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

[Trevor Marriott]

Trevor, I used the word "maybe" in one of five responses. It was in response to your claim that the police were prepared to take Kosminski to trial, which is not a fact as we know it. Hence, we can only say that they might have been prepared to go to trial, or rather that they might have been prepared to produce their witness to a magistrate for him to make a decision about whether Kosminski should go to trial.

The bottom line here is that we have the head of the CID, his assistant chief constable and the chief inspector on the JTR investigation ALL telling us that there was good reason to suspect Kosminski of being Jack the Ripper. That is the uncomfortable FACT that you don't seem willing or able to confront.

But there is no evidence anywhere to show what that good reason was other than this other mythical ID of a man seen by a mythical police officer near to Mitre Square.

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Trevor Marriott]

Having told me to "stick to the facts as we know them", you then provide a completely evidence free post with not a single fact in it relating to how Scotland Yard operated in the nineteenth century!

As I keep saying, Swanson reported directly to Anderson. That was his reporting line.

But it doesn't matter because MM himself tells us that Kosminski was a strong suspect.

This means that the three top Scotland Yard officials within CID at the time all tell us that there was reason to suspect Kosminski of being JTR.

and MM exonerates Kosminski in the later Aberconway version. As I said before the police don't exonerate a suspect who has been identified as being a serial killer

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Herlock Sholmes]

But there is no evidence anywhere to show what that good reason was other than this other mythical ID of a man seen by a mythical police officer near to Mitre Square.

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

Trevor what ARE you talking about?

Anderson tells us in his book that the good reason was an identification of Kosminski by "the only person who ever had a good view of the murderer" and Swanson confirms in the marginalia that this identification did take place.

That is the evidence.

[Herlock Sholmes]

and MM exonerates Kosminski in the later Aberconway version. As I said before the police don't exonerate a suspect who has been identified as being a serial killer

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

Trevor, the Aberconway version is quite plainly a draft that was corrected, and the version in the Metropolitan Police file is the final version of the report.

This is obvious from the very first sentence. The Aberconway draft refers to the "articles which appeared in the Sun re Jack the Ripper on 14 Feb 1894 and subsequent dates". In the final report in the Met Police file, however, MM amended this to "the sensational story told in the Sun in its issue of 13th inst. & following dates". That is the correct date. The Cutbush articles commenced in the Sun of 13th Feb 1894. QED the Aberconway version is a draft which contains uncorrected errors. MM evidently decided on reflection that Kosminski was not exonerated.

[rjpalmer]

If Aaron Kosminski is the City Suspect, I am the Pope.

Sagar described a 'well-known' Aldgate businessman associated with Butcher's Row. In one account, he is specifically identified as a butcher.

By contrast, Aaron Kosminski was an unemployed hairdresser who hadn't attempted work 'in years.'

I don't see this being the same suspect.

[Scott Nelson]

Neither do I.

[Trevor Marriott]

Trevor, the Aberconway version is quite plainly a draft that was corrected, and the version in the Metropolitan Police file is the final version of the report.

This is obvious from the very first sentence. The Aberconway draft refers to the "articles which appeared in the Sun re Jack the Ripper on 14 Feb 1894 and subsequent dates". In the final report in the Met Police file, however, MM amended this to "the sensational story told in the Sun in its issue of 13th inst. & following dates". That is the correct date. The Cutbush articles commenced in the Sun of 13th Feb 1894. QED the Aberconway version is a draft which contains uncorrected errors. MM evidently decided on reflection that Kosminski was not exonerated.

Another pathetic attempt to prop up the marginalia

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Herlock Sholmes]

Another pathetic attempt to prop up the marginalia

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

We don’t all work from an agenda Trevor. Why don’t you take a brake from your fixations and maybe one day you might come to a conclusion that someone else actually agrees with. It might happen one day.

[Darryl Kenyon]

Going off track a little. Do we now know for certain if this is our Woolf Abrahams ? And have we any info on the third partner TC Davies ?

Regards Darryl

PS I think it was Chris Scott who originally found this interesting snippet

[Darryl Kenyon]

Neither do I.

Hi Scott,
Just reread your summary on this site regarding The Butchers row suspect. Thank you for an excellent article

Regards Darryl

[Trevor Marriott]

Trevor, the Aberconway version is quite plainly a draft that was corrected, and the version in the Metropolitan Police file is the final version of the report.

