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

[Herlock Sholmes]

Thats pure conjecture on your part

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

You asked me a question, Trevor, and I answered it.

I'm not sure what part of my post you claim to be "conjecture" but it must be obvious, even to you, that MM didn't change the correct date of 13th Feb to an incorrect date of 14th Feb, which means that the Aberconway version came first in time.

As a result, the Aberconway version contains stuff which MM corrected and/or deleted. As such, it belongs in the wastepaper basket and must be ignored.

[Bridewell]

You asked me a question, Trevor, and I answered it.

I'm not sure what part of my post you claim to be "conjecture" but it must be obvious, even to you, that MM didn't change the correct date of 13th Feb to an incorrect date of 14th Feb, which means that the Aberconway version came first in time.

As a result, the Aberconway version contains stuff which MM corrected and/or deleted. As such, it belongs in the wastepaper basket and must be ignored.

Hi Herlock.

I agree that the Aberconway version pre-dates the final draft but I wouldn't discard it without knowing the reasons for the alterations. Was the City PC perhaps a Metropolitan Police PC? Is that why he's missing from the official version? Did the PC, from whichever force, see and recognise the offender but keep quiet about it until it was much too late? That would be an embarrassment either way. It's the reason for the changes that makes them either crucial or utterly irrelevant - and we have no way of knowing which they are.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Hi Herlock.

I agree that the Aberconway version pre-dates the final draft but I wouldn't discard it without knowing the reasons for the alterations. Was the City PC perhaps a Metropolitan Police PC? Is that why he's missing from the official version? Did the PC, from whichever force, see and recognise the offender but keep quiet about it until it was much too late? That would be an embarrassment either way. It's the reason for the changes that makes them either crucial or utterly irrelevant - and we have no way of knowing which they are.

Hi Colin,

It looks like we’ll have to disagree on this point. I think it’s enough to know that anything removed from the draft wasn't wanted by MM in his final report.

As far as I'm concerned, we have to assume that everything removed was removed due to error but we don't even need to go that far.

This final version is what MM wanted his superiors to read. Everything in the draft must be ignored because it was a draft.

What's important here - and all one needs to know in the context of this thread - is that in the final version of his report MM said that there were a number of reasons why Kosminski was a strong suspect.

And that is entirely consistent with what both Anderson and Swanson wrote about the ID parade which is what Trevor won’t accept.

[Aethelwulf]

Originally posted by Trevor Marriott View Post
Thats pure conjecture on your part

You asked me a question, Trevor, and I answered it.

I'm not sure what part of my post you claim to be "conjecture" but it must be obvious, even to you, that MM didn't change the correct date of 13th Feb to an incorrect date of 14th Feb, which means that the Aberconway version came first in time.

As a result, the Aberconway version contains stuff which MM corrected and/or deleted. As such, it belongs in the wastepaper basket and must be ignored.

Credit to both parties for stubbornly refusing to give up the argument over weeks on end. Reminds me of the Rocky films when it's round 15 and both fighters are dripping in blood and desperately trying to get up.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Originally posted by Trevor Marriott View Post
Thats pure conjecture on your part




Credit to both parties for stubbornly refusing to give up the argument over weeks on end. Reminds me of the Rocky films when it's round 15 and both fighters are dripping in blood and desperately trying to get up.

If you've ever tried to discuss anything with Trevor you'll know it's like talking to a child, and requires endless repetition of a point before it finally sinks it. I've had to explain to him 3 times the reason why the Aberconway version is an early draft but, frankly, I doubt if it's yet sunk in it. Perhaps after another 3 or 4 attempts maybe.

I don't see myself as having gone 15 rounds in a slog. In fact, if this is a boxing match, Trevor hasn't even laid a glove on me with his incomprehensible twittering. I'm just bashing him around the ring.

Just hope that he doesn’t start on Bury next.

[Aethelwulf]

Just hope that he doesn’t start on Bury next.

I think it's been established that Trevor's area of expertise is 'notorious' shoplifters!

[Herlock Sholmes]

I think it's been established that Trevor's area of expertise is 'notorious' shoplifters!

[Bridewell]

Hi Colin,

It looks like we’ll have to disagree on this point. I think it’s enough to know that anything removed from the draft wasn't wanted by MM in his final report.

