Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The Mental institution, didn't he go? (recovered)

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

  • The Mental institution, didn't he go? (recovered)

    felidae 6
    11th July 2006, 10:43 PM
    I had always thought that David Cohen, aka what ever his real name is, had done the murders mainly because he had gone into the mental hospital and it seemed the murders stopped. I thought it was because the police may have been getting closer to him that he did this to protect himself.

    am i way off base? or do I have him mixed up with someone else?
    ________________________________________
    dannorder
    12th July 2006, 12:27 AM
    am i way off base? or do I have him mixed up with someone else?

    A number of people ended up in asylums, committed suicide, moved elsewhere or so forth shortly after the murders ceased (using a quite generously vague definition of "shortly after" and counting from whichever murder you choose as being the Ripper's last). That alone clearly does not make any single one of them a killer, and the real killer may not even fit into that criteria.
    ________________________________________
    felidae 6
    12th July 2006, 05:31 PM
    ohh... i thought when dan cohen went in the murders ended.. apparently i'm missing a lot of something.. can you point me in the right direction to get caught up?
    ________________________________________
    dannorder
    12th July 2006, 07:54 PM
    ohh... i thought when dan cohen went in the murders ended..

    And when did the murders end? The police investigated a number of murders after Mary Kelly was killed over the space of several years.

    Not to mention that there have been lots of serial killer cases where the murders had ended or the police only thought they had and the killer was alive, well, not locked up and still living in the area, just no longer killing for whatever reason.
    ________________________________________
    robert
    12th July 2006, 10:40 PM
    Hi Felidae

    http://www.casebook.org/suspects/davidcohen.html

    Fido's book is a good thing to read

    Robert
    ________________________________________
    felidae 6
    12th July 2006, 10:52 PM
    thank you robert! i'll start there!
    ________________________________________
    caz the cleaner
    26th July 2006, 05:47 PM
    In the Jack the Ripper A-Z bY pAUL Begg,David Cohens full name is Aaron Davies Cohen and was born in 1865,i thought it was a big coincidence that his first name was Aaron,so i naturally assumed he and Aaron Kosminski were one and the same,especially when they are born the same year.But cosidering they die years apart they cant be,its very baffling.And what is also strange is that there is a description of David Cohens appearance,who died in 1889 and yet there is no description of Aaron Kosminski who died in 1919,if he was a top Ripper suspect you would have thought there would be a description of him some where.
    ________________________________________
    JonnyKoala
    1st August 2006, 10:19 PM
    This is my first post on here after years of lurking, book reading and study of this subject.

    I must be honest that after studying each of the major suspects, I've got the feeling (which I'm sure everyone else has had at some time) that "this might actually be the guy". However, there is always counter evidence which almost certainly rules them out when looked into at greater detail.

    I'm still leaning towards the feeling that "Jack" was an average Mr Nobody who was just too mundane to stand out from the crowd. If we were told his name today, we probably would never have heard of him. (I can imagine a mild mannered, clever but boring and inadequate bloke with a name like Arthur Tiddlewink, who put an extra valium in his wife's cocoa and then sneaked out of his marital home in the early hours to get his kicks before unassumingly sneaking back and into bed without ever being missed.)

    However, out of all the popular suspects listed here and throughout Ripper history, there is one character that sticks out more than most to me and that is David Cohen. He still fits in with the Mr Average philisophy - the fact he is listed as "David Cohen" is like putting a file on the shelf with the label of "miscellaneous". Looking at the facts - he's a flipping good fit:

    1. We know he would have been in the right age range to be a serial killer. 2. We know he was suffering from mental illness.
    3. We know he was taken off the streets after the murders ended and died shortly after (something that the police alluded to).
    4. He was a Polish Jew so would almost certainly been "quietly locked away" and hushed up to avoid anti-semitic rioting/murders.
    5. For whatever reasons, many people including Swanson thought that the killer (or prime suspect) was a Polish Jew by the name of Aaron who was locked up shortly after the murders stopped. I'm sure there's a good chance that these people mixed up / assumed it was Kosminski because he was a raving nutter who trawled the gutters and fitted the details.

