Plausibility of Kosminski

[Errata]

Can the mantle of Jack be placed on Kosminski? Sure. Can Kosminski be found in Jack? That's a little harder. Especially when trying out mental illnesses.

For example: according to his known symptoms, Kosminski could have had crippling obsessive compulsive disorder. But OCD doesn't make people violent. The closest you get is people with OCD lashing out at people trying to "cure" them. So, if it was OCD, that doesn't make him a killer. Unless he was a sociopathic killer who also had OCD, but a: I think that's impossible and b: the odds of that are so astronomical as to be safely discarded as a theory. So if OCD, then not Jack the Ripper.

Schizophrenia is not a great fit either. It's an okay one, but some some pretty basic symptoms are missing, ones that certainly would have been noted. Disorganization of speech, of thought, crippling depression, etc. He could have been schizophrenic without those symptoms, but it is unlikely. Schizophrenics tend not to be violent, but certainly can be. In practice however, the paranoid schizophrenic killer targets enemies, or prey. The people they are killing are either the source of the problem, or their death is the cure to the problem. Hebephrenic killers lack guile, and any kind of sophisticated targeting. They don't just kill one kind of person. They kill all kinds. Jack the Ripper was not hebephrenic. He could easily have been a paranoid schizophrenic, but Kosminski was not. Therefore, if schizophrenic, not Jack the Ripper.

As far as being a compulsive masturbator... that's hard to say. This is Victorian England. Someone could easily have walked in on him only once for that label to have been applied. Or maybe he sat on the stoop all day every day doing it. There's no way of knowing. It is even possible that there was no documented instance, but the doctors or his family felt that masturbation was the only explanation for such a dramatic loss of sanity. I don't think given the attitudes of the day that it can seriously be considered part of his pathology.

We know that Kosminski was clearly suffering. He knew something was terribly wrong with him, and he was trying to treat himself in a way that was clearly neither comfortable nor sanitary. He was therefore capable of recognizing that he was not well, and was willing to take drastic steps to become more acceptable to society. So he was not a sociopath. He may have been unable to cope with his illness, but he was not under the impression that he was okay. Whatever psychoses may or may not have been in play, he was not delusional about his own standing.

Personally, I don't see a lot of delusion in Kosminski as much as I see compulsion. For example, someone with OCD will do things that sound absolutely delusional. They will kiss every key on their keychain in a row three times so they will not get in a car wreck. They will tap a pencil 50 times five times a day so they won't lose their job. They will wash the skin off of their hands so they won't die of some dread disease. But really, none of that is true. They absolutely cannot bear the loss of control in daily life, and they invent superstitions and magical thinking to regain that control. They don't actually think they will wreck their car. They just can't bear to take the chance of not controlling the outcome.

Kosminski seems to not have really believed that his radical dietary rules would cure him, as he made no effort to keep them up in the hospital. I think it is very possible he used those harsh restrictions to try and keep himself under control, and once hospitalized (and under someone else's control) was able to let those compulsions go. Delusions are much harder to break. To me it says he was not delusional.

So then what could motivate him to kill 3-12 women and mutilate them? It could have been a compulsion, but compulsions occur rather more than once every three weeks. Also compulsives tend to be very detail oriented, and you would expect either much more in common with the victims, or if the compulsion is the act, then much less. He does not appear to have been noticeably delusional. He certainly believed things that were not true, but did not appear to experience an alternate reality. He did not appear to be paranoid, or someone would have mentioned. He appeared to only engage in self harm, was not a sociopath, was aware of his own difficulties. There is no mention of disorganized speech, or any thought disorder, no catatonia. Evidently he lived for years on the street without either an arrest or a complaint, so evidently he didn't particularly frighten anyone.

Does this mean he couldn't be the murderer? Of course not. But even with an intervening 170 years, it is a serious thing to say that madmen kill. Most people with mental illness never harm another living soul. Kosminski was clearly mentally ill, but the question then has to be "What from what we know would make him kill?". Anyone can work backward from what we know of Jack's crimes. And we do. I have. But when examining a suspect, we have to do it both ways. Does the suspect fit what we know of Jack, and does Jack fit what we know of the suspect. With Kosminski I think the first is easy, it's the second where it starts to fall apart a little.

[Jonathan H]

To Garry

Thanks for that.

As you say, it beggars belief that Abberline et al would not know about the positive identification, or even that 'Kosminski' was a strong suspect?

This is what leads me to believe that information about Kosminski (and Druitt) entirely bypassed just about eveybody apart from Macnaghten, Anderson and Swanson. It is why I do not believe that the 'Seaside Home' identification is a true memory but a muddled one of Sadler and Lawende (see Evans and Rumbelow, 2006).

On the other hand, if Anderson and/or Swanson came across Aaron Kosminski in 1895, long after the murders and long after he was sectioned, and it was just a private interview with a family member or something like that, then the contradictory sources arguably do not beggar belief.

Something else to consider, quite diabolical, about Aaron Kosminski's 'plausibility' is that he seems to have been clothed by Macnaghten in details appropriated from the Druitt story: that he died 'soon after'; that his family 'suspected the worst'; that he was some kind of sexual/homicidal maniac; that he was headed for the madhouse; and that he was allegedly sighted by the best witness chatting with Eddowes.

