Seaside Home

[The Good Michael]

Chris,

Was the Jewish convalescent home actually there as the seller says? If so,
the possibility seems... possible?

I'm kind of just sitting back waiting to see what Stewart Evans has to say about this idea.

Nice post, however.

Mike

[Chris]

Was the Jewish convalescent home actually there as the seller says?

Yes and no (but mostly no).

The Jewish Convalescent Home in Hove wasn't opened until May 1891. The consecration service, which took place on 24 May, was reported in the Jewish Chronicle of 29 May. So - unless it was used before it had opened - it couldn't have been used for an identification in February 1891, and Aaron Kozminski couldn't have been identified there and then returned to his brother's house.

[The Good Michael]

Chris,

I assume that a convalescent home is a for-profit organization. I don't know about the UK, but in the States, grand openings occur sometimes months after something is opened. Sometimes it's because something isn't finished, so showcasing it as a 'Grand Opening' isn't quite appropriate. Yet, the owners still want to bring in business while it is being finished. This occurs in stores and restaurants that I've seen, and happens more than rarely. Why not a convalescent home?

Mike

[Chris]

I don't know about the UK, but in the States, grand openings occur sometimes months after something is opened. Sometimes it's because something isn't finished, so showcasing it as a 'Grand Opening' isn't quite appropriate. Yet, the owners still want to bring in business while it is being finished. This occurs in stores and restaurants that I've seen, and happens more than rarely. Why not a convalescent home?

It's a fair point, but it wasn't the case for the Jewish Convalescent Home. The advertisement below appeared in the Jewish Chronicle of 22 May 1891, and shows that it wasn't open to patients until 28 May.

[Victor]

Hi Chris,

Just a small point.
The article you quote suggests that Kosminski was taken to Brighton in a one day cab journey.

Why take a cab when there would have been a perfectly good train service, taking only one or two hours?

Rgds
John

As a Brightonian, the prospect of getting to London by train in a hour or two is conditional upon there being a "perfectly good train service" rather than as a result of there being!

[Robert]

This service looks pretty good.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3BpgtWrjbhY

[fido]

Valuable as all this discussion of alternative Seaside Homes is to my "Cohen" theory, I thnik I should point out that from the time that Don Rumbelow and I first saw the marginalia together - (I should say he saw it before me, and was the first Ripperologist approached by the Telegraph) - he told me that 'the Seaside Home' in police parlance always meant the Hove home (I don't know whether its still used of the non-seaside home at Goring. Possibly Morley House was one of the boardins houses where beds were taken as ad hoc convalescent homes before the Convalescent Home Fund (started in 1887) was in a position to use one house for its own purposes (1888) and finally buy the Hove property (1890) I don't know. It seems possible.
Martin F

[Chris]

It's a fair point, but it wasn't the case for the Jewish Convalescent Home. The advertisement below appeared in the Jewish Chronicle of 22 May 1891, and shows that it wasn't open to patients until 28 May.[ATTACH]2194[/ATTACH]

As there's some discussion on jtrforums.com of the possibility that Swanson was referring to the Jewish Convalescent Home, I thought it was just worth posting a reminder that it didn't open until several months after Aaron Kozminski was committed to Colney Hatch. So it wouldn't fit Swanson's narrative as given.

[Errata]

I'm still trying to figure out why they felt the need to do the identification outside of London at all. Couldn't they just as easily arrange it in London without making it seem like an identification? Or was sea air a necessary component to their cunning plan?

[Scorpio]

I'm still trying to figure out why they felt the need to do the identification outside of London at all. Couldn't they just as easily arrange it in London without making it seem like an identification? Or was sea air a necessary component to their cunning plan?

The police seemed certain that the suspect was the Ripper, as they felt that common sense and there own intuition determined it. Intelligence then and know is difficult to keep from a growing media, which was especially voracious within The City and Met districts, and some neutral ground outside of Greater London seemed appropriate to them for making a positive ID, which they probably considered a forgone conclusion.

[Chris]

Intelligence then and know is difficult to keep from a growing media, which was especially voracious within The City and Met districts, and some neutral ground outside of Greater London seemed appropriate to them for making a positive ID, which they probably considered a forgone conclusion.

If they really couldn't find anywhere in London that wasn't being watched by the press (which I find very difficult to believe), then why not use somewhere nearby, rather than sending the suspect on a long journey to the coast?

[Scorpio]

Perhaps the choice of venue was limited and subject to interference from very conservative City force top brass. I dont see anything sinister in the decision; it was just Victorian beaurocracy in action.

[Chris]

Perhaps the choice of venue was limited and subject to interference from very conservative City force top brass.

But what could have limited the choice of venue in this way? And why should the City Police Force have wanted to send the suspect a longer distance than necessary, any more than the Metropolitan Force would have wanted to?

[Errata]

But what could have limited the choice of venue in this way? And why should the City Police Force have wanted to send the suspect a longer distance than necessary, any more than the Metropolitan Force would have wanted to?

I can't even a little credit the idea that someone thought taking a guy in cuffs on a four hour carriage ride attracts less attention than say, calling the witness in to fill out some paperwork and saying "oh hey check out that guy in the cell. look familiar?"

And if they were trying to get the suspect identified without the suspect knowing he was being identified, it becomes even more ludicrous.

And if the goal was to keep it a secret, how does the witness explain his need to be gone for a day and a night? Why doesn't Kosminski mention to anybody what had happened? Why doesn't the witness? Or any of their families? Why aren't there records of the identification? If you have a guy who has technically gotten away with being JtR, dont you have a file on him that says that in big red letters "This guy was JtR. If he so much as sneezes, shoot him." or something? Don't you make damn sure that you know where he is and what he is doing for the rest of his life?

Or does it make more sense that an old man who has one spectacular failure on his record spins a tale in his memoirs that cannot be disproven that he in fact succeeded, it was the witness who failed.

[jason_c]

I can't even a little credit the idea that someone thought taking a guy in cuffs on a four hour carriage ride attracts less attention than say, calling the witness in to fill out some paperwork and saying "oh hey check out that guy in the cell. look familiar?"

And if they were trying to get the suspect identified without the suspect knowing he was being identified, it becomes even more ludicrous.

And if the goal was to keep it a secret, how does the witness explain his need to be gone for a day and a night? Why doesn't Kosminski mention to anybody what had happened? Why doesn't the witness? Or any of their families? Why aren't there records of the identification? If you have a guy who has technically gotten away with being JtR, dont you have a file on him that says that in big red letters "This guy was JtR. If he so much as sneezes, shoot him." or something? Don't you make damn sure that you know where he is and what he is doing for the rest of his life?

Or does it make more sense that an old man who has one spectacular failure on his record spins a tale in his memoirs that cannot be disproven that he in fact succeeded, it was the witness who failed.

That should read two old men then.