    My gut feeling is that if it was one of the famous suspects then David Cohen fits the bill. When Kosminski was apparently ID'd by a witness who wouldn't testify - are we sure this was Kosminski and not this other Polish Jew called Aaron? Communication can be bad enough in this day and age, but must have been a damn site worse in the 1880's. I for one, think that a foreign raving looney who stood out from the crowd would have been a popular public suspect in those days, but feel that Aaron Kosminski wasn't capable of sexually driven serial killing.

    Would be interested in your opinions.
    ________________________________________
    dannorder
    2nd August 2006, 12:59 AM
    4. He was a Polish Jew so would almost certainly been "quietly locked away" and hushed up to avoid anti-semitic rioting/murders.

    I wonder where this idea came from that people keep bringing it up lately? There's no evidence that anyone would have hushed up the capture of Jack the Ripper, Jewish or otherwise, if they really had evidence that they had gotten the right person.

    5. For whatever reasons, many people including Swanson thought that the killer (or prime suspect) was a Polish Jew by the name of Aaron who was locked up shortly after the murders stopped.

    There is no contemporary reference to the name "Aaron," not in Swanson's notes nor in Macnaghten's memorandum.
    ________________________________________
    How Brown
    2nd August 2006, 01:18 AM
    Mr.Koala...

    Kosminski was not locked away immediately after the last Canonical murder.

    Dan:

    The argument that it would be impossible to convict Kosminski might play a part in why some feel a "coverup" occurred. Of course,no such thing is known to have happened as you stated.
    ________________________________________
    Magpie
    2nd August 2006, 02:46 AM
    I wonder where this idea came from that people keep bringing it up lately? There's no evidence that anyone would have hushed up the capture of Jack the Ripper, Jewish or otherwise, if they really had evidence that they had gotten the right person.





    I agree with that totally. I sincerely doubt anyone would have taken the responsibility for suppressing the fact that Jack the Ripper had been caught. It makes no sense with the bashing the police and Home Office were taking.
    ________________________________________
    JonnyKoala
    2nd August 2006, 02:49 PM
    But what if the police weren't sure they had the right man? Cohen seems to have been admitted after the last canonical murder even if Kosminski wasn't.

    Perhaps the murders stopped, the police weren't sure why but knew that Colney Hatch contained some possible suspects, and with the apparent lack of communication Cohen (Kaminski?) was mixed up with Kosminski? And what about the Aaron Davies Cohen mentioned as possibly being David Cohen?

    It's all speculation, and rumours but then 130 years later it's all we have to go on with the lack of solid evidence, and we know that the 2 police forces of the day didn't exactly work well together for most of the case.
    ________________________________________
    JonnyKoala
    2nd August 2006, 03:00 PM
    Also, serial killers (and serial offenders in general) are quite cunning have a tendency to change their names quite often and this even confuses the police and computer database sytems of our age, let alone the cops of the century before last. I seem to remember no one putting two and two together when Ian Huntley changed his name/address and applied for a job in a school after being logged on computer as a sex offender...

    David Cohen / Aaron Davies Cohen / Nathan Kaminski / Aaron Kosminski. If all these names were possibly around at the time, the police wouldn't have had a clue who was who, and 5 years later might just resign themselves to the fact that the guy was probably dead - case closed. Some would no doubt say that Aaron Kosminski was a nutter and therefore it must have been him.

