Anderson - More Questions Than Answers

[Chris]

Maybe Nats meant that there are no reports of self-abuse in Aaron's notes during the time he was at the asylums.

But if it's a question of whether Macnaghten's and Swanson's Kosminski is Aaron or a different Kozminski, that's irrelevant. Macnaghten speaks of "solitary vices" and Anderson of "unmentionable vices" - both as the cause of Aaron's insanity - and Houchin records that Jacob Cohen told him he practised "self-abuse", which is carried over into the asylum records as the cause of insanity. So Aaron Kozminski fits the Anderson/Macnaghten account precisely in that respect.

[Robert]

Hi Chris

Maybe Nats meant that there are no reports of self-abuse in Aaron's notes during the time he was at the asylums.

It's impossible to get inside his mind. Maybe such self-abuse as there was actually stopped after his incarceration, because he felt happier? He would have been nagged to get up in the morning and take baths. But there would have been no stressful children to deal with, no one prompting him to get a job, and unless the authorities were heavily into therapy (which I doubt) he'd have been left more or less to himself.

One other thing, on a similar point to the self-abuse issue : we don't hear of Aaron refusing to eat meals in the asylum, or roaming the corridors and searching the floors for discarded scraps.

Robert

[Lyn]

Hold on a minute, Jeff, I don't think that Norma is trying to 'romanticise' Aaron. (Nor do I see that 'whose dog it was' exactly matters. I think Norma was simply trying to mention that Aaron was apparently not considered dangerous at that time.)

Remember too, not to get into the mindset that ALL Schizophrenics aren't dangerous 'as a matter of fact'; some (far too many) have been known to be. But most aren't.

My curiosity is why Kosminski's family felt the need to 'bring him in'.

And bear in mind too that masturbation is more typical than hypersexuality amongst male Schizophrenics after 'burn out'. (Well, it often is.) There's a difference.

Ya, you got me here, you old goat you!

Lyn

[Chris]

What I am trying to establish is why Anderson"s suspect should be Aaron Kosminski.

I think there are two questions here:
(1) Were Anderson, Swanson and Macnaghten talking about Aaron Kozminski, or a different Kozminski?
(2) Was Aaron Kozminski the murderer?

Now admittedly there are statements in the accounts of Swanson (certainly) and Macnaghten (apparently) that don't fit Aaron Kozminski. But in the absence of any other Kozminski that fits any of the statements of Anderson, Swanson or Macnaghten, I think we have to assume that the person they are talking about is Aaron.

The only realistic alternative is that for some reason they knew someone as Kozminski who, for some reason, was never officially recorded under that name. But if there was anyone who fitted all the accounts, it appears that Martin Fido's searches would have eliminated him, regardless of the name under which he was recorded.

But of course that doesn't mean Aaron was the murderer. As I've said many times, I think he is unlikely to have had any connection with the crimes.

Finally both Anderson and Macnaghten give "solitary vices" as the reason Kosminski [or their low class Jew]suspect, has become mentally ill---as did his family ---yet not a single doctor refers to it ...

I don't understand this comment.

Of course, Aaron's medical records do refer to "self abuse" as the cause of his insanity, and that he practised self abuse was among the information supplied to Dr Houchin by Jacob Cohen.

As Ap pointed out earlier,if Aaron really was Jack the Ripper or the "homicidal maniac described,it is very strange indeed that he was not sent to Broadmoor,which was and still is a high security hospital for the criminally insane.

I'm quite happy to be corrected on this, but as I understand it he could not have been sent to Broadmoor, unless he had been indicted for a criminal offence and been found "guilty but insane" - which obviously no one was, in respect of the Whitechapel Murders.

[Natalie Severn]

Firstly as far as I remember the Dog wasn't Aaron's, it belonged to Jacob.

And to portray Aaron as an animal lover on what is actually known, is a stretch of the imagination. Though I guess possible, I dont think there's anything of fact to draw this conclusion from.

