Plausibility of Kosminski

[Stewart P Evans]

But...

...
As far as witnesses who makes a statement having witnessed a crime and states they would not be able to recognise the offender again is concerned the police would not ask that witness to participate in an Id parade. This would be a pointless excercise as if he did then go an participate and pick the person out the evidential value of that ID would be zero having stated in writng that he would not be able to identify him again

But if, as in the case of Lawende, the witness is not positive that he/she wouldn't recognise the suspect again, if lacking other witnesses, they will attempt an identification with the witness they have.

[Stewart P Evans]

Yes...

I'm getting an interesting visual.
Plus post #584 totally cracked me up.

Yes, silly me, I thought a cartel was a small cart.

[Stewart P Evans]

I just noticed...

I just noticed that I was on post 1,999, so just for a round number...

[mariab]

And I thought a cartel was a big piece of broken cart-e-lage.
(This thread has turned very serious. And SPE just entered the new millenium – in posts.)

[Stewart P Evans]

Yes...

...
(This thread has turned very serious. And SPE just entered the new millenium – in posts.)

Yes, it's nice to reach these landmark points in your latter years. I have to confess that I have difficulty in remaining serious during these debates.

[mariab]

I have to confess that I have difficulty in remaining serious during these debates.

Even as a newbie I know the feeling.

[Trevor Marriott]

Goodness! And wasn't I born a few years before you?

By the way, didn't Diemschitz approach Dutfield's Yard in a cartel?

Stewart
You admitted you were old and you knowledge of this case is immense I wonder if in fact you were in the back of the cart with other older cartel members.

Puts a whole new meaning to the saying "A cart load of monkeys"

[Stewart P Evans]

Possibly

Stewart
You admitted you were old and you knowledge of this case is immense I wonder if in fact you were in the back of the cart with other older cartel members.
Puts a whole new meaning to the saying "A cart load of monkeys"

Possibly, I always was a bit of a hanger-on. But the old memory isn't what it used to be. Hang on, aren't you even older than me?

[Trevor Marriott]

Possibly, I always was a bit of a hanger-on. But the old memory isn't what it used to be. Hang on, aren't you even older than me?

Stewart no one is older than you I thought your middle name was Methuselah

[Chris]

I was referring to the addresses at Sion Square and Greenfield Street which I believe came under the met so when he was taken back for The ID he would still have been in Met Territory

I was responding to this bit in your post:
"He couldnt have been taken from Mile End because he was taken back to a relatives house had he been taken from Mile End then they would have taken him back to there."

The comment about the Met doesn't make that any clearer to me. Did you perhaps mean the Workhouse when you referred to Mile End?

[Chris]

Although he was still in the area, by the date of the 1891 census he had apparently changed his address at least three times - to 16 Brunswick Street by 8 December 1890, to 19 Brunswick Street by 3 March 1891 and to 22 Samuel Street by 5 April 1891. (Possibly one of the Brunswick Street addresses is an error for the other, but on the other hand, he has not been found before December 1890, so there may well have been other moves between October 1888 and December 1890. Of course, the witness had been due to move house on the day of the murder itself.) So unless the police had made special arrangements to keep track of him he might not have been easy to find.

I see that in another place someone has commented that the police would have had no difficulty finding Schwartz's address in 1891, considering that someone can do so 120 years later (using the index to the 1891 census!).

Obviously the police didn't have computers in 1891. Still, they could no doubt have tracked down Schwartz if they'd put a couple of detectives on to the job for a day or two. But my point is that they could probably have found Lawende immediately by contacting his employers.

[Trevor Marriott]

I was responding to this bit in your post:
"He couldnt have been taken from Mile End because he was taken back to a relatives house had he been taken from Mile End then they would have taken him back to there."

The comment about the Met doesn't make that any clearer to me. Did you perhaps mean the Workhouse when you referred to Mile End?

Yes i did mean the workhouse I should have made it clearer thank you for allowing me to clarify the position.

Of course another question arises as to who the possible witness was and the sugestion that it might have been Lawende and that is why would the met go to all the trouble of using lawende when he was a witness in the city murder. Surely if it had been him there would have had to be some lisaon with the city police and even if there was i would have thought it would be recorded on City police files. But again no one connected to the city police has ever mentioned it.

As to the sugestion that Cohen was the suspect well he falls by the wayside along with Druitt if any of the later murders were attributed to the ripper which it would appear they were. he was out of circulation from december 1888.

[harry]

What if there was no identification?No seaside home?No witness and no suspect.Four carts without horses.

[Trevor Marriott]

What if there was no identification?No seaside home?No witness and no suspect.Four carts without horses.

Which is where we are today !

[TomTomKent]

What if there was no identification?No seaside home?No witness and no suspect.Four carts without horses.

Then, as others have been doing so for fifty odd pages, we ask why they were refered to. It may get you no closer to a firm case for any suspect, but offers insight into key individuals. After all, those are fairly firm statements, suggesting that swanson, Anderson, et al, believed there HAD been a witness, an identification and so forth. For one officer to casually lose track of the most infamous killer of their lifetime would be odd. For him to do so, and another expand on the false memories, in notations written for his own use would be even odder. Why would Swanson lie to himself in the margins of a book he read?

As with the name Kosminski, these could all be utterly wrong, but the officers involved believed they were true, and there must logically be a reason why they were believed to be true. If this reason can ever be explained by new evidence is an entirely different matter, thoughit seems unlikely they would mentioned as a pure fantasy.

When it is assumed by some that there were NOT a witness, identification, or seaside home, this is not entirely true. There is no evidence there was, or was not, so no data to draw a conclusion from.