    It seems to have been well-recorded that there was a lot of anti-semitic feeling in the East End in those days (why else wash down the graffiti before the locals saw it?), and possibly declaring that Jack had been caught and was a Jew might have caused some big problems in the East End, if they weren't 100% sure. Can you imagine if they did that, caused some riots, and then the murders started again and it was later found out that the police blamed a Jew but it wasn't. Ouch.
    ________________________________________
    fido
    28th August 2006, 09:47 PM
    Your thinking seems to me eminently sensible, Jonny K (surprise! surprise!) Cohen is the ONLY Jewish patient from Whitechapel admitted at a time that coincides with the ending of the murders, and the ONLY Jewish patient to die of anything but old age between 1888 and 1892. The Jewish patient from Whitechapel admitted in the spring of 1889 (when Macnaghten said Kosminski was incarcerated) was clearly not the Ripper: he was identified by his wife to whom he was the real threat.
    I have to say that if I thought Anderson had really known who Aaron Kosminski was and thought he was the murderer, I should conclude at once that Anderson didn't know his coccyx from his humerus and wasn't worth paying any attention to!
    I don't think anyone seriously suggests that the police hushed up the finding of the Ripper because he was Jewish. They hushed up the fact that they were still looking for a Jewish suspect while the murders were going on, and it's my belief they used the wrong identification of Pizer as Leather Apron to suppress the dangers of antiSemitic rioting. But if Anderson's serialized implication is corect, they didn't give out the identity of Anderson's suspect because he was already certified insane before he was identified. It would be quite improper to release the name of a suspect who couldn't have his day in court. Note that they have still not released the name of the suspect who committed suicide and Du Rose avers they were sure was the 'nudes-in-the-Thames' murderer or Jack the Stripper of the 1960s. (Yes, i know it's recently been indicated that Du Rose was probably wrong. But Scotland Yard has still never released the name).
    All the best,
    Martin F
    ________________________________________
    Leather_Apron
    16th September 2007, 10:04 AM
    Well heres Mr Fido right here saying the same thing I suspected!
    So perhaps Im not as dumb as some people think.

    The whole Pizer thing just dont seem right to me unless Pizer was pretending He was Leather Apron. Then it seems to me the story makes sense.
    ________________________________________
    Grey Hunter
    16th September 2007, 11:05 AM
    "...After a stranger has gone over it [Whitechapel] he takes a much more lenient view of our failure to find Jack the Ripper, as they call him, than he did before." - Dr. Robert Anderson, August, 1889.
    ________________________________________
    Grey Hunter
    16th September 2007, 11:27 AM
    I don't think anyone seriously suggests that the police hushed up the finding of the Ripper because he was Jewish. They hushed up the fact that they were still looking for a Jewish suspect while the murders were going on, and it's my belief they used the wrong identification of Pizer as Leather Apron to suppress the dangers of antiSemitic rioting. But if Anderson's serialized implication is corect, they didn't give out the identity of Anderson's suspect because he was already certified insane before he was identified. It would be quite improper to release the name of a suspect who couldn't have his day in court. Note that they have still not released the name of the suspect who committed suicide and Du Rose avers they were sure was the 'nudes-in-the-Thames' murderer or Jack the Stripper of the 1960s. (Yes, i know it's recently been indicated that Du Rose was probably wrong. But Scotland Yard has still never released the name).
    All the best,
    Martin F

    It's all very well suggesting that the police suppressed information with regard to the public and did not release identities of suspects. However, it's a very different thing to suggest that such information was also suppressed in regard to official internal police reports and memos. A thorough reading of the surviving official records shows no evidence whatsoever of any such suppression and a reading of the below extract from the 7 September 1888 report by Inspector Helson, the J Division Local Inspector, clearly shows that the police knew Pizer as 'Leather Apron' - 'bending' of these official records seems to become a necessity for anyone pushing their own favoured suspect into the frame -

    8636

    [MEPO 3/140 f 238]
    ________________________________________
    Mishter Lusk
    12th January 2008, 02:54 AM
    Not to mention that there have been lots of serial killer cases where the murders had ended or the police only thought they had and the killer was alive, well, not locked up and still living in the area, just no longer killing for whatever reason.

    Name a few!

    Mishter Lusk
    ________________________________________
    dannorder
    12th January 2008, 09:02 PM
    How many are a few? The Green River Killer (Gary Ridgway) and BTK (Dennis Rader) are certainly the most widely-publicized, but there are others too.
    ________________________________________
    Mishter Lusk
    12th January 2008, 10:31 PM
    Thanks for the reply. While I agree that Ridgway did dramtically reduce his number of kills compared to the early eighties I believe he still killed a few in the late eighties and in the nineties. But not that many relatively speaking.

    As for Rader well yeah he pretty much did stop.

    Interesting to note both these guys had family commitments

    But although I'm not a complete expert on serial killers aren't these guys pretty much the exception?

    Notwithstanding, I would say these guys have different profiles than JTR as I don't think JTR tortured victims as in the case of BTK, or had any sexual involvement as per Ridgway and BTK.

