New Article on the Swanson Marginalia in Ripperologist 128

[Tom_Wescott]

Coolio.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Jenni Shelden]

All I am getting at is that the witness who ID'd Kosminski is not necessarily someone obvious - i think we would be stretching it to suggest he was Jewish either (stranger things have been known).

Jennifer

[Supe]

Mr Shelden once made me wonder if Hutchinson was not in fact the person who got the best look at the Ripper

On suggested age alone Aaron Kosminski would not seem a good match for Hutchinson's "Astrakhan Man."

Don.

[Scott Nelson]

Sagar evidently retired to Brighton - did he have earlier connections there?

So did the butcher, Joseph Hyam Levy.

[Jenni Shelden]

Mr Shelden once made me wonder if Hutchinson was not in fact the person who got the best look at the Ripper- as implied here.
This is what I mean about us not being able to be sure it was schwart or Lawnde

Jenni

[Jenni Shelden]

Hello Jen, Sally, Abby, Phil H, all,

So let me get this right.. just for the point of balance...

1) According to some, Anderson and Swanson may have been doing some sort of covert operation, unbeknown to the rest of the main players in the Met Police.

2) They completed the operation, were convinced that the suspect was the murderer, and let him go back to his family because the witness refused to id him as he was a fellow Jew.

3) After a while, the family of this Jew thought him to be dangerous, and had him committed to an asylum.

4) He stayed in the asylum system until 1919, nearly 20 years later, when he died.

5) Meanwhile, back at the ranch..sorry, Scotland Yard, the hunt for the killer continues. In this hunt, D S Swanson takes part, believing, in the case of one murderered woman, that the suspect who was arrested for the Francis Coles murder, is Jack the Ripper. This murderer is not named Kosminski, please note.

6) Despite knowing that Anderson has yet to publically announce any favourite suspect, despite Swanson's own involvement in the continual hunt, despite all the other main players either denouncing of producing other theories and or suspects or stories that nobody had a clue, two of the players, totally unconnected job-wise at this point in time, continue as if nothing has happened and JTR still must be caught.

7) Only these two knew of this apparent covert operation. Nobody ever talked of accompanying the suspect 60 miles to attend an id to willingly be identified as Jack the Ripper.

8) Nobody ever talked about accompanying Jack the Ripper (now identified), back to London and dropping him off with a slap on the back and "we're watching you sunshine".

9) At no point did the police try to get this super mad maniac put away into an asylum...despite doing things totally unlawfully to get him id'd..they can't make up one story to get this nutter shut away in an asylum.. oh no.. now they play everything by the book and wait for the family to get him sectioned away, for threatening with a knife, apparently.

10) This absolute nobody is now kept quiet. Nobody in the Met Police Force who is told of or knows of the Polish Jew Story confirms it, because either the Anderson story is littered with holes, the Swanson back up story is full of holes, things that cannot be proven rule throughout, and a complete lack of belief in it is given by all those who have heard of the story.

11) The two people who WOULD know what happened to JTR do not agree either..Abberline and Reid, One says another suspect, the other says that nobody had a clue about the Ripper's identity.

12) Meanwhile, back at the Swanson family Home, DSS annotates some marginalia at some time between 1910 and 1924, in Anderson's memoirs of his life in the Force. He states that a person called Kosminski is the suspect Anderson is talking about.

13) His family claim that DSS wouldn't have revealed the name of the killer to them at any cost, yet he nonchalently/cleverly writes this Kosminski name in a book that is only by sheer chance looked at some 55 years or so after DSS died.

14) There is no name given to the place the proposed id of the man took place. It was first suggested by a researching expert in the 1980's. There is no evidence to suggest this place was used for any identification.

15) Any known procedural ID in regards to the hunt for the Whitechapel Murderer has been in the East End itself at Police Stations. Not at a Police Rest Home 60 miles away.

16) The witness who id'd the suspect may have been one of two. One of them didnt see the face and the other is doubtful.

17) The man who wrote the marginalia and annotations, gets some of the details wrong, confusing the known facts.

