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

[Herlock Sholmes]

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

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

Baseless accusations. The lengths that you’ll go to simply to try and dismiss Kosminski.

What financial gain? It’s hardly a first folio Shakespeare. A few hundred quid at best. If he was going add something why didn’t he add something really juicy like “we found a large knife under Kosminski’s bed with blood on it but we couldn’t prove it was the one,” or something like that?

If you’re that confident why don’t you accuse Swanson of fraud in public?

[c.d.]

Can anyone provide details on how the marginalia was first made public? Was it hyped as solving the case? Initial asking price or auction bid? Provenance checked?

c.d.

[Aethelwulf]

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

To be fair, I think the type of person DK and Sunny D are proposing is pretty good, I just think we're talking about someone relatively more accomplished in terms of social interactions, intelligence. I'm also looking at things with the old suspect tinted specs on, sly and cunning little s**t that WHB was.

[Elamarna]

Can anyone provide details on how the marginalia was first made public? Was it hyped as solving the case? Initial asking price or auction bid? Provenance checked?

c.d.

The history is in Ripperologist #128 C.D.

But of course Trevor questions that too.


Steve

[Trevor Marriott]

Baseless accusations. The lengths that you’ll go to simply to try and dismiss Kosminski.

What financial gain? It’s hardly a first folio Shakespeare. A few hundred quid at best. If he was going add something why didn’t he add something really juicy like “we found a large knife under Kosminski’s bed with blood on it but we couldn’t prove it was the one,” or something like that?

If you’re that confident why don’t you accuse Swanson of fraud in public?

Read the chapter in my book again the financial gain is explained in detail.

Macnagten dismisses Kosminski I simply concur

If the marginalia is not authentic or is not authentic in some part then the list of those who had access to it is very short and I will go no further on that issue, researchers are at liberty to draw their own conclusions

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Elamarna]

Read the chapter in my book again the financial gain is explained in detail.

Macnagten dismisses Kosminski I simply concur

If the marginalia is not authentic or is not authentic in some part then the list of those who had access to it is very short and I will go no further on that issue, researchers are at liberty to draw their own conclusions

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

Suggestions of fakery with no proof again Trevor?

Steve

[Herlock Sholmes]

Read the chapter in my book again the financial gain is explained in detail.

Macnagten dismisses Kosminski I simply concur

If the marginalia is not authentic or is not authentic in some part then the list of those who had access to it is very short and I will go no further on that issue, researchers are at liberty to draw their own conclusions

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

MacNaghten is trustworthy when it suits you. But not trustworthy in anything to do with Druitt. Good to see you taking your usual fair-minded approach Trevor.

…….

A couple of questions…..

1. Why is there an assumption that some parts of the marginalia were written at different times? Surely it can’t be just because different pencils were used?

2. Do you think that Swanson’s granddaughter, Mary Berkin, was ‘in on it’ too because she said that she saw the name Kosminski written in Anderson’s book at Jim Swanson’s house just after Alice Swanson’s funeral in 1980?

[Herlock Sholmes]

Suggestions of fakery with no proof again Trevor?

Steve

You sound surprised Steve.

[JeffHamm]

Read the chapter in my book again the financial gain is explained in detail.

Macnagten dismisses Kosminski I simply concur

If the marginalia is not authentic or is not authentic in some part then the list of those who had access to it is very short and I will go no further on that issue, researchers are at liberty to draw their own conclusions

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

Hi Trevor,

You've only presented one side of the "if". The other side, of course, would start with "If the marginalia is authentic then ..."

Since there is no evidence, to my knowledge, of it being inauthentic that would suggest the missing side of the if is currently the one that is more likely to lead to productive outcomes. Your suggestion just covers the world of all possibilities, and so one shouldn't forget to go back and double check in case some evidence has been produced that changes things in favour of it being inauthentic. Should that happen, then it would change the direction that is likely to be more productive, pending of course on how solid that new evidence is, and how well it holds up to scrutiny, etc. As I say, to my knowledge there is no such evidence to date of any level of quality (merely suggesting a hypothesis isn't evidence, it's just an idea awaiting evidential support), but I'm happy to consider any you have to offer.

- Jeff

[Trevor Marriott]

Hi Trevor,

You've only presented one side of the "if". The other side, of course, would start with "If the marginalia is authentic then ..."

Since there is no evidence, to my knowledge, of it being inauthentic that would suggest the missing side of the if is currently the one that is more likely to lead to productive outcomes. Your suggestion just covers the world of all possibilities, and so one shouldn't forget to go back and double check in case some evidence has been produced that changes things in favour of it being inauthentic. Should that happen, then it would change the direction that is likely to be more productive, pending of course on how solid that new evidence is, and how well it holds up to scrutiny, etc. As I say, to my knowledge there is no such evidence to date of any level of quality (merely suggesting a hypothesis isn't evidence, it's just an idea awaiting evidential support), but I'm happy to consider any you have to offer.

- Jeff

Hi Jeff
If the marginalia is the real deal firstly why is there no corroboration of what is contained in it?

