Clearly, there is a risk associated with anything.
The marginalia can never be proven absolutely to have been the notes of Swanson.
But, on the balance of probabilities, it looks very much like they were his notes.
In terms of whether or not he was relaying someone's beliefs: I think it is a stretch to suggest that in the event he didn't agree with those beliefs/held suspicions towards another suspect, that he simply would have repeated the story verbatim without adding a critical comment.
The idea that he repeated Anderson's views only holds water if you argue that Swanson had no knowledge of Kosminski nor the ID and it follows he was not in a position to agree nor disagree but simply complete the picture of that which he was told.
I find this aversion to Kosminski as a serious suspect to be illogical. Senior policemen were convinced of his guilt. To me, the trick is to piece together why, and when and where the ID took place, as opposed to arguing that since we can't answer these questions then Anderson/Swanson/The Marginalia is flawed in some way.
A more important question for me is this: could they have been convinced but wide of the mark? and it follows were they simply relying on the ID or did they have something else?
Logically, it would seem they had something else and the ID cemented the proposition because, assuming the only two possible witnesses were Schwartz and Lawende, a point upon which I'm not convinced, then it is difficult to see a scenario where the suspect could have been hanged on an ID parade years after the event; and, also, in the event that witness was Lawende then it is difficult to see how the suspect could have been hanged by virtue of seeing the suspect talking to someone who was possibily the victim.
The marginalia can never be proven absolutely to have been the notes of Swanson.
But, on the balance of probabilities, it looks very much like they were his notes.
In terms of whether or not he was relaying someone's beliefs: I think it is a stretch to suggest that in the event he didn't agree with those beliefs/held suspicions towards another suspect, that he simply would have repeated the story verbatim without adding a critical comment.
The idea that he repeated Anderson's views only holds water if you argue that Swanson had no knowledge of Kosminski nor the ID and it follows he was not in a position to agree nor disagree but simply complete the picture of that which he was told.
I find this aversion to Kosminski as a serious suspect to be illogical. Senior policemen were convinced of his guilt. To me, the trick is to piece together why, and when and where the ID took place, as opposed to arguing that since we can't answer these questions then Anderson/Swanson/The Marginalia is flawed in some way.
A more important question for me is this: could they have been convinced but wide of the mark? and it follows were they simply relying on the ID or did they have something else?
Logically, it would seem they had something else and the ID cemented the proposition because, assuming the only two possible witnesses were Schwartz and Lawende, a point upon which I'm not convinced, then it is difficult to see a scenario where the suspect could have been hanged on an ID parade years after the event; and, also, in the event that witness was Lawende then it is difficult to see how the suspect could have been hanged by virtue of seeing the suspect talking to someone who was possibily the victim.
Comment