As far as I'm concerned, we have to assume that everything removed was removed due to error but we don't even need to go that far.

This final version is what MM wanted his superiors to read. Everything in the draft must be ignored because it was a draft.

What's important here - and all one needs to know in the context of this thread - is that in the final version of his report MM said that there were a number of reasons why Kosminski was a strong suspect.

And that is entirely consistent with what both Anderson and Swanson wrote about the ID parade which is what Trevor won’t accept.

That's fine. At least we've both presented reasoned arguments for thinking what we do. For what it's worth I have understood your point about Swanson thinking Kosminski was dead, even though he wasn't. I also agree with it because you're right - when Kosminski actually died and when DSS thought he had died are not the same dates.

[Scott Nelson]

I also agree with it because you're right - when Kosminski actually died and when DSS thought he had died are not the same dates.

DSS could have been right about the bit "then to Colney Hatch and died afterwards". We may not know what he knew.

[Trevor Marriott]

If you've ever tried to discuss anything with Trevor you'll know it's like talking to a child, and requires endless repetition of a point before it finally sinks it. I've had to explain to him 3 times the reason why the Aberconway version is an early draft but, frankly, I doubt if it's yet sunk in it. Perhaps after another 3 or 4 attempts maybe.

I don't see myself as having gone 15 rounds in a slog. In fact, if this is a boxing match, Trevor hasn't even laid a glove on me with his incomprehensible twittering. I'm just bashing him around the ring.

Just hope that he doesn’t start on Bury next.

Well at least I am not like you one of the many gullible and naive people on here who readily accept the writings of the likes of Swanson, Anderson, despite the flaws in their writings being highlighted and in many aspects of what they wrote disproved i.e

No evidence from any source to corroborate the ID parade as described in the marginalia

The mythical police officer referred to in the Mitre Square murder was never identified and there is no evidence to corroborate he ever existed as described

No evidence to corroborate the Kosminski referred to was in fact Aaron Kosminski

No evidence to show the Kosminski referred to was ever arrested or interviewed despite the positive ID described in the marginalia

In the Aberconway version, MM exonerates the man he refers to as Kosminski

All of the marginalia has not been conclusively proven to have been written by Swanson

The Seaside home has never been identified

No evidence from any of the officers who were directly involved in the investigation that Kosminski was ever regarded as a prime suspect or even a person of interest, in fact what do they say

Detective Inspector Reid 2 quotes

“Now we have Sir Robert Anderson saying that Jack the Ripper was a Jew, that I challenge him to prove, and what is more it was never suggested at the time of the murders. I challenge anyone to prove that there was a tittle of evidence against man, woman or child in connection with the murders, as no man was ever seen in the company of the women who were found dead.”

“I challenge anyone to produce a tittle of evidence of any kind against anyone. The earth has been raked over, and the seas have been swept, to find this criminal 'Jack the Ripper’, always without success. It still amuses me to read the writings of such men as Dr Anderson, Dr Forbes Winslow, Major Arthur. Griffiths, and many others, all holding different theories, but all of them wrong. I have answered many of them in print, and would only add here that I was on the scene and ought to know

Walter Dew

“Since 1888, many people have written on the subject of the Ripper's uncanny escapes, some of them putting forward their own theories. I was on the spot, actively engaged throughout the whole series of crimes. I ought to know something about it. Yet I have to confess I am as mystified now as I was then:
One big question remains to be asked, but, I am afraid, not to be answered. Who was Jack the Ripper?
I was closely associated with most of the murders. Yet I hesitate to express a definite opinion as to whom, or what the man may have been.
He may have been a doctor. He may have been a medical student. He may have been a foreigner. He may even have been a slaughterman, and so on.
Such speculation is little more than childish, for there is no evidence to support one view any more than another

Major Henry Smith, retired City of London Police Commissioner
“The Ripper ...completely beat me and every Police officer in London." and that "...I have no more idea now where he lived than I had twenty years ago."

Maybe we can now drop the prime suspect labels from those who have been wrongly categorised from what we know

There are various reasons a person may be considered a prime suspect.