And Secondly, Schizophrenics are NOT dangerous.

So his asylum records seem consistant with the illness.

The point is that in 'rare' circumstance. Given certain conditions, Schizophrenics can become dangerous. And I understand can be sexually over active.

I'm not disputing the possibility that Aaron was very intelligent, Schizophrenics often are, but his asylum records were not written by Aaron Kosminski, and I think we should be careful of over romanticizing his character.

There is nothing in what we know about Aaron that suggests that Anderson's conclusions were incorrect.

Pirate

PS Glad your back casebook

To make a statement like "schizophrenics are not dangerous" - is unhelpful.The question to ask is surely whether the particular form of schizophreia Aaron Kosminski suffered from was dangerous.
Now if Aaron suffered from paranoid schizophrenia ,then certainly he "could "have been very dangerous.And Jack the Ripper "could have" suffered from paranoid schizophrenia.
What I am trying to establish is why Anderson"s suspect should be Aaron Kosminski.The same Kosminski btw, that Macnaghten talks of as being a "homicidal maniac" the one who terrified Whitechapel in Autumn 1888.
Macnaghten refers to him having 'a great hatred of women",yet here again there is no evidence from any records that this was the case with Aaron. Finally both Anderson and Macnaghten give "solitary vices" as the reason Kosminski [or their low class Jew]suspect, has become mentally ill---as did his family ---yet not a single doctor refers to it,though records describe his untidiness,unwillingness to work, apathy,"cleanliness" fetishes about drinking and eating, preferences for speaking in his mother tongue,intermittent incoherence etc and his hallucinations -both auditory and visual etc.
As Ap pointed out earlier,if Aaron really was Jack the Ripper or the "homicidal maniac described,it is very strange indeed that he was not sent to Broadmoor,which was and still is a high security hospital for the criminally insane.
It is absolutely ridiculous to assert that Jack the Ripper was ever harmless.If he was schizophrenic then he was a paranoid schizophrenic, and moreover he was a paranoid schizophrenic whose illness took a highly dangerous course that ended the lives of at least five women.And lets not talk nonsense about premature "burn out".Aaron Kosminski was 24 years of age when he walking the dog in Cheapside.This was a full year after Jack the Ripper had held Whitechapel in a state of abject terror.Aaron certainly was not "burnt out then,when he was walking the dog in November 1889 ,neither was he,according to his records ,"burnt out" until at least the end of the following decade.
Meanwhile we are expected to believe that Jack the Ripper magically morphed into Aaron Kosminski , a rather stubborn but quite harmless person with mental health problems as the hospital records record.

[Jeff Leahy]

Isn"t it therefore perfectly "appropriate" and "reasonable" ,in the light of these records we have on Aaron,showing him first as a young man who enjoyed walking the dog in Cheapside and later as a "non-dangerous" / harmless asylum inmate, to question whether Anderson"s statements on JtR being a low class Polish Jew, bear any correlation to the picture of Aaron that has begun to emerge ?

Firstly as far as I remember the Dog wasn't Aaron's, it belonged to Jacob.

And to portray Aaron as an animal lover on what is actually known, is a stretch of the imagination. Though I guess possible, I dont think there's anything of fact to draw this conclusion from.

And Secondly, Schizophrenics are NOT dangerous.

So his asylum records seem consistant with the illness.

The point is that in 'rare' circumstance. Given certain conditions, Schizophrenics can become dangerous. And I understand can be sexually over active.

I'm not disputing the possibility that Aaron was very intelligent, Schizophrenics often are, but his asylum records were not written by Aaron Kosminski, and I think we should be careful of over romanticizing his character.

There is nothing in what we know about Aaron that suggests that Anderson's conclusions were incorrect.

