Anderson in NY Times, March 20, 1910

[Phil Carter]

Hello all,

And a very Happy New Year to you all!

Having ploughed my way (introduces another farming analogy) through this thread, we have had the "Cart before the Horse", "Two bob each way bet" from Magnaghten, including his third horse, a non runner, (well, it started the race but didn't run...), and the chicken before the egg theory. We have had dry turds left in the stable, after the nagical horse has disappeared through the side wall, having discovered the door was bolted. (We do not know who nicked the key, or if it was a latch-key lock).
And finally, scrambled egg revelations we need to turn the radio on for. Umm, they shoot horses, don't they?

Hello, good evening, this is the news.

Today in Ripperology, analogies were the recipe of the day. Jimmy Young, on radio of course, would have been proud to present this. (This...is what, you dooooo)

To come back from a seemingly semblance of disorder, may I, as a lay man, as opposed to the egg that was laid, make a few comments on this clearly embattled situation? Thank you.

First of all..

AP wrote the following..

So I think Anderson .....was being racist by using one of the many myths about the Jews that had followed them over the sea from Eastern Europe..

That comment is probably near to the crux of the argument about Anderson's views on Jews. Yes, it is without question, that there were anti-semitic tendencies, and more so, within society. In the East End, in Whitechapel, tension was sky high. And anarchists, Fenians and the like were being watched left right and centre. The influx of the European Jewish population into Whitechapel had inflamed the general situation. And as to whether policemen of ANY rank were racist, either in their actions or in their comments, we know that it happened, and still does. So if Anderson's comments are today seen as racist, inflamatory (as Norma said when quoting a Jewish leader did THEN), then common sense must prevail. Anderson quoted one of the many myths about Jews, and that, in all it's forms, is underlyingly racist in the context in which it was said.


Simon wrote..

If we are truly concerned about such matters, then Aaron Kosminski deserves better from us than the current lynch mob mentality which seems intent on protecting the reputations of two top cops at the exorbitant expense of condemning an innocent man to eternal damnation.

Better to spend our time asking why Macnaghten originally chose to put Kosminski in the frame for the Whitechapel murders, why it took seven years for Anderson to first advance his nameless homicidal maniac committed to an asylum theory, and why someone so desperately wanted Macnaghten and Anderson to be seen walking on water that they were willing to tinker with Swanson's marginalia.

Here, the crux is Kosminski, and his name.
The job of compiling accusational "evidence", and I use that term carefully, that COULD destroy ANY historical view of our methodology in how we present a suspect, may cause historians to look back on OUR efforts with dismay if Kosminski does turn out to be totally innocent of being the Whitechapel murderer. We have to be very careful not to let the reputation of this man be in any way more tarnished than it historically should be. We only have to look at Sir William Gull's reputation after his inclusion as a suspect. Mud sticks.

Simon's next point, about the reputations of two top policemen, is crucial as well. There isn't a shadow of doubt that this question would NEVER have arisen, if they had been seen to have been squeaky clean in their utterances and writings. However, Anderson, who I have previously mentioned, IS severely doubted for many such comments and utterances, let alone his actions. Macnaghten's mentioning and naming of Druitt, based on the flimsiest of provable evidence, if any at all, coming from such a high ranking official, casts SERIOUS doubts over his command of the situation. If he is willing to use this man and his name in this manner, causing us, today, to refer to Druitt as being used as a scapegoat, then, Macnagghten's reputation as a police officer SHOULD be severely criticised. And in my honest, lay man's opinion, rightly so.

Rob wrote..

My motivation to write the book was simply to get the information about Kozminski out to the public, in a readable form.

That attitude Rob, is to be applauded. If that indeed is your primary motivation (and it is the only one you mentioned, so I can safely presume it is the one which you give greatest importance to) then it is to give us all historical information, hopefully liberally sprinkled with facts hitherto unknown in general to us all. I look forward to reading the aforementioned book. And even though I reason that Anderson and his statements are, in my opinion, a source of serious concern, as written about above, the historical evidence ABOUT Kosminski is a source of anticipation.

Lynn wrote..

"Indeed some would question the term ‘SCHIZOPHRENIA’ altogether, which means its likely that in a few years people will look back and laugh as I am doing to those who raised theories twenty years ago."

Well, R D Laing and Thomas Szasz are 2 such. I daresay it is to them you refer.

I think such skepticism is well founded--the diagnosis is indeed a slippery one.

Do you see a distinction to be made between schizophrenia (again, if it exists) and paranoid schizophrenia? Do you see a possible connection between Kosminski and the latter?

