Did the Seaside Home ID happen?

[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

[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.

[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

[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]

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

[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.

[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?

[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.

[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

[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]

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?

The confusion theory has been largely rejected by most people who losely might be described as Kozminsites.

Personally I now believe that there might have been confusion on the ground around the time of the leather apron scare between known lunatics and unknown lunatics.

So I'm happy to keep an open mind on possible mix ups at the time but believe they would have been ironed out eventually.

Thats not being evasive just open minded on the issue.

Yours Jeff

[harry]

Jeff,
It is one thing to have a belief in things claimed,another to produce provenence.
I asked a simple question regarding persons you claim were at an ID.Where is the evidence these persons were there,wherever there was?
None of those three persons, and I have kept a close watch on this,ever made the claim themselves. At the best,they only expressed hearsay knowledge of such a happening.Crawford,unless he was present,can do no better.

[pinkmoon]

I think the most likely explanation was that Mr lawende was asked if there was any possibility that he might be able to recognise the man he saw and his reply might well have been "no"now some policemen might have drawn the conclusion that he could and he was trying to protect a fellow Jew and other policemen decided he was telling the truth .

[Jeff Leahy]

Jeff,
It is one thing to have a belief in things claimed,another to produce provenence.
I asked a simple question regarding persons you claim were at an ID.Where is the evidence these persons were there,wherever there was?
None of those three persons, and I have kept a close watch on this,ever made the claim themselves. At the best,they only expressed hearsay knowledge of such a happening.Crawford,unless he was present,can do no better.

Hi Harry

What we have is the Head of CID Sir Robert Anderson writing an Auto-biography for public consumption in which he makes a number of most surprising claims. The identity of the killer was known to police and instantly recognised when confronted by the only man who ever had a good look at him.

I'd say of all the provenance we have on the case this is by far the most intriguing, as of course did Martin Fido.

Over the years many theories and claims have been put forward about Andersons claims, from he lied, to was going senile, was become forgetful to wishful thinking.

However none of these claims have ever answered with satisfaction what happened. And the discovery of the Marginalia further confounded the explanation of a witness with the added Seaside Home.

Of all the evidence in the Ripper case, and various clues we have, i think this is the most important and its the mysteries within this evidence and statements that I am trying to get to the bottom of…Why did they claim these things, if they did not happen?

I believe if nothing else further investigation into areas connected to this might shine some new light on that Mystery.

Certainly with areas like the Crawford otter we still know comparatively little, and I'd be most surprised if something somewhere didn't offer knew onsite into that letter.

Yours Jeff

[Trevor Marriott]

Hi Harry

What we have is the Head of CID Sir Robert Anderson writing an Auto-biography for public consumption in which he makes a number of most surprising claims. The identity of the killer was known to police and instantly recognised when confronted by the only man who ever had a good look at him.

This statement is ambiguous because no one can say which ID Anderson was referring to. You seem convinced that it was the same one mentioned in the Marginalia, but then again and I keep using these words "there is not one scrap of evidence" to suggest the two were one and the same.

But of course we know a later suspect Grainger was subjected to an ID when the police believed him to be the killer.

I'd say of all the provenance we have on the case this is by far the most intriguing, as of course did Martin Fido.

With all due respect to Martin Fido he later accepted that he had made a mistake in suggesting that Aaron Kosminski was the same Kosminski mentioned by MM and Swanson.

Finally no one ever saw the killer !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!