Is Kosminski the man really viable?

[Dr. John Watson]

I'm curious why so many posters are willing to ignore, or minimize, the threatening his sister with a knife episode. Do people think it didn't happen, or was exaggerated? Sincere question.

A single episode of threatening someone with a knife, be it male or female, more likely represents nothing more than a loss of temper rather than a sign of mental illness or homicidal tendencies. Repeated instances may be a warning sign, as would actual use of the knife with intent to harm someone. In Kosminski's case, he may have reacted to something his sister said, or somehow saw her as a threat and used the knife as a warning to stop. The important thing is, it happened on only one occasion, and he never followed through on the threat. An individual with homicidal tendencies would likely not have warned her; he would have simply stabbed her.

John

[Chris]

In Kosminski's case, he may have reacted to something his sister said, or somehow saw her as a threat and used the knife as a warning to stop.

It's worth bearing in mind what Houchin actually wrote:
"He took up a knife & threatened the life of his sister."

[Phil H]

And was it Kosminski's sister, or as the recent article suggests as a possibility, Cohen's? I find the latter the more likely.

Phil H

[Phil H]

Just read this:

The only sources naming Aaron Kosminski as a suspect in the Ripper murders are MacNaughton and Swanson, with Swanson identifying Kosminski as the anonymous "Polish Jew" mentioned by Anderson. MacNaughton was not on the police force during the killings, so everything he wrote is based on hearsay.

Is it? He joined in June 1889, as I recall, so would have been around while "Kosminski" was under consideration. he could well be assumed to have first hand knowledge to some degree.

Anderson and Swanson were actively engaged in finding the Ripper, but their statements regarding Kosminski, written years later, contain significant errors of fact.

Not that many. Death date is the worst and that could have been accurate according to what they were told, though the information was wrong.

More importantly, they offer nothing in the way of hard evidence to corroberate their claim and conveniently omit verifiable details.

In the case of the marginalia nothing is "conveniently" omitted. What Swanson wrote is logical and complete given the context. remember, the annotations were for no eyes other than Swanson's and he KNEW the detail. Why should he offer "hard" evidence given what the document is? And what "hard evidence" could he provide? He mentions several things that we knew nothing of until the marginalia was published.

For instance, while Swanson tells of a crucial identification at the "Seaside Home," he gives no date, no reason for the unusual location, and no identification of the witness or any officers who were present during the identification.

In the context he had no need to - he knew and the conclusion he was writing towards did not need those details. And why should he. But he does mention things that, given they were unusual, are extremely unlikely to be made up or mistaken. It is for us now to pursue these leads as we can.

If such an identification had occurred and if Kosminski was the suspect, the witness must have been Isreal Schwartz.

I find your statement too definite to be credible. It could have been Lawende or someone we have as yet no knowledge of.

In Kosminski's condition, had a strange woman accosted him on the street, I can see him grabbing her, pushing her away and fleeing in fear. So Kosminski could have been the man seen by Schwartz. But Schwartz would not have identified Kosminski as the Ripper because he didn't see who pulled Stride into Dutfield's Yard and there cut her throat.

All assumption on your part. I'll say no more.

Swanson is libeling an innocent man if he's relying on Schwartz.

Swanson libelled no one. He thought Kosminski dead - you cannot libel the dead. Moreoveer the marginalia was not "published" until decades after kosminski actually died.

If you mean to infer Swanson was saying an untruth - first you make an assumption of his basis; second given that he knew much more than we do, we cannot make such a statement. You in fact defame an apparently honourable man by your inference.

And if not Schwartz, the unnamed witness must be one who saw a man chatting up Eddowes on Duke Street.

Only if you believe we are playing a "zero sum" game, in which we have all the knowledge ever available to Anderson and Swanson. We are not and do not.

Forgetting for a moment that no one claims to have had a good look at this suspect's face, and knowing what we do about Kosminski, can you imagine any woman being induced to follow this wretched man into a dark corner of Mitre Square at the height of the Ripper scare?

What I can "imagine" is neither here nor there.

