A possibility for the Seaside Home?

[Monty]

We know that not all policemen were or are by the book. We know that corruption has been rife in the police force almost from its creation, sometimes notoriously so. Trevor isn't as naive as he appears. His stance is simply avoidance.

Rife?

It exists, however there are plenty ore honest Bobbies than bent ones. Just that the good work is often ignored.

However, sometimes the bending of protocols are a necessity in order to progress an investigation. Sometime rules and regs hinder.

Like going into a boxing ring with one arm tied behind your back.

Monty

[Harry D]

You're just dragging in anything and everything you can find to divert attention from the question - the police did not always act within the rules and guidelines, the marginalia describes an unconventional event, so why do you insist that the police followed some unspecified procedure and conclude that the event described by the marginalia did not take place?

Martin Fido had no doubt that Aaron Kosminski was the suspect Kosminski, but he believed that he was confused with Aaron Davis Cohen.

Would MM mention the identification if it wasn't exactly on the up and up?

[PaulB]

You're just dragging in anything and everything you can find to divert attention from the question - the police did not always act within the rules and guidelines, the marginalia describes an unconventional event, so why do you insist that the police followed some unspecified procedure and conclude that the event described by the marginalia did not take place?

Martin Fido had no doubt that Aaron Kosminski was the suspect Kosminski, but he believed that he was confused with Aaron Davis Cohen.

[Trevor Marriott]

Lots of perhaps’s of course but this is because we can’t know for certain. Perhaps not doing it by the book was the only option available to them? Perhaps because Kosminski was extremely disturbed they felt confident that they could trick him into being ID’d without any repercussions? Perhaps they were so desperate that even an “ ‘well it certainly looks like him” would have been worth it?”

Why do you keep asking everyone to stay within reason but you keep implying conspiracies? The Marginalia is unsafe. The MM is unsafe. Anderson saying a suspect was id’d is unsafe.

The Id is not corrborated, and further more MM makes no mention of such a positive ID ever taking place when he talks about Kosminski, and he should have known because he was Swansons immediate boss. So are you and others going to say that this Id parade was solely orchestrated by Swanson with Anderson going along to drive the bus, and after such a positive outcome, no one else ever knew about it. Not even Major Smith who would have been kept in the picture to authorize City officers to watch the suspect house as has been described. Not even anyone from the asylum. nothing mentioned in his asylum notes.

It did not happen in the way described. No evidence to prove Aaron Kosminski was the Kosminski mentioned, even Martin Fido who discovered Aaron cannot be certain that they are one and the same.

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[PaulB]

I wish all police officers were as strictly by the book as you, Trevor. Perhaps the copper's son who assaulted me when I was 14 would have got in trouble instead of getting away with it and the case getting covered up.

We know that not all policemen were or are by the book. We know that corruption has been rife in the police force almost from its creation, sometimes notoriously so. Trevor isn't as naive as he appears. His stance is simply avoidance.

[PaulB]

There you go again creating imaginary scenarios

If Aaron Kosminski had have ever been arrested and then deemed to be insane he would have been sent to an asylum and certified insane, that process would have stopped any inital police action. He would not have been deemed capable of giving his consent to anything that took place thereafter. But why are we again ta;kin about AAron Kosminsk when it might not have been him.

You cant just form and Id parade and go and grab someone and put them on it, why can you not understand that ? especiall with such a high profile case

and if the police were so sure the killer had been identified why did they not go public and tell the public that, they wouold not have needed to mention any name ?

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

I'm not inventing imaginary scenarios, I am presenting a scenario that has been advanced by others far better qualified discuss them than I am, and clearly stating at the outset that it's a scenario that needs clarification.

There is no certainty that Aaron Kosminski would have been sent to an asylum. Cutbush, who was clearly insane, appeared in court, for example. We are again talking about Aaron Kosminski because neither you nor anybody else has presented an alternative. Until somebody does, he will be discussed and it would be beyond stupid not to do so.