• Being positively identified as the only person seen at or near the scene of the crime around the time the crime occurred
• Being linked by some form of forensic evidence, such as DNA
• Being named by a witness(es)
• Having the most likely motive to commit the crime
• Racial profiling
• Having the knowledge that only one who committed the crime would have
• Having a history of committing crimes with some resemblance to the crime being investigated
• Having confessedto the act

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[GBinOz]

Well at least I am not like you one of the many gullible and naive people on here who readily accept the writings of the likes of Swanson, Anderson, despite the flaws in their writings being highlighted and in many aspects of what they wrote disproved i.e

No evidence from any source to corroborate the ID parade as described in the marginalia

The mythical police officer referred to in the Mitre Square murder was never identified and there is no evidence to corroborate he ever existed as described

No evidence to corroborate the Kosminski referred to was in fact Aaron Kosminski

No evidence to show the Kosminski referred to was ever arrested or interviewed despite the positive ID described in the marginalia

In the Aberconway version, MM exonerates the man he refers to as Kosminski

All of the marginalia has not been conclusively proven to have been written by Swanson

The Seaside home has never been identified

No evidence from any of the officers who were directly involved in the investigation that Kosminski was ever regarded as a prime suspect or even a person of interest, in fact what do they say

Detective Inspector Reid 2 quotes

“Now we have Sir Robert Anderson saying that Jack the Ripper was a Jew, that I challenge him to prove, and what is more it was never suggested at the time of the murders. I challenge anyone to prove that there was a tittle of evidence against man, woman or child in connection with the murders, as no man was ever seen in the company of the women who were found dead.”

“I challenge anyone to produce a tittle of evidence of any kind against anyone. The earth has been raked over, and the seas have been swept, to find this criminal 'Jack the Ripper’, always without success. It still amuses me to read the writings of such men as Dr Anderson, Dr Forbes Winslow, Major Arthur. Griffiths, and many others, all holding different theories, but all of them wrong. I have answered many of them in print, and would only add here that I was on the scene and ought to know

Walter Dew

“Since 1888, many people have written on the subject of the Ripper's uncanny escapes, some of them putting forward their own theories. I was on the spot, actively engaged throughout the whole series of crimes. I ought to know something about it. Yet I have to confess I am as mystified now as I was then:
One big question remains to be asked, but, I am afraid, not to be answered. Who was Jack the Ripper?
I was closely associated with most of the murders. Yet I hesitate to express a definite opinion as to whom, or what the man may have been.
He may have been a doctor. He may have been a medical student. He may have been a foreigner. He may even have been a slaughterman, and so on.
Such speculation is little more than childish, for there is no evidence to support one view any more than another

Major Henry Smith, retired City of London Police Commissioner
“The Ripper ...completely beat me and every Police officer in London." and that "...I have no more idea now where he lived than I had twenty years ago."

Maybe we can now drop the prime suspect labels from those who have been wrongly categorised from what we know

There are various reasons a person may be considered a prime suspect.

• Being positively identified as the only person seen at or near the scene of the crime around the time the crime occurred
• Being linked by some form of forensic evidence, such as DNA
• Being named by a witness(es)
• Having the most likely motive to commit the crime
• Racial profiling
• Having the knowledge that only one who committed the crime would have
• Having a history of committing crimes with some resemblance to the crime being investigated
• Having confessedto the act

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

Good post Trevor.

Cheers, George

[Herlock Sholmes]

Well at least I am not like you one of the many gullible and naive people on here who readily accept the writings of the likes of Swanson, Anderson, despite the flaws in their writings being highlighted and in many aspects of what they wrote disproved i.e

No evidence from any source to corroborate the ID parade as described in the marginalia

The mythical police officer referred to in the Mitre Square murder was never identified and there is no evidence to corroborate he ever existed as described

No evidence to corroborate the Kosminski referred to was in fact Aaron Kosminski

No evidence to show the Kosminski referred to was ever arrested or interviewed despite the positive ID described in the marginalia

In the Aberconway version, MM exonerates the man he refers to as Kosminski

All of the marginalia has not been conclusively proven to have been written by Swanson

The Seaside home has never been identified

No evidence from any of the officers who were directly involved in the investigation that Kosminski was ever regarded as a prime suspect or even a person of interest, in fact what do they say

Detective Inspector Reid 2 quotes

“Now we have Sir Robert Anderson saying that Jack the Ripper was a Jew, that I challenge him to prove, and what is more it was never suggested at the time of the murders. I challenge anyone to prove that there was a tittle of evidence against man, woman or child in connection with the murders, as no man was ever seen in the company of the women who were found dead.”