    Would be interesting to know if there was a ripper/mutilation type murderer who stopped. Jeffrey Dahmer pretty much kept going till he got caught.
    Say hello: http://www.myspace.com/alansharpauthor

  • #2
    There's a lot of very good sense on this board. I'd only add, in response to the first posting, that Cohen didn't put himself in the asylum: he was committed by the police who arrested him as a lunatic at large. He was apparently a violent maniac, and would have been locked up inevitably soon after he snapped. Forensic psychologist Luigi Cancrini concurred that a lapse into raving mania was a very possible course for a man who had been holding himself together by the release of wild tension he secured by Ripper murders, once 'swamping' the district with police made it impossible for him to get his 'fix' of murder when he needed it. Jeffrey Dahmer snapped in the same way when he realized he was caught, and was taking away raving and struggling - nothing like the calm figure who had evaded previous police enquiries successfully, or the tranquillized zomby in court.
    All the best,
    Martin F

    Comment


    • #3
      Being mentally ill, even violent one, does not make a person of JTR, Dahmer, Bundy etc. who were not psychotic but sociopaths. Where´s the evidence against the poor guy? Slightest one?
      Me?
      For the memory of my sweet, ambereyed and animal-loving mother (1932-2007). Be happy in Heaven.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Christine1932 View Post
        Being mentally ill, even violent one, does not make a person of JTR, Dahmer, Bundy etc. who were not psychotic but sociopaths. Where´s the evidence against the poor guy? Slightest one?
        There's no evidence against anyone, and almost certainly never will be. With a case of this kind, the murderer is never going to stop or change MI to something less animalistic (like poisoning). This guy tore people apart and sought out circumstances to do as much damage as he could.

        The only way this ends is a) he dies, b) he's caught, c) he moves away. If he died, we'll never ever know. If he had moved away, murders of this sort would have happened elsewhere, and historically that didn't happen. Therefore it is reasonable to look at anyone who might have been incarcerated and died in prison/asylum as our best chance of identifying a suspect. David Cohen is the best fit by a mile. Swanson and Anderson, the ONLY two men at the time to have all the details to hand, identified this solution to the end of the case, even if the identity doesn't match Cohen exactly. Right or wrong, Cohen still looks the best match.

        It is highly unlikely this can be proved, but on circumstantial evidence, supposing the Ripper didn't die shortly after Kelly's death, this is the best solution you're going to get and does broadly fit into the historical account of the lead detectives in charge of the case.

        If all you want is proof, this is probably not the case for you. If you want to know the identity of JtR, Cohen is as good as it gets currently, and is head and shoulders above any other named suspect. If only people spent their energy investigating along similar lines rather than promulgating daft and unlikely theories... there is still information out there, but it won't be there forever. It could even prove the whole Cohen theory wrong. It could provide evidence about Kaminsky / Kosminski / Levy / someone totally new to research. Until that day I am comfortable with saying there is no evidence against anyone, but the most likely suspect theory is against Cohen.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by fido View Post
          There's a lot of very good sense on this board. I'd only add, in response to the first posting, that Cohen didn't put himself in the asylum: he was committed by the police who arrested him as a lunatic at large. He was apparently a violent maniac, and would have been locked up inevitably soon after he snapped. Forensic psychologist Luigi Cancrini concurred that a lapse into raving mania was a very possible course for a man who had been holding himself together by the release of wild tension he secured by Ripper murders, once 'swamping' the district with police made it impossible for him to get his 'fix' of murder when he needed it. Jeffrey Dahmer snapped in the same way when he realized he was caught, and was taking away raving and struggling - nothing like the calm figure who had evaded previous police enquiries successfully, or the tranquillized zomby in court.
          All the best,
          Martin F
          The thing is, mania doesn't really work that way. At least true mania doesn't. Someone with mania, or even bipolar cannot just stuff that down. It isn't an illusion the way psychosis is, it's a chemical reality. A manic can no more control it than you would be able to control yourself after a massive shot of epinephrine to the heart. It just has to wear off. Essentially, mania can absolutely be turned on, but it can't be turned off. So no one can control their mania through ritual. They can attempt to keep an even keel through ritual, but the truth is, it doesn't work. If someone is manic, and they are murdering, they are not keeping the mania under control. And there's no way a risky act calms the chemical imbalance in the brain. In fact, it amplifies it.