Pirate

PS Glad your back casebook

[Chris]

I cited the Press cutting above,discovered only recently and which I believe is of huge importance when looking into the viability of Aaron Kosminski as the Kosminski who Macnaghten said was admitted to an asylum in March 1889.Well Aaron was out and about with his dog in November 1889 so its either a different Kosminski or Aaron was in an asylum somewhere else for part of that year which is most unlikely.

But on that basis the M. J. Druitt that Macnaghten describes as "a doctor of about 41 years of age" must have been someone other than the Montague John Druitt we know about!

Considering that the records have been thoroughly but unsuccessfully checked for another Kozminski who fits the bill, the most likely explanation is that Macnaghten simply got the date wrong (as we know he got a number of his other facts wrong).

[Natalie Severn]

Norma

You raise some interesting points However none of this has anything to do with Sir Robert Anderson. I have taken some care to start a new thread dealing exactly with this subject. I guess we don't always see eye to eye, but I really would like to have this conversation and see where it leads, if thats OK with you? So how about moving to the appropriate Thread?

Pirate

Pirate,
I dont agree that the above has nothing to do with this Anderson thread.
The reason some of us are interested in Anderson is because of he said he knew who the Ripper was.
A good place to start questioning his words on this is surely to ask who his "Kosminski" suspect was?
Whether the Aaron Kosminski discovered by Martin Fido,was the Kosminski about whom some believe was Anderson stated was Jack the Ripper-a "low class Polish Jew"? -and about whom Macnaghten wrote in his 1894 memorandum and we are told Swanson wrote, in marinalia and end notes.
We need therefore to test whether these assertions of Anderson match the picture of Aaron Kosminski that begins to emerge via the scant information that does exist.Information nevertheless which is absolutely crucial to whether or not we can give any credence at all to any of "Robert Anderson"s " statements about him knowing who the Ripper was.
I cited the Press cutting above,discovered only recently and which I believe is of huge importance when looking into the viability of Aaron Kosminski as the Kosminski who Macnaghten said was admitted to an asylum in March 1889.Well Aaron was out and about with his dog in November 1889 so its either a different Kosminski or Aaron was in an asylum somewhere else for part of that year which is most unlikely.


However this is not the only information on Aaron we have. Fortunately Martin found some hospital records of Aaron Kosminski. These records ,though scant, are very important surely? Moreover they are to the point , succinct and cover the 30 year period he was detained- a period that stretches from Mile End Workhouse in 1890 to Colney Hatch asylum in 1891 and Leavesdon lunatic asylum 1894.

Most importantly the asylum records never refer to him being considered dangerous.So why is that?
Don"t you think that is an important question to ask viz a viz Anderson"s allegations and statements regarding the identity of his suspect-a suspect he claimed was the vicious murderer and mutilator ,Jack the Ripper ?
Isn"t it therefore perfectly "appropriate" and "reasonable" ,in the light of these records we have on Aaron,showing him first as a young man who enjoyed walking the dog in Cheapside and later as a "non-dangerous" / harmless asylum inmate, to question whether Anderson"s statements on JtR being a low class Polish Jew, bear any correlation to the picture of Aaron that has begun to emerge ?

[Jeff Leahy]

Norma

You raise some interesting points However none of this has anything to do with Sir Robert Anderson. I have taken some care to start a new thread dealing exactly with this subject. I guess we don't always see eye to eye, but I really would like to have this conversation and see where it leads, if thats OK with you? So how about moving to the appropriate Thread?

Pirate

[Natalie Severn]