I don't know whether the police in 1888 grabbed passers by off the street and stuck them on an identity parade. Nor do I know how many of those who gave their permission to appear on an ID parade actually did so. Not all ampolicemen were saints! But who said there was any identity parade? All we know is that there was an informal confrontation between the suspect and the witness.

As to why the police didn't tell the public that the killer had been identified, is isn't customary for the police to officially announce that living suspects are the guilty man, no matter how much they might believe it. Possibly because someone is considered innocent until proven guilty. It's usually a copper in their autobiography who reveals such things, as was the case with Jack the Stripper.

Now, I've answered you, why don't you have a bash at answering the question posed to you in about a dozen posts so far?

[Aelric]

I wish all police officers were as strictly by the book as you, Trevor. Perhaps the copper's son who assaulted me when I was 14 would have got in trouble instead of getting away with it and the case getting covered up.

[Trevor Marriott]

One element that perhaps requires greater clarification is the fact that Aaron Kosminski - if he was indeed ths suspect - was manifestly insane. It is therefore likely that he would have appeared before the magistrate, the police would have outlined the charge against him, and he would have been deemed unfit to plead and been committed to an asylum. The police would have thus had the satisfaction of telling the world they'd caught Jack the Ripper, but there would have been no court case, no defence solicitor calling the police evidence into question. The refusal of the witness to give evidence is unlikely to have mattered much if the suspect would have been committed, so why did Anderson seem to blame him? The answer is that he caused a delay during which the suspect's family had him committed, thus avoiding having their name revealed at the magistrate's hearing.

There you go again creating imaginary scenarios

If Aaron Kosminski had have ever been arrested and then deemed to be insane he would have been sent to an asylum and certified insane, that process would have stopped any inital police action. He would not have been deemed capable of giving his consent to anything that took place thereafter. But why are we again ta;kin about AAron Kosminsk when it might not have been him.

You cant just form and Id parade and go and grab someone and put them on it, why can you not understand that ? especiall with such a high profile case

and if the police were so sure the killer had been identified why did they not go public and tell the public that, they wouold not have needed to mention any name ?

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[PaulB]

Lots of perhaps’s of course but this is because we can’t know for certain. Perhaps not doing it by the book was the only option available to them? Perhaps because Kosminski was extremely disturbed they felt confident that they could trick him into being ID’d without any repercussions? Perhaps they were so desperate that even an “ ‘well it certainly looks like him” would have been worth it?”

Why do you keep asking everyone to stay within reason but you keep implying conspiracies? The Marginalia is unsafe. The MM is unsafe. Anderson saying a suspect was id’d is unsafe.

One element that perhaps requires greater clarification is the fact that Aaron Kosminski - if he was indeed ths suspect - was manifestly insane. It is therefore likely that he would have appeared before the magistrate, the police would have outlined the charge against him, and he would have been deemed unfit to plead and been committed to an asylum. The police would have thus had the satisfaction of telling the world they'd caught Jack the Ripper, but there would have been no court case, no defence solicitor calling the police evidence into question. The refusal of the witness to give evidence is unlikely to have mattered much if the suspect would have been committed, so why did Anderson seem to blame him? The answer is that he caused a delay during which the suspect's family had him committed, thus avoiding having their name revealed at the magistrate's hearing.

[PaulB]

I think is you that need to get real and prove first that Aaron Kosminski was the Kosminski mentioned, and that this Id parade took place as described, and what the police would gain by not conforming with the rules as laid down in the Victorian police codes of the day, and while you are at it conclusively prove that Donald Swanson was the author of all the marginalia you and others seek to rely on.

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

Trevor wrote that the event described in the marginalia 'could not have happened in the way described that is an irrefutable fact.'

Herlock questioned that statement, suggesting that the police aren't saints and do bend and break the rules.

Herlock basically asks the same question I have been asking you, which is why did the police HAVE to follow proceedure? We don't know what the circumstances were, so can't say what lengths they may have felt it was necessary to go.

Now, Herlock doesn't have to do any of those questions does he. It's just you dodging answering the point he's made that the police break the rules.

