Did the Seaside Home ID happen?

[S.Brett]

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?Yours Jeff

Hi Jeff!

I have already written to you that there was a Rabbi in 6 Yalford Street, Israel Lubnowski-Cohen. Yalford Street was next to Greenfield Street where Morris & Matilda Lubnowski and Isaac & Bertha Abrahams were living at the time. Before Woolf and Betsy Abrahams moved to Providence Street they had also lived in Greenfield Street and you know; "34 Yalford St. from before March 1889 to after May 1889 (exact dates are unclear)" -Rob House, Prime suspect-.

I did not know much more...

But then Rob House again:

"Morris Lubnowski's older brother was a rabbi, living at 6 Yalford Street in the 1891 census:

1891 census (5 April) - Israel [Lubnowsky] Cohen at 6 Yalford St

Rabbi Minister (37), b. Poland Carlish [Kalisz], with wife Leah (30), b. Poland [?]Kutnor [Kutno], children [?]Lilly [or Tilly] (7), Rachael (4), Joseph (2), all b. Poland, and Kitty (7 months), b. London Mile End."

http://www.jtrforums.com/showthread.php?t=17414

Joseph (2) born in Poland? 1888 or 1889?

[S.Brett]

Hi Karsten

Is it possible to re-post the information and times on the Matilda knife incident?

This thread post # 515

http://forum.casebook.org/showthread.php?t=8856&page=52

"he took up a knife and threatened the life of his sister"

How often did it happen? Once, and again, then a third time?

What did Jacob Cohen actually know about this incident?

What exactly did happen? A dispute out of control? An attempted murder without prior warning? An overstatement?

We do not know...

Just as a quick reminder, for a number of reasons I'm more interested in Bethlam than Holloway. However I think I've pretty much established from the Ladies admissions book that they did take Jewish patients and people from Eastend…remember one woman admitted in Sept 1889 was actually given as cause of madness 'Whitechapel Murders' unfortunately I could discover no more about this woman.

The question with Holloway is could Rees-Philips have had some connection to Jewish communities in the Eastend and so far we've drawn a blank. Will keep searching.

Yours jeff

I guess; for this man -suspected to be Jack the Ripper- it was harder to find a good hiding place.

Yours Karsten.

[Bridewell]

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

"Unless possibly it was the City PC that was (on) a beat near Mitre Square".

[harry]

Mr Lucky,
Yes it is strange,that when one asks for provenance,in the Ripper case,and the questions become a little too inquisitive,legal considerations cease to be a concern.
I always believed that guilt by accusation alone,ended with the death of Charles the First,or was it the second.It seems not.
Kosminski has been accused of being JTR.No provenence tendered.On the word of one person,Swanson,and on that word alone,he has been condemned.No need to prove anything.
Swanson,Monroe,and Anderson were there at the seaside home,and witnessed an identification.Jeff tells us so,and we shouldn't question Jeff's claim,or asks how he knows.Is that it Monty?

[Monty]

Kosminski has never officially been accused of any criminal act, that needs to be made clear.

He is a suspect.

Is what it Harry?

Monty

[harry]

Suspects become so when information is of a suspicious nature.There is no known information connecting Kosminski with the killing of anyone.There is a claim,by Swanson ,that he was identified at a seaside home,a claim that is disputed,and as yet to be proven.
The latest claim is that Anderson,Swanson and Monroe were present at that ID.The claimant is being asked to prove their presence.If he can,then suspicion can be said to have been established.Kosminski can be accepted as a suspect.Simple as that.
Personnely I do not believe the claim will be proven.
W hat says you Monty?
It is as it is,as you say.

[Jeff Leahy]

Suspects become so when information is of a suspicious nature.There is no known information connecting Kosminski with the killing of anyone.There is a claim,by Swanson ,that he was identified at a seaside home,a claim that is disputed,and as yet to be proven.
The latest claim is that Anderson,Swanson and Monroe were present at that ID.The claimant is being asked to prove their presence.If he can,then suspicion can be said to have been established.Kosminski can be accepted as a suspect.Simple as that.
Personnely I do not believe the claim will be proven.
W hat says you Monty?
It is as it is,as you say.

The claim is not that Swanson, Anderson and Monroe were present at the ID.

What is being theorised is an explanation as to why MacNAughten believed Kozminski entered the Asylum in March 1889.

I'm suggesting a very simple explanation, that Aaron Kozminski was firstly placed in a Private Asylum in Surrey in March 1889. That it was possible to pay a quarter in advance to such Private asylums and we know Kozminski's brother (Who owned a valuable watch) down sized to Yalford Street about this time.

This is supported by Harry Cox who claimed the suspect he followed entered a private asylum in Surrey about March 1889 also.

