Anderson in NY Times, March 20, 1910

[The Good Michael]

---so long as they dont keep suggesting Kosminski"s admission to either Colney Hatch or Leavesdon had anything to do with him being a dangerous criminal such as Jack the Ripper.

Of course that wouldn't be the reason given. Duh! It couldn't have been.

"My brother-in-law is Jack the Ripper. Would you mind if we left him here?"

No one has suggested such a ridiculous thing and to read such thing into any suggestion is as mad as suggesting Anderson was some religious fanatic hell-bent on persecuting Jews. No one would logically suggest that either.

Cheers,

Mike

[Natalie Severn]

Of course that wouldn't be the reason given. Duh! It couldn't have been.

"My brother-in-law is Jack the Ripper. Would you mind if we left him here?"

No one has suggested such a ridiculous thing and to read such thing into any suggestion is as mad as suggesting Anderson was some religious fanatic hell-bent on persecuting Jews. No one would logically suggest that either.

Cheers,

Mike

Mike,
Can we be a bit clearer here.My original post re Robert Anderson and the possibility that he suffered from "religious mania" was addressed to Jeff who said his brother had expert knowledge about schizophrenia.As I myself have some knowledge about schizophrenia having worked in Art Therapy in a large psychiatric hospital in the North West of England,I have been profoundly puzzled by Aaron Kosminski"s case notes
,especially those recording upon his admission that he was HARMLESS and NOT A DANGER TO OTHERS both at Colney Hatch and later Leavesdon. Quite frankly I believe it to be utterly ridiculous to say this person could possibly have been the dangerous killer that JtR was.
Yes I do wonder about whether Robert Anderson had some sort of paranoia.His religious texts,what I have seen of them,strike me as being saturated with messianic fervour of a kind I have come to associate with religious fanaticism or mania-so I asked Jeff to discuss this with his brother to see what he thought.This way it begins to make sense as to why Anderson might have had such revulsion about about a mentally ill young man such as Aaron Kosminski whose symptoms were delusional and whose behaviour particularly ---according to Anderson- was "lower than the beast". -his "self abuse" being one symptom referred to by several people and which would likely have been an anathema to someone given to quoting and writing on biblical passages like Anderson did.And crucially for Anderson this "loathsome beast" fitted his profile of a "low class Polish Jew" from Whitechapel who he believed could have been sheltered from Gentile Justice by his people.

[The Good Michael]

Quite frankly I believe it to be utterly ridiculous to say this person could possibly have been the dangerous killer that JtR was.

I understand exactly what you are saying. I suggest that no one who didn't want their brother executed, would have him committed as a mutilating butcher of women, and especially immigrant Jews who were already feeling the pains of immigration and the isolation from British society. I can give you plenty of cases where dangerous murderers were nothing of the sort once behind bars or in custody of some sort. You can recall those cases yourself. I will say to you that your arguments regarding Anderson as a Jew-hater and a religious zealot capable of absolutely foul deeds, are far more absurd than the idea of a family protecting a brother and themselves from retaliation. It is my opinion only. I may be not thinking straight at the moment, but let others judge which situation is the furthest from possible.

Cheers,

Mike

[tnb]

Simon (or anyone)- do we know what the procedures were for a family who had commited a relative subsequently getting them released? Did such patients (as may be suspected) enter a slightly different stream or were you, to put it bluntly, once a lunatic always a lunatic?

You assert that Kosminski could not have been especially violent as he was admitted by his family and not on a doctor's insistence; this seems a reasonable assumption but do we know it is necessarily true? Would it have been the case that when a family took in a prospective patient they would have been triaged for such behaviours and commited by magistrates in addition if that was the case (and thus it would be recorded), or were patients once presented by their family (and thus on their family's evidence, ie 'he's harmless really') taken as they were found? There would be no need to get the magistrates involved after all, as the patient's commital was not in doubt.

From what I know of the system during the LVP it does seem possible that family's commiting a member would have been able to secure some degree of preferential treatment for them, but this seems to have applied primarily to families with a fair bit of money behind them, which I think it safe to assume the Kosminskis did not. I have no idea how this would relate to procedures regarding discharge, however.