This is obvious from the very first sentence. The Aberconway draft refers to the "articles which appeared in the Sun re Jack the Ripper on 14 Feb 1894 and subsequent dates". In the final report in the Met Police file, however, MM amended this to "the sensational story told in the Sun in its issue of 13th inst. & following dates". That is the correct date. The Cutbush articles commenced in the Sun of 13th Feb 1894. QED the Aberconway version is a draft which contains uncorrected errors. MM evidently decided on reflection that Kosminski was not exonerated.

I stand to be corrected here
The original memo is dated 1894 in which he first mentions Kosminski
The Aberconaway version was penned after the sun article was published in which he exonerates Kosminski so it was not a first draft as you suggest and he could not have reinstated Kosminski as a suspect as you suggest

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Herlock Sholmes]

I stand to be corrected here
The original memo is dated 1894 in which he first mentions Kosminski
The Aberconaway version was penned after the sun article was published in which he exonerates Kosminski so it was not a first draft as you suggest and he could not have reinstated Kosminski as a suspect as you suggest

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

Trevor, what you have written makes absolutely no sense. None. Not even a particle of sense.

The first Sun article about Cutbush was published on 13th Feb 1894 (as I already said). The Aberconway version (clearly a draft for the reason I've given) is undated. The final report filed at Scotland Yard is dated 23rd Feb 1894.

What is it about that sequence of events which causes you to state that the Aberconway version was not a first draft?

[Trevor Marriott]

Trevor, what you have written makes absolutely no sense. None. Not even a particle of sense.

The first Sun article about Cutbush was published on 13th Feb 1894 (as I already said). The Aberconway version (clearly a draft for the reason I've given) is undated. The final report filed at Scotland Yard is dated 23rd Feb 1894.

What is it about that sequence of events which causes you to state that the Aberconway version was not a first draft?

Official version re Kosminski

(2) Kosminski, a Polish Jew, & resident in Whitechapel. This man became insane owing to many years indulgence in solitary vices. He had a great hatred of women, specially of the prostitute class, & had strong homicidal tendencies; he was removed to a lunatic asylum about March 1889. There were many circs connected with this man which made him a strong 'suspect'.

Aberconway Version

No one ever saw the Whitechapel murderer (unless possibly it was the City P.C. who was on [3] a beat near Mitre Square) and no proof could in any way ever be brought against anyone, although very many homicidal maniacs were at one time, or another, suspected. I enumerate the cases of 3 men against whom Police held very [4] [page 6A] [re]asonable suspicion. Personally, & after much careful & deliberate consideration, I am inclined to exonerate the last 2 (Ostrog and Kosminski). but I have always held strong opinions regarding no 1., (Druitt)

How can you possibly say that the Aberconway version came first?

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Herlock Sholmes]

Official version re Kosminski

(2) Kosminski, a Polish Jew, & resident in Whitechapel. This man became insane owing to many years indulgence in solitary vices. He had a great hatred of women, specially of the prostitute class, & had strong homicidal tendencies; he was removed to a lunatic asylum about March 1889. There were many circs connected with this man which made him a strong 'suspect'.

Aberconway Version

No one ever saw the Whitechapel murderer (unless possibly it was the City P.C. who was on [3] a beat near Mitre Square) and no proof could in any way ever be brought against anyone, although very many homicidal maniacs were at one time, or another, suspected. I enumerate the cases of 3 men against whom Police held very [4] [page 6A] [re]asonable suspicion. Personally, & after much careful & deliberate consideration, I am inclined to exonerate the last 2 (Ostrog and Kosminski). but I have always held strong opinions regarding no 1., (Druitt)

How can you possibly say that the Aberconway version came first?

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

I've already explained it to you, Trevor. The first sentence of the Aberconway version contains a mistake about the date of the first Sun article which is corrected in the filed version.

As for Kosminski, MM obviously realised after he wrote the 1st draft - quite possibly after having belatedly found out about the ID parade - that he couldn't properly exonerate him, and, indeed, that he was a "strong suspect".

[Trevor Marriott]

I've already explained it to you, Trevor. The first sentence of the Aberconway version contains a mistake about the date of the first Sun article which is corrected in the filed version.

As for Kosminski, MM obviously realised after he wrote the 1st draft - quite possibly after having belatedly found out about the ID parade - that he couldn't properly exonerate him, and, indeed, that he was a "strong suspect".

Thats pure conjecture on your part

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk