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

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

It is clear that you don't accept the comments of either Anderson or Swanson, yet are happy to accept those of men , who were either not directly involved, or involved at a lower level, or not involved for the full duration of the case.

Anderson wrote:

And the conclusion we came to was that he and his people were certain low-class Polish Jews ... And the result proved that our diagnosis was right on every point.

Evidently, the men whom you refer to did not recognise themselves in the line quoted above.

Whom did Anderson mean by we and our?

There seems to have been a remarkable shortage of policemen who were party to a conclusion reached which necessarily had a radical effect on the course of the investigation.

For Anderson was stating quite clearly that a point was reached in the investigation when, in spite of the absence of a suspect, it was decided that the murderer had to be a Jew.

Abberline was unaware of that.

Smith knew nothing of it.

Reid denied it.

Swanson kept his mouth shut.

How could the investigation have taken such a dramatic turn with no-one or almost no-one knowing about it?

How could Abberline have been seeking gentile suspects while Anderson had already ruled them out?

How can anyone accept Anderson's comment quoted above to be true?

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

I'm sorry to hear that William Gull doesn't have an alibi.

How about Sagar's Pc who said he saw a man of Jewish appearance leaving Mitre Square?

Maybe the Pc made it up and was himself the murderer?

According to the same people who claim that the Pc's sighting means the murderer must have been Jewish, because he was of Jewish appearance, it is ludicrous to suggest that anyone could have distinguished Jews and Gentiles at that time.

Can the Pc provide alibis for any of the other murders?

It seems he had no alibi.

[Herlock Sholmes]

I considered it while assessing and evaluating the facts and evidence I referred to, but quickly dismissed that consideration as a non-starter

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Trevor Marriott]

Have you ever considered that it might be because you’re wrong?

I considered it while assessing and evaluating the facts and evidence I referred to, but quickly dismissed that consideration as a non-starter

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Abby Normal]

Kosminski has no alibi that we know of. I don't think that he was the Ripper, but we have no evidence that shows he was probably, let alone definitely somewhere else when the victims were killed.

In contrast to Prince Albert Victor, who had solid alibis. Or William Gull, who was a recovering stroke victim. Or Charles Lechmere, who was at work when some of the murders were committed. Or Robert Anderson and Walter Sickert, who weren't even in England when some of the murders occurred.

fiver
you kind of lose credibility when in arguing with someone who says koz had an alibi you do so by giving counter example of another suspect who you say also had an alibi.. lechmere.. and that he was at work. really? were you there? have you seen his work records??
Lech dosnt have an alibi as much as koz dosnt.
and william gull wasnt the ripper but recently having a stroke does not give him an alibi either.

and you were doing so well.

[Herlock Sholmes]

I never said he was taken from an asylum I refer to those researchers who wrongly believe that he was taken from an asylum

Despite all that has been said I cant understand why there are still some who believe that this Id took place as described in the marginalia when there is so many facts and evidence to negate it

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

Have you ever considered that it might be because you’re wrong?

[Trevor Marriott]

Which officers specifically say an ID never took place ?

Insp Reid for a start in as many words when he challenges Anderson to prove what he wrote in his book

But the ID failed

Not according to Swanson who says the killer knew he had been identified

What asylum was he taken from ?

I never said he was taken from an asylum I refer to those researchers who wrongly believe that he was taken from an asylum

Despite all that has been said I cant understand why there are still some who believe that this Id took place as described in the marginalia when there is so many facts and evidence to negate it

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

Kosminski has no alibi that we know of. I don't think that he was the Ripper, but we have no evidence that shows he was probably, let alone definitely somewhere else when the victims were killed.

In contrast to Prince Albert Victor, who had solid alibis. Or William Gull, who was a recovering stroke victim. Or Charles Lechmere, who was at work when some of the murders were committed. Or Robert Anderson and Walter Sickert, who weren't even in England when some of the murders occurred.

But his house was being watched day and night by CID for seven months?

And what happened during those seven months?

[Herlock Sholmes]

It has been stated in # 855 that Kosminski had no alibi.

There is no correction forthcoming from Elamarna nor from any of the other sticklers who pounce on suppositions, assumptions and speculations when it suits them.

Now we're being told that unless I can provide Kosminski with an alibi, he had no alibi.

That is a fallacy.

If Pizer had not been accused to his face, we would almost certainly be reading similar accusations now that he had no alibi.

Kosminski was never given the chance to produce an alibi because he was never accused to his face.

Anderson never answered his own accusers because he could not and Swanson kept his silence because there never was any case against Kosminski and never will be.

Are you for real?

An alibi has to be proven. You can’t just imagine one. No proof of an alibi then no alibi. It’s very simple. Ask Trevor, he’s a former police officer who has no time for Kosminski as a suspect but even he will tell you that an alibi has to be established and not just assumed.

[Fiver]

It has been stated in # 855 that Kosminski had no alibi.