18) D S Swanson was apparently chasing down a bperson that didn't exist after Aaron Kosminski's incarceration...i.e. The Whitechapel murderer. (Because he knew that the murderer had already been locked away)

19) It is suggested that Swanson didn't fully KNOW Kosminski was the killer until later on in his life (see one of the previous postings today/yesterday)...which doesn't make sense because of the certainty of the Swanson statement and the certainty of the Anderson statement...they both would have been certain as soon as the suspect was positively identified... they don't need 20 years top make up their mind on the subject.

20) In conjunction with (18), in 1910, Anderson produces a book claiming that the suspect who he believed was the murderer, was the murderer claiming this as a fact, ascertained..i.e. PROVEN. Anderson's claim is water tight.. no room for doubt. That means it was water tight WHEN IT HAPPENED.At the end of the ID.

21) Aaron Kosminski, the man himself, had already been dismissed in 1987 by Martin Fido as the applicable Kosminski, saying that any such suspect Anderson describes must have another name. This is directly countered by the comment in the annotations.."Kosminski was the suspect".

22) Aaron Kosminski was never prosecuted for anything other than a misdemeanour... walking an un-muzzled dog. There is no record, either in any asylum nor police file, of any known violence connected to Aaron Kosminski acted upon women, apart from once threatening a woman with a knife. We do not know the details of this alleged incident. We do not know what type of knife this was either.

23) There are claims that Kosminski files have been lost. This is unprovable and conjecture. There could be a file on someone's Great Grandfather that has been lost. Because it isnt there doesn't mean there is a chance there was one based on what we know.


24) Conversely, the Polish Suspect was Anderson's boasting story, because he rated himself above being beaten by criminals, owing to his "moral guilt" certainty get out clause. He had a very dodgy attitude towards the Jewish Race, and claimed that the murderer was a Polish Jew of low life level. When the claim was made.. nobody stood up and shouted Hurrah! Solved at last!...except Anderson.

25) Then along comes the Swanson Marginalia that shows very clearly that Swanson is writing to expand on Anderson's story. DSS cannot be writing from personal experience as he has already been known to try and nail another person, i.e. the suspect proposed of murdering Francis Coles, as JTR.

Now if Swanson was proposing Sadler as JTR, privately... I could believe it. But not Kosminski. That's Anderson's suspect, and his alone imho.

And that is just SOME of the doubt surrounding this "Kosminski" fellow.



The History of the Marginalia has opened up this subject properly. The Swanson family are to be thouroughly thanked from us all. PI won't be surprised if more revelations suddenly turn up. I am sure that this subject may have been written about and discussed within the family quite often. The Swanson family are still sorting through family papers. I genuinely look forward to more news.

However, without finding a thoroughly explanitary letter written by DSS himeself regarding this whole business, which would go against all we know of the man and his character, then we are left with what we have.

My apologies on beforehand for any historically inaccuracies in the above.
Humanum errare est. I acknowledge them on beforehand.

best wishes

Phil

Hi Phil,

re your points
1) i dont think anyone is saying that. It may be the case that their view was not widely known or not widely shared. This doesnt mean they were doing a covert operation.

there are clearly some known unknowns at play.

2) you cant lock someone up without a trial. You cant commit someone to trial without there being evidence. I presume from what DSS/Anderson say there was not sufficient evidence to send the killer to trial without the ID witness evidence. However, whether I think that means there was sufficient evidence is different to the matter in hand ie clearly Anderson and DSS were convinced this person was JtR - or at the v v least a good suspect.

3) yes - if it is Aaron Kosminski - we know why - he attacked his sister with a knife.

4) if it is Aaron Kosminski then yes we know his movements thanks to some excellent research.

5) we dont know when the marginalia was written. Ergo when DSS thought this.

6) JtR had no been caught - no man had been arrested or sent to trial.

7) we dont know who else knew. This is not ever mentioned. There is nothing to indicate that no one else knew. In fact in Rob House's book he sets out some pretty good evidence Kosminski may have been the person the City Police were watching.

8) talking about it at the time could have further prejudiced the investigation and any subsequent trial (police type people on here, is this not right?)

