Plausibility of Kosminski

[mariab]

Rob House:
Another possible avenue of research is the fact that Aaron may have been listed in various documents and records under the name "Aaron Abrahams".
Mr House, has anyone yet systematically researched the records for an Aaron Abrahams?

[robhouse]

Hi Maria,

I know that some people have searched for this name in various places, databases and so forth. But as far as a "systematic" search, I would say no. I don't think it has really been on people's radar to think along these lines, but in my opinion, it is as likely that Aaron went by the name Abrahams as Kozminski. Aaron's brother Woolf, for example, went by the name Abrahams in every document except for the asylum records where he is listed as Wolf Kozminski.

Aaron admitted in City Summons Court that "I goes by the name of Abrahams sometimes, because Kosmunski is hard to spell."

RH

[mariab]

To Rob House:
Thank you so much for all the information. Going by the name of “Abrahams“ since “Kosminski“ wasn't easy to pronounce for Britons is as typical for the time as the Brits having called any unidentified Jew “Cohen“.
I'd be interested to hear about any new results on Kosminski, even though I very much think that he doesn't “profile“ right for the Ripper.
If you'd permit a newbie question, Mr House, I've been hearing about your book on numerous casebook threads, without further, more specific information. Might I ask what specific subject it's about?
Thank you and

[robhouse]

Hi Maria,

To Rob House:
Thank you so much for all the information. Going by the name of “Abrahams“ since “Kosminski“ wasn't easy to pronounce for Britons is as typical for the time as the Brits having called any unidentified Jew “Cohen“.

It was common for immigrant Jews to change their names. I am not sure if you are referring to Mr. Fido's assertion that the name David Cohen was a sort of "John Doe" for unidentified Jews. As far as I know there is no real evidence to support this idea.

I've been hearing about your book on numerous casebook threads, without further, more specific information. Might I ask what specific subject it's about?
Thank you and

I am not sure what "numerous threads" you are talking about, but yes, I am working on a book about Aaron Kozminski, and it should hopefully come out next year sometime.

RH

[mariab]

Hi Mr House,
I'm familiar with immigrant Jews frequently changing their names into something more “intelligible“ for European ears, or, not less frequently, changing their names into a European name altogether. (I'm more familiar with the latter happening in 19th century France.)
Yes, I was referring to Mr. Fido's assertion that the name “David Cohen“ was a sort of “John Doe“ for unidentified Jews. Is it so that during your own research you've found out that there is NO real evidence to support this idea? This is very interesting! Does the book you're about to finish working on about Aaron Kozminski contest Mr Fido's old theory about Cohen/Kaminsky and so on, based on new research? If I may ask, have you found any new information regarding Aaron Kozminsky and his family in police reports or in asylums records in the UK, and might I ask about the state of the documentation on the latter (asylums records in the UK), is there much left in there? As I newbie I have to confess I haven't yet read Mr Fido's book, (although I've gone through interviews of him and through casebook threads about his theory), so I'm afraid I'm quite fuzzy on the details.
The best of lucks with the publication of your book!

[MrTwibbs]

I have to say that asylum records in some cases are quite good (from my research) and have to say the archive departments are pretty efficient. Better than I expected. Although I would like to get a list of private asylums in 1888 this i'm finding difficult as don't know where to start.

no records exist for the Police Seaside Home in Hove regarding who actually were patients there. Shame really as it would have cleared up some big questions imo.

[robhouse]

Hi Maria,

"Is it so that during your own research you've found out that there is NO real evidence to support this idea?"

I have never seen or heard of anything that actually backs up Mr. Fido's theory that David Cohen was a sort of John Doe. However, I have never personally done any research along these lines... but this has been discussed on the boards by others.

"Does the book you're about to finish working on about Aaron Kozminski contest Mr Fido's old theory about Cohen/Kaminsky and so on, based on new research? If I may ask, have you found any new information regarding Aaron Kozminsky and his family in police reports or in asylums records in the UK, and might I ask about the state of the documentation on the latter (asylums records in the UK), is there much left in there?"

My book does not specifically challenge Mr. Fido's theory, although I have discussed it on the boards (with him directly) and I do not find that the whole Cohen/Kaminsky theory makes much sense at all. My book focuses on the plausibility of Kozminski as a suspect, and yes, much new research has been done on this suspect in the last 5 years or so... not just by me, but by other people, including Chris Phillips, Scott Nelson, Robert Linford, etc. In my opinion, a lot of the reasons that people tend to dismiss Kozminski as a suspect are not really valid, and are often based on lack of understanding of him as a suspect, and wrong assumptions about various things. As John Malcolm's recent article points out, some of these wrong assumptions seem to have originated with Sugden's book, others came from elsewhere and were propagated in various forms over the years.

