Did the Seaside Home ID happen?

[Jeff Leahy]

Jeff. In post 821 you state the ID was done in secret by Anderson,Swanson and Monroe.
Care to prove this? Not infer,but prove.
As it stands,the information of Anderson and Swanson is not even hearsay evidence.It has no origin.There is no evidence on which to form a suspicion against Kosminski.

Hi Harry

Yes I'm currently theorising that the discrepancies between what Anderson and Swanson claim and what MacNaughten says can be very simply explained by accepting all these men spoke the truth as they were aware of the truth.

However MacNaughten worked from a file dated up to March 1889 when Kozminski was placed in a Private Asylum in Surrey. I believe this information as largely collated by Cox and his team.

I believe that Kozminski was back out and on the street three months later but kept away from the Berner street area. Its possible that Sagar was involved in a surveillance also at this time.Sept 1889. Triggered by the McKenzie murder. Check also White.

But the ID was triggered by the family approaching Anderson and done in secret. Re: Crawford Letter.

Thats what I'm theorising.

I am currently following several lines of research which relate to that theory.

I'd be most interested in talking to any ripperologist who lives in Edinborough and would be interested in finding out more about Crawford. So far to my knowledge noone has really found links between him and Anderson, although they appear to have met at the Royal observatory in Edinbough 1882. There are lots of notes relating to Crawford and it simply requires someone with a keen eye going through them with a ripperologist hat on.

Possible connections to the Eastend and Crawford are through Jewish businessman 'Rothchilde' who built several synagogs and was good friends with Crawford. And 'Montegu' who was the local MP. As a long shot Crawford's younger son did charitable work in the Eastend when 17 but these records were frustrating destroyed for that period during the Blitz (Not the Attack type).

I'd also like to find out more about the other correspondence in the USA what they contain, what they relate to and most importantly of all dates.

Many thanks

Yours Jeff

[Jeff Leahy]

The only “Kosminski” was found in Colney Hatch (and other non-private asylums) is Aaron Kozminski. Sagar said “private asylum” and this could be the asylum where “Kosminski” was caged and identified (Anderson). Cox stated: asylum in Surrey, maybe this asylum in surrey was a private asylum. We also know that asylums in Surrey had “Seaside Homes”. I believe that the Holloway Asylum had connections to the Seaside Home in Brighton.

There are a large number of Asylums in Surrey that might fit the bill. They range from the large like Holloway to private Asylums around Surbiton that only took two or three patients. If i was a betting man I'd say we were looking for something small with connections to a synagog… I noted with interest that there was a small synagog connected to the back ally in Greenfeild street not far from Issac's premises and wonder if its possible to find out who was the rabbie there at the time?

Holloway's Private Home in Brighton didn't open until 1891 but did have a Seaside Home in Poole at the time. Holloway also had an oral tradition that Jack the Ripper stayed there.

Better possibilities in my opinion are Bethlam in Southwark and an Ayslum in Balham. Both took private patients who would be free to come and go as they wished.

Its also interesting to note that Woolfe Abraham appears to have moved around the March 1889 to Yaflod Street which would suggest he down sized.

Many thanks for your post on Cox. I'm not certain why Roy was getting so shirty yesterday, a number of people including Rob House have speculated that Cox might be talking about Kozminski, and if he is surely it supports the idea that Kozminski was highly functional in 1888 to March 1889.

Many thanks and good morning

Yours Jeff

[S.Brett]

Good Morning!

Cox:

“from time to time he became insane” but worked day and night (“occupied several shops”)

Sagar:

“worked in Butchers Row Aldgate… There was no doubt that this man was insane” Insane but he worked

Anderson:

“… he could go and come and get rid of his blood-stains in secret”

Sims:

“…who was the sole occupant of certain premises in Whitechapel after night-fall… He had at one time been employed in a hospital in Poland”

So, Sims –see above- (via Macnaghten) talked about Anderson´s suspect (“… he could go and come and get rid of his blood-stains in secret”) and this could mean that the suspect had a job… as in earlier years in Poland (anatomical knowledge)

So “He was known to be a lunatic at the time of the murders” (Sims) “He had become insane/ This man became insane” (Macnaghten) but he worked

Jacob Cohen described a man who is insane:

"Jacob Cohen, 51 Carter Lane, St Paul´s EC says that he goes about the streets and picks up bits of bread out of the gutter and eats them, he drinks water from the tap & he refuses food at the hands of others. He took up a knife and threatened the life of his sister. He says that he is ill and his cure consists in refusing food. He is melancholic, practises self abuse. He is very dirty and will not be washed. He has not attempted any kind of work for years."