9) we dont know they did things unlawfully to get him ID'd all we know is where this took place. You cant just lock someone in an asylum - even in Victorian Britain - surely if you were going to do this - you just send him to trail without adequate evidence. I would assume the police would continue to try and get evidence - but his family had their eye on him. Surely the police's aim would be to comit their pet jtr suspect to trial.

10) no one was given cause to confirm it. Althoguh arguably the marginalia is confirming it

11) we dont know who would have known what. I find it interesting that Abberline seemed to indicate Chapman. The marginalia being genuine doenst mean we have to accept that Kosminski actually was JTR just that what DSS said is what he thought.

12) yes this is a definite and ascertained fact

13) i think you are talking about two separate things. What DSS would say to his family and what he would annotate in his private book. Just because he said one thing does not mean he didnt do the other. Yes they seem to contradict. But again the article clearly proves he wrote the marginalia.

14) a name is given Seaside Home - presumably DSS knew where he meant

15) I dont know what the police procedures were. We dont know why this ID took place at this seaside home, we dont know where DSS meant or where it was. We do know he doesnt comment as to this being so terrible or feel he should defend it.

16)we dont know who the witness is. We dont know if it is even someone we have heard of - all we know is they were Jewish.

17) yes. He is relying on his memory.

18) we are speculating - as i said previously no one was actually hung for being jtr so they could hardly stop hunting.

19) - im not sure what your point is here, Phil. I would assume they thought it at the time, but we dont know when Swanson thought it other than after 1910.

20) Anderson was writing for publication - he was bigging himself up - i think he was wrong to claim an ascertained fact - if it was then the ripper would have been in the dock.

21) no offence to Martin - but i'll take the word of someone who was there at the time over someone who wasnt. It is also true that neither DSS or Anderson say Arron Kosminski was the Ripper.

I am not saying this is significant.

22) this is correct. Although the asylum records indicate that he was violent to the guards. Just because someone has no record of violence doesnt mean they have not been violent, alternatively, we know that schizphrenia can be degenerative hence, he may not have been so bad at the time of the murders. I actually myself find him more likely to have been the ripper the better he was in 1888 but thats just my opinion and i dont really have a reason for thinking it.

23) I think it is certainly unprovable. What we know is likely is that there would have been suspect files, contemporary police suspects seem likely candidates. I guess there would be many suspect

24) again we are speculating. You may find that suspicious others dont. As we werent there we cant tell from what is left behind why people didnt tell Anderson to shut up.

25) id agree to the extent - is DSS writing what he thinks Anderson means - which i think he is defiantly doing -or is he writing about what he too believes . I think from what he says he thinks so too - but it is i guess down to interpretation.

I think everyone was thinking aloud, i havent throughly read this thread and i am sure that i do not share the shame opinions of all the people you mentioned. We certainly should not be lumped together as though we are jointly putting forward a case against what you are saying.

As far as im concerned this is not the case. I dont really have a view on Kosminski that necessarily makes sense.

To me he is a viable suspect - but that doesnt mean i think hes the Ripper

respectfully
Jenni

[Phil H]

The witness must have been the key to the convictions of Swanson and Anderson.

The witness must have been key to conviction - but they had much more:

* results of house-to-house;

* something that alerted them to Kosminski in the first place;

* stake-out of his home by City CID (mentioned by DSS confirmeed by Cox - probably).

Add to that anything they had on his from family, neighbours (perhaps one of those was the witness) or friends (Cohen?).

Phil H

[Fleetwood Mac]

Hi Fleetwood,
in a court of law they would need a case that could convict the defendant beyond reasonable doubt. It seems clear from what Anderson and DSS say about Kosminski they didnt have an identification because the witness didnt formally ID the suspect ie Kosminski. I dont think this tells us anything about the suspect other than that he or she was probably Jewish. It doesnt say how an eye witness they were likely to be. It just tells us they saw the Ripper and would have ID'd Kosminski if he werent Jewish. As this is what is said in the Marginalia/book. Presumably for whatever reason Anderson and DSS were sure this was the Ripper - either due to what this witness said to the police - or - perhaps more likely - due to ome other information - now lost - that led the police to take this witness to ID this suspect at some considerable cost.