What I am getting at is whether, was Kosminski's family's intention (as is often suggested) in commiting him simply to avoid his being tried for certain crimes (including or not one or more of the Whitechapel murders), how easy would it have been for them, down the line, to get him out of said institution? Ergo, can we read much into the fact they did not do so? If it was possible and yet they did not, it would seem to add credence to the suggestion that they were genuinely concerned about his behaviour being a threat to their own safety, rather than simply concerned about a 'harmless lunatic', would it not?

I do have a couple of excellent reference books on the history of mental illness and its management in the uk but unfortunately do not have them to hand at the minute- I will have a flick through later and see if I uncover anything, but you sound as if you have already done a fair bit of research of your own?

[The Good Michael]

TNB,

In the states there was commitment for moral insanity by the family. That included sexual infidelity at times and also homosexuality and masturbation, but according to one source, Alicia Curtis, may have been a precursor to anti-social behavior disorder. It seems that police could commit someone and so could family. In fact, in the States, up into the 1930s, it seems to have been a way for husbands to get rid of wives.

I have no more details, though I have fired off some emails. I would guess that the police were involved in bringing the committed person in. There would have been a period of observation and not just the taking someone's word for a person's lunacy, though I'm sure money changing hands would have been a problem and a push in either direction.

In making a case for Kosminski, it is necessary to assemble some sort of plausible scenario(s). Of course having to assemble anything casts doubt on the plausibility, doesn't it.

Cheers,

Mike

[Simon Wood]

Hi TNB,

I haven't made a study of the particular subject, but in my researches I have encountered the incidence of Broadmoor patients petitioning for release, so it's not beyond the bounds of possibility that similar procedures took place at Colney Hatch. But as Aaron Kosminski died, still institutionalised, in 1919, and there was little improvement in his health or general demeanour during his time at Leavesden, it appears unlikely that he could ever have been successfully rehabilitated back into society.

I mean you no disrespect, but Aaron Kozminski's family committing him to avoid his being tried for certain crimes, most notably the WM, is nothing more that a handy scenario for fudging the issues, and its consideration is about as big a waste of time as trying to square the circle. If the story was true, then in the light of an on-going Ripper investigation Kozminski's family would have been laying themselves wide open to a charge of conspiring to pervert the course of justice.

I have done little to no research into mental illness, the reason being that as there is not one jot of evidence to suggest that Kosminski was guilty of any crime—let alone the WM— any discussion of his mental condition is completely redundant.

Regards,

Simon

[The Good Michael]

the reason being that as there is not one jot of evidence to suggest that Kosminski was guilty of any crime

Simon,

With respect, Kosminski being named as the suspect is evidence enough to look for possibilities. Your dismissal because you don't have a clue via some sort of police record, doesn't make it implausible or impossible that he was the murderer. Maybe he wasn't, but we need to be able to dismiss all plausible arguments to be sure. We haven't come close to doing that.

Cheers,

Mike

[Simon Wood]

Hi Michael,

You're putting the cart before the horse. What we must first discover is why Kosminski was named as a suspect by the same policeman who "was inclined to exonerate" him in favour of someone else. Once we surmount that piece of Alice in Wonderland logic we might begin to get somewhere.

Personally, I do not believe that Kosminski falls into the plausible category.

Regards,

Simon

[tnb]

Simon

Very interesting arguments, and I appreciate*the*Broadmoor info.

I would like to point out however that my post was merely intended in the vein of gathering information to test hypothesis (hypothesii?), and as TGM says that is what me must do with every hypothesis, whether we like it or not. Kosminski is one of 3 suspects named more or less contemporarily with the investigation; some people are even still looking into Ostrog for the same reason. We cannot simply dismiss them.

In that scenario, personal opinion is largely irrelevant, however, if you re-read my post you may see that I was NOT suggesting Kosminski being commited by his family, merely I was, actually, suggesting an interpretation mitigating against such a scenario ('why didn't they get him out then?'). It is not some fly-by-night theory I came up with myself, it forms the basis of a lot of people's arguments. Thus it deserves attention.