Strip away the elements which can be traced across to Druitt, and you are left with a harmless lunatic who was not incarcerated and did not die soon after the Kelly or Coles murders, who was not sighted with Eddowes by a policeman, who only threatened a relative with a knife, and whose mania only took the form of chronic masturbation.

[Garry Wroe]

I cannot envisage any sane person assuming Chase to have been sane, Hunter. One has to wonder at the American legal system. But Chase bears striking similarities to Joachim Kroll. Extraordinarily, Kroll freely admitted to his crimes upon arrest. After making a statement in which he detailed multiple rapes, murders, dismemberment and cannibalism, he registered genuine surprise when investigators told him that he wouldn't be allowed to go home.

[Hunter]

It's often the case too, Hunter, that they fail to understand the ramifications of their actions. Chase believed that his killings were relatively unimportant and simply represented the means to an end. In his case, the end was the prevention of his own death via 'soap-dish poisoning'.

In speaking of Chase, some of the people involved with prosecuting him thought that he was legitimately insane and shouldn't have gotten the death penalty because he didn't understand the ramifications. He decided the issue himself by committing suicide with an overdose of drugs he had accumulated from his 'treatment regimen'... a bit ironic.

[Chris]

Except, Chris, that schizophrenia doesn't manifest itself overnight. It is years in the making and often stems back to childhood.

Be that as it may, as I said, there's obviously no basis for certainty about any of this. You yourself say only that you're inclined to believe that he was probably psychotic at the relevant time.

Others may have different opinions. My point is that it is a matter of opinion, not something any of us can be certain about.

[Garry Wroe]

That is the most revealing. Most of the psychotic killers that I've read about too, chattered like a magpie after they were apprehended. Their condition seemed to cause them to relive these events as a recurring manifestation.

It's often the case too, Hunter, that they fail to understand the ramifications of their actions. Chase believed that his killings were relatively unimportant and simply represented the means to an end. In his case, the end was the prevention of his own death via 'soap-dish poisoning'.

[Garry Wroe]

Of course it's possible, but obviously there's no basis here for "certainty" about any of this. The information just isn't available.

Except, Chris, that schizophrenia doesn't manifest itself overnight. It is years in the making and often stems back to childhood.

[Chris]

Given that Kosminski had not attempted any kind of work for years, I think it likely that his ‘instincts’ extended back prior to 1888. Indeed, the most common onset time for schizophrenia is between the mid-teens and early-twenties. Thus I’m inclined to believe that he was probably psychotic during the relevant timeframe.

Of course it's possible, but obviously there's no basis here for "certainty" about any of this. The information just isn't available.

[Hunter]

There is nothing about Kosminski to suggest that he harboured fantasies involving the destruction of women.

Nothing that we know of, but, of course, there was this from Macnaghten:

'He had a great hatred of women, specially of the prostitute class, & had strong homicidal tendencies'

Where he got his information is not known; nor how reliable Macnaghten was considering the errors in his document. He claimed Ostrog was a homicidal maniac when some of the police involved with Ostrog thought he was faking insanity. We now know Ostrog's record and there was only the altercation with a policeman.

So far as we are aware, he had no history of violence and remained passive throughout his twenty-eight years of incarceration. Nor did he confess to the killings. Compare this to Richard Trenton Chase, Herb Mullin, Ed Gein, Joachim Kroll, Sirhan Sirhan, Albert Fish, or the many other psychotic killers who openly admitted to their crimes both upon arrest and whilst incarcerated.

That is the most revealing. Most of the psychotic killers that I've read about too, chattered like a magpie after they were apprehended. Their condition seemed to cause them to relive these events as a recurring manifestation.

[Garry Wroe]

The murderer had to be insane to some degree but this 'mania' was not outwardly noticable, and this 'mania' apparently did not hinder his thought processes or his actions on the nights in question.

Absolutely, Jon.

What we seem to be dealing with was a man who was outwardly normal, in control & aware of his surroundings, yet harbors intentions which are wholly abnormal.

That’s my reading of it, too, hence my suggestion the posters should familiarize themselves with the case of Arthur Shawcross.

Where I would hold reservation is on the subject of "what was Kosminski's condition in 1888?".

I can understand that, Jon, but there were no effective treatments for schizophrenia in 1888 – unless the drilling of holes into patients’ skulls might be considered effective. Given that Kosminski had not attempted any kind of work for years, I think it likely that his ‘instincts’ extended back prior to 1888. Indeed, the most common onset time for schizophrenia is between the mid-teens and early-twenties. Thus I’m inclined to believe that he was probably psychotic during the relevant timeframe.

I could not be certain that Kosminski, or anyone else, was not the murderer in 1888, clearly someone was. Does that mean Kosminski can be included?, yes it does.

Let me put it another way, Jon. If Kosminski was lucid during the Ripper’s operational timeframe, I very much doubt that he would have committed a series of mutilation murders. If, on the other hand, he was psychotic, his disrupted cognitive functionality makes it virtually impossible that he could have committed these murders with the lethal efficiency that characterized the Ripper’s mode of operation.