“I challenge anyone to produce a tittle of evidence of any kind against anyone. The earth has been raked over, and the seas have been swept, to find this criminal 'Jack the Ripper’, always without success. It still amuses me to read the writings of such men as Dr Anderson, Dr Forbes Winslow, Major Arthur. Griffiths, and many others, all holding different theories, but all of them wrong. I have answered many of them in print, and would only add here that I was on the scene and ought to know

Walter Dew

“Since 1888, many people have written on the subject of the Ripper's uncanny escapes, some of them putting forward their own theories. I was on the spot, actively engaged throughout the whole series of crimes. I ought to know something about it. Yet I have to confess I am as mystified now as I was then:
One big question remains to be asked, but, I am afraid, not to be answered. Who was Jack the Ripper?
I was closely associated with most of the murders. Yet I hesitate to express a definite opinion as to whom, or what the man may have been.
He may have been a doctor. He may have been a medical student. He may have been a foreigner. He may even have been a slaughterman, and so on.
Such speculation is little more than childish, for there is no evidence to support one view any more than another

Major Henry Smith, retired City of London Police Commissioner
“The Ripper ...completely beat me and every Police officer in London." and that "...I have no more idea now where he lived than I had twenty years ago."

Maybe we can now drop the prime suspect labels from those who have been wrongly categorised from what we know

There are various reasons a person may be considered a prime suspect.

• Being positively identified as the only person seen at or near the scene of the crime around the time the crime occurred
• Being linked by some form of forensic evidence, such as DNA
• Being named by a witness(es)
• Having the most likely motive to commit the crime
• Racial profiling
• Having the knowledge that only one who committed the crime would have
• Having a history of committing crimes with some resemblance to the crime being investigated
• Having confessedto the act

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

Trevor, you've proved what I said about why talking to you is like talking to a child. All you've done is repeat points which have already been fully answered by me in this thread, while ignoring the issue we were actually discussing, namely the order of the versions.

If, as I suggest, the result of the ID parade was only known to a select few senior officers within Scotland Yard, there's no point parroting the views of Reid, Dew and Smith, none of whom were at Scotland Yard prior to 1894. If they didn't know of the ID parade, their views as to the identity of JTR are utterly irrelevant.

There's no point in referring to the content of the Aberconway version if it was only a draft, as we've established it was. In his final report, as filed at Scotland Yard, MM described Kosminski as a "strong suspect", something that seems to cause you so much anguish you can never bring yourself to acknowledge it!

There's also no point in discussing the "mythical police officer referred to in the Mitre Square murder" because MM makes no mention of this officer in his final report. An obvious reason for this is that he realized he had made a mistake about an incident which had occurred long before he joined the Met Police.

You keep talking aimlessly about corroboration but the fact of the matter is that the 3 most senior officers within Scotland Yard CID at the time of MM's report ALL corroborate each other as to Kosminski being a strong suspect. MM explicitly says he was, Anderson went further and said he definitely was JTR and Swanson gives us the reason for this, being that he had been positively identified at an ID parade by a key witness.

Those are the facts which you can't wish away by your endless babbling.

As for the authenticity of the marginalia, it was only a few days ago that you were scrambling around like a headless chicken desperately trying to argue that this was only written after Martin Fido discovered details about Aaron Kosminski in 1987, only for this to be proven as utterly incorrect by Steve who explained how a journalist had seen the marginalia identifying Kosminski in 1981, making it virtually impossible for the marginalia to have been faked because no one knew in 1981 that Kosminski had been transferred to Colney Hatch. A handwriting expert has confirmed that the marginalia is consistent with Swanson's handwriting. Your desperate attempt to cast doubt on this finding is hopeless.

[Aethelwulf]

Back in 1888, Catherine Mylett was believed by some to have fallen down drunk in an awkward position, with her larynx pressed against the collar of her dress.
Caz
X

Anderson still believed this was the case more than twenty years later, in the very same book he is assuredly telling use of his secret knowledge of the Ripper's ID.......

[Abby Normal]

Trevor, you've proved what I said about why talking to you is like talking to a child. All you've done is repeat points which have already been fully answered by me in this thread, while ignoring the issue we were actually discussing, namely the order of the versions.