I do not accept that the family would have been liable for prosecution, if the above was the case after all, for commiting Kosminski, especially if a doctor had as you suggest also testified to his 'lunacy', which would have rendered him immune to full prosecution anyway. Sorry.

That said, this is an interesting debate (Thankyou TGM for your reply too) and I of course mean no offence by any of the above.

Natalie - you have every right to raise your point and I for one find it intriguing. I am of little use to you I must admit as I am sketchy on Anderson's biography, but I will certainly monitor developments! Unfortunately you have I feel opened a hornet's nest as debates about 'religious lunacy' inevitably descend into a debate on the nature of religion - as an atheist, to me someone being guided by instruction from above is mentally ill, but to a devout believer the line is not so clear cut. All I can say is good luck!

I do not see that Natalie is suggesting Anderson as a lunatic or even worse some kind of suspect, but you cannot deny the irony of the similarities - and the fact that one man was taken for a lunatic poor foreign Jew and the other was allowed to publish his thoughts and maintain high office says a lot for the power of race and class in the LVP.

[DVV]

Kosminski is one of 3 suspects named more or less contemporarily with the investigation

Hi TNB,

I rather think he was named after the failure of the investigation.

Amitiés,
David

[Roy Corduroy]

- as an atheist, to me someone being guided by instruction from above is mentally ill

The first step in any good investigation is, of course, to gather a room full of atheists interpreting religious tracts. At this rate, we'll have the Jack the Ripper case solved in no time. And why stop there? Next, sic the atheists to breaking the Navajo Secret Radio Code used in World War II.

Hot Dog !

Roy

[jason_c]

Masturbation of course does not make someone go mad. Excessive masturbation however can lead to psychologcal problems or be a symptom of these problems.

Comparing Kosminski to Anderson is nonsense. Kosminski ate out of the gutter and claimed he knew the movements of all mankind.

[Simon Wood]

Hi Jason,

Nobody has compared Kosminski to Anderson except in a brief abstract discussion on the various manifestations of madness, of which religious zealotry is one.

Regards,

Simon

[Natalie Severn]

Thankyou tnb.You are quite right.I was not suggesting that Anderson was a lunatic or JtR.
Like you I have some difficulty understanding people who are religious fanatics such as Anderson .
Perhaps Jeff will let us know what his brother thinks about the schizoid characteristics that appear in the intense religiosity of Anderson"s theological writings,such as "The Second Coming of Christ" and Blood Sacrifice etc.
Best
Norma

[Chris]

A while ago Howard Brown posted on jtrforums.com an article published in the Butte Weekly Miner on 2 December 1897, which was recently posted again by Chris Scott, and which I have only just read in full:

http://www.jtrforums.com/showthread.php?t=9366

This article is credited to "Ex-Attache", which we know - thanks to the Who's Who in America entry which Simon Wood referred me to earlier - was another pseudonym of Frederick Cunliffe-Owen ("A Veteran Diplomat"), the author of the 1910 New York Times article:

http://forum.casebook.org/showpost.php?p=110969&postcount=15

The 1897 article, like the 1910 one, speaks of the practice of detaining the criminally insane at Broadmoor during Her Majesty's Pleasure, and asserts that the Ripper had been detained there:
Incidentally it may be mentioned that it was at Broadmoor that the blue-blooded perpetrator of the Whitechapel murders is now admitted by the authorities to have breathed his last, and it is likewise to Broadmoor that will be consigned without trial the well-born and hitherto successful member of the bar whose homicidal mania has now been ascertained by the police to have led him to perpetrate the mysterious murder of Miss Camp, on the Suburban London railroad, last spring, and likewise to put to death in an equally unaccountable fashion a young woman whose body was found some six weeks ago at Windsor. It is probable that his true name will be kept from the public precisely in the same way as that of the author of the "Jack the Ripper" series of murders.

(It's interesting that the Ripper murder is linked to that of Elizabeth Camp, as these two cases would also be linked by Anderson in 1908, and an unnamed "well-known Scotland Yard detective" in 1905.)

Obviously the details given in these two articles are difficult to reconcile. In the 1897 one, the Ripper is supposed already to have died at Broadmoor, but in 1910 he is said to have been sent there "five or six years ago".