So, Aaron Kozminski worked in earlier years. But what does this mean: “He has not attempted any kind of work for years”?

For years?

Cox: “…and that very soon he removed from his usual haunts and gave up his nightly prowls.” About March 1889? The end of attempting any kind of work? Between March 1889 and February 1891 are almost two years.

And what does this mean: Any kind of work? His job as hairdresser? Is night watchman a real job?

Cox, Sagar, Cohen and Anderson; everyone had his own definition of work probably.

Who knows:

For Sagar this is a job: Night watchman in Butchers Row
For Cohen is Tailor, Butcher, Boot maker, Hairdresser a job, not a night watchman

Sagar: “Worked in Butchers Row” What does this mean: Worked in Butchers Row? How long did the suspect work there? 10 days, 3 weeks, 3 months?

Here are some links, schizophrenia and work:

http://www.livingwithschizophreniauk.org/advice-sheets/schizophrenia-and-work-what-kind-of-work-can-i-do/

http://www.everydayhealth.com/schizophrenia/working-with-schizophrenia.aspx

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/27/op...upid.html?_r=1

Maybe the work during the day was an easy job, simple (Hairdresser?). I guess that the Ripper was a night person without a hard job during the day (“and was forced to spend a portion of his time in an asylum in Surrey”/Cox)

It seems that the suspects of Anderson/Macnaghten, Cox and Sagar were extremely busy... and insane... and were forced to spend a portion of their time in an asylum in Surrey (Cox), in a private asylum (Sagar) or "safely caged in an asylum" (Anderson), “He was (and I believe still is) detained in a lunatic asylum about March 1889”/ “he was removed to a lunatic asylum about March 1889”(Macnaghten)... always the same "type"... curious…

Anderson:

“I will only add that when the individual whom we suspected was caged in an asylum, the only person who had ever had a good view of the murderer at once identified him”

“identified him in an asylum”

Swanson:

“After the suspect had been identified at the seaside home…”

“In a very short time the suspect with his hands tied behind his back, was sent to Stepney Workhouse, and then to Colney Hatch… Kosminski was the suspect“

So, “Kosminski“ identified in an asylum and sent to Colney Hatch sometime after the identification.

The only “Kosminski” was found in Colney Hatch (and other non-private asylums) is Aaron Kozminski. Sagar said “private asylum” and this could be the asylum where “Kosminski” was caged and identified (Anderson). Cox stated: asylum in Surrey, maybe this asylum in surrey was a private asylum. We also know that asylums in Surrey had “Seaside Homes”. I believe that the Holloway Asylum had connections to the Seaside Home in Brighton.

If it is possible that we would find Aaron Kozminski in a private asylum in Surrey (in this period) then we can be sure that Aaron Kozminski is the "Kosminski" of Anderson, Swanson and Macnaghten and also probably the man of Cox and Sagar.

[Pcdunn]

What about Hyams?

I've read a good deal about Kosminski, and the pros and cons of his identification. Some of the details seem to me to fit Hyam Hyams, an insane Jew of the period. See:

http://www.casebook.org/dissertations/rn-hyam-hyams.html

He is linked to Mitre Square and Aldgate, is known to have been violent towards women, especially his wife, praticed "self-abuse", and was in Colney Hatch asylum. It just seems odd that two men could have so many similarities at approximately the same time. Thoughts? Could the names been mixed up?

