When did investigators start watching Kozminski?

[Trevor Marriott]

The 1873 victim had received two vicious blows to her temple, quite enough to be lethal as per the examining medico. That begs two questions:

1. Is this not physical evidence of murder?

2. What role would two such blows have played in an abortion process?

Did anyone mention 1873? in the original post? and did I mention abortions. You just cant help yourself can you

1873, by my mathematics 15 years before the WM murders, but of course silly of me, i forgot you are trying to pin every murder, and every torso in the whole length of the river thames on one man.

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Trevor Marriott]

The 1873 victim was killed by the same hand that killed Mary Kelly, as far as I´m concerned. Won´t tell you exactly why, though.

Kosminski was a child at the time, and not even in Britain.

He can therefore not be the killer.

So the question is "Why bring Kosminski up on these boards?"

A less troublesome answer to your question is "I commented on the discussion initiated by others out here, and Trevor claimed that there was no physical evidence of murder in the torso cases".

In the cases cited in that specific post- pay attention

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Fisherman]

Did anyone mention 1873? in the original post? and did I mention abortions. You just cant help yourself can you

1873, by my mathematics 15 years before the WM murders, but of course silly of me, i forgot you are trying to pin every murder, and every torso in the whole length of the river thames on one man.

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

Yes, I didn´t think of that - no serial killer has been able to kill fifteen years apart, that´s true.

It´s a good thing I have you, Trevor. When I can´t help myself, you always can.

Anyway, maybe you can answer my questions just the same? Just in case? No?

[Scott Nelson]

Although, like you I would expect there to have been a number of people involved who might have mentioned something consistent with this ID.
But there's nothing.

City Police Inspector Robert Sagar on watching a suspicious suspect: We watched him carefully. There was no doubt that this man was insane, and after a time his friends thought it advisable to have him removed to a private asylum. After he was removed, there were no more Ripper atrocities.

An additional bit from Sagar's retirement in the City Press January 1905 stated that "suspicion fell upon a man, who, without a doubt, was the murderer. Identification being impossible, he could not be charged"

Aside from the "private asylum", this pretty much dovetails with the Swanson marginalia.

[Simon Wood]

Hi Scott,

Robert Sagar told his story to the Morning Leader, 9th January 1905.

In 1906, Sagar's detective colleague Henry Cox published his memoirs in Thomson's Weekly.

The Truth About the Whitechapel Mysteries [1st December 1906].

His opening sentence lent verisimilitude to what he was about to reveal—

“It is only upon certain conditions that I have agreed to deal with the great Whitechapel crimes of fifteen years ago . . .

“. . . There are those who claim that the perpetrator was well known to the police; that at the present moment he is incarcerated in one of His Majesty’s penal settlements. Others hold that he was known to have jumped over London Bridge or Blackfriars Bridge; while a third party claims that he is the inmate of a private asylum. These theories I have no hesitation in dispelling at once.”

And the big reveal?

“The mystery can never be cleared up until someone comes forward and himself proves conclusively that he was the bloodthirsty demon who terrorised the country, or unless he returns to his crimes and is caught red-handed. He is still alive then? you ask. I do not know. For all I know he may be dead. I have personally no evidence either way.”

It sounds like Cox and Sagar were out to BS one another.

Regards,

Simon

[Scott Nelson]

Thank you Simon. You're probably right. I'm looking forward to reading the new addition of your book.

[Batman]

Sagar is an interesting character. Didn't he drop out of medical school to become a policeman and was one of the first of his kind never to wear a uniform and went around plainclothed. Wasn't he some sort of a liaison between city police and the met? Didn't he spend quite a bit of time in the met side of town?

[Scott Nelson]

No, I believe he finished medical school. Yes to the other queries.

Sorry, the above post should read "edition", although I'm sure Simon will have many new additions.

[Batman]

No, I believe he finished medical school. Yes to the other queries.

Sorry, the above post should read "edition", although I'm sure Simon will have many new additions.

Thanks.

Do you think he makes a Ripper candidate?

A William Gull Lite* without all the royal conspiracy trimmings?

[Scott Nelson]

No, not in the least.

[Batman]

No, not in the least.

I'm thinking of the possibility that JtR had inside knowledge. How else could he dodge every single stakeout and every single stop n check and every single plainclothes, not to mention bait set up for him. Avoided PC beats like clockwork.

[Scott Nelson]

The Ripper had all the luck?

Maybe Simon Wood has the answers.

[Simon Wood]

Ah, Scott. If only.

[Wickerman]

I'm thinking of the possibility that JtR had inside knowledge. How else could he dodge every single stakeout and every single stop n check and every single plainclothes, not to mention bait set up for him. Avoided PC beats like clockwork.

He doesn't have to dodge anyone, just not be seen killing a woman.
Then he walks away in plain sight of everyone, just another figure in the night.

[J6123]

I'm thinking of the possibility that JtR had inside knowledge. How else could he dodge every single stakeout and every single stop n check and every single plainclothes, not to mention bait set up for him. Avoided PC beats like clockwork.

Not necessarily any inside knowledge required. I certainly get the impression he was a risk-taker, and probably psychotic. He was lucky and he knew the area.

Excellent thread by the way.