Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

hot potato

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Michael W Richards
    replied
    Originally posted by Scott Nelson View Post
    Well I wouldn't go that far Michael...
    Pretty judgmental reading back over it, fair point Scott.

    Leave a comment:


  • DJA
    replied
    Especially as far as Abberline goes .....

    If you wanted someone to protect the upper echelon at the expense of the lower,he was your man.

    Leave a comment:


  • Scott Nelson
    replied
    Well I wouldn't go that far Michael...

    Leave a comment:


  • Michael W Richards
    replied
    Originally posted by Simon Wood View Post
    Hi John,

    I'd hardly call it an obsession. Anderson was an accomplished liar. He used to practice in his sleep.

    The only reason people hang on to Anderson's every word is to lend credence to the patently absurd idea that Kosminski was the suspect/murderer.

    I prefer to believe [and I admit to having nothing to substantiate my belief] that after the MM was written, Macnaghten promoted the lawyer, Anderson promoted the Polish Jew, with both ignoring Ostrog because he would have been a hard sell. His Autumn 1888 alibi and the fact that he'd been paid 10 compensation for false arrest were a matter of record.

    Hope you're staying safe during these wretched times.

    Regards,

    Simon
    In truth Simon I have my doubts just how tasked and committed Anderson was to these cases. I think many things he said, the fact that immediately upon being assigned duties he leaves for the continent having later to be summoned home when the murders continue, from Paris...a centre for all the Counter Intelligence, Espionage, National Security, Revolutionary organizations on the continent. Things like the stuff he did in his real job. I think he was the only one whose opinion was that the door to door searches in September revealed that the killer was an immigrant jew whose relations and friends were concealing him. He stated the killer was unequivocally such a person. Without any evidence at all to support it, and as Scott recently reminded, with lower ranking officers directly refuting him.

    Personally, he is for me just a sidebar in this whole mess. An egotistical self righteous anti-Semite. Whose job it was to keep secrets. Monro is different. More moral character there, more internal compass usage. Most of the detectives I see as genuinely pursuing this killer with all they could muster, and I don't see anyone more committed to answers than Abberline. The guy who made his career in these neighborhoods. The guy who knew the streets. And the people on them. Many of the others are upper echelon corporate types, who would have seen these murders as distractions at best. They had bigger fish to fry.

    Leave a comment:


  • Simon Wood
    replied
    Hi John,

    I'd hardly call it an obsession. Anderson was an accomplished liar. He used to practice in his sleep.

    The only reason people hang on to Anderson's every word is to lend credence to the patently absurd idea that Kosminski was the suspect/murderer.

    I prefer to believe [and I admit to having nothing to substantiate my belief] that after the MM was written, Macnaghten promoted the lawyer, Anderson promoted the Polish Jew, with both ignoring Ostrog because he would have been a hard sell. His Autumn 1888 alibi and the fact that he'd been paid 10 compensation for false arrest were a matter of record.

    Hope you're staying safe during these wretched times.

    Regards,

    Simon

    Leave a comment:


  • John Malcolm
    replied
    Originally posted by Scott Nelson View Post
    Perhaps the most telling recollection of all is rarely commented on:

    "Now we have Sir Robert Anderson saying that 'Jack the Ripper' was a Jew. That I challenge him to prove; and, what is more, it was never suggested at the time of the murders. ..... The number of descriptions that have been given of 'Jack the Ripper' are truly astonishing, but I challenge anyone to prove that there was a tittle of evidence against any man, woman or child in connexion with the murders, as no man was ever seen in the company of the women who were found dead."

    --Edmund Reid Morning Advertiser 23 April 1910

    Here we have an ex-Metropolitan Detective Inspector openly challenging his former superior about the Ripper's identity. Its not a nebulous attempt to befuddle the issue -- it's a blunt statement contradicting Anderson's belief.
    I should have included this in ...Another Dead End? Because I do have a reply to this, as well as other criticisms of Anderson that were not included in the first edition. In short, this is just another policeman pissed off at Anderson for saying what he said. "...it was never suggested at the time of the murders."? Really? Bitterness towards Anderson (H. Smith, et al) is justified, in my opinion, but "challenging him to prove" what he said is clearly a safe and hollow statement that needed no reply. Could Reid have been so obviously oblivious to the Macnaghten memoranda, or maybe his memory had failed him, yes? One other famous criticism used, found in H.L. Adam's Behind the Scenes at Scotland Yard relating to Anderson's "failing memory" is also overblown and deserves addressing. And I'm currently also tackling Simon Wood's Anderson obsession in Deconstructing Jack.