[harry]

Jeff. In post 821 you state the ID was done in secret by Anderson,Swanson and Monroe.
Care to prove this? Not infer,but prove.
As it stands,the information of Anderson and Swanson is not even hearsay evidence.It has no origin.There is no evidence on which to form a suspicion against Kosminski.

[Jeff Leahy]

Is it possible that the knife incident never happened and the family just wanted rid of Kosminski it must have been no joy to have him under the same roof especially if he was not washing and masturbating all the time could his family just have had enough and decided to lie to get him taken of them.

That would assume that the family knew what was happening and didn't give a damn…

I expect the exact opposite

This was a tragic illness, and events happened out of the family control

If what I expect happened they were all victims who did there best

Yours Jeff

[pinkmoon]

Is it possible that the knife incident never happened and the family just wanted rid of Kosminski it must have been no joy to have him under the same roof especially if he was not washing and masturbating all the time could his family just have had enough and decided to lie to get him taken of them.

[Jeff Leahy]

Yeah you did that wierd thing you do again Jeff. You ignored the part about the man Cox watched who:

had his shop
was observed busy as usual in daylight hours
waited on customers

Roy

Roy I simply conclude that if thats what Cox says he observed thats what he observed.

1) He clearly describes a man who is at several premises

2) Schizophrenics often have trouble sleeping, day and night

3) We don't know enough about Aaron to conclude that he couldn't have served a customer

The man we suspected was about five feet six inches in height, with short, black, curly hair, and he had a habit of taking late walks abroad. He occupied several shops in the East End, but from time to time he became insane, and was forced to spend a portion of his time in an asylum in Surrey. While the Whitechapel murders were being perpetrated his place of business was in a certain street, and after the last murder I was on duty in this street for nearly three months.

Cox said that after the murder of Mary Kelly, City Police suspicions ‘fell on a man living in the East End of London’ and that Cox and several other officers were on duty for three months watching this suspect.

This would match MacNaughtens claim that Kozminski went into an Asylum in March 1889.

Cox said his suspect was ‘a misogynist who at one time or another had been wronged by a woman.’ His motive was ‘revenge on womankind.

Again this Matches what MAcNAughten says

Cox remarking that the suspect became insane ‘from time to time.’

This matches what we know about schizophrenia, so perhaps during hhis lucid moments he was kept busy working with other family trades?

"A possible identification of Dr Houchin's informant, Jacob Cohen. Woolf's wife Betsy, whose maiden surname was also Kozminski, had a brother named Jacob (born 6 April 1850). After a spell in South Africa, around 1882 he and his wife and children came to England, where he was known as Jacob Cohen. Eventually, in 1905, the family returned to South Africa. In 1891 he was running a butcher's business in Manchester, so it's not clear that he was the same man as Woolf's business partner in London, but it is a possibility".

Goldas father was also a butcher

If Aaron was kept busy as a Night watchman….Butcher, the Taylor, the boot maker, and the brothel

Thats a lot for Cox to keep his eye on

Yours Jeff

[S.Brett]

OK… Failed attacks.

Its generally assumed that Jack only killed five in a clear and purposeful MO.

Your now raising the possibility of a failed knife attack in brick lane on his own sister. And actually if we look at the attack described by Schwartz we are , as a few people have pointed out, looking at a killer taking a high risk random approach and with such a killer we would expect to see other failed attacks.

It's interesting that this high risk attack very much matches the type of an attack reported by Annie Millwood in Whites Row and somewhere in the back of my mind is an attack on a woman in Hanbury street. You might even re-consider Smith as a failed attack, she managed to get away.

Actually there are possibly more failed attacks than successful ones if you start to include Wilson, even Tabram might be argued as a failed Ripper attack

Yours Jeff

Hello Jeff,

More than one Double Event?