If, as I suggest, the result of the ID parade was only known to a select few senior officers within Scotland Yard, there's no point parroting the views of Reid, Dew and Smith, none of whom were at Scotland Yard prior to 1894. If they didn't know of the ID parade, their views as to the identity of JTR are utterly irrelevant.

There's no point in referring to the content of the Aberconway version if it was only a draft, as we've established it was. In his final report, as filed at Scotland Yard, MM described Kosminski as a "strong suspect", something that seems to cause you so much anguish you can never bring yourself to acknowledge it!

There's also no point in discussing the "mythical police officer referred to in the Mitre Square murder" because MM makes no mention of this officer in his final report. An obvious reason for this is that he realized he had made a mistake about an incident which had occurred long before he joined the Met Police.

You keep talking aimlessly about corroboration but the fact of the matter is that the 3 most senior officers within Scotland Yard CID at the time of MM's report ALL corroborate each other as to Kosminski being a strong suspect. MM explicitly says he was, Anderson went further and said he definitely was JTR and Swanson gives us the reason for this, being that he had been positively identified at an ID parade by a key witness.

Those are the facts which you can't wish away by your endless babbling.

As for the authenticity of the marginalia, it was only a few days ago that you were scrambling around like a headless chicken desperately trying to argue that this was only written after Martin Fido discovered details about Aaron Kosminski in 1987, only for this to be proven as utterly incorrect by Steve who explained how a journalist had seen the marginalia identifying Kosminski in 1981, making it virtually impossible for the marginalia to have been faked because no one knew in 1981 that Kosminski had been transferred to Colney Hatch. A handwriting expert has confirmed that the marginalia is consistent with Swanson's handwriting. Your desperate attempt to cast doubt on this finding is hopeless.

good post herlock. nice summary of the issues.

[Trevor Marriott]

Trevor, you've proved what I said about why talking to you is like talking to a child. All you've done is repeat points which have already been fully answered by me in this thread, while ignoring the issue we were actually discussing, namely the order of the versions.

And what gives you the right to state that you are right when all your posts are full of "What if`s" and I`think and I suggest to name but 3 ?

If, as I suggest, the result of the ID parade was only known to a select few senior officers within Scotland Yard, there's no point parroting the views of Reid, Dew and Smith, none of whom were at Scotland Yard prior to 1894. If they didn't know of the ID parade, their views as to the identity of JTR are utterly irrelevant.

There you go again using the term "If as I suggest" you are entitled to your opinion but that doesn't mean you are right

There's no point in referring to the content of the Aberconway version if it was only a draft, as we've established it was. In his final report, as filed at Scotland Yard, MM described Kosminski as a "strong suspect", something that seems to cause you so much anguish you can never bring yourself to acknowledge it!

Simply because there is no corroboration to back it up

There's also no point in discussing the "mythical police officer referred to in the Mitre Square murder" because MM makes no mention of this officer in his final report. An obvious reason for this is that he realized he had made a mistake about an incident which had occurred long before he joined the Met Police.

There you go again interpreting the facts in a way that suits your own purpose

You keep talking aimlessly about corroboration but the fact of the matter is that the 3 most senior officers within Scotland Yard CID at the time of MM's report ALL corroborate each other as to Kosminski being a strong suspect. MM explicitly says he was, Anderson went further and said he definitely was JTR and Swanson gives us the reason for this, being that he had been positively identified at an ID parade by a key witness.

So where is the evidence to support what these officers stated, there is none

Those are the facts which you can't wish away by your endless babbling.

I wouldn't call it babbling I would call it assessing and evaluating the facts

As for the authenticity of the marginalia, it was only a few days ago that you were scrambling around like a headless chicken desperately trying to argue that this was only written after Martin Fido discovered details about Aaron Kosminski in 1987, only for this to be proven as utterly incorrect by Steve who explained how a journalist had seen the marginalia identifying Kosminski in 1981, making it virtually impossible for the marginalia to have been faked because no one knew in 1981 that Kosminski had been transferred to Colney Hatch. A handwriting expert has confirmed that the marginalia is consistent with Swanson's handwriting. Your desperate attempt to cast doubt on this finding is hopeless.

And Steve didn't provide any evidence to support his claim and despite what you say there is no conclusive proof that Swanson penned all of the marginalia

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk