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

[Darryl Kenyon]

According to City Det. Robert Sagar, reported in Reynolds News on 15 September 1946: ‘We had good reason to suspect a man who worked in Butchers’ Row, Aldgate. We watched him carefully. There was no doubt that this man was insane, and after a time his friends thought it advisable to have him removed to a private asylum. After he was removed, there were no more Ripper atrocities.’

Sagar’s words parallel those of Anderson and Swanson like a tailored glove and it is difficult to think that they aren’t referring to the same person.

Hi Scott
Wasn't there a quote from Sagar somewhere that identification was impossible, [ of the Butchers Row suspect ] ?
If that is right, I wonder what Sagar could have meant ? Could he have been referring to the witness [ ID ] refusing to testify as such ? Tempting to think so.

Regards Darryl

[Trevor Marriott]

Cheers Al.

When you have read that I would suggest you read the chapter on The Swanson marginalia which can be found in my latest book which challenges the content of that article

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Herlock Sholmes]

When you have read that I would suggest you read the chapter on The Swanson marginalia which can be found in my latest book which challenges the content of that article

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

I see nothing to suggest that the marginalia isn’t genuine. Why would Swanson’s descendant forge it? He’d have know that it would probably be analysed so why risk discovery for an article that’s hardly going to be worth thousands? It makes no sense. Genuine - 99%.

[Trevor Marriott]

I see nothing to suggest that the marginalia isn’t genuine. Why would Swanson’s descendant forge it? He’d have know that it would probably be analysed so why risk discovery for an article that’s hardly going to be worth thousands? It makes no sense. Genuine - 99%.

In 1987, following the publication of the marginalia and the revelations contained in it, it was later noticed that on page 138 of the book, which contained the main annotations there was a red line going down the left-hand side of the page. This was later confirmed to have been added by James Swanson in an attempt to highlight the marginalia. This showed that James Swanson on at least one occasion had tampered with the book.

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Herlock Sholmes]

In 1987, following the publication of the marginalia and the revelations contained in it, it was later noticed that on page 138 of the book, which contained the main annotations there was a red line going down the left-hand side of the page. This was later confirmed to have been added by James Swanson in an attempt to highlight the marginalia. This showed that James Swanson on at least one occasion had tampered with the book.

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

I have the Kindle version of your book so I read the relevant chapter.

That’s not ‘tampering’ that’s highlighting. I’ve made marks and notes in books and so have thousands of people….that doesn’t that qualify as tampering. It’s a pretty desperate point to be honest Trevor.

[Aethelwulf]

The letters are quite obviously not connected with the case and as usual in these instances some sick minds were at work. I think Daryl is quite correct in his thinking though- Robert Napper showed the same type of escalation as JTR. He was very disorganised in the type of attacks he carried out but displayed a great deal of cunning and organisation in his planning. He had a job, lodgings and would be almost identical to Bonds profile which is somewhat disconcerting. I have absolutely no doubt that whoever JTR was his name is buried in a long lost or destroyed file and we have not mentioned his name i the history of the case.

Although on the face of it the Napper comparison seems useful, there are some important differences.

As I understand it, Napper lay in wait and attacked strangers. For his crime that sounds very reminiscent of Kelly, he broke in to the house. Napper committed most of his crimes in green/countryside areas, or areas backing commons, where there was very little chance of being caught or traced (his crimes took place just before the widespread/dense use of CCTV and things like dashcams). In contrast, JtR (perhaps with the exception of Stride) appears to have chatted to his victims (at least for Lawende and long(?) sightings, and Kelly if you believe Hutch, which I do) and put them at ease (Napper is described as socially awkward - probably why he ambused people - didn't have the skills to talk to women). Even if Hutch is dismissed, I think it's all but certain Kelly's room wasn't broken into, so he must have gone in their on normal/good terms. JtR was also choosing to go into an area swarming with police for the later murders. All I'm saying is that I think JtR's crimes look to me like the work of someone more towards the Bundy end of things. Perhaps not hi IQ intelligence, but streetwise/savy/good actor.

That being said, I have no idea how outwardly normal either Napper or someone like Koz or JI would appear, or if they were capable of pulling off a socially normal/persuasive demeanour.

[Trevor Marriott]

I have the Kindle version of your book so I read the relevant chapter.

That’s not ‘tampering’ that’s highlighting. I’ve made marks and notes in books and so have thousands of people….that doesn’t that qualify as tampering. It’s a pretty desperate point to be honest Trevor.

It's not a desperate attempt, it shows that James Swanson tampered with the marginalia page it doesn't matter as to why but it shows a course of conduct which could be looked upon as suspicious given the content of the marginalia and the lack of any corroboration to prove that marginalia content.

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Herlock Sholmes]

It's not a desperate attempt, it shows that James Swanson tampered with the marginalia page it doesn't matter as to why but it shows a course of conduct which could be looked upon as suspicious given the content of the marginalia and the lack of any corroboration to prove that marginalia content.

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

Not in the slightest. ‘Tampering’ is a deliberately loaded word. Highlighting something in a book in absolutely no way suggests or implies anything underhand.