Chapman/Walker 8 September 1888

Emily Walter/Walker/Walton:

The Star, 10 SEPTEMBER, 1888:

“With regard to the bright farthings, a woman has stated that a man accosted her on Saturday morning and gave her two "half-sovereigns," but that, when he became violent, she screamed and he ran off. She discovered afterwards that the "half-sovereigns" were two brass medals. It is said that this woman did accompany the man, who seemed as if he would kill her, to a house in Hanbury-street, possibly No. 29, at half-past two a.m. This woman, Emily Walter, a lodger in one of the common lodging-houses of Spitalfields, was asked to describe the man, but her description of him was not considered clear. Still the police determined to follow up the matter, more particularly because the woman states that the man seemed ready to kill her. The woman's description did not answer the description of the man "Leather Apron," for whom they have been searching in connection with the murder of Mary Ann Nicholls.”

See also A-Z page 233 (Description)

Smith/ Haynes 3 April 1888

Malvina Haynes:

http://www.casebook.org/press_reports/eastern_post/easternpost880414.html

“…in the vicinity of Leman Street Railway Station”

Cox:

"I followed him to Lehman Street, and there I saw him enter a shop which I knew was the abode of a number of criminals well known to the police.”

A shop in Leman Street… “He did not stay long.” (Cox)

Cox:

"He occupied several shops" In which he did not stay long “after night-fall”?

Macnaughten via Sims:

"who was the sole occupant of certain premises in Whitechapel after night-fall"

Anderson:

“…if he was not living absolutely alone, his people knew of his guilt”

The Cox suspect worked day and night; during the day in his own shop and after nightfall in other shops/premises (Hats off!), and, maybe one of them was in Leman Street (and -later-another in Butchers Row-/ Sagar?).

Insomnia is frequent in schizophrenia:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21856129

Cox:

“…and that very soon he removed from his usual haunts and gave up his nightly prowls.”

He worked during the day and at night he prowled and occupied several shops. And Anderson´s suspect was living (not absolutely?) alone.

[Roy Corduroy]

Yeah you did that wierd thing you do again Jeff. You ignored the part about the man Cox watched who:

had his shop
was observed busy as usual in daylight hours
waited on customers

so this is how many times now? I'm not counting. Bye Bye

Roy

[Jeff Leahy]

Hi Jeff,

You state that "He had enough communication skills to ask for business..." Doesn't that tend to rule out Kosminksi as he couldn't speak English?

We simply don't know whether he spoke english. Given the time he had been in England and his families various business occupation it seems reasonable to conclude that he did.

Yours Jeff

[Jeff Leahy]

Aaron Kosminski was not the man Cox watched.
Roy

Really and the coincidence of taking a disguise as Inspectors of Sweat shops, watching a certain premises. Several premise.

All interesting relevant to a large family with a number of trades.

We simply do not know Aarons mental condition in 1888. And the possibility remains that he was highly functional. He was certainly able to appear in court in 1889 and was released from the work house in July 1890

Yours Jeff

[John G]

Many thanks. Your apology is accept.

I was getting somewhat frustrated, its one thing defending something you have created but being attack over something you were never involved with becomes highly frustrating. Hopefully the issue is dropped.



I simply feel this argument is going nowhere. What we appear to be arguing about is the precise definition of 'Blitz' and how it is used.

The important thing here is how we see the attack happening.

Clearly I believe that the killer did speak to the victims and was coherent enough to do so. My opinion is that he was well known possibly seen regularly in the area. He had enough communication skills to ask for business and struck the women suddenly and by surprise once they were somewhere quiet..opportunity

That's as I see this killer operating, I think it quiet possible that this technique was learn by trial and error with early attacks such as that on Millwood.

Serial killers are not machines they are individuals each with there own unique personality no two killers are identical they are as different as one human being to the next. The important thing here is how you see Jack as a killer, I've described the MO as I see it, getting bogged down in an argument over the meaning of the word 'Blitz' doesn't take us any closer to what happened at the ID.

As I've said several times now I don't think Schizophrenia alone can explain this type of serial killer there has to be a cocktail of cluster B, environment and catalyst. What schizophrenia might explain is what happened to Kozminski later on once placed in an Asylum.

Yours Jeff

Hi Jeff,

You state that "He had enough communication skills to ask for business..." Doesn't that tend to rule out Kosminksi as he couldn't speak English?