Lynn is correct imho...To use this terminology, even with a medical education within the field of psychology or psychoanalogy, is indeed fraught with problems relating to distinguishing the existance of the one variety, and the difference between the two forms.

Norma wrote...

As far as I am concerned Pirate,the family behaved in an utterly conventional manner with regards to taking care of their dead brother Aaron"s funeral arrangements.Aaron was buried according to Jewish tradition,by a Jewish funeral parlour in Aldgate.
So Aaron,with his belief in a Universal Instinct and his obedience to his voices as well as his obstinate refusal to work,eat conventional meals or keep himself clean, must have caused a great deal of tension within his particular family.Small wonder it all ended up in tears and him going for his sister with a knife.Everybody was probably close to breaking point by the time they got Aaron sectioned.

Yes, totally agree. This really IS getting down to brass tacks. The family environment for the ENTIRE family would have been severely put on edge with these very "extreme", non traditional views. Over time, tensions most certainly would rise. Very possibly to boiling point, as Norma points out. And THAT, in itself, is a crucial point here. People react according to emotional standpoints. Built up over time, they CAN disrupt all rational behaviour. On both sides of the fence.

Jeff wrote...

Schizophrenia would cause a large amount of strain and friction in any family house hold reguardless of religeon.

Indeed it would Jeff. Again, built up over time, and to what degree it had attained. However, I believe Norma's reasoning about the family tension to be the base of the problem, which could very well have been made a darn site worse by mental imbalance.

Trevor wrote...

The answer is quite simple. None of them did know the identity of the killer. In later years they volunteered nothing more than uncorrobrated theories or personal opinions. You only have to look at the different suspects they suggested. To date no one has been able to come up with any direct evidence to prove any of their theories or opinions

The truth is still out there

Yes, I agree. That is an EXTREMELY logical viewpoint, based on what we have been given. It is extremely difficult to push the boundaries beyond exactly those points. The evidence is flimsy. And totally WITHOUT proof. It is, at best supposition.

As to "the truth is still out there".... very probably.... (he says, humming to himself).

And finally the last word goes to AP who wrote...

History is best left to the honesty of the common man in his search for a common truth, rather than in the highly questionable hands of 'experts'.

Well said that man!
Which leads to my point in all this....

Whoever sits on what side on what fence, for whatever reason....

Happy New Year Ladies and Gentlemen. No, I won't suggest a New Year's resolution.

best wishes

Phil

PS

Simon wrote...

That makes three-and-a-half camps.

If we add Francis to this we have more "camping-ology" Oh, the bells. the bells....from the Whitechapel foundary perchance?

[Stephen Thomas]

We've shifted from AP's chicken to Stephen's egg.
Now something must come out.

Stay tuned for oeuf shattering revelations David.

My best wishes to you for the New Year

[Stephen Thomas]

What do you mean by a "curate's egg"?

Hi Rob

It's a common Brit phrase meaning 'good in parts'

I'm sure it'll be on Google.

[DVV]

We've shifted from AP's chicken to Stephen's egg.
Now something must come out.

[robhouse]

Hello Stephen,

What do you mean by a "curate's egg"?

RH

[Natalie Severn]

It isactually A DEFINITELY ASCERTAINABLE FACT -written and recorded

that Kosminski was NOT considered "a danger to others" .That particular "definitely ascertainable fact " was never "adjusted" by the medical staff of either Colney Hatch or Leavesdon. Then as now medical staff could have been sued for putting other patients and staff at risk by writing half truths about dangerous inmates.There is no record whatever of Kosminski even having been put under restraint-a very common practice then and even now.But there are details of the danger David Cohen was at Colney Hatch and what restraints had to be used.

[Cap'n Jack]

I'd bet my headless chicken against Trev's headless chicken anytime.
My advance is always bigger.

[Simon Wood]

Hi Rob,

If the scenario you describe actually took place in February 1891 and was known only to top CID officials, why was Chief Constable Macnaghten "inclined to exonerate" Kosminski and Ostrog in favour of Druitt?

Regards,

Simon

[DVV]

Hi Stephen,

chill out, my friend, I'll soon replace Kosminski by "the maniac of a most virulent type".

Best wishes,
David

[Stephen Thomas]

Errrrrr......

One more time folks

Anderson does not mention anybody called Kosminski.

He may well have never heard of him.

His suspect/culprit isn't named.

The relevant Swanson marginalia may well be a Curate's egg.