I'm then connecting a theory first proposed by Rob House that the Crawford letter pertains to Anderson's suspect. ANd that a member of Kozminski's family Matilda, approached Anderson asking for help. Thus the ID was done in secret with only the knowledge of Swanson, Anderson and Monroe. (Although given the unusual letter sent by Anderson to Major Smith I wonder if he was aware the ID had taken place possibly via Sagar)

Hence MacNAughten did not know about the Kozminski ID so he preferred Druitt.

What this theory does is explain many of the contextual problems and apparent contradictions between the MacNaughten Memo and later via Sims. And Andersons claims in TLSOMOL and the Marginalia.

And remember that in Adam Woods feature he makes the claim that Swanson had told family members that he 'Knew the identity of JAck the Ripper but wild horses would not drag it from him'

Surely its reasonable to speculate that the man in charge of the JAck the Ripper investigation not only supports Anderson's claims but goes one further claiming Kozminski was 'Jack the Ripper'.

Yours Jeff

PS Another poster here is proposing something very similar however he's claiming that an attack on a Matilda was an attempt by Kozminski to kill his own sister, who initially refused to testify against him. Hence the witness at the ID relates to that incident not one of the cannon. It throws up a lot of problems but its an interesting new theory.

[AdamNeilWood]

And remember that in Adam Woods feature he makes the claim that Swanson had told family members that he 'Knew the identity of JAck the Ripper but wild horses would not drag it from him'

I didn't make that claim, it was a quote from James Swanson in the unused News of the World article.

It was probably something he said while being interviewed by the NOTW reporter Charles Sandell, who visited Jim at his home.

It's worth bearing in mind that Jim Swanson wasn't born until 1912, nine years after his Grandfather retired. He was 12 when Donald Swanson died, so how much he actually heard about the case directly from Donald is open to question.

[pinkmoon]

I just find it impossible to believe that some policemen knew who jack the ripper was and kept it quite the police wanted this case solved they would have wanted the reputation of the police force restored .Fame and immortality would have been granted to the policeman who announced this case solved to the public and I think the police force would have even taken the chance on some civil unrest directed at the jews if it meant putting this case to bed.

[Jeff Leahy]

I didn't make that claim, it was a quote from James Swanson in the unused News of the World article.

It was probably something he said while being interviewed by the NOTW reporter Charles Sandell, who visited Jim at his home.

It's worth bearing in mind that Jim Swanson wasn't born until 1912, nine years after his Grandfather retired. He was 12 when Donald Swanson died, so how much he actually heard about the case directly from Donald is open to question.

Sorry Adam, I was of course referencing the section with a lengthy typed letter.

But the way it reads to me is that Jim Swanson is referencing other family members. This intrigues me because I remember talk of Jack the Ripper at my aunts house about Jack, which is why I stayed up and watched the Barlow and Watts about that same age.

But why its fair to be cautious if elder family members had made this claim to Jim Swanson wouldn't it put a slightly different light on how we might interpret Swansons Marginalia notes?

Trusting you are well on this fine day.

Yours Jeff

[pinkmoon]

Hi Jeff,all six parts of Barlow and watts are on YouTube now watched first episode before and found it very entertaining.

[Monty]

Suspects become so when information is of a suspicious nature.There is no known information connecting Kosminski with the killing of anyone.There is a claim,by Swanson ,that he was identified at a seaside home,a claim that is disputed,and as yet to be proven.
The latest claim is that Anderson,Swanson and Monroe were present at that ID.The claimant is being asked to prove their presence.If he can,then suspicion can be said to have been established.Kosminski can be accepted as a suspect.Simple as that.
Personnely I do not believe the claim will be proven.
W hat says you Monty?
It is as it is,as you say.

Monroe? Surely Munro yeah? ;-)

Being suspicious is not an inference of guilt, nor should it be taken that is exactly what Swanson is stating with his use of the word 'suspect'. Anderson goes a step further in his use of both 'suspect' and 'murderer' in his book (although he does tone it down to just 'suspect' in the Blackwoods version), however, again for clarity, Swanson refrains from going that far. He is in the privacy of his own home, and needs not to sell books. That said, the fact Swanson notes this passage in his copy of Andersons book does indeed lean toward comments being made upon the same incident.

No, there is no known information connecting Kosminski killing anyone, whoever just because we cannot locate it does not mean it did not exist. Personally Ive never been to the moon however I am willing to believe that it isn't made of cheese due to the evidence presented. Now some will blindly question anything, that is their nature, despite being shown evidence suggesting a certain conclusion is entirely plausible and most likely probable. And there is nothing wrong in that if they can provide equally reasoned alternatives, instead of the convoluted conspiracy theories with no valid rhyme nor reason nor evidence as to why Anderson and his cronies would create such a yarn.

