Did the Seaside Home ID happen?

[Bridewell]

Quite apart from anything else, a sighting of Kosminski (or whoever) in that area on any other occasion would be evidentially insignificant.

[Bridewell]

However, yeah, I feel to many are, in itself, giving the seaside home incident too much importance.

By what yardstick do we determine how much importance to ascribe to it?

[Wickerman]

The context being the Aberconway version of the MacNaghten Memoranda and the reference being to nobody having ever seen the killer "unless possibly it was the City PC who was (on) a beat near Mitre Square", I think it's reasonable to conclude that it relates to the Eddowes murder and the night thereof.

What I take as significant is, that the reference to the PC as a witness is associated to Kozminski as No.2 Suspect.

no 2. [Kos]minski, a Polish Jew, who lived in [... ...] heart of the district where the murders were committed. He had become insane owing to many years indulgence in solitary vices. He had a great hatred of women, with strong homicidal tendencies. He was (and I believe still is) detained in a lunatic asylum, about March 1889. This man in appearance strongly resembled the individual seen by the City P.C. near Mitre Square.

The reference here reads like it is referring to another report which has not survived. It merely connects Kozminski with the area around Mitre Square.

Therefore, in the preamble he makes mention of the PC as an aside, in brackets:

"No one ever saw the Whitechapel murderer (unless possibly it was the City P.C. who was on a beat near Mitre Square) and no proof could..."

Which suggests to me he is making reference to the mention of this witness in the paragraph on Kozminski.

There is nothing here to suggest he meant specifically, on the night of the murder. Only that one beat constable had recognised a similar looking man in the vicinity of Mitre Square. When this sighting took place is not given.

[Bridewell]

"No one ever saw the Whitechapel murderer (unless possibly it was the City P.C. who was on a beat near Mitre Square) and no proof could..."

Which suggests to me he is making reference to the mention of this witness in the paragraph on Kozminski.

There is nothing here to suggest he meant specifically, on the night of the murder. Only that one beat constable had recognised a similar looking man in the vicinity of Mitre Square. When this sighting took place is not given.

Jon,

Why would this be significant if it wasn't on the night of the Eddowes murder? Kosminski was a local man who presumably could, like any other, be seen in the vicinity of Mitre Square on a pretty regular basis. There would be nothing of significance, surely, in Kosminski (or a man fitting his description) being seen there on any other occasion?

[Trevor Marriott]

The now world famous trip to the seaside hinges on one thing and one thing only that those pencil written notes in that book are genuine no more no less.If you had to try and think of a harder way to organize an identification you couldn't really beat the seaside story it would have been easier and SAFER to have the witness taken to the asylum and that is what would have happened.

If the marginalia isn't authentic and someone did invent it, they have probably invented the perfect scenario. They take the name Kosminski from the MM which was in the public domain from the 1960`s. Add Andersons story of an ID already in the public domain in the 1960`s and build a fictitious story around it. A story that they knew would be accepted by Ripperologists and would never likely be totally disproved because of the limited information contained in it and likely to be believed because of the aforementioned documents supposedly corroborating each other and the Marginalia

Of course if anyone did do this, then they could not have foreseen the emergence of the Aberconway version in the 1960`s and the names therein effectively ruling out Kosminski and thus throwing the proverbial spanner in the works for those who have favoured Kosminski.

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Monty]

By what yardstick do we determine how much importance to ascribe to it?

I'm talking about as an isolated incident Colin,

However, when you throw Andersons and Swansons words into the mix, the yardstick becomes digitised.

Monty

[Wickerman]

Jon,

Why would this be significant if it wasn't on the night of the Eddowes murder? Kosminski was a local man who presumably could, like any other, be seen in the vicinity of Mitre Square on a pretty regular basis. There would be nothing of significance, surely, in Kosminski (or a man fitting his description) being seen there on any other occasion?

Colin.
Many have suggested that the PC referred to was either Watkins or Harvey, but there is no rational reason why either of these constables would omit that testimony from the inquest.
Secondly, that even if it were another PC entirely, that such a witness would not be summoned to the inquest, nor mentioned in any subsequent reports by McWilliam, is also questionable.
The suggestion fails at the first hurdle.

If the statement reflects any truth at all, it must be an indirect association which only surfaced later, after the inquest had terminated, perhaps some time after.

I believe it is possible that this PC only came forward after Kozminski was brought up as a suspect, and he was recognised by a beat constable who patrolled the streets near Mitre Square.
Sadly, we have no idea when Kozminski was first suspected.

[Scott Nelson]

Let's believe kosminski is the murderer, which therefor proves the evidence against him exists!!

The many "circs" against Kosminski as described by Macnaghten and additional "factoids" provided by Sims and Griffiths suggest there was a file on Kosminski containing additional information, which has not survived.