I always felt sorry for the police as without DNA, fingerprinting, blood typing and so on, they had much less to go on in terms of non - circumstantial evidence. Eye witness testimony is part of this. For whatever reason this eye witness did not ID Kosminski.

I dont think as i said it tells us who the witness was. We have plenty to go on and equally not much. They didnt just go to ID Ksominski out of everyone in London for no reason i would hasten a guess.

BTW, I dont think he was necessarily the Ripper

Jenni

Hello Jenni,

I think we can infer that the witness was the make or break piece of evidence, but we don't know what else they had on Kosminski. I think it would be reasonable to suggest that without the witness, it wasn't enough, and therefore shouldn't have been enough to make it a 'definitely ascertained fact'. The witness must have been the key to the convictions of Swanson and Anderson.

I don't think he was necessarily Jack because we don't know what the witness witnessed. What would convince Swanson and Anderson wouldn't necessarily convince the next man, but I'm convinced that Swanson and Anderson were convinced; which isn't saying much when one of them said: "definitely ascertained fact" and the other: "murderer would have hanged".

[Phil H]

PC Robert Sagar is well known as having a suspect.

He was a City PC, I believe - and Harry Cox said City CID staked-out a house in a Jewish area of Met territory. This could confirm DSS's statement in the marginalia.

Sagar evidently retired to Brighton - did he have earlier connections there?

The Seaside Home is in Brighton.

Are there connections here we are not seeing?

Phil H

[Jenni Shelden]

Clearly they did not have enough on him to get him into a court of law and have him shipped off to Broadmoor.

From this there seems to be a contradiction: Swanson and Anderson were convinced they had their man, but they needed the witness to cement it. It follows that what they actually had on him is a conundrum: enough to be convinced, but not enough to convict.

The only feasible answer that I can come up with is that they thought he was a decent suspect, but no more, when they took him to the ID. But that which the witness saw left no room for doubt; which would rule out Lawende, and leave open the possibility of Schwartz.

Hi Fleetwood,
in a court of law they would need a case that could convict the defendant beyond reasonable doubt. It seems clear from what Anderson and DSS say about Kosminski they didnt have an identification because the witness didnt formally ID the suspect ie Kosminski. I dont think this tells us anything about the suspect other than that he or she was probably Jewish. It doesnt say how an eye witness they were likely to be. It just tells us they saw the Ripper and would have ID'd Kosminski if he werent Jewish. As this is what is said in the Marginalia/book. Presumably for whatever reason Anderson and DSS were sure this was the Ripper - either due to what this witness said to the police - or - perhaps more likely - due to ome other information - now lost - that led the police to take this witness to ID this suspect at some considerable cost.

I always felt sorry for the police as without DNA, fingerprinting, blood typing and so on, they had much less to go on in terms of non - circumstantial evidence. Eye witness testimony is part of this. For whatever reason this eye witness did not ID Kosminski.

I dont think as i said it tells us who the witness was. We have plenty to go on and equally not much. They didnt just go to ID Ksominski out of everyone in London for no reason i would hasten a guess.

BTW, I dont think he was necessarily the Ripper

Jenni

[Abby Normal]

Hello Jen, Sally, Abby, Phil H, all,

So let me get this right.. just for the point of balance...

1) According to some, Anderson and Swanson may have been doing some sort of covert operation, unbeknown to the rest of the main players in the Met Police.

2) They completed the operation, were convinced that the suspect was the murderer, and let him go back to his family because the witness refused to id him as he was a fellow Jew.

3) After a while, the family of this Jew thought him to be dangerous, and had him committed to an asylum.

4) He stayed in the asylum system until 1919, nearly 20 years later, when he died.

5) Meanwhile, back at the ranch..sorry, Scotland Yard, the hunt for the killer continues. In this hunt, D S Swanson takes part, believing, in the case of one murderered woman, that the suspect who was arrested for the Francis Coles murder, is Jack the Ripper. This murderer is not named Kosminski, please note.

6) Despite knowing that Anderson has yet to publically announce any favourite suspect, despite Swanson's own involvement in the continual hunt, despite all the other main players either denouncing of producing other theories and or suspects or stories that nobody had a clue, two of the players, totally unconnected job-wise at this point in time, continue as if nothing has happened and JTR still must be caught.

