Did Anderson Know

[robhouse]

In addition, (and I may be wrong here) Anderson's 1908 comment that "the author of those murders [i.e. the Whitechapel murders] was a lunatic, and if evidence had been available to bring him to justice he would have been sent to Broadmoor" seems to suggest that Broadmoor was an asylum specifically for people who were guilty of a crime, but also insane. In other words, it would deal with those criminals who were deemed not responsible because of the MNaughten Rules, but were still guilty of the crime (and thus dangerous, and should be locked up in the maximum security Broadmoor Asylum). Anderson's statement clearly indicates that the reason Kozminski was NOT sent to Broadmoor is that the police had no evidence to prove conclusively that he was the Ripper.

And to re-iterate, Colney Hatch was NOT for non-dangerous patients, nor was it an Imbeciles asylum lke Leavesden, Caterham, and Darenth Schools in Kent.

Rob H

Rob H

[The Good Michael]

Rob,

I did throw up. I too, am sick of people rehashing the same tired, unsupported claims from old books about Kosminsky. It's best to say we don't have all the details about what he was like in the asylum except that he deteriorated while there. That's all we can know right now, barring some revelation from relatives.

Cheers,

Mike

[Natalie Severn]

Natalie,

Can you please stick to the facts. First of all, as I have posted before, in reply to one of your posts I believe... we do not have Kozminski's records "throughout his ENTIRE THIRTY YEAR STAY." We have his Colney Hatch records from 1891-4, then nothing for 16 years, then his Leavesden records from 1910-19. In other words, we have 13 years of records... less than half.

Secondly, Colney Hatch was not an asylum for imbeciles. Thirdly you obviously know nothing about the Victorian medical or legal usage of the term imbecile, nor about the criteria for entry into an "Imbeciles" asylum. The term had a different connotation from the modern one. And in any case, Aaron was not an imbecile, as is clearly noted on his certification, admission order, and the 1901 census.

Thirdly, although Aaron's admission to Colney Hatch claims he was not violent, this was almost certainly simply communicated to Mile End or Colney Hatch officials by Kozminski's family. And there are at least two cited instances of Aaron being violent.

The next time I hear this "harmless imbecile" phrase I am going to throw up.

Rob H

Rob,
First, I happen to know quite a lot about Victorian Mental Institutions,having attended a series of lectures at Hanwell Preservation Society and later on Community Education about Joseph Conolly,the pioneering doctor of the 1850"s who oversaw the radical overhaul of both St Bernards and its sister hospital Colney Hatch and the treatment of the mentally ill who were sent there.I am also fully familiar with the discussions that have been had on the term imbecile and well aware of its usage in 1888.One other point: I have worked in such institutions as Colney Hatch and Leavesdon and all such work required prior training by the psychiatric medical team.
The point I was making was that neither Colney Hatch nor Leavesdon would have been suitable long term institutions for the Whitechapel murderer,also known as Jack the Ripper.There were several insitutions that housed the criminally insane such as Thomas Cutbush-----and several other equally well known Broadmoor Inmates who had committed knife crimes and murders and were held at Her Majesty"s Pleasure.It is absurd to believe
that Aaron Kosminski,a man who remained in hospitals for the mentally ill and NOT the criminally insane[implying they were a danger to others] was some kind of burnt out wreck in 1891.He was not.He suffered from "hallucinations".Quite common in a certain mental illness.
We do not need "daily records" to discover whether or not he ever committed a violent act.The very fact that he remained where he remained speaks volumes about health and safety factors that would have had to have been taken into consideration viz a viz staff and other patients.
His sad progression from the notes we do have ,which to my mind are more than sufficient to understand what was happening,indicate a slow disintegration of personality that deteriorated sharply in 1894 but picked up again,episodically, in the early nineteen hundreds only to decline again sharply a few years before his death."burn out" as it is sometimes termed,took place over some 15 years----not in some burst of cathartic psychosis at the time of Mary Kelly"s death or something.The progress of his illness was typical of a pattern of decline that existed prior to the discovery of drugs that can secure remission,when taken regularly,
Best
Norma

[Natalie Severn]

Rob,

I did throw up. I too, am sick of people rehashing the same tired, unsupported claims from old books about Kosminsky. It's best to say we don't have all the details about what he was like in the asylum except that he deteriorated while there. That's all we can know right now, barring some revelation from relatives.

Cheers,

Mike

Can I ask you,have you ever worked in an institution for the mentally ill?What training do you have to state claims are "unsupported"?
Norma

[robhouse]

Natalie,

I think you are implying a number of things in your last post. First you seem to be implying that if the police deemed Kozminski "dangerous" they would have had the legal authority to consign him to an asylum like Broadmoor, even without a trial, evidence etc. Please confirm whether or not you are saying this.

Second, I said nothing at all about Aaron's deterioration, nor any assumptions on that matter. I do not think Aaron was catatonic in 1891, although it does appear that he was by 1910. Also, in my opinion, Aaron's transfer to Leavesden in 1894 indicates that he was probably significantly deteriorating by then.