Secondly, if this ID did take place as described it goes against the rules of evidence as set out in The Victorian police codes and why would the police risk jeopardising any subsequent prosecution by breaking those rules?

Thirdly the MM was discovered in the early 60`s I believe in that he describes a suspect by the name of Kosminski with no Christian name who he later exonerates. I find it strange that MM makes no mention of any such ID, and if the marginalia is genuine why is the full name of Kosminski not recorded in the marginalia? and I also find it strange that the marginalia does not name the suspect until the very last sentence and then only by surname.

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Elamarna]

Hi Jeff
If the marginalia is the real deal firstly why is there no corroboration of what is contained in it?

What do you expect, an official report?
Such clearly suggests you really have not grasped the arguments made.

Secondly, if this ID did take place as described it goes against the rules of evidence as set out in The Victorian police codes and why would the police risk jeopardising any subsequent prosecution by breaking those rules?

Again, demonstrating that you either don't grasp the argument or simple refuse to consider it.

The argument of course is, that lacking forensics, and with a witness who refused to cooperate, the ID was not intended to be used for a prosecution, but to confirm the correct man was the suspect.

Thirdly the MM was discovered in the early 60`s I believe in that he describes a suspect by the name of Kosminski with no Christian name who he later exonerates. I find it strange that MM makes no mention of any such ID, and if the marginalia is genuine why is the full name of Kosminski not recorded in the marginalia? and I also find it strange that the marginalia does not name the suspect until the very last sentence and then only by surname.

He doesn't actually fully exonerate, he says he is inclined to. His reason being that he apparently had other information and preferred Druitt. He gives no reasons for rejecting Kosminski, whoever that is.

It is certainly the oddest document in the case.

However, contrary to your claim, an identification is mentioned, no one saw the killer unless it was the police officer near to Mitre Square. He then adds that his Kosminski, greatly resembled the individual seen, that is clearly an identification of some sort.

The full name is not recorded, because Swanson is writing for himself, he knows exactly who he was refering to.
If I was writing a note about say you, I would either say Trevor or Marriott, depending on the context, I would use your full name, unless it was in a formal post or comment meant for public consumption.

Steve

[Herlock Sholmes]

I’ll repeat my two questions:

1. Why is there an assumption that some parts of the marginalia were written at different times? Surely it can’t be just because different pencils were used?

2. Do you think that Swanson’s granddaughter, Mary Berkin, was ‘in on it’ too because she said that she saw the name ‘Kosminski’ written in Anderson’s book at Jim Swanson’s house just after Alice Swanson’s funeral in 1980?

[Darryl Kenyon]

Secondly, if this ID did take place as described it goes against the rules of evidence as set out in The Victorian police codes and why would the police risk jeopardising any subsequent prosecution by breaking those rules?

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

Trevor
The same sort of confrontational ID was attempted with the then suspect Jacob Isenschmid. See post 61

Regards Darryl

[Darryl Kenyon]

Trevor
In Macnaghten's draft version of his memorandum, he says Kosminski strongly resembled the individual seen by the City PC near Mitre square.
Even if the City PC is wrong and should read City witness , how would anyone know if Kosminski did look like the person seen by the witness or PC unless he had been confronted by him ? By ID or otherwise

Regards Darryl

[Trevor Marriott]

What do you expect, an official report?
Such clearly suggests you really have not grasped the arguments made.

Such a high profile case and such an important issue that not one police or otherwise makes mention of it in later years. the arguments are nothing more than conjecture.

Again, demonstrating that you either don't grasp the argument or simple refuse to consider it.

There is nothing to consider the facts and the absence of corroboration in any form speak for themselves

The argument of course is, that lacking forensics, and with a witness who refused to cooperate, the ID was not intended to be used for a prosecution, but to confirm the correct man was the suspect.

Again conjecture

He doesn't actually fully exonerate, he says he is inclined to. His reason being that he apparently had other information and preferred Druitt. He gives no reasons for rejecting Kosminski, whoever that is.

Well in between the two versions of his memo he clearly had sufficient info for Kosminski`s status to be changed from a prime suspect to someone he was inclined to exonerate, and besides MM was Swanson's immediate superior he produces two memos some time apart from each other and in neither is an ID mentioned. You cant have it both ways the two MM memos or the suspicious marginalia

It is certainly the oddest document in the case.

However, contrary to your claim, an identification is mentioned, no one saw the killer unless it was the police officer near to Mitre Square. He then adds that his Kosminski, greatly resembled the individual seen, that is clearly an identification of some sort.

Did any police officer make a statement to say that he had seen a suspect near Mitre Square and gave a description of that person? If there had been such a police officer he would have been a city officer and then Major Smith would have been involved, and we all know what he says about the identity of the killer

The full name is not recorded, because Swanson is writing for himself, he knows exactly who he was refering to.
If I was writing a note about say you, I would either say Trevor or Marriott, depending on the context, I would use your full name, unless it was in a formal post or comment meant for public consumption. Steve

So why did he wait till the last sentence to state "Kosminski was the suspect" and considering he was supposed to have been a prime suspect he doesn't even know his full name and he led the investigation