7) Only these two knew of this apparent covert operation. Nobody ever talked of accompanying the suspect 60 miles to attend an id to willingly be identified as Jack the Ripper.

8) Nobody ever talked about accompanying Jack the Ripper (now identified), back to London and dropping him off with a slap on the back and "we're watching you sunshine".

9) At no point did the police try to get this super mad maniac put away into an asylum...despite doing things totally unlawfully to get him id'd..they can't make up one story to get this nutter shut away in an asylum.. oh no.. now they play everything by the book and wait for the family to get him sectioned away, for threatening with a knife, apparently.

10) This absolute nobody is now kept quiet. Nobody in the Met Police Force who is told of or knows of the Polish Jew Story confirms it, because either the Anderson story is littered with holes, the Swanson back up story is full of holes, things that cannot be proven rule throughout, and a complete lack of belief in it is given by all those who have heard of the story.

11) The two people who WOULD know what happened to JTR do not agree either..Abberline and Reid, One says another suspect, the other says that nobody had a clue about the Ripper's identity.

12) Meanwhile, back at the Swanson family Home, DSS annotates some marginalia at some time between 1910 and 1924, in Anderson's memoirs of his life in the Force. He states that a person called Kosminski is the suspect Anderson is talking about.

13) His family claim that DSS wouldn't have revealed the name of the killer to them at any cost, yet he nonchalently/cleverly writes this Kosminski name in a book that is only by sheer chance looked at some 55 years or so after DSS died.

14) There is no name given to the place the proposed id of the man took place. It was first suggested by a researching expert in the 1980's. There is no evidence to suggest this place was used for any identification.

15) Any known procedural ID in regards to the hunt for the Whitechapel Murderer has been in the East End itself at Police Stations. Not at a Police Rest Home 60 miles away.

16) The witness who id'd the suspect may have been one of two. One of them didnt see the face and the other is doubtful.

17) The man who wrote the marginalia and annotations, gets some of the details wrong, confusing the known facts.

18) D S Swanson was apparently chasing down a bperson that didn't exist after Aaron Kosminski's incarceration...i.e. The Whitechapel murderer. (Because he knew that the murderer had already been locked away)

19) It is suggested that Swanson didn't fully KNOW Kosminski was the killer until later on in his life (see one of the previous postings today/yesterday)...which doesn't make sense because of the certainty of the Swanson statement and the certainty of the Anderson statement...they both would have been certain as soon as the suspect was positively identified... they don't need 20 years top make up their mind on the subject.

20) In conjunction with (18), in 1910, Anderson produces a book claiming that the suspect who he believed was the murderer, was the murderer claiming this as a fact, ascertained..i.e. PROVEN. Anderson's claim is water tight.. no room for doubt. That means it was water tight WHEN IT HAPPENED.At the end of the ID.

21) Aaron Kosminski, the man himself, had already been dismissed in 1987 by Martin Fido as the applicable Kosminski, saying that any such suspect Anderson describes must have another name. This is directly countered by the comment in the annotations.."Kosminski was the suspect".

22) Aaron Kosminski was never prosecuted for anything other than a misdemeanour... walking an un-muzzled dog. There is no record, either in any asylum nor police file, of any known violence connected to Aaron Kosminski acted upon women, apart from once threatening a woman with a knife. We do not know the details of this alleged incident. We do not know what type of knife this was either.

23) There are claims that Kosminski files have been lost. This is unprovable and conjecture. There could be a file on someone's Great Grandfather that has been lost. Because it isnt there doesn't mean there is a chance there was one based on what we know.


24) Conversely, the Polish Suspect was Anderson's boasting story, because he rated himself above being beaten by criminals, owing to his "moral guilt" certainty get out clause. He had a very dodgy attitude towards the Jewish Race, and claimed that the murderer was a Polish Jew of low life level. When the claim was made.. nobody stood up and shouted Hurrah! Solved at last!...except Anderson.