RH

[mariab]

Hi Mr House,
Rob House wrote:
I have never seen or heard of anything that actually backs up Mr. Fido's theory that David Cohen was a sort of John Doe. However, I have never personally done any research along these lines... but this has been discussed on the boards by others.
My point was that for the people who have researched asylum archives in the UK, it would be easy to see if a lot of “David Cohen“s turn up, so that one would have a reason to make the assumption that Mr. Fido has. (Still, even this is problematic, because I have no doubt that many REAL David Cohens might have existed in Victorian London!)
I'll definitely look up the old threads discussing the Fido theory, esp. your discussing it with Mr Fido himself. Just tonight is not possible, due to pending work. I've noticed that Scott Nelson too knows a lot on this particular subject, and I don't know if “Chris“ posting here and about the SB ledgers (with a lot of pertinent knowledge!) is the Chris Phillips you mention. I thought that he was Chris Scott!
The reason why I'm afraid I have to totally dismiss Kozminski as a suspect is that he doesn't “profile“ right. To me he sounds like a typical “disorganized schizophrenic“, so for me it's kind of “end of story“ from then on. But I'm VERY interested in finding out more information about all the references to Kozminski in the police reports and in which asylums he got incarcerated. And I'll be very interested to read your book, when it comes out!
I fully agree that Philip Sugden's chapter on Kozminski is not up to par, in an otherwise exceptional book (which as a newbie I haven't properly read yet, but I've recently acquired it and will study it very soon), but I believe that the reason for this omission of Sugden's is the fact that the Fido research and the Cohen/Kaminsky theories, which happened in the 1980s, were not existant yet when Sugden produced his book. I think that John Malcolm's essay in Examiner 3 will inspire even more research in all matters pertaining to Kozminski, although I have to say that the tone and style of the essay I've found very unscholarly and quite a bit immature! But I'm under the impression that John Malcolm is in his early 20s or something, and this perhaps explains it all. (Spoken with much authority from someone just past 30!)
And by the way, what is your opinion on Jacob Levy as a suspect, Mr House?

[MrTwibbs]

Hi Mr House,

The reason why I'm afraid I have to totally dismiss Kozminski as a suspect is that he doesn't “profile“ right. To me he sounds like a typical “disorganized schizophrenic“, so for me it's kind of “end of story“ from then on.se?

Yes I would have to agree with you on that. He's chaotic in personality according to the reports, spoke little English and would hardly have set anyone at ease. The type of killer JTR was was probably some cool and calm and planned it. Think Bundy.
And schizophrenics seldom stick to one type of victim and their MO tends to be frenzied and uncontrolled, and they are also careless.

[mariab]

Mr Twibbs,
speaking little English wouldn't have been a hindrance to being the Ripper. Elizabeth Stride “specialized“ in working with the Jewish population of Whitechapel, both as a seamstress and as a prostitute.
I believe that a much more viable Jewish suspect than Kozminsky would be Jacob Levy. He has been followed by the police and incarcerated in an asylum, and he was a Jewish butcher, specialized in slaughtering animals by cutting their throat and bleeding them in a traditional Jewish fashion (whatever that was).
As for schizophrenics, it's a total mislead that they can't commit crimes. There are 4 distinct types of schizophrenics, 1) disorganized, 2)catatonic (both obviously incapable of planning a crime and avoiding detection), 3)paranoid, and 4)undifferentiated.Kozminsky sounds very much like a disorganized schizophrenic. A paranoid schizophrenic would have hallucinations and delusions (like hearing voices telling him to kill all prostitutes and harvest their organs, for instance), and be totally capable of organized criminal behaviour. An undifferentiated schizophrenic would have no hallucinations, but psychotic violent episodes where he could succeed with severe harming of others. Many serial killers have been diagnosed as paranoid or undifferentiated schizophrenics. Bundy might have been an undifferentiated schizophrenic, or mentally “healthy“ but a sociopath.
Oh, and good luck with your research in asylums records!

[Stewart P Evans]

Misinterpret

...
...I think that John Malcolm's essay in Examiner 3 will inspire even more research in all matters pertaining to Kozminski, although I have to say that the tone and style of the essay I've found very unscholarly and quite a bit immature! But I'm under the impression that John Malcolm is in his early 20s or something, and this perhaps explains it all. (Spoken with much authority from someone just past 30!)
...