[PaulB]

If the police were looking to detect the crime, and identify the killer, and bring him to justice then it could not have happened in the way described that is an irrefutable fact, there can be no other explanation. Add to that what would have been needed to facilitate such an ID parade, manpower etc, add to that no other officers make any mention of this earth shattering seaside home identification, add to that no one named Kosminksi was ever arrested, add to that the questionable marginalia as to who actually penned it in it entirety

Now again i ask you or anyone else to provide evidence that Aaron Kosminski was the Kosminski mentioned, the simple fact is you cant, and i know that you have your own personal agenda for propping up the marginalia, and Kosminski, so your input on this topic is somewhat biased I would suggest.

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

Trevor, the marginalia manifestly describes an event that was unorthodox. It didn't conform to accepted practice. Nobody was following the rules and guidelines. So explain to us why it could have happened in the way described. As for the rest of what you write, they are distinct and seperate points and can and should be dealt with individually.

The evidence that Aaron Kosminski was the suspect Kosminski has been explained to you several times, but here goes yet again: Aaron Kosminski fits the criteria to be the suspect and no other K-something-ski has so far been found in the asylum records. So there you are, two good reasons for thinking they are one and the same. Not proof, of course, which is why the identification has remained open for thirty years.

And don't try the old 'biased' fall back routine, it just reveals your desperation. Why is it that every time you make a statement and are asked to explain and justify it, you dance around and throw out a stream of other questions and otherwise duck and dive? Either you can answer the question or you can't, and whilst I appreciate that it would be hard for you to acknowledge that you can't, by not doing so you are potentially misleading people. Now, the marginalia clearly describes an unorthodox event in which the police deviated from accepted proceedure. You are saying it isutterly impossible for the police to have circumvented proceedure. So tell us why?

[Herlock Sholmes]

Because this was a high profile case and if the police felt that a potential witness would be the key to unlocking the case why would they not do it by the book. They would gain nothing by doing it for the various ways and whyfores you and other posters have suggested.

Everything surrounding this mythical ID is totally unsafe to rely on, along with the events leading up to it and the events that followed it.

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

Lots of perhaps’s of course but this is because we can’t know for certain. Perhaps not doing it by the book was the only option available to them? Perhaps because Kosminski was extremely disturbed they felt confident that they could trick him into being ID’d without any repercussions? Perhaps they were so desperate that even an “ ‘well it certainly looks like him” would have been worth it?”

Why do you keep asking everyone to stay within reason but you keep implying conspiracies? The Marginalia is unsafe. The MM is unsafe. Anderson saying a suspect was id’d is unsafe.

[Trevor Marriott]

Because in the attempt to solve a crime the police have never bent or broken the rules of course? And of course it’s wrong of us to cast such an aspersion against an organisation staffed throughout its history with virtual saints.

An irrefutable Fact?

Come on Trevor, get real.

I think is you that need to get real and prove first that Aaron Kosminski was the Kosminski mentioned, and that this Id parade took place as described, and what the police would gain by not conforming with the rules as laid down in the Victorian police codes of the day, and while you are at it conclusively prove that Donald Swanson was the author of all the marginalia you and others seek to rely on.

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Trevor Marriott]

I simply don’t see how you can make a definite assertion that someone couldn’t possibly have done something because is was risky or against the rules?

Because this was a high profile case and if the police felt that a potential witness would be the key to unlocking the case why would they not do it by the book. They would gain nothing by doing it for the various ways and whyfores you and other posters have suggested.

Everything surrounding this mythical ID is totally unsafe to rely on, along with the events leading up to it and the events that followed it.

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Herlock Sholmes]

If the police were looking to detect the crime, and identify the killer, and bring him to justice then it could not have happened in the way described that is an irrefutable fact,

Because in the attempt to solve a crime the police have never bent or broken the rules of course? And of course it’s wrong of us to cast such an aspersion against an organisation staffed throughout its history with virtual saints.

An irrefutable Fact?

Come on Trevor, get real.