25) Then along comes the Swanson Marginalia that shows very clearly that Swanson is writing to expand on Anderson's story. DSS cannot be writing from personal experience as he has already been known to try and nail another person, i.e. the suspect proposed of murdering Francis Coles, as JTR.

Now if Swanson was proposing Sadler as JTR, privately... I could believe it. But not Kosminski. That's Anderson's suspect, and his alone imho.

And that is just SOME of the doubt surrounding this "Kosminski" fellow.



The History of the Marginalia has opened up this subject properly. The Swanson family are to be thouroughly thanked from us all. PI won't be surprised if more revelations suddenly turn up. I am sure that this subject may have been written about and discussed within the family quite often. The Swanson family are still sorting through family papers. I genuinely look forward to more news.

However, without finding a thoroughly explanitary letter written by DSS himeself regarding this whole business, which would go against all we know of the man and his character, then we are left with what we have.

My apologies on beforehand for any historically inaccuracies in the above.
Humanum errare est. I acknowledge them on beforehand.

best wishes

Phil

Hi Phil
Sure there are alot of little mysteries surrounding the whole kosminski episode but if you just step back and look at it big picture there really is no (to me anyway) BIG MYSTERY.

He was simply a suspect (albeit a strong suspect) at the time. With the passage of time and the ripper never being caught/convicted, Kosminski became in their minds the ripper-more so in Andersons obviously.


Now for the small questions:
How did he come to the polices attention?-probably from the family and/or a doctor at the workhouse. The knife incident was probably the catalyst.

Why the Seaside home? Well he was not under arrest so if they wanted to set up an ID you can see the "with difficulty" part. For whatever reason they felt the seaside home was the best place to set this up.

Who was the witness?Probably Lawende, possibly Scwartz.

Why didn't they arrest him after the ID? Because witness would not swear to it. And theres issue with his sanity. But they had him watched. And then later he is safely caged in an aylum anyway.


To address some of your specific points:
No this was not some "covert" operation-at least in that it was only carried out and known by Anderson and Swanson, as MM knew about it and also considered Kos a suspect.

Re Swanson and Sadler-Sadler was never convicted of Coles Murder let alone any of the others, and his whereabouts of the other murders cleared him,I beleive. So Swanson may have thought he was a strong suspect early on, but changed his mind.

I think alot of the mystery people struggle with is that they have a hard time grappling with the fact that as time progresses,people's memory change, wishful thinking is involved, egos are involved, people change there mind about things etc.

The whole thing can simply be explained by Kos only being a strong suspect at the time, and with time, and no other man being nailed as the ripper, becoming the Ripper in their minds.

As in, "yup, it was him after all".

[Phil H]

Good, balanced post FM. I reserve my position, but you summarise elements of it well.

Phil C

By contrast, your long post loses something for me by it's tone. I am far from having answers, but I am trying to wrestle with what we have to understand what was going on. Something must have been.

As FM says if THREE senior officials were of a view that someone named Kosminski was a strong suspect, then we would be well-advised to take it seriously.

MM, Sir RA and Dss had access to and were familiar with the information available at the time, and could talk personally to individuals such as AK, or others who had. Whatever information has been lost, pilfered or retained, we certainly have less than they did. So our first port of call for any confusion should be that we are misreading things, NOT necessarily that THEY were wrong. Just my approach.

23) There are claims that Kosminski files have been lost. This is unprovable and conjecture. There could be a file on someone's Great Grandfather that has been lost. Because it isnt there doesn't mean there is a chance there was one based on what we know.

I certainly have never said that any specific file has been lost. But we KNOW suspect files have gone missing in recent decades (seen by researchers in the 1970s gone now - see the Ultimate); we KNOW files have been routinely destroyed or lost. We know purloined material was returned in the 1980s (photos and reports). So material HAS gone. the fact that we have nothing on Kosminski, or Tumblety for that matter, could be because it was destroyed (the most unlikely option, I think), purloined or withheld - someone was posting about DPP files a day or two ago.

Only these two knew of this apparent covert operation. Nobody ever talked of accompanying the suspect 60 miles to attend an id to willingly be identified as Jack the Ripper.