          Which is not to say that a manic cannot kill while not manic. In my personal experience I can't see how that wouldn't immediately trigger a manic episode, but the brain of the serial killer is a constant source of wonder. Jeffrey Dahmer did not in fact trigger a manic episode when caught. He had a breakdown. Jeffrey Dahmer was not crazy, though he did have a delusion. The delusion is not what made him kill, but dictated how he treated the bodies afterwards. His identity was fractured, and the only thing holding it together was the fact that he was "the guy who got away with it". When he lost that, he became... well the technical term is that he had a "geographical shock" but in essence he unraveled. His ability to keep it together was inextricably linked to his identity as the guy who could talk his way out of anything. In losing one he lost the other. So he went a little apesh*t. It didn't last. By that evening he was fine, if I recall correctly. He was.. blank. Which is what happens to people who have their identity taken away. He expressed remorse, cooperated, but had no appreciable emotional reaction to anything. Except possibly depression. His reaction was purely psychological. A manic reaction is by definition chemical.

          But there are any number of things out there that mimic mania. Cocaine is a popular one. ADD is another, certain schizophrenic symptoms can mimic mania. Psychosis can do it, and even paranoia. Anything that jacks up the body's fight or flight chemistry can mimic mania. Without a biological inability to correctly process those chemicals, the reaction doesn't last, but it can go on long enough to be taken as mania. Manic people do kill, but it's as a result of the mania. And the adrenaline boost that goes along with that act jacks them up even more. And at that level, it's alarming. It takes a lot to scare someone who is manic. Their ability to experience fear is hammered down by the high. But people who experience a natural boost in concurrence with their mania get scared. You can't sleep, you can't follow your own thoughts, you are shaking uncontrollably for a really long time, you start to see things like tracers or weird shadows, you start to lose body function, and then it occurs to you that if you don't calm down you will die. Which is not the most calming thought to be had. Which is when you either get checked into a hospital, or you drink yourself unconscious. Which is a terrible idea, but does have the benefit of forcing your heart to slow down. This level of mania, and the attendant level of stress are very evident. Little kids and animals back away from you kind of evident. There's way that goes unnoticed, and there's no way someone seeks out that state.
          The early bird might get the worm, but the second mouse gets the cheese.

          Comment


          • #6
            I don't want to overstep the facts (and as the chap who kind of wrote the defenitive texts on this suspect has already posted in this thread) but I always wondered if Cohen were the best suspect (and given we know the police were interested in a Polish Jew and he matches the best description we have of a suspect by at least one officer close to the case it is at the very least worth stating "he is the best fit for the person those close to the case considered the best suspect" if not the best suspect for JTR himself) then what drove him to this utter state of rage in which he was captured?

            Was it his mental state degenerating, his mind dissolving after the Kelly killing, or something else?

            Given he was dragged in by the folks he lived with, and that he was (assuming the marginalia to be correct) definately identified not only as a likely suspect but as THE man who had been actively sought for by the police, that he went into a rage when somebody in his family worked out he was not just Leather Apron but the Ripper himself.

            I know, pure speculation on my part, and I will in no way present this as an evidence based theory, only as my pet idea that I think "feels" right on the assumption that all those hints and whispers pointed in the right direction.

            The way I see it is this: Somebody in his family circle pieces it together and confronts him. Cohen flies into a rage, and is dragged into the cells much as Swanson describes. At some point somebody asks who he is, what happened, etc, as he is bundled into a cell (after all he was delivered in restraints he didn't just appear in a cell) and it is revealed not only that he is a madman in a rage, but also what caused the rage. "I asked him about the bloodstains," or the night he didn't come home, or something, "and asked him to just assure me he wasn't the Ripper, and he went like that!" Maybe the doctor tells the police that he has a Ripper suspect in a cell, maybe the policeman helping drag him in makes a note, but somehow we get a definate, logical progression from Madman Raving to Ripper Suspect Identified.

            Could his identification by his kin be the cause of his rage? Or just fancy on my part?
            There Will Be Trouble! http://www.amazon.co.uk/A-Little-Tro...s=T.+E.+Hodden

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by TomTomKent View Post
              I don't want to overstep the facts (and as the chap who kind of wrote the defenitive texts on this suspect has already posted in this thread) but I always wondered if Cohen were the best suspect (and given we know the police were interested in a Polish Jew and he matches the best description we have of a suspect by at least one officer close to the case it is at the very least worth stating "he is the best fit for the person those close to the case considered the best suspect" if not the best suspect for JTR himself) then what drove him to this utter state of rage in which he was captured?