Swanson does not have a track record for being intentionally misleading, nor does he have a strong track record for being constantly erroneous. What he states, and what Anderson states also, is a part of a contemporary process of investigation for the period. We see it during the Whitechapel murder cases with regards the Gillbanks, Fiddymont & Chappell, and the attempt to identify Isenschmid. Albeit years later, we see Arthur Harding citing exactly that process, we also see it during the work of the Mets Ghost Squad during the late 1940s. It was the strongest tool the police had at that time, and for a multitude of reasons, not necessarily in order to gain an outright conviction, and it is that which is being lost amongst the continual modern debate.

Because the identification would have been a step in the process, not the final location. This is bolstered by the fact that legal protocols and guidance were not strictly adhered to, a suggestion that the actual identifying of the suspect was secondary to its intended impact.

Monty

[Jeff Leahy]

Hi Jeff,all six parts of Barlow and watts are on YouTube now watched first episode before and found it very entertaining.

Sort of my first introduction o the case. In those days it was all Royal conspiracy. I still love it however

I remember my aunt taking me to the Eastend and talking about Jack the Ripper her mothers Uncle was even a Ripper suspect, they were Parnells.

But I'm afraid I don't remember much more than all the house's in London looked Black in those days. All the bricks were black and the chimneys smoked constantly. Even Westminster and St Pauls were Black.

Just on a point you raised early about Anderson and Monroe keeping it quiet. As Maonroe called it a 'Hot Potato' the Crawford letter says the woman was in fear of her life..

We are talking about a potentially explosive point in History, and the Kozminski family were bang slap in the middle, hated by exploited workers on one side and disgruntled native workers on the other.

You have to place what happened in its historical context. They would certain speak out today, but in those days it just wasn't done.

Yours Jeff

[pinkmoon]

Sort of my first introduction o the case. In those days it was all Royal conspiracy. I still love it however

I remember my aunt taking me to the Eastend and talking about Jack the Ripper her mothers Uncle was even a Ripper suspect, they were Parnells.

But I'm afraid I don't remember much more than all the house's in London looked Black in those days. All the bricks were black and the chimneys smoked constantly. Even Westminster and St Pauls were Black.

Just on a point you raised early about Anderson and Monroe keeping it quiet. As Maonroe called it a 'Hot Potato' the Crawford letter says the woman was in fear of her life..

We are talking about a potentially explosive point in History, and the Kozminski family were bang slap in the middle, hated by exploited workers on one side and disgruntled native workers on the other.

You have to place what happened in its historical context. They would certain speak out today, but in those days it just wasn't done.

Yours Jeff

Hi Jeff,my great grandparents on my dad's side were both kids during the autumn of terror they actually lived in the area I was told many a tale over the years about how this top hat cloak wearing fiend complete with his Gladstone bag held them all in terror which only ended because he threw himself into the Thames!.As for hot potatoes I'm convinced the police wouldn't keep the killers identity secret.my regards and happy viewing jason.

[Jeff Leahy]

Hi Jeff!

I have already written to you that there was a Rabbi in 6 Yalford Street, Israel Lubnowski-Cohen. Yalford Street was next to Greenfield Street where Morris & Matilda Lubnowski and Isaac & Bertha Abrahams were living at the time. Before Woolf and Betsy Abrahams moved to Providence Street they had also lived in Greenfield Street and you know; "34 Yalford St. from before March 1889 to after May 1889 (exact dates are unclear)" -Rob House, Prime suspect-.

I did not know much more...

But then Rob House again:

"Morris Lubnowski's older brother was a rabbi, living at 6 Yalford Street in the 1891 census:

1891 census (5 April) - Israel [Lubnowsky] Cohen at 6 Yalford St

Rabbi Minister (37), b. Poland Carlish [Kalisz], with wife Leah (30), b. Poland [?]Kutnor [Kutno], children [?]Lilly [or Tilly] (7), Rachael (4), Joseph (2), all b. Poland, and Kitty (7 months), b. London Mile End."

http://www.jtrforums.com/showthread.php?t=17414

Joseph (2) born in Poland? 1888 or 1889?

Its a really interesting thread I've not seen before, I hope Chris George won't mind my reposting his item on Jewish law. (Ah! to big for casebook sorry)

Its again interesting that Anderson might be referencing something specific when he talks about 'not giving up one of there own'

I wonder if anyone knows more about the Rabi brother? I'd be most interested if this guy could be connected to Montegue or Crawford

Lets face it if they were dealing with a problem it seems reasonable they would turn to the family Rabi, I wonder if he is connected to the synagog in the ally behind Issac's workshops?

Yours Jeff