John Malcolm is certainly past his early 20s. It might be easy to misinterpret his article as 'immature', but this is not the case. As I explained, its tone is the result of a genuine passion for his subject and sheer frustration. For he deals with a genuine suspect who is frequently dismissed out of hand. John has a lot to offer this field and has already contributed much. He should never be ignored for he speaks much sense.

[mariab]

Dear Mr Evans,
Wow! I can hardly believe I got engaged in a debate “against“ you, it's such an honour that I almost feel dizzy. Please don't think of me as intentionally disrespectful, to you or to John Malcolm.
What I referred to as “immature“ (which obviously was too strong a word) was the tone of the essay, not its content. A sentence such as “the sheer mass of anti-Anderson propaganda trotted out in order to clog up the East End bogs“ doesn't constitute a very scholarly style, and I believe that it rather damages an otherwise very interesting, concerned essay. I happen to be a firm believer in the adage that to sell one's point, “less is more“ stylistically, and that one should not get overemotional during a debate, but this is of course debatable.
(As a newbie) I got misled into the impression that John Malcolm was in his 20s by seing the photo he uses on JTR Forums. I don't have any doubts whatsoever that he has very-very much to offer to the field of Ripperology, and I'll always be interested in reading whatever he publishes or posts on the threads, both on casebook and the JTR Forums. I have no doubt that his essay in Examiner 3 will inspire more research on Aaron Kozminski, and I also can't wait to see what new information and ideas Rob House's book will bring to us.
Again, I apologize for having used the word “immature“ for a Ripperologist.

[MrTwibbs]

Thanks Maria

I appreciate what you're saying, but what I don't understand is schizophrenics have episodes of mania or homicidal behaviour. Is it safe to assume these episodes are triggered by certain conditions being met?
i.e. if he meets a prostitute he likes the look of, time of day, weather conditions? (i believe in 2 of the murders it had rained that very night)
Or has it nothing to do with that and these episodes could be random? if they are random then perhaps its unusual they occurred in the early hours of the morning?

[mariab]

Mr Twibbs, the post by Pirate Jack you quote in your post #178 explains a lot about schizophrenia. The different phases of this illness are triggered both by chemical inbalance in the brain and by external circumstances, such as stress, lack of sleep, intake of alcohol (VERY dangerous for schizophrenics), and yes, even weather conditions (like incessant rain – which is a joke, considering we're talking about London!!)
Mania is a different thing altogether, it's a phase of the manic-depressive illness (also called bipolar condition), and in its extreme phase it can lead to psychotic episodes – “psychotic“ meaning practically out of control, as in screaming, rolling on the floor, taking off ones clothes in public, doing harm to objects and to onesself, attacking other people etc. (good times!). Mild mania starts when one can't sleep, talks too fast, feels all energized and invincible, etc., then it can degenerate into a full psychotic episode. There's also a phase called hypomania, when one is overenergized and can't sleep, but in a productive way. Many artists, writers, and scientists (such as Mozart, Balzac, Einstein) have produced their very best work during an hypomanic state.
But manic-depressives experience the misfortune of going from hypomania to mania.
I have to add that psychiatry is not my field, I've dubbed a bit and have read quite a bit, mostly out of personal interest, having had to deal with depression. And I've also experienced hypomania, which is kind of cool, apart from the fact that one can't sleep for 48 hours or longer (but at some point one ends up falling asleep.) But hypomania has nothing to do with mania and schizophrenia, which I'm sure would feel really scary, as in “the green men are coming to get me“.

[Ashkenaz]

I remember years ago when I first started studying the Ripper case casually (before I really delved into it more deeply the past couple of years) having the impression that Kosminski being the Ripper was almost a done deal. He was the first suspect I had a strong feeling about. But having learned a lot more now, one thing seems to stand out. The Ripper was clearly not a predator that lurked in shadows waiting for his prey to pass by and then pounced on them, but one who approached his victims posing as a client, talking to them with some level of charm and convincing them to come away with him into dark and remote places. As the body count grew and the prostitutes would have become more and more cautious, he would have had to have seemed as non-threatening as possible. But Kosminski is described as having deteriorated mentally to such a low state that he roamed the streets eating garbage off of the ground. Does anyone else feel that there is no way that such a character could have posessed the appearance, charm, or even the mental capacity to put his victims at ease? I no longer feel there is any chance that he was Jack the Ripper.

It might be that his illness was episodic. He could have been unbalanced for days or weeks, then returned to health. It would be enlightening to read the asylum records about him