Plausibility of Kosminski

[Chris]

Seems we disagree then. Internal police documents neglected the identification, too.

Obviously we'll have to agree to differ about whether there was a positive identification, but I think the suggestion that there was a secret witness to one of the murders - and a police officer at that - really is untenable.

You really need to explain why this would not be referred to in internal police reports. And if you are suggesting it was Macnaghten's City PC, you need to consider why Macnaghten would have written "No one ever saw the Whitechapel Murderer (unless possibly it was the City P.C. who was on a beat near Mitre Square) ..." If a City PC had actually witnessed the Ripper committing a murder, it would have been blindingly obvious that he had seen the murderer!

[Chris]

Trevor

I don't quite understand what you're arguing.

Obviously the police had suspects, and obviously they investigated them. I'm saying information about that process would be interesting - forgetting all about the actual identity of the murderer - and obviously records of it existed in the past and have since been lost.

If you're saying it wasn't generally accepted among police officers that the Ripper had been identified as a particular man (be it Kozminski, Druitt, Tumblety, Feigenbaum or whoever), then obviously I agree. Some officers had theories - and some presented them as more than theories - while some said the police hadn't a clue about the identity of the killer.

I think the interesting thing is to try to find out more about why various men were suspected and what the evidence was - as far as we can after more than 120 years. In doing that, I think it's as well to acknowledge at the outset that we're never going to know who actually committed the murders - or probably even come close.

[jason_c]

How so?

Monty

They obviously should have relied upon CCTV. Inspector Clouseau Marriot obviously failing to realise the police were under extreme pressure. In these circumstances the positive ID of clothing would have been jumped upon by a grateful constabulary. But no, Trev insists its naievety.

[Trevor Marriott]

Trevor

I don't quite understand what you're arguing.

Obviously the police had suspects, and obviously they investigated them. I'm saying information about that process would be interesting - forgetting all about the actual identity of the murderer - and obviously records of it existed in the past and have since been lost.

If you're saying it wasn't generally accepted among police officers that the Ripper had been identified as a particular man (be it Kozminski, Druitt, Tumblety, Feigenbaum or whoever), then obviously I agree. Some officers had theories - and some presented them as more than theories - while some said the police hadn't a clue about the identity of the killer.

I think the interesting thing is to try to find out more about why various men were suspected and what the evidence was - as far as we can after more than 120 years. In doing that, I think it's as well to acknowledge at the outset that we're never going to know who actually committed the murders - or probably even come close.

Chris
I keep offering a plausible explantion as to how suspect names appeared in both the SB registers and The CID equivelant but it seems that when ever anyone comes out with something plausible relating to police matters and how they worked and how the evidence gathering process works up pop the knockers and they simply choose to knock it or simply not respond to it.

Unless you or anyone else has been involved in the intelligence gathering process and the subsequent recording and documenting of that information its difficult for the normal reseracher to understand it fully and therefore cant grasp what the likes of myself Stewart and Monty at times try to explain on these issues.

Times change although the current police intelligence gathering process is not disimilar from that used in 1888 apart from now computers have replaced registers and card index systems.

[Chris]

Which would not be particularly uncommon - a fair proportion of Polish Jews had blond hair and blue eyes.

For what it's worth, we know from members of the family that Aaron's sister Matilda had blue eyes, as did her husband Morris Lubnowski Cohen (who was also Aaron's first cousin) and all their children. So did another of Aaron's cousins, David Lubin (born Lubnowski), the founder of the International Institute of Agriculture [Olivia Rossetti Agresti, "David Lubin: a study in practical idealism," p. 339 (1922)].

I've only just found out that this little post has apparently raised an absolute storm of controversy among the folks at jtrforums.com - though none of the participants have thought to mention anything about it to me - apparently mainly because one of them is unable to understand the meaning of the phrase "we know from members of the family" or to understand a bibliographical reference (to a work for which I have already provided a link to an online copy http://forum.casebook.org/showpost.p...6&postcount=56 ).

As for the rather bizarre accusations that this is a crucial piece of evidence that I have been hiding from the community for some nefarious reason, I'll just point out that as with all the collaborative research I've done with Rob, this has been known to both of us for several years. To be honest, I wasn't quite sure whether he'd bothered to mention the fact in his book or not, but apparently he didn't.

