He took up a knife and threatened the life of his sister."

By contrast, the belief that Kosminski instead threatened someone with scissors is traceable to the exceedingly dubious 'Tilly' letter sold two or three years back on eBay, that contained a description of Kosminski's threatening behavior, along with the ridiculous line

"those ghastly scissors...."

[Kosminski had been described as a hairdresser].

This was recently alluded to by Chris Phillips on the 'Maybrick' thread that you've been contributing to over on JTR Forums. This is the letter that Phil Kellingley had been asked to authenticate.

Thus, I was hoping your comment was merely made in jest because, if not, it signals that you've confounded a hoax document with a real document which carries its own brand of irony.

Hope that helps.

Thanks for your guidance. I'm grateful an eminent student like yourself is here to help. It is obvious I confused this detail with Cutbush.

Jacob Cohen could have possibly been referring to his sister rather than Kosminski in his statement.

Or have I got that wrong as well?

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

That Aaron Kosminski threatened his sister with a knife is well-known to serious students of the case.

But it was not well-known to the police until after he was incarcerated.

So why would the police have been interested in him before his incarceration and why did it take the knife incident to result in his incarceration?

[rjpalmer]

What joke would that be then RJ?

Well, since you asked...

That Aaron Kosminski threatened his sister with a knife is well-known to serious students of the case.

It comes from an account given by Jacob Cohen of 51 Carter Lane, St. Paul's, and can be found in Kosminki's records at Colney Hatch.

"He took up a knife and threatened the life of his sister."

By contrast, the belief that Kosminski instead threatened someone with scissors is traceable to the exceedingly dubious 'Tilly' letter sold two or three years back on eBay, that contained a description of Kosminski's threatening behavior, along with the ridiculous line

"those ghastly scissors...."

[Kosminski had been described as a hairdresser].

This was recently alluded to by Chris Phillips on the 'Maybrick' thread that you've been contributing to over on JTR Forums. This is the letter that Phil Kellingley had been asked to authenticate.

Thus, I was hoping your comment was merely made in jest because, if not, it signals that you've confounded a hoax document with a real document which carries its own brand of irony.

Hope that helps.

[erobitha]

I hope this was an attempt at humor.

What joke would that be then RJ?

[rjpalmer]

Was she actually threatened with a knife? My understanding it was a pair of scissors.

I hope this was an attempt at humor.