Regarding Aaron Kosminski, the symptoms documented by his treating physicians are consistent with someone suffering from advanced schizophrenia, most significant being the references to hallucinations and paranoia leading to an unrealistic fear of all others. This disease usually first appears in young adults, and sufferers are far more likely to harm themselves than others. Schizophrenics have killed others, but their inability to deal with reality causes them to make mistakes which usually lead to their quick arrest. While Kosminski cannot be ruled out as a suspect, taking into account the mental disease that warped his mind and the descriptions of his appearence and mannerisms, he is perhaps the least likely Jack the Ripper ever so named.

Add, "in my view" and I'd have no difficulty, but please don't try to foist of hypothesis and personal views as some undeniable truth.

Phil H

[Chris]

And was it Kosminski's sister, or as the recent article suggests as a possibility, Cohen's? I find the latter the more likely.

On balance I still feel the context suggests it was Aaron's sister (from whose address he had been admitted to the workhouse):
(b) Facts communicated by others, viz.:-
Jacob Cohen 51 Carter Lane St Pauls, City of London says that he goes about the streets and picks up bits of bread out of the gutter & eats them, he drinks water from the tap & he refuses food at the hands of others. He took up a knife & threatened the life of his sister. He says that he is ill and his cure consists in refusing food. He is melancholic, practises self-abuse. He is very dirty and will not be washed. He has not attempted any kind of work for years.

[Robert]

I wonder why he was taken away bound? From the way the threat to the sister is mentioned as part of a list, it seems that the threat wasn't the reason for his being taken away. So either he offered violence a second time, or he just didn't want to go.

Were there any reports of his refusing food once admitted? I can't recall any.

[Phil H]

But Cohen's words are reported in the 3rd person, so logically and grammatically, it could and would be Cohen's sister referred to as "his".

[Errata]

I'm curious why so many posters are willing to ignore, or minimize, the threatening his sister with a knife episode. Do people think it didn't happen, or was exaggerated? Sincere question.

I don't ignore it, but I can see any number of circumstances under which a mentally ill man may be prompted to defend himself against a perceived threat that doesn't actually exist. And I don't have the impression that he grabbed her, put a knife to her throat and threatened to kill her. I also have the impression that the incident took place some time before his entrance into the workhouse, so while certainly unacceptable, it didn't lead to his immediate eviction from the house. I admit I have a certain sympathy for the situation.

Also, where does it say he was a compulsive masturbator?

[Robert]

Phil, how so? The "he" refers to Aaron - Jacob isn't saying that he, Jacob, eats bread from the gutters etc. The "his" is the only point at which there is any ambiguity.

Errata, well it might just have been the nagging that made him pick up the knife. The nagging must have been intense.

[Errata]

I wonder why he was taken away bound? From the way the threat to the sister is mentioned as part of a list, it seems that the threat wasn't the reason for his being taken away. So either he offered violence a second time, or he just didn't want to go.

Were there any reports of his refusing food once admitted? I can't recall any.

As best I can tell, Swanson sad he was taken away bound, but that may or may not be accurate. It would surprise me if he was taken away bound to a workhouse, but it would not surprise me if he was subdued in some manner during the transfer to the asylum. I would have assumed that to be procedure for everyone, given the probable urge to bolt upon entering the facility.

As for his food, it is entirely probable that his delusions shifted somewhat due to a change in circumstance. I would have thought it would be in his records, but clearly many did not survive. For example I don't recall any reference to pulse, respiration, etc. in his records either, and those would have been monitored as general indicators of health. His weight at the time of his death was low, but not alarmingly so. He may have lost weight due to his final illness from pain and fever. I don't remember his intake weight, but I think it was lower than his death weight, which would mean some progress.

[Errata]

Errata, well it might just have been the nagging that made him pick up the knife. The nagging must have been intense.

You joke, but I've gotten violent when people insist on trying to stop some aspect of my mental illness. In my case, only when touched (for the OCD) but anytime someone tells me to "Cheer up" or "Just don't think about it" in reference to my Bipolar, the urge to knock their teeth out is overwhelming. Like "Oh! Just stop doing it! That totally never occurred to me! Thank you Dr. F@cking Phil."