Aaron Kosminski may well have been protected by members in his family who were aware of some " odd" behaviour but being fond of him didnt want him "put away'-at least not until things got out of hand in 1891.
The story of Kosminski and the dog he walked around Cheapside, is an interesting one.It sounds as though he liked taking the dog out and to me this sounds like he liked dogs and had a gentle side to him concerning animals.Ofcourse he got into trouble with the law because he took the dog out without a muzzle and recent legislation had ruled that all dogs had to be muzzled when out in the streets. Aaron may not have wanted to put a "muzzle" on his dog friend,and he probably knew it wasn"t necessary for this particular dog when he was with Aaron at any rate and Aaron,from all accounts, was exceedingly obstinate when asked to do anything he didnt want to do.
I accept though that there were a couple of instances when he showed a side to himself that was violent.The attack on his sister with a knife is instructive in this regard.He showed he could be dangerous.Likewise, he took a chair to someone in Colney Hatch who had crossed him- which also isnt the sort of behaviour that someone who is completely "harmless" would usually indulge in.
Other than these two events nothing is known about him so far from Hospital records that tallies with Robert Anderson"s description of a Jewish suspect who he believed was JtR or with Melville Macnaghten"s description of the suspect he named Kosminski.More certainly needs to be discovered
about him .

[Rosey O'Ryan]

Mr Evans,
I have been away in Switzerland for a while! I see that you kicked off this thread with reference to Mr Anderson's health spa jaunt. Can you tell us where he stayed in Switzerland ?
Many thanks.
Rosey :-)

[Johnr]

There is no doubt Robert Anderson was a mass of contradictions: a deeply religious man who devoted many paragraphs to the consideration of " sexual maniacs '.
That's right. He had no doubt his Ripper was an out and out sexual maniac.
Much has been said about the virtuous character of Anderson - a good Christian man. Who did honourable things and led a pure life.
Well, here is a contradiction.
Anyone who understands the role of the Special Irish Branch as a cat's-paw for dirty deeds in rounding up the Fennian terrorists - (A cat's-paw for a Westminster- style British government) - will know that people like Anderson
had to get their hands well and truly dirty. To encourage others to tell lies, indulge in forgery and occasionally perhaps even look the other way whilst murder happened.(And I'm not talking Ripper murders here).
My point is, Anderson's involvement with a secret detective force who resorted to any means to get their targets indicates a certain moral athleticism.
My final observation is that Anderson, by training, was a lawyer. He brought his training to bear on his explanation as to how the Ripper was not caught on his watch. Because the Ripper was insane or committed suicide, he could not be brought to book. Therefore, here was the excuse why the Ripper was not caught. Hence Anderson escapes censure.
In my opinion both Macnaghten's and Anderson's whole venturing into Ripper literature was to explain the police were blameless in not catching the Ripper.
JOHN RUFFELS.

[Fisherman]

Harry writes:
"I would accept that if an identification could be proven,and the place and identities of the persons present established,then the ripper murders would probably be seen as solved."

I am not all that sure, since there would have been such a long gap of time between sighting and identification. Keeping in mind that Lawende said that he was not sure whether he would recognize his man or not if he was to encounter him again, I donīt see how we could reach any certainty on the matter with an identification made such a long time after Church Passage.

The best, Harry!
Fisherman

[harry]

As for myself,I do not,fortunately,allow any person of any position,the priviledge of being unable to lie.I do allow that most people,most of the time,tell the truth.So I put Anderson in both categories.

I would accept that if an identification could be proven,and the place and identities of the persons present established,then the ripper murders would probably be seen as solved.

The persons,Anderson,and indirectly Swanson,who made the claim that an identification had taken place,did not furnish the details neccessary to substantiate the claim,and exhaustive efforts by acknowledged expert researchers to unearth such details have failed.That being so,it is most probable that the event did not occur.

I feel that if present day authors want to be taken seriously,and want theories to be accepted,they should first,before one word is written,prove the basis of their theory.In the case under consideration,it would be the identification of one person in respect of another.

[Chris]

Well whoever it was these two policeman accuse of being Jack the Ripper,the man Anderson said" died" soon after being caged in an asylum,it is certainly very far fetched and not dealing with the reality of the matter ,to conclude it was "Aaron" Kosminski, a young man freely walking his dog in Cheapside in 1889,a year after the frenzied attack on Mary Kelly.

But of course, Anderson didn't say anything about the suspect being dead - that was Swanson, who obligingly named him as "Kosminski".