Still, to most rational people, I'd have thought that the fact that I posted it on Casebook would be some indication that I wasn't intent on keeping it a secret ...

[Chris]

... its difficult for the normal reseracher to understand it fully and therefore cant grasp what the likes of myself Stewart and Monty at times try to explain on these issues.

Perhaps what makes it so hard for us poor civilians is that you and Monty (and even sometimes you and Stewart) don't always seem to be entirely in agreement about these matters.

[Tom_Wescott]

Quite an exaggeration of what actually happened, but anyway, in my opinion BSs back was to Schwartz for most of the time, and the only time Schwartz would have seen BS face was when he was on the other side of the road.

I don’t see how I’m exaggerating when I’m merely reiterating what is in Swanson’s notes, taken from Schwartz’s statement. He did not cross the street until after witnessing the incident in which Stride finds herself on the ground. During this time he got a good look at both people and was subsequently able to describe Stride and identify her at the morgue, something he could not have done if he only viewed her from across a dark street while she was on the ground and his attention would have been focused on the two men. How is it you feel he could have witnessed their talking quietly as well as the assault without actually seeing their faces? In any event, all I said at the beginning is Schwartz saw more than Lawende, which is a matter of fact, not opinion, in that Lawende could not say he saw Eddowes, whereas Schwartz could identify Stride. But apparently this only means something to myself, Garry, and one or two others.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Garry Wroe]

Also, Tom, as I mentioned in an earlier post, the anti-Semitic cry of 'Lipski!' infers that Broad Shoulders must have had a reasonable view of Schwartz. If so, then it is likely that Schwartz had an equally good view of Broad Shoulders.

[mariab]

Ms. Kür

Maria,
I have done a comprehensive audit of the newspaper reports related to this incident, and yes they evolve a bit, for obvious reasons, but in general they are not as contradictory as you may think.

Possibly we agree on this, as I haven't claimed that the newspapers here are as contradictory as in different instances pertaining to the Ripper case or to other matters.

Le Grand and Batchelor found out about this stuff apparently on October 9... ie. approximately a week after the police already knew about it.

This obviously I agree with, as corroborated by the Northern Eastern Gazette of October 10.

It does not matter at all when the newspaper reported what... ie 5 days after the Northeastern Gazette.

Here our interpretations radically differ. I believe that it matters A LOT on which exact date the first report on the incident appeared and which detectives were FIRST mentioned in it.

The police found out about the incident from a neighbor, during house to house inquiries following the Stride murder. It is a known fact when these inquiries took place... I cannot give a precise date of the top of my head, but it was in the 2 (or3?) days immediately following the murder. I am assuming October 1-3. You can consult several Ripper books on this

The fact is that until the spring of 2010 the Northern Eastern Gazette of October 10, 1888 was NOT known yet, making references to and interpretations of the roots of this incident in other Ripper books partly inaccurate.

The earliest reports of the incident were clearly... I repeat.. clearly muddled. And the papers even admitted this. Presumably the reason was that Mrs. Kuer was not talking to them, probably because the police told her not to. The Police were trying to keep the whole story quiet... and they succeeded in this for about 10 days apparently.

I understand you interpretation, Mr. House, but indeed there is no evidence whatsoever that the police or any private detectives had been with Ms. Kür at any time previously to October 9 (as reported by The Northern Eastern Gazette of the next day) and that the police had managed to supress the story up until then.

So again.. Le Grand clearly just "discovered" something that was already known by at least one neighbor of Mrs. Kuer, and probably more neighbors or residents on the street. And already clearly known by the police. Le Grand then apparently informed the police about it (around October 9). The police of course already knew about it, and were probably mainly annoyed that Le Grand had made public an inquiry that they were trying to keep quiet about.

I agree with everything but the highlighted parts. The fact that the Ms. Kür story got its first coverage in the press immediately after a German speaking player turned up in the game is very significant, in my opinion. Also, the fact that the first report about 2 police sergeants visiting Ms. Kür is documented by the press on October 15, almost a week LATER than the Le Grand report in The Northern Eastern Gazette of October 10 (and than the later mentioning of Packer) proves the point, I believe.
By the by, I'm totally open to change my interpretation if an earlier or a conflicting press report turns up in the future. Wouldn't it be better if we agreed to disagree about this, Mr. House, and not discuss it anymore in this thread? I'm very much looking forward to reading your book, as long as I get my deadlines done (which are quite a bit tight right now, irritatingly and due to my having procrastinated).