Kosminski has no alibi that we know of. I don't think that he was the Ripper, but we have no evidence that shows he was probably, let alone definitely somewhere else when the victims were killed.

In contrast to Prince Albert Victor, who had solid alibis. Or William Gull, who was a recovering stroke victim. Or Charles Lechmere, who was at work when some of the murders were committed. Or Robert Anderson and Walter Sickert, who weren't even in England when some of the murders occurred.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

It has been stated in # 855 that Kosminski had no alibi.

There is no correction forthcoming from Elamarna nor from any of the other sticklers who pounce on suppositions, assumptions and speculations when it suits them.

Now we're being told that unless I can provide Kosminski with an alibi, he had no alibi.

That is a fallacy.

If Pizer had not been accused to his face, we would almost certainly be reading similar accusations now that he had no alibi.

Kosminski was never given the chance to produce an alibi because he was never accused to his face.

Anderson never answered his own accusers because he could not and Swanson kept his silence because there never was any case against Kosminski and never will be.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Abby says that Kosminski had no alibi.

You don't find that ludicrous?

You couldn't even attempt to refute the points I made in # 853 and repeated in # 856.

There is no evidence that Kosminski came to the police's attention prior to his incarceration.

No evidence of an arrest, no evidence of his being questioned, no evidence of failure to produce an alibi, no evidence that there was any incriminating evidence against him, no evidence that he was put under surveillance, and no evidence that he was ever subjected to an identification procedure.

This is the only case in British criminal history in which it is claimed that a suspect was identified by an unnamed witness at a venue which his two accusers cannot even agree about, and in the presence of people who have never been named or identified themselves.

A total fiction.

Provide the evidence that places Kosminski elsewhere at the time of any of the murders. That’s exactly what you have to do to show that he had an alibi.

If you can’t (and you can’t) then by definition he has no alibi.

It looks like we can add Darryl to the lengthening list of posting who find you an impossibly frustrating poster to discuss this case with. Or any case for that matter.

[Herlock Sholmes]

I see that Druitt is being expected to prove his Dorset alibi, as some expect Sickert to prove his French alibi.

No, Druitt is dead……I’m asking you to prove his alibi…..

I suggest the police would not have taken seriously the idea that Druitt was using one of his cricketing trips to Dorset as a cover to commit murder in Whitechapel any more than that of Sickert commuting between England and France for the same purpose.

Again, you’re just making things up. No one has ever said, suggested or even hinted at Druitt using a cricket trip as an alibi.

Where is the evidence that Druitt ever visited Whitechapel?

What evidence could there be?

Is there any evidence that Frank Sinatra ever visited Park City, Utah? If there isn’t does that mean he couldn’t possibly have been there?

You said that Druitt had an alibi…..no amount of waffle will help you disguise that fact……..we know for an absolute fact that he didn’t have an alibi.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

I am done arguing with you. Like Abby says to suggest that Kosminski was never a suspect [ no matter how strong ], is completely ludicrous .What do you think ? They stuck a pin in the street directory or lunatic records and pulled his name out ? If Martin Fido had never found him in the asylum records all those years ago I am sure that you would suggest that he never existed and was wishful thinking in Anderson's mind of some sort of Hybrid Leather apron and crazy Jew character

Abby says that Kosminski had no alibi.

You don't find that ludicrous?

You couldn't even attempt to refute the points I made in # 853 and repeated in # 856.

There is no evidence that Kosminski came to the police's attention prior to his incarceration.

No evidence of an arrest, no evidence of his being questioned, no evidence of failure to produce an alibi, no evidence that there was any incriminating evidence against him, no evidence that he was put under surveillance, and no evidence that he was ever subjected to an identification procedure.

This is the only case in British criminal history in which it is claimed that a suspect was identified by an unnamed witness at a venue which his two accusers cannot even agree about, and in the presence of people who have never been named or identified themselves.

A total fiction.

[Darryl Kenyon]

I quote from my # 853.

As far as I can see, you have not even attempted to refute these points.

I suggest they are irrefutable.



None of them ('Anderson, MM, Swanson and perhaps Sagar') provided any evidence even that Kosminski was ever arrested or questioned.

No such CID officer (who allegedly watched Kosminski) has ever been named nor identified himself.

If his alibi did not stand up, why did your two senior policemen never mention it?

There is no evidence that he was ever arrested.

There is no evidence to support your statements (that Kosminski was sent to be identified and was identified).

None of the [senior police officers] cited one shred of incriminating evidence against him.

According to Macnaghten, the case was wholly circumstantial and, according to Anderson and Swanson, depended on identification by a witness who obviously did not exist, which is why he was never named.

I am done arguing with you. Like Abby says to suggest that Kosminski was never a suspect [ no matter how strong ], is completely ludicrous .What do you think ? They stuck a pin in the street directory or lunatic records and pulled his name out ? If Martin Fido had never found him in the asylum records all those years ago I am sure that you would suggest that he never existed and was wishful thinking in Anderson's mind of some sort of Hybrid Leather apron and crazy Jew character