The mentally ill don't have boundaries. We have Berlin Walls. Lots of signs, clear warnings, easy to avoid if you pay the slightest amount of attention. Cross at your peril. The results aren't always violent, but they are always bad.

[Phil Carter]

Macnaghten memorandum.

Document? yes.

Mentions Kozminski? Yes.

In connection to murders? Yes.

RH

Hello Rob,

I don't know..I really don't.

One of the things I NEVER expected from you was a basic error.

I stated that there is not one mention of Aaron Kosminski in any document connected to the murders..ever... and you write the above...

Here's that MM line for you.. peruse...

(2) Kosminski -- a Polish Jew -- & resident in Whitechapel. This man became insane owing to many years indulgence in solitary vices. He had a great hatred of women, specially of the prostitute class, & had strong homicidal tendencies: he was removed to a lunatic asylum about March 1889. There were many circumstances connected with this man which made him a strong 'suspect'.

Read it? Good.

Now do be a good fellow and point out exactly where it says AARON......... yes.. check my post.. I said Aaron Kosminski.

It doesn't. So it's time to get off the old high horse and back down. I am correct. AARON KOSMINSKI was never mentioned in any document connected to the murders...EVER.

Unless you have something we don't have... you are mistaken.

You can't place Aaron Kosminski near any of the murders on any of the nights.... that's AARON Kosminski.



Phil

[Phil Carter]

A single episode of threatening someone with a knife, be it male or female, more likely represents nothing more than a loss of temper rather than a sign of mental illness or homicidal tendencies. Repeated instances may be a warning sign, as would actual use of the knife with intent to harm someone. In Kosminski's case, he may have reacted to something his sister said, or somehow saw her as a threat and used the knife as a warning to stop. The important thing is, it happened on only one occasion, and he never followed through on the threat. An individual with homicidal tendencies would likely not have warned her; he would have simply stabbed her.

John

Hello John,

Bang on. All this fuss over how schitzo this man is and only once has he ever even made the threat. Im sure more would have been reported to the doctors on his admittance..family history etc. Schitzo's tend, I'd say, to have other occasions of outbursts...but if Aaron Kosminski was a schitzo..he is a rare breed with only one recorded violent eruption...And that wasn't recorded as him actually touching the sister either. Nothing physical...in stark contrast to the Whitechapel murderer, who was literally, "hands on"...

Like I said earlier.. I'd bet a pound to a penny a few people on this site have had a fight in a bar over the years...and witnessed fights that were physically with oral threats.. and witnessed oral threats that didnt result in a fight.

How many of those people would be locked up for their actions... for 27 years?..Not many.. but then again, Kosminski was described, I believe, as melancholy.

Umm, do forgive me here, but I thought that particular trait led more to people topping themselves in desperation and depression..not going on rampages meticulously slicing out female organs.

A sad street urchin, feeble minded and a nobody isn't a recipe for a mass murderer... it's a recipe for a long slow lock up because he is not well enough for normal function of the basic sort in society.

Thanks for the posting.

best wishes

Phil

[Robert]

Errata, only half joking : when you imagine how many times his sister must have said, "Aaron, you should eat more," "Go on, Aaron, try a bit," "Aaron, you haven't shaved today," - this kind of thing can have sudden and dramatic effects (albeit not the ones intended).

I only just thought : he is dirty and does not wash. Does this mean he was bearded? Never thought of him with a beard.

[Phil Carter]

Errata, only half joking : when you imagine how many times his sister must have said, "Aaron, you should eat more," "Go on, Aaron, try a bit," "Aaron, you haven't shaved today," - this kind of thing can have sudden and dramatic effects (albeit not the ones intended).

I only just thought : he is dirty and does not wash. Does this mean he was bearded? Never thought of him with a beard.

Hello Robert,

Oh dear, what would that mean.. oh yes..let me think now.. I'll finish the thought for you..hope you don't mind...

He wouldn't match any known description seen near the murders?.A man with a beard?..Or am I incorrect?

Nice ball Robert. Cover drive. 4 runs.



best wishes

Phil