There are many aspects of the case for which we have little or no corroboration. But we do know that DSS's assertion that CITY CID watched Kosminski's house is in part borne out by Cox's story. We knew nothing of an ID until Swanson gave us the details (not enough maybe - but why invent them?).

The onus is on us to understand a prime source, NOT ridicule it.

Phil H



Phil H

[Fleetwood Mac]

The problem with all of that Phil is:

1) Macnaghten claimed something like: "there were many circumstances surrounding Kosminski that made his a strong suspect".

"Many circumstances", "strong suspect".

2) Anderson claims it was a definitely ascertained fact that he was a Polish Jew and he had been positively identified.

3) Swanson writes that he was identified, he knew he'd been identified, the murderer would have hanged in the event the witness had given evidence.

Now, there are obvious problems.

But, these obvious problems do not negate the fact that we have three very senior police officers believing either there were many circumstances to make him a strong suspect, he would have hanged or it was a definitely ascertained fact.

Now that is pretty strong stuff.

Whatever the problems regarding who exactly was this Kosminski; when exactly he was identified; where exactly the ID took place; who exactly was the witness; when exactly he died - it is inescapable that Kosminski was highly favoured by these three men.

It seems to me that, broadly speaking, there are two options from here:

1) Believe that they must have been mistaken, or confused, or they deliberately misled because some of the particulars around the main event do not fit with what we know - emphasis on what we know as opposed to do not possibly fit regardless of our reliance on part of the jigsaw of information.

or

2) Accept that he was a highly favoured suspect who was picked out in an ID, while attempting to reconcile the supporting particulars, even though it seems a bridge too far at this stage.

I know which one seems most reasonable to me. Ultimately, there are a few untidy loose ends, but the main proposition is agreed upon by 3 senior police officers.

[Phil Carter]

Hello Jen, Sally, Abby, Phil H, all,

So let me get this right.. just for the point of balance...

1) According to some, Anderson and Swanson may have been doing some sort of covert operation, unbeknown to the rest of the main players in the Met Police.

2) They completed the operation, were convinced that the suspect was the murderer, and let him go back to his family because the witness refused to id him as he was a fellow Jew.

3) After a while, the family of this Jew thought him to be dangerous, and had him committed to an asylum.

4) He stayed in the asylum system until 1919, nearly 20 years later, when he died.

5) Meanwhile, back at the ranch..sorry, Scotland Yard, the hunt for the killer continues. In this hunt, D S Swanson takes part, believing, in the case of one murderered woman, that the suspect who was arrested for the Francis Coles murder, is Jack the Ripper. This murderer is not named Kosminski, please note.

6) Despite knowing that Anderson has yet to publically announce any favourite suspect, despite Swanson's own involvement in the continual hunt, despite all the other main players either denouncing of producing other theories and or suspects or stories that nobody had a clue, two of the players, totally unconnected job-wise at this point in time, continue as if nothing has happened and JTR still must be caught.

7) Only these two knew of this apparent covert operation. Nobody ever talked of accompanying the suspect 60 miles to attend an id to willingly be identified as Jack the Ripper.

8) Nobody ever talked about accompanying Jack the Ripper (now identified), back to London and dropping him off with a slap on the back and "we're watching you sunshine".

9) At no point did the police try to get this super mad maniac put away into an asylum...despite doing things totally unlawfully to get him id'd..they can't make up one story to get this nutter shut away in an asylum.. oh no.. now they play everything by the book and wait for the family to get him sectioned away, for threatening with a knife, apparently.

10) This absolute nobody is now kept quiet. Nobody in the Met Police Force who is told of or knows of the Polish Jew Story confirms it, because either the Anderson story is littered with holes, the Swanson back up story is full of holes, things that cannot be proven rule throughout, and a complete lack of belief in it is given by all those who have heard of the story.

11) The two people who WOULD know what happened to JTR do not agree either..Abberline and Reid, One says another suspect, the other says that nobody had a clue about the Ripper's identity.

12) Meanwhile, back at the Swanson family Home, DSS annotates some marginalia at some time between 1910 and 1924, in Anderson's memoirs of his life in the Force. He states that a person called Kosminski is the suspect Anderson is talking about.