[DVV]

If the above conjectures are correct, then the police certainly would have wanted to keep the facts about Kozminski a guarded secret. This is supported by Swanson's statement that the suspect was known only to top officials of CID... we may assume that others were aware of Kozminski (members of the city CID, etc) but that probably the details were known only to top officials at CID and the HO.
RH

Hi Rob,

Ok, I see and admit some of your points.

As to what I've quoted, well, we're back into conspiracy...

A suspect "watched" day and night in the East End and only known to "top officials"?

Hmmm...

Amitiés, best wishes,
David

[DVV]

Tottie Fay in Broadmoor??? Where are you getting this from? Anderson? I thought Totty was a press invention.

What has irked me for many years in reading various conclusions drawn by many posters on this site is that just because something doesn't appear to make sense on the surface, is that it couldn't have happened at all. What we have is fragmentary, so when you say the police apparently didn't warn the asylum about Kosminski, you are basing that assumption on the surviving written record, or what has been discovered thus far.

Hi again Scott,

as far as I've understood, Tottie Fay could have inspired the name of "Fairy Fay", though it's unlikely (the song being more likely).
Anyway, Tootie is real, and ended her days in Broadmoor, acc to Paul Begg (Chapter: "The beginning" in "The facts").

Amitiés
David

[robhouse]

Hi AP,

I have always assumed it was Kozminski's family that tied him up and brought him to the workhouse.

DVV,

I don't know what the police would have communicated, nor to whom. But I think it is a very important question to ponder. One must remember a few things:

a) The police did not have sufficient evidence to convict Kozminski, as Anderson himself said. Thus they could not have put him into Broadmoor, nor would they have been able to do much of anything, legally speaking. However, the extraordinary nature of the Ripper murders may have mitigated against such obstacles, and forced the police to go beyond normal measures in coming up with a "solution."

b.) It would not have been desirable to the police nor the home office that it should be publicized that the police "knew" or even suspected that they knew who Jack the Ripper was, but were unable to convict him for lack of proof. At the very least, if it became public knowledge that Kozminski was a "strong suspect" he and probably his family would have been subject to a lynch mob. Even worse so because he was a Jew... the entire Jewish community might have been targeted for violent retribution. The police, in other words, must have been worried as to the larger ramifications of the disclosure of such information.

With this in mind, we must ask, what would the police have done? Who would they have informed, and so on?

If the above conjectures are correct, then the police certainly would have wanted to keep the facts about Kozminski a guarded secret. This is supported by Swanson's statement that the suspect was known only to top officials of CID... we may assume that others were aware of Kozminski (members of the city CID, etc) but that probably the details were known only to top officials at CID and the HO.

So who would they choose to tell? And what would have been recorded as to the matter in official publicly accessible documents?

I would conjecture that the police may have told some of the higher officials at the asylum, but that little about their suspicions re JTR would have been recorded in public documents. Kozminski was quite possibly secluded, restrained, chemically restrained etc at Colney Hatch... and nothing at all is known about his first 16 years at Leavesden. By 1910, he was essentially catatonic.

I assume the police may have cooperated with the family in having him put away, but their participation was quite possibly discreet and behind the scenes.

RH

[Scott Nelson]

Tottie Fay in Broadmoor??? Where are you getting this from? Anderson? I thought Totty was a press invention.

What has irked me for many years in reading various conclusions drawn by many posters on this site is that just because something doesn't appear to make sense on the surface, is that it couldn't have happened at all. What we have is fragmentary, so when you say the police apparently didn't warn the asylum about Kosminski, you are basing that assumption on the surviving written record, or what has been discovered thus far.

[Trevor Marriott]

Before the year passes I feel i should contribute once more before wishing everyone a happy new year.

A question was posted earlier on this thread which was in my mind a very good question. The question was framed along the line of How it was that all of the so called senior officers Anderson/Monro/Littlechild/Abberline when publishing their memoirs many years after the murders ceased all suggested they new the identity of the ripper or what fate had befallen him and why did they not mention them at the time of he murders.

The answer is quite simple. None of them did know the identity of the killer. In later years they volunteered nothing more than uncorrobrated theories or personal opinions. You only have to look at the different suspects they suggested. To date no one has been able to come up with any direct evidence to prove any of their theories or opinions

If anyone of a senior rank knew he would certainly not have kept it a secret even the name of a suspect would have neccesitated an enquiry.

All this rubbish about the police knowing his identity and incarcerating him and not being able to prosecute him. With such a high profile case they would have without a doubt put him before a court even it were later deemed that the person was insane. The truth is again there was no evidence.

As a result since the theories and opinions still linger today researchers have been running around like headless chickens trying to find the missing pieces of the jigsaw when they dont even exist.

happy new year

The truth is still out there