There is nothing about Kosminski to suggest that he harboured fantasies involving the destruction of women. So far as we are aware, he had no history of violence and remained passive throughout his twenty-eight years of incarceration. Nor did he confess to the killings. Compare this to Richard Trenton Chase, Herb Mullin, Ed Gein, Joachim Kroll, Sirhan Sirhan, Albert Fish, or the many other psychotic killers who openly admitted to their crimes both upon arrest and whilst incarcerated.

As far as I’m concerned there is no case against Kosminski, and even less likelihood that he was the Whitechapel Murderer. If others disagree, fine. But I need something more tangible than Anderson’s ‘moral certainty’, and it simply isn’t there.

[Garry Wroe]

But then why do you think that Anderson and/or Swanson thought [presumably] Aaron Kosmisnki was the Ripper … In fact strongly believed this to be the case.

My belief, Jonathan, is that Kosminski came to the attention of investigators and was identified by Schwartz. His personal circumstances were looked into and were thought to provide a perfect explanation for the cessation of the murders. He also conformed to Anderson’s preconceived notion that the killer was not only mentally unstable, but a low-class Polish Jew. In other words, the identification aside, the whole case against Kosminski was purely suppositional.

Anderson, of course, later stated that the killer’s identity had been established as a ‘definitely ascertained fact’. But the reality that no investigator beyond Swanson gave the slightest credence to this ‘identification’ is so bizarre as to beggar belief. More extraordinarily still, Abberline stated in 1903 that the rumour that the killer had been caged in an asylum was completely without foundation.

So whilst I am in no doubt that a positive identification took place at the Seaside Home as described by Swanson, the rest of the case against Kosminski was less a ‘definitely ascertained fact’ than a classic example of ‘confirmation bias.’ Whether consciously or not, Anderson magnified those elements which conformed to his Kosminski-as-Ripper belief, and all but dismissed those that didn’t. Hence his ‘moral certainty’ as to the killer’s identity.

That’s the way I see it, anyway.

[Garry Wroe]

I'd also add that cops, vigilantes and most of Whitechapel were looking for him - including the door to door searches - and he managed to avoid detection there as well.

Absolutely, Greg. This man was no Morriarty, but neither was he a Kosminski. Somewhere in-between, I tend to believe.

[GregBaron]

Koz or no Koz...

Not because of any presumed insanity, merely because he did live in the vicinity at the time. The most obvious fly in the ointment, to my mind, is his age at 23. I think that fact speaks more against his candidacy than anything else.

Nice post Wickerman. I believe the first manifestations of schizophrenia occur in the early 20's. Koz at this time could have been free of symptoms or just beginning to experience them. If he also had psychopathic tendencies he could be the fiend before the delusions made it impossible.

Recall also that he was a heavy masturbator apparently, which can be indicative of hyper-sexuality or other deviancy's which could manifest themselves as a lust murderer. I know it's a huge leap from 'yanking it' to murder but it's one of the few details we have...

It's very hard to keep Koz in the frame but I think your point is key - his mind in 1888 is the question - not his mind many years later....


Greg

[Wickerman]

Nicely written post Garry.

...It has been suggested that a schizophrenic might have perpetrated these crimes whilst experiencing a lucid period. This, however, is unlikely.

Agreed, though it cannot be denied the actions of the Whitechapel murderer are hardly those of a sound mind, but the schizophrenia argument falls short of conviction.
The murderer had to be insane to some degree but this 'mania' was not outwardly noticable, and this 'mania' apparently did not hinder his thought processes or his actions on the nights in question.
What we seem to be dealing with was a man who was outwardly normal, in control & aware of his surroundings, yet harbors intentions which are wholly abnormal.

We see none of this in the case of Aaron Kosminski. In fact, the medical reports suggest that Kosminski was a hebephrenic rather than paranoid schizophrenic, and there is every indication that he was an essentially benign individual who had no history of violence or haematic preoccupation.

But of one thing we may be certain: Aaron Kosminski was not Jack the Ripper.

Where I would hold reservation is on the subject of "what was Kosminski's condition in 1888?".
I could not be certain that Kosminski, or anyone else, was not the murderer in 1888, clearly someone was. Does that mean Kosminski can be included?, yes it does.
Not because of any presumed insanity, merely because he did live in the vicinity at the time. The most obvious fly in the ointment, to my mind, is his age at 23. I think that fact speaks more against his candidacy than anything else.

What is needed are medical records of someone who is suffering from schizophrenia which might parallel the records we have of Kosminski in 1892.
Then we need to know what the condition of that person was 4 years previous.
This might give a clue to Kosminski's condition in 1888. Without this barometer we are all just treading water.

Kosminski appeared in court over the dog incident in 1889, somewhat of a failed encore for a Jack the Ripper.

Regards, Jon S.

[Chris]

I'm not capable of such certainty, since I know the same amount about Kozminski as the rest of you, which is next to nothing.

Specifically, we have no information at all about Aaron Kozminski's state of mind in the Autumn of 1888. So we're not in position to compare it with the results of psychological profiling.