13) His family claim that DSS wouldn't have revealed the name of the killer to them at any cost, yet he nonchalently/cleverly writes this Kosminski name in a book that is only by sheer chance looked at some 55 years or so after DSS died.

14) There is no name given to the place the proposed id of the man took place. It was first suggested by a researching expert in the 1980's. There is no evidence to suggest this place was used for any identification.

15) Any known procedural ID in regards to the hunt for the Whitechapel Murderer has been in the East End itself at Police Stations. Not at a Police Rest Home 60 miles away.

16) The witness who id'd the suspect may have been one of two. One of them didnt see the face and the other is doubtful.

17) The man who wrote the marginalia and annotations, gets some of the details wrong, confusing the known facts.

18) D S Swanson was apparently chasing down a bperson that didn't exist after Aaron Kosminski's incarceration...i.e. The Whitechapel murderer. (Because he knew that the murderer had already been locked away)

19) It is suggested that Swanson didn't fully KNOW Kosminski was the killer until later on in his life (see one of the previous postings today/yesterday)...which doesn't make sense because of the certainty of the Swanson statement and the certainty of the Anderson statement...they both would have been certain as soon as the suspect was positively identified... they don't need 20 years top make up their mind on the subject.

20) In conjunction with (18), in 1910, Anderson produces a book claiming that the suspect who he believed was the murderer, was the murderer claiming this as a fact, ascertained..i.e. PROVEN. Anderson's claim is water tight.. no room for doubt. That means it was water tight WHEN IT HAPPENED.At the end of the ID.

21) Aaron Kosminski, the man himself, had already been dismissed in 1987 by Martin Fido as the applicable Kosminski, saying that any such suspect Anderson describes must have another name. This is directly countered by the comment in the annotations.."Kosminski was the suspect".

22) Aaron Kosminski was never prosecuted for anything other than a misdemeanour... walking an un-muzzled dog. There is no record, either in any asylum nor police file, of any known violence connected to Aaron Kosminski acted upon women, apart from once threatening a woman with a knife. We do not know the details of this alleged incident. We do not know what type of knife this was either.

23) There are claims that Kosminski files have been lost. This is unprovable and conjecture. There could be a file on someone's Great Grandfather that has been lost. Because it isnt there doesn't mean there is a chance there was one based on what we know.


24) Conversely, the Polish Suspect was Anderson's boasting story, because he rated himself above being beaten by criminals, owing to his "moral guilt" certainty get out clause. He had a very dodgy attitude towards the Jewish Race, and claimed that the murderer was a Polish Jew of low life level. When the claim was made.. nobody stood up and shouted Hurrah! Solved at last!...except Anderson.

25) Then along comes the Swanson Marginalia that shows very clearly that Swanson is writing to expand on Anderson's story. DSS cannot be writing from personal experience as he has already been known to try and nail another person, i.e. the suspect proposed of murdering Francis Coles, as JTR.

Now if Swanson was proposing Sadler as JTR, privately... I could believe it. But not Kosminski. That's Anderson's suspect, and his alone imho.

And that is just SOME of the doubt surrounding this "Kosminski" fellow.



The History of the Marginalia has opened up this subject properly. The Swanson family are to be thouroughly thanked from us all. PI won't be surprised if more revelations suddenly turn up. I am sure that this subject may have been written about and discussed within the family quite often. The Swanson family are still sorting through family papers. I genuinely look forward to more news.

However, without finding a thoroughly explanitary letter written by DSS himeself regarding this whole business, which would go against all we know of the man and his character, then we are left with what we have.

My apologies on beforehand for any historically inaccuracies in the above.
Humanum errare est. I acknowledge them on beforehand.

best wishes

Phil

[Phil H]

Perhaps reverse engineering is what is required here.

Maybe we could all think through what situations could have arisen whereby a SINGLE Jewish witness, recognising and being recognised by AK, could have been of sufficient weight to prove him guilty and thus hang him?

If we can work out the possible circumstances for that to happen conjecture though it may be, it might throw some light on what DSS was saying in the marginalia.

Thinking caps on folks.

I have suggested one option in the other current AK thread.

Phil H