Imbeciles asylums came about as a way of dealing with the large number of chronic uncurable patients in workhouses and asylums. The term imbecile was one of three categories of insanity... the other two being "lunatic" and "person of unsound mind". Person of unsound mind is defined as a "person who by reason of a morbid condition of intellect is incapable of managing himself and his affairs." Although as I was informed by author David Wright, the precise definition of a “person of unsound mind” “was murky and confusing, ... and it was not unusual for the terms ‘lunatic’ and ‘person of unsound mind’ to be used more or less interchangeably.”

Aaron is specifically referred to not once, but twice as a "person of unsound mind.".. not an imbecile. The 1901 census refers to him as a lunatic.

Furthermore, the criteria for admission to Leavesden was NOT that a patient be an imbecile (as I think some authors have assumed, including apparently Phillip Sugden and Martin Fido) but instead that the patient be both uncurable and not-dangerous/ not disruptive. And even these admission criteria were not apparently stricly adhered to. In any case, there were many different classifications of insane people in Leavesden, including imbeciles (mentally handicapped people) and lunatics (insane people).

On no document is Aaron ever referred to as an imbecile. In both the legal and medical terminology of the day, he was not an imbecile. He was insane. So I will hope people will stop referring to him as an imbecile.

Rob H

[Chris]

The point I was making was that neither Colney Hatch nor Leavesdon would have been suitable long term institutions for the Whitechapel murderer,also known as Jack the Ripper.There were several insitutions that housed the criminally insane such as Thomas Cutbush-----and several other equally well known Broadmoor Inmates who had committed knife crimes and murders and were held at Her Majesty"s Pleasure.It is absurd to believe
that Aaron Kosminski,a man who remained in hospitals for the mentally ill and NOT the criminally insane[implying they were a danger to others] was some kind of burnt out wreck in 1891.

As you know, I think it's very unlikely that Aaron had anything to do with the Whitechapel Murders.

However, I don't think your argument - that he couldn't have been the Ripper because he was committed to Colney Hatch rather than Broadmoor - is a valid one.

I think I'm right in saying that he could not have been detained at H.M.'s Pleasure unless there was sufficient evidence to indict him for the murders (no doubt legal experts will correct me if I'm wrong). That is why Anderson wrote that the murderer would have been sent to Broadmoor "if evidence had been available to bring him to justice".

So the fact that Aaron went to Colney Hatch rather than Broadmoor simply shows there wasn't sufficient evidence for him to be sent to trial. But arguing that this in itself proves he didn't commit the murders isn't logical. One might as well argue that because no one was ever tried for the murders, no one could have committed them.

Of course, it does demonstrate that, whatever suspicions the police may have had, they didn't have any evidence strong enough to stand up in court.

And of course, as Rob says, Colney Hatch wasn't an institution for imbeciles. Aaron was committed to Colney Hatch as a lunatic, and only transferred to Leavesden - which was a hospital for imbeciles - in 1894, presumably because his condition had deteriorated.

[robhouse]

"Aaron is specifically referred to not once, but twice as a "person of unsound mind.".. not an imbecile. The 1901 census refers to him as a lunatic."

And I will add, other patients on the same page of the census ARE specifically referred to as "imbeciles" so there was clearly a differentiation.

RH

[Natalie Severn]

Lets put it this way then Chris:I have never ever heard of a dangerous lunatic murderer being "detained" in an "open" institution such as Colney Hatch was and Leavesdon was in the late 1880"s and early 1900"s.Ways were found to make sure they were in appropriately "safe and secure" houses.It wasn"t part of the prevailing liberalising philosophy of either Colney Hatch or Leavesdon to have people who were a risk to others [in terms of "life and limb"] hovering in the wings of the amateur dramatic productions or sabotaging the mixed sex painting for pleasure classes!

[robhouse]

But Natalie, Chris's point is pretty clear... there was no proof that Aaron was a murderer... so there would have been no legal basis for committing Aaron to Broadmoor which, as I understand, was for insane "criminals".

You say "Ways were found to make sure they were in appropriately "safe and secure" houses." but what is your proof of this. And what do you mean exactly? What ways?

Rob H

[Chris]

Lets put it this way then Chris:I have never ever heard of a dangerous lunatic murderer being "detained" in an "open" institution such as Colney Hatch was and Leavesdon was in the late 1880"s and early 1900"s.

Well, we already know that Aaron was described as not dangerous to others when he was committed to Colney Hatch.

That's stated in his records. But it doesn't follow from the fact that he was in Colney Hatch, because clearly some of those who were sent there were considered dangerous to others. They couldn't be sent to Broadmoor unless there was good evidence that they had committed a criminal offence.

[Natalie Severn]

But Natalie, Chris's point is pretty clear... there was no proof that Aaron was a murderer... so there would have been no legal basis for committing Aaron to Broadmoor which, as I understand, was for insane "criminals".

You say "Ways were found to make sure they were in appropriately "safe and secure" houses." but what is your proof of this. And what do you mean exactly? What ways?