[Jeff Leahy]

That might be the one. If so, and if Jeff Leahy had nothing to do with it, then I again offer an unreserved apology.

Many thanks. Your apology is accept.

I was getting somewhat frustrated, its one thing defending something you have created but being attack over something you were never involved with becomes highly frustrating. Hopefully the issue is dropped.

Far from intending to create a diversion, I would have been much more interested in eliciting your response to the post which caused your hysterical outburst. You have stated, for example, that the Ripper was a blitz attacker, and that this is an opinion substantiated by Roy Hazelwood amongst sundry other experts.

Here’s a link to a report on the FBI’s website:-

http://www.fbi.gov/news/stories/2014/october/serial-killers-part-8-new-research-aims-to-help-investigators-solve-cases/serial-murder-pathways-for-investigations

And here’s a quotation that may be found on Page 11:-

‘Blitz was defined as an immediate physical attack, without any verbal interaction.’

As I previously stated, the blitz attack was originally defined as a mode of assault which entailed no precrime interaction between victim and assailant. This definition was later relaxed by criminologists and crime analysts in order to facilitate obvious blitz attacks where minimal interaction occurred. You, however, insisted that we stick to the original FBI version. Okay, then, let’s do that.

Explain, if you will, the clear interaction witnessed by Mrs Long involving the woman presumed to have been Annie Chapman and her likely killer. Perhaps you’d also care to explain how Chapman and this man made their way into the yard if Chapman was killed blitz-style – in other words, if the attack took place immediately upon first contact with no precrime interaction of any kind.

The same applies to Kate Eddowes, who was almost certainly seen with her killer at the Church Passage entry. In this instance there was palpable precrime interaction between victim and assailant. On top of this Eddowes’ body was found approximately ten minutes later at an entirely different location.

The blitz attack as originally defined by the FBI, remember, constitutes an immediate physical attack with no interaction between victim and assailant.

So, given your aversion to diversionary tactics, feel free to explain how either of the Chapman or Eddowes murders could have resulted from a blitz attack.

I simply feel this argument is going nowhere. What we appear to be arguing about is the precise definition of 'Blitz' and how it is used.

The important thing here is how we see the attack happening.

Clearly I believe that the killer did speak to the victims and was coherent enough to do so. My opinion is that he was well known possibly seen regularly in the area. He had enough communication skills to ask for business and struck the women suddenly and by surprise once they were somewhere quiet..opportunity

That's as I see this killer operating, I think it quiet possible that this technique was learn by trial and error with early attacks such as that on Millwood.

Serial killers are not machines they are individuals each with there own unique personality no two killers are identical they are as different as one human being to the next. The important thing here is how you see Jack as a killer, I've described the MO as I see it, getting bogged down in an argument over the meaning of the word 'Blitz' doesn't take us any closer to what happened at the ID.

As I've said several times now I don't think Schizophrenia alone can explain this type of serial killer there has to be a cocktail of cluster B, environment and catalyst. What schizophrenia might explain is what happened to Kozminski later on once placed in an Asylum.

Yours Jeff

[Jeff Leahy]

But then he adds that "not the slightest scrap of evidence" could be found against him and that the police continued to investigate the crimes long afterwards.He concludes by saying that the crimes are much a mystery as they were 15 years ago that the theories of amateur detectives are based on nothing more than surmise.

Yes he does indeed. Thats what I've been arguing. That the investigation into Kozminski happened early on. Possibly starting as early as 14th Oct 1888

And that investigation came to an end in March 1889 when the family decided to place the suspect out of harms way. Thus Cox and MacNaughten concluded correctly from their perspective that Kozminski was not a serious contender for Jack the Ripper.

What they did not know is that almost two years later the family would give that suspect up. A trade in order to gain protection…hence the Crawford letter

The ID was done in secret by Anderson, Swanson and Monroe

The only person who may have picked up on a later observation was Sagar.. He seems to have been watching someone well into 1889, which begs the question how long the family kept Aaron in the Asylum..

But Schizophrenic attacks typically last between 18-22 weeks so if we estimate four months he might have been out by the end of July

Yours Jeff