[Errata]

What I take as significant is, that the reference to the PC as a witness is associated to Kozminski as No.2 Suspect.

no 2. [Kos]minski, a Polish Jew, who lived in [... ...] heart of the district where the murders were committed. He had become insane owing to many years indulgence in solitary vices. He had a great hatred of women, with strong homicidal tendencies. He was (and I believe still is) detained in a lunatic asylum, about March 1889. This man in appearance strongly resembled the individual seen by the City P.C. near Mitre Square.

The reference here reads like it is referring to another report which has not survived. It merely connects Kozminski with the area around Mitre Square.

Therefore, in the preamble he makes mention of the PC as an aside, in brackets:

"No one ever saw the Whitechapel murderer (unless possibly it was the City P.C. who was on a beat near Mitre Square) and no proof could..."

Which suggests to me he is making reference to the mention of this witness in the paragraph on Kozminski.

There is nothing here to suggest he meant specifically, on the night of the murder. Only that one beat constable had recognised a similar looking man in the vicinity of Mitre Square. When this sighting took place is not given.

Yeah, but I have Homeless Frank near my house, and I see him every three days or so within a two mile radius dancing down the street singing about being Homeless Frank (he gave himself the name, I'm not that big of an ass). So how unusual is it to see the same homeless man somewhere in Whitechapel around the murders? Homeless Frank has been here for years.

[John G]

Colin.
Many have suggested that the PC referred to was either Watkins or Harvey, but there is no rational reason why either of these constables would omit that testimony from the inquest.
Secondly, that even if it were another PC entirely, that such a witness would not be summoned to the inquest, nor mentioned in any subsequent reports by McWilliam, is also questionable.
The suggestion fails at the first hurdle.

If the statement reflects any truth at all, it must be an indirect association which only surfaced later, after the inquest had terminated, perhaps some time after.

I believe it is possible that this PC only came forward after Kozminski was brought up as a suspect, and he was recognised by a beat constable who patrolled the streets near Mitre Square.
Sadly, we have no idea when Kozminski was first suspected.

But how would a beat constable be aware that Kosminski had been identified as a suspect? And surely any of the local beat constables must have seen a great many individuals around the Mitre Square area, but if wasn't near to the time that Eddowes was murdered what reason would they have for suspecting any of them, i.e. to the extent that they felt obliged to report the sightings?

[Phil Carter]

The P. C. on a beat near Mitre Square.

Hello all,

It has occurred to me over the years..that the "P.C." referred to could in fact be a "D.C."..who was on a beat near Mitre Square..who did stop at least two people, either individually or together. That being D.C.Halse.

Sadly there is no information to back up Halse's claim at the inquest....neither written details nor confirmed by senior ofgicers nor reported in the newspapers with details. .but at least he is known through inquest testimony to have actually stopped someone. .and does fit the description of being on duty near Mitre Square on the evening in question.

No doubt this possibility may have occurred to others.


Phil

[pinkmoon]

Yeah, but I have Homeless Frank near my house, and I see him every three days or so within a two mile radius dancing down the street singing about being Homeless Frank (he gave himself the name, I'm not that big of an ass). So how unusual is it to see the same homeless man somewhere in Whitechapel around the murders? Homeless Frank has been here for years.

I've got a homeless Vincent who sleeps on a bench near where I live i see him nearly ever day he dosnt dance about at all and always refuses money and offers of help very sad.I agree a local down and out or lunatic wouldn't stand out .I find homeless extremely offensive and with all the tax we pay in this country no one should sleep rough we will have to discuss that some other time though.

[Paddy]

SAT, SEP 29, 1888
8:30pm

Police Constable Louis Robinson, 931City, was on duty in Aldgate High St when he noticed a small crowd standing around Catherine. PC Robinson tried to Stand Catherine up against the house, but she fell.

City Police Constable George Simmons assisted PC Robinson in taking Catherine to the Bishopsgate Police Station

The crowd around Catherine Eddowes would have become significant only after her murder. Maybe there was a man there, only identified later when he came under suspicion?

Just a thought....Pat.

[Wickerman]

But how would a beat constable be aware that Kosminski had been identified as a suspect? And surely any of the local beat constables must have seen a great many individuals around the Mitre Square area, but if wasn't near to the time that Eddowes was murdered what reason would they have for suspecting any of them, i.e. to the extent that they felt obliged to report the sightings?

Hi John.
If you recall, Eddowes was not seen alive by police in or near Mitre Square on the night of the murder, but, according to one source, the beat constables knew she frequented the area.
This is no different to how I interpret the PC reference for Kozminski.

Given that all the City Police records were destroyed in the blitz, we cannot know when Kozminski was first suspected, or whether his likeness was ever posted at the station.

[Harry D]

Don't forget that George R Sims said: "The policeman who got a glimpse of Jack in Mitre Court said, when some time afterwards he saw the Pole, that he was the height and build of the man he had seen on the night of the murder."