    I do appreciate the challenges Scott, keep them coming. I don't have an answer for everything, but I'll continue fighting the current until something more substantial comes along that might change my mind. When that happens, I'll admit defeat and disappear into the ether with my tail between my legs. Until then...

    Leave a comment:


  • Scott Nelson
    replied

    Perhaps the most telling recollection of all is rarely commented on:

    "Now we have Sir Robert Anderson saying that 'Jack the Ripper' was a Jew. That I challenge him to prove; and, what is more, it was never suggested at the time of the murders. ..... The number of descriptions that have been given of 'Jack the Ripper' are truly astonishing, but I challenge anyone to prove that there was a tittle of evidence against any man, woman or child in connexion with the murders, as no man was ever seen in the company of the women who were found dead."

    --Edmund Reid Morning Advertiser 23 April 1910

    Here we have an ex-Metropolitan Detective Inspector openly challenging his former superior about the Ripper's identity. Its not a nebulous attempt to befuddle the issue -- it's a blunt statement contradicting Anderson's belief.

    Leave a comment:


  • Simon Wood
    replied
    Hi RJ,

    Yours is without doubt the best ever description of the collective recollection of the Metropolitan Police regarding the identity of the Whitechapel murderer.

    The sooner we all agree that the LVP police were, by agreement, talking bollocks about Jacky Boy, the happier and more contented our lives will be.

    Stay well.

    Simon

    Leave a comment:


  • rjpalmer
    replied
    Originally posted by Simon Wood View Post
    Hi Scott,

    You might be onto something.

    The Aberdeen Journal, 5th December 1949, awarded Fred Wensley the ultimate posthumous accolade—

    “It is said he was the only living person who knew the identity of Jack the Ripper.”

    Stay well.

    Simon
    Another complication: Wensley considered Francis Coles a Ripper victim, which is hard to reconcile with...just about anything...let alone Cohen, Kosminski, or Druitt...

    Still, I don't think we can allow a Wensley to bother our sleep in the same way as a Swanson or an Abberline…

    If you take all the police opinions and piece them together you initially end up with something akin to a duckbill platypus painted by a drunken Picasso during his cubist period.

    Leave a comment:


  • NotBlamedForNothing
    replied
    Originally posted by packers stem View Post

    That's not shortening , it's lengthening

    Bit of a stretch that......
    That's what she said

    Leave a comment:


  • S.Brett
    replied
    Originally posted by Scott Nelson View Post

    Israel Zangwill's book featuring Kosminsky was likely a result of Zangwill's childhood living in Ebenezer Square, Aldgate (near what was later Stoney Lane) where a Jacob Koski family lived. Speculation: Koski was shortened from Kosminski.

    Jacob Koski and family later moved to 2 Hutchinson Street, next door to the butcher (and Mitre Square witness) Joseph Hyam Levy.
    Hi Scott!

    Maybe Koski was shortened from Kothsolkowski.

    Karsten.

    Leave a comment:


  • packers stem
    replied
    Originally posted by Scott Nelson View Post

    Israel Zangwill's book featuring Kosminsky was likely a result of Zangwill's childhood living in Ebenezer Square, Aldgate (near what was later Stoney Lane) where a Jacob Koski family lived. Speculation: Koski was shortened from Kosminski.

    Jacob Koski and family later moved to 2 Hutchinson Street, next door to the butcher (and Mitre Square witness) Joseph Hyam Levy.
    That's not shortening , it's lengthening

    Bit of a stretch that......

    Leave a comment:


  • Scott Nelson
    replied
    Originally posted by packers stem View Post
    Kosminsky literature appears at regular intervals ....... table runners a little less frequently
    Very apt as Kosminsky was a literary character in a popular 1892 work of fiction depicting the life of poor east enders.
    Had the marginalia read "Fagin was his name....." the roars of incredulity would have been deafening
    Israel Zangwill's book featuring Kosminsky was likely a result of Zangwill's childhood living in Ebenezer Square, Aldgate (near what was later Stoney Lane) where a Jacob Koski family lived. Speculation: Koski was shortened from Kosminski.

    Jacob Koski and family later moved to 2 Hutchinson Street, next door to the butcher (and Mitre Square witness) Joseph Hyam Levy.

    Leave a comment:


  • Simon Wood
    replied
    Hi Scott,

    You might be onto something.

    The Aberdeen Journal, 5th December 1949, awarded Fred Wensley the ultimate posthumous accolade—

    “It is said he was the only living person who knew the identity of Jack the Ripper.”

    Stay well.

    Simon

    Leave a comment:


  • Scott Nelson
    replied
    Hi Simon, Roger

    I seem to recall it was suggested that "Fred" was Frederick Wensley.

    Hope you're all staying safe as well.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X