[Trevor Marriott]

Not in the slightest. ‘Tampering’ is a deliberately loaded word. Highlighting something in a book in absolutely no way suggests or implies anything underhand.

That is a question of interpretation given all the supporting evidence which may suggest that the marginalia was not penned entirely in its current form by Donald Swanson and as stated is lacking in any corroboration.

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Sunny Delight]

Although on the face of it the Napper comparison seems useful, there are some important differences.

As I understand it, Napper lay in wait and attacked strangers. For his crime that sounds very reminiscent of Kelly, he broke in to the house. Napper committed most of his crimes in green/countryside areas, or areas backing commons, where there was very little chance of being caught or traced (his crimes took place just before the widespread/dense use of CCTV and things like dashcams). In contrast, JtR (perhaps with the exception of Stride) appears to have chatted to his victims (at least for Lawende and long(?) sightings, and Kelly if you believe Hutch, which I do) and put them at ease (Napper is described as socially awkward - probably why he ambused people - didn't have the skills to talk to women). Even if Hutch is dismissed, I think it's all but certain Kelly's room wasn't broken into, so he must have gone in their on normal/good terms. JtR was also choosing to go into an area swarming with police for the later murders. All I'm saying is that I think JtR's crimes look to me like the work of someone more towards the Bundy end of things. Perhaps not hi IQ intelligence, but streetwise/savy/good actor.

That being said, I have no idea how outwardly normal either Napper or someone like Koz or JI would appear, or if they were capable of pulling off a socially normal/persuasive demeanour.

The MO was slightly different in Nappers case but his escalation mirrored JTR. He initially attacked his first victim in an open area but he stabbed her 49 times in a frenzied attack. His second murder took place indoors and he had the time to mutilate his victim cutting her open from the genitals to the breasts. Her ribcage was open and on 'display' and a piece of abdomen takes away as a 'trophy'. Napper was someone who had been identified by neighbours after a photofit was released of the Green Chain Rapist but despite two requests to attend the Police station in order to give blood he didn't show up. He was eventually eliminated from enquiries as he did fit the witness descriptions. He was deemed too tall. This was 105 years or so after JTR. I think we would be looking at a similar type of person to Napper. Seem as a little weird but neat and tidy. Punctual at his work but kept to himself. Ice cold when under interrogation. Someone capable of living alone and supporting himself.

[Herlock Sholmes]

That is a question of interpretation given all the supporting evidence which may suggest that the marginalia was not penned entirely in its current form by Donald Swanson and as stated is lacking in any corroboration.

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

I can’t see how it’s simply a matter of interpretation unless your looking at it with the intention of trying to see a mystery where none exists? The red line would obviously have been easily discoverable as a modern addition so it can’t have been added with the intention of fooling anyone and highlighting passages in a book is a common place occurrence and so not remotely suspicious. And what supporting evidence is there? The experts saw no issue with the handwriting so what else is there to give cause for suspicion. There isn’t even a convincing motive.

[rjpalmer]

. I’ve made marks and notes in books and so have thousands of people….that doesn’t that qualify as tampering. It’s a pretty desperate point to be honest Trevor.

Hi Mike.

Yes, people make marks in books, but would you have still done so if it was an important old book that was already annotated with historically significant marginalia?

Why add marks, thus giving the skeptics ammunition?

It's subjective, and people with have differing opinions, but it seems to me that it shows a certain lack of judgment. I wouldn't have done it.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Hi Mike.

Yes, people make marks in books, but would you have still done so if it was an important old book that was already annotated with historically significant marginalia?

Why add marks, thus giving the skeptics ammunition?

It's subjective, and people with have differing opinions, but it seems to me that it shows a certain lack of judgment. I wouldn't have done it.

Hi Roger,

Yes it probably wasn’t the smartest thing to have done but I’m wary of reading too much into it. It would be interesting to hear what he was thinking at the time that he did it.

[Trevor Marriott]

I can’t see how it’s simply a matter of interpretation unless your looking at it with the intention of trying to see a mystery where none exists? The red line would obviously have been easily discoverable as a modern addition so it can’t have been added with the intention of fooling anyone and highlighting passages in a book is a common place occurrence and so not remotely suspicious. And what supporting evidence is there? The experts saw no issue with the handwriting so what else is there to give cause for suspicion. There isn’t even a convincing motive.

Well for a start there is no corroboration to the marginalia content.

As to the experts you refer to, I would suggest you read my chapter on the marginalia again as the handwriting experts do not give definitive opinions, and of course, there is the absence of any record of Dr Tottys first examination of the marginalia commissioned by Paul Begg who has been asked to publish it but stated there was no written report to publish, and on that issue, I now believe in fairies at the bottom of the garden

As to a motive the words "for financial gain" spring to mind

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Abby Normal]

Could be. If we assume that from hell and possibly Openshaw and other letters are genuine, given their taunting nature and perhaps Bond's man of 'great coolness and daring', he could have been somewhere along the scale towards someone like Bundy. A pure evil and relatively clever person.

totally agree with this. also, only a cunning person could have pulled off the events of the double event.