Rob H

Well its clear that staff would have had to have been informed if a very dangerous person was in their care.The policies of Colney Hatch and Leavesdon were to provide an "alternative" community---a busy but pleasurable place of "work", as close to a working community as possible with as few rules and regulations as possible.Clearly Aaron did not fit into this scheme of things very well anyway ,refusing to work and sometimes refusing to speak in English or wash---even though he could speak in English and could wash and dress himself when he felt like it.But really,the picture that emerges is of a rather withrawn person,living so much in his own world and fantasy life ---that world being "directed" by some sort of " universal instinct"---- that no matter what was provided in terms of concrete and real experiences ,he chose to retreat to that world.Whereas what these institutions were all about was "breaking the fantasy" and trying to help the person cope better with a real world.But it seems to me doctors were well aware of his delusions and obsessions and though staff found him stubborn and difficult at times, they didnt actually find him " acting out" dangerous fantasies,so they got on with it and managed him as best they could.
But had Aaron"s fantasy life been all about laying women out and cutting them up, and on top of all that, staff had had reports that he was THE Jack the Ripper who in 1888 actually acted out his delusions in the streets of Whitechapel,he would have been considered a huge danger to others and unsuitable for both institutions his needs would have been considered outside their remit.

[Natalie Severn]

Well, we already know that Aaron was described as not dangerous to others when he was committed to Colney Hatch.

That's stated in his records. But it doesn't follow from the fact that he was in Colney Hatch, because clearly some of those who were sent there were considered dangerous to others. They couldn't be sent to Broadmoor unless there was good evidence that they had committed a criminal offence.

Yes,that must sometimes have happened---it did with David Cohen apparently.But in those cases,more often than not the person spent their days in padded cells---and jackets of restraint ---a state of affairs that still goes on today.But its clear,even from the records we have,that the progress of Aaron"s illness wasnt like this.There isnt a hint of him spending time in padded cells or wearing a straight jacket.

[robhouse]

Well Natalie,

I assume you are suggesting that if the police considered Aaron a top suspect, then they would have informed Asylum staff about this. That is a reasonable idea, but it is just speculation I think. I dont think we can know exactly what the police would have done if Aaron's family had committed him to an asylum, AND they thought he was a strong suspect in the case. For one thing, I am quite sure that if the police informed asylum staff that Kozminski was (quite possibly) the Ripper, then word would have gotten out, which I doubt they would have wanted.

In any case, this does not have anything to do with the original objection I had to your post, which was simply that you were said numerous things that were wrong. Specifically that we have all 30 years of Aaron's records, that there was no indication of violence, and that, as you said "Colney Hatch and Leavesdon were for the non-dangerous "imbeciles" as such mentally ill people like Kosminski were labelled."

Kozminski was NEVER labelled an imbecile.

Rob H

[Chris]

Natalie

It seems to me that what you're really arguing is that the authorities at Colney Hatch would have been warned if the police had believed Aaron to be the Ripper - not that Aaron would have been sent to Broadmoor rather than Colney Hatch in that case.

I think that's a better argument, but the problem is that we know so little about how strong the police suspicions were at the time, when they materialised and who they told about them.

The other problem is that I think I'm right in saying that the statements about Aaron not being considered dangerous were both made at the time when Aaron was committed to Colney Hatch. At least those are the only such statements I can find in my notes. We know that it was Aaron's family, not the police, who took him to the workhouse from where he was sent to Colney Hatch. Given the uncertainties surrounding the interpretation of the Swanson Marginalia, we really can't be sure that Aaron was under police surveillance at that time, so it may well be that the police didn't know he had been committed until after the event. If they did then communicate their suspicions to Colney Hatch, where would those suspicions have been noted? Given the sensitivity of the situation, would they necessarily have been entered in the documents that survive, which would have been routinely accessible to so many of the asylum staff? Or would they have been made known to senior staff, and communicated to others on a "need to know" basis?

So I think it would be a mistake to press that argument too far. After all, you could advance a similar argument - that if the police had seriously considered Aaron to be a suspect they would have warned Colney Hatch about him. But I think we can see from what Macnaghten, Anderson and Swanson say that Aaron was at least a serious suspect.

[Natalie Severn]

For what its worth I did not mean that.I meant that Colney Hatch and Leavesdon were not the places where dangerous lunatics were sent----which Broadmoor was.
I am very happy indeed Rob, to accept that nobody labelled Aaron an imbecile.Thank God for that then.
Likewise.30 years was simply a way of saying that this man had been in one or other of these institutions since being 25 or so .His records began on admission in 1891 and ended in his death in 1919 and at no time do we read of him presenting as a violent unmanageable patient.---unless you insist on using the single reference to the chair and his threatening his sister with a knife as evidence of other violent tendencies----they do in fact show a level of violent behaviour --- but we dont know what sort of household it was or how intolerable it may have been for an odd ball like Aaron to have to cope with - the family dynamics that is.Certainly once he was in professional care he seems to have more found less aggressive ways of responding,however awkward he could be.
Must go to bed now----have had hay fever all day and its wiped me out---will look in tomorrow---
Cheers
N