              Was it his mental state degenerating, his mind dissolving after the Kelly killing, or something else?

              Given he was dragged in by the folks he lived with, and that he was (assuming the marginalia to be correct) definately identified not only as a likely suspect but as THE man who had been actively sought for by the police, that he went into a rage when somebody in his family worked out he was not just Leather Apron but the Ripper himself.

              I know, pure speculation on my part, and I will in no way present this as an evidence based theory, only as my pet idea that I think "feels" right on the assumption that all those hints and whispers pointed in the right direction.

              The way I see it is this: Somebody in his family circle pieces it together and confronts him. Cohen flies into a rage, and is dragged into the cells much as Swanson describes. At some point somebody asks who he is, what happened, etc, as he is bundled into a cell (after all he was delivered in restraints he didn't just appear in a cell) and it is revealed not only that he is a madman in a rage, but also what caused the rage. "I asked him about the bloodstains," or the night he didn't come home, or something, "and asked him to just assure me he wasn't the Ripper, and he went like that!" Maybe the doctor tells the police that he has a Ripper suspect in a cell, maybe the policeman helping drag him in makes a note, but somehow we get a definate, logical progression from Madman Raving to Ripper Suspect Identified.

              Could his identification by his kin be the cause of his rage? Or just fancy on my part?
              Forgive me, I think some of your assumptions don't fit with what we know. I don't wish to speak for Mr Fido, but I will paraphrase the argument he has put forward on the podcasts and in his writings.

              Cohen is on record as having no family, so we can't discuss theories about that. Cohen was arrested during a raid on a brothel. AFTER arrest, he then became violent. As with Dahmer, once he knew he was in trouble, he became VERY violent - this seemed to be the point the cold and controlled Dahmer's mind obviously snapped. So too, it seems, did Cohen's in a similar situation.

              I hope this is of help.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by empty View Post
                Forgive me, I think some of your assumptions don't fit with what we know. I don't wish to speak for Mr Fido, but I will paraphrase the argument he has put forward on the podcasts and in his writings.

                Cohen is on record as having no family, so we can't discuss theories about that. Cohen was arrested during a raid on a brothel. AFTER arrest, he then became violent. As with Dahmer, once he knew he was in trouble, he became VERY violent - this seemed to be the point the cold and controlled Dahmer's mind obviously snapped. So too, it seems, did Cohen's in a similar situation.

                I hope this is of help.
                Ah, I wasn't aware of the raid and hadn't read the 1988 book in uite some time. My mtake. For some reason I thought his rage was reported by family, but I am probably confusing him with Kosminski, Kosmanski, or some other possible suspect.
                There Will Be Trouble! http://www.amazon.co.uk/A-Little-Tro...s=T.+E.+Hodden

                Comment


                • #9
                  Though I now wonder how the raging and raving lunatic from the brothel went from ranting and incoherent squawker who was one of many in a raid on a brothel to definate Ripper suspect. There seems to me to be a page missing there and I would love to know what anybody else thinks fills the gap.
                  There Will Be Trouble! http://www.amazon.co.uk/A-Little-Tro...s=T.+E.+Hodden

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by TomTomKent View Post
                    Ah, I wasn't aware of the raid and hadn't read the 1988 book in uite some time. My mtake. For some reason I thought his rage was reported by family, but I am probably confusing him with Kosminski, Kosmanski, or some other possible suspect.
                    Oh if only Kosminski and Cohen weren't always confused, we possibly would have had a solution! The Swanson marginalia has 4 details about the suspect - 2 of which ring true for Cohen and 2 for Kosminski. All of which are mysterious when you consider how important both Swanson and the case was. Kosminski seems to have been incarcerated by his family. Cohen was "caught". The mystery's solution eludes us still...

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by TomTomKent View Post
                      Though I now wonder how the raging and raving lunatic from the brothel went from ranting and incoherent squawker who was one of many in a raid on a brothel to definate Ripper suspect. There seems to me to be a page missing there and I would love to know what anybody else thinks fills the gap.
                      As I said, his mania seems to have come on AFTER the raid. There are many reports from many contemporaries involved in the case that the suspect was being watched - and he knew it - if you follow Cohen, then they weren't sure entirely of his identity and Cohen was a "John Doe" name. If you follow Kosminski, we must assume he was watched for nearly 2 years and was aware of it, which is why the killings stopped.