[Roy Corduroy]

Mr. House, ... I'm very much looking forward to reading your book,

Once you do read it, Maria, you'll see that the idea of who said it first, or who discovered which article first, is irrelevant as to how Rob uses it in his book. The Batty Street lodger press coverage uncovers that a man nearby is being watched, and Rob proposes this could be Aaron Kosminski. Who lived near there.

Roy

[Steven Russell]

I believe that Liz Stride was a JtR victim. But according to the poll, 36% of those who voted on here disagree. If they are right, then Schwartz as Anderson's and Swanson's witness is only any good for identifying Stride's killer - and NOT Jack the Ripper. Obvious, I know, but perhaps worth mentioning.

Best wishes,
Steve.

[mariab]

Once you do read it, Maria, you'll see that the idea of who said it first, or who discovered which article first, is irrelevant as to how Rob uses it in his book. The Batty Street lodger press coverage uncovers that a man nearby is being watched, and Rob proposes this could be Aaron Kosminski. Who lived near there.

Yes, I've figured this out from Rob House's posts, Roy, still, this is sheer speculation and rationalization based on not any concrete evidence, apart from the fact that Kozminsky lived nearby. I'm not in the least criticizing Mr. House for chosing the “speculative“ approach (and the adjective is in NO WAY meant negatively) in a suspect-oriented book, when the evidence is long gone (or never existed?). Speculation is a necessary ingredient in a suspect-oriented book, as it was necessary in The Lodger/JTR:The first American serial killer?.
I'm very interested in reading the discussion of the asylums in the Rob House book.

[mariab]

I believe that Liz Stride was a JtR victim. But according to the poll, 36% of those who voted on here disagree.

I'm convinced that more posters would agree in seing Stride as a JTR victim if an article with the title Exonerating Michael Kidney in Examiner 1 was better advertized (http://www.casebook.org/dissertations/exonerating-kidney.html), but never mind. The article in question corrects a host of misconceptions about the Stride murder, and in my opinion is the most significant text published on Berner Street in the last decade.

[Tom_Wescott]

Also, Tom, as I mentioned in an earlier post, the anti-Semitic cry of 'Lipski!' infers that Broad Shoulders must have had a reasonable view of Schwartz. If so, then it is likely that Schwartz had an equally good view of Broad Shoulders.

Thank you, Garry. That is a great point and one I missed before.

Once you do read it, Maria, you'll see that the idea of who said it first, or who discovered which article first, is irrelevant as to how Rob uses it in his book. The Batty Street lodger press coverage uncovers that a man nearby is being watched, and Rob proposes this could be Aaron Kosminski. Who lived near there.

The man who dropped off the shirt, who became of interest to police, was a West End business man.

I believe that Liz Stride was a JtR victim. But according to the poll, 36% of those who voted on here disagree. If they are right…

Hi Steven. They’re not right, they’ve just been sucked in by too many recent authors who don’t know what they’re talking about.

The article in question corrects a host of misconceptions about the Stride murder, and in my opinion is the most significant text published on Berner Street in the last decade.

Thanks for the link, Maria. I just read the essay and consider it the most significant text published on Berner Street EVER. Actually it’s one of the best things ever written on any subject. Coulda used more sex though.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[mariab]

The man who dropped off the shirt, who became of interest to police, was a West End business man.

Is this corroborated in the letter published in the press, or in Gavin Bromley's article? I haven't read that letter yet and NO time to research this now, as I'm sitting on a deadline (and deeply hating every part of it).

I just read the essay and consider it the most significant text published on Berner Street EVER. Actually it’s one of the best things ever written on any subject. Coulda used more sex though.

Modest as ever. (Incidentally, the most significant text published on Berner Street EVER will be by myself.) Yeah, I guess if you had sexed it up more, then the Stride-as-a-victim pole results would have been higher. Like the guy who put “sex wax“ on the cover of surf wax as a joke, to increase sells. (Which I wasn't able to figure out for years, until it was explained to me.)