                      According to Anderson and Swanson, whichever suspect it was was identified by the City Police's PC/witness, meaning there were already strong suspicions against the suspect, whoever it was. In Cohen's case, his mania was revealed by arrest. In Kosminski's case he was, by then, an 'imbecile' (his mind blown because he was prevented from killing/being constantly watched?).

                      In Cohen's case he was identified but the witness refused to swear, so Cohen was locked up as mentally ill.

                      In Kosminski's case, he was identified (probably in 1888/9) but released to his brother's house (this seems to definitely reference Kosminski) and watched and soon after sent to an asylum (by his family).

                      Swanson said the suspect died soon after. Kosminski did not (was not dead at time of Swanson's writing). Cohen did.

                      Swanson's marginalia, if believed/trusted, fits for both, but at the same time netiher accurately. Incredibly frustrating.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by empty View Post
                        Oh if only Kosminski and Cohen weren't always confused, we possibly would have had a solution! The Swanson marginalia has 4 details about the suspect - 2 of which ring true for Cohen and 2 for Kosminski. All of which are mysterious when you consider how important both Swanson and the case was. Kosminski seems to have been incarcerated by his family. Cohen was "caught". The mystery's solution eludes us still...
                        Fair point. Bare in mind that there are no doubt other jewish suspects for whom one or more of the statements rings true. Levy for example died not long after he was caged and seems to have been violent.

                        It could well be that one small factor like, for example, the location of the suspects arrest meaning the asylum was not in London but somewhere outside in Kent, could well mean there is an almost exact match that has elluded us all together. Cohen is one of the better fits for Swansons suspect, of those possibilities so far identified, but does that make him the Ripper?

                        We should be careful of the distinction.
                        There Will Be Trouble! http://www.amazon.co.uk/A-Little-Tro...s=T.+E.+Hodden

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by TomTomKent View Post
                          Fair point. Bare in mind that there are no doubt other jewish suspects for whom one or more of the statements rings true. Levy for example died not long after he was caged and seems to have been violent.

                          It could well be that one small factor like, for example, the location of the suspects arrest meaning the asylum was not in London but somewhere outside in Kent, could well mean there is an almost exact match that has elluded us all together. Cohen is one of the better fits for Swansons suspect, of those possibilities so far identified, but does that make him the Ripper?

                          We should be careful of the distinction.
                          I stand to be corrected, but I believe Levy also was at large for two years after Kelly's murder. His location fits those that were being monitored. For me, though, he is outside the top two - Kosminski has been twice named, Cohen more aptly fits the profile. Even if Swanson and Anderson really thought Kosminski WAS the suspect (and got his death date wrong?), Cohen, for me, still is the strongest candidate historically. A & S could have been wrong, but close nonetheless, and it was luck that ended the killing spree...

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by empty View Post
                            I stand to be corrected, but I believe Levy also was at large for two years after Kelly's murder. His location fits those that were being monitored. For me, though, he is outside the top two - Kosminski has been twice named, Cohen more aptly fits the profile. Even if Swanson and Anderson really thought Kosminski WAS the suspect (and got his death date wrong?), Cohen, for me, still is the strongest candidate historically. A & S could have been wrong, but close nonetheless, and it was luck that ended the killing spree...
                            Again, I agree with the caveat of him being in the top two we know about. If the name is flawed and we are working on personal memory years after the fact we have to allow for there being other mistakes, which allow for there to be equally good fits we have yet to identify because of the falibility of the human mind.
                            There Will Be Trouble! http://www.amazon.co.uk/A-Little-Tro...s=T.+E.+Hodden

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              I stand to be corrected, but I believe Levy also was at large for two years after Kelly's murder. His location fits those that were being monitored. For me, though, he is outside the top two - Kosminski has been twice named, Cohen more aptly fits the profile.
                              Levy was committed August 1890 and died just under a year later in July 1891 ...I do believe there's a pretty good case to consider him a suspect at least!

                              Dave

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X