Is Kosminski the man really viable?

[Phil H]

But the circumstances and timing of the putative ID of AK (alleged by Anderson & have been long debatedSwanson).

Who was the witness? How long after the sighting was the ID? How seriously can we take it that a witness would not testify even if compelled?

We cannot rule out that AK was identified by someone, but as yet we have no proof he was or how good the ID was.

Just my view.

Phil H

[DVV]

They were absolutely convinced they had their man.

Yes, Fleetwood.
But "they" seems to refer to a vast community of two people.

[Phil H]

They were absolutely convinced they had their man.

Anderson claimed the diagnosis was proven right on every count.

Swanson's notes make it clear that suspect would have hanged and his name was Kosminski.

Strong stuff. Difficult to see how they could have been any more convinced outside of catching him red handed.

But we have no PROOF of any of that, and parts of Swanson's account don't seem to add up.

Phil H

[Fleetwood Mac]

It seems to me that:

Kosminski (most likely Aaron on current knowledge) was considered a suspect and possibly the perpetrator in the Ripper case by senior police officials.

Given the connection that Kosminski had with Berner St and envrions, he could have been identified by Schwartz.

Ok, here's a wild stab in the dark.

Pipeman was a club man who had gone for a wander and was on his way back to the club.

Pipeman knew the fella attacking Stride.

What he actually shouted was: "Kosminski!".

Club members knew Kosminski reasonably well and didn't want him handed over to the police.

What they couldn't know was whether or not anyone heard the cry of 'Kosminski', and so they concocted a story where the cry became 'Lipski!' as that was the only thing they could come up with that would be believable in the circumstances.

Dah dah!

Believe it? Me neither.

According to the Sun, the City Police weren't looking for a man who's most distinguishing feature was being broad shouldered. So, perhaps Schwartz didn't hold court in this matter.

[Fleetwood Mac]

but as yet we have no proof he was or how good the ID was.

Phil H

We do have proof regarding the success of the ID. We have 2 senior policemen stating that they had "proof" and "murderer would have hanged".

Outside of finding an old betamax recording of the ID, you couldn't wish for anything more convincing than that.

It's pretty solid, and questions over where the ID took place, and the identity of the witness, should not in any way detract from the statements of senior policemen to the effect that they were convinced that the man who was ID'd was ID'd beyond doubt and was the man known as JTR.

[Phil H]

No FM, sorry to contradict you, but we do not have PROOF "regarding the success of the ID".

We may indeed have "2 senior policemen stating that they had "proof" and "murderer would have hanged". But that is only their view. we hve none of the official reports or records of the ID that would constitute actual evidence. Moreover the marginalia are somewhat curious in regard to the location of the identification and how it was conducted.

Who was the witness (a Jew it seems - but Lawende, Schwartz? or someone else?) How long after the sighting was the ID? How reliable? Why did the suspect have to be taken (apparently) to Brighton? If he was seen to identify but refused to testify - why did the police react as they did?

One can speculate on all these things, but we do not KNOW.

If, as some would argue, Swanson recorded details given to him by Anderson and hitherto unknown to him, why was that? (There is nothing in the phrasing of the marginalia to oppose that view - though I am personally uncommitted.) If DSS knew, why are the procedural issues so strange?

Outside of finding an old betamax recording of the ID, you couldn't wish for anything more convincing than that.

I'd settle for an official file. old men writing in retirement are under no requirement to be as accurate as possible, a serving officer is.

It's pretty solid, and questions over where the ID took place, and the identity of the witness, should not in any way detract from the statements of senior policemen to the effect that they were convinced that the man who was ID'd was ID'd beyond doubt and was the man known as JTR.

I agree, we have powerful material which cannot be ignored. But it does not, as yet, constitute PROOF.

Phil H

[Fleetwood Mac]

I agree, we have powerful material which cannot be ignored. But it does not, as yet, constitute PROOF.

Phil H

Which begs the question, Phil, what exactly would constitute proof in your eyes?

You say an official file.

Not quite sure how the views of two senior policemen are reduced to lesser status because they are not in an official file. Presumably, we don't doubt that Swanson and Anderson penned those words, so what's the difference?

As a lapsed historian, doing other things these days, I would count the words written around the ID to be excellent source material. The fact that we don't know where it took place nor the identity of the witness, does not negate the fact that two senior policeman had no doubts that this man was identified and this was their man.

They could have been wide of the mark, of course, but it certainly appears to the be the case that they were convinced.

[robhouse]

The description of the man is one of a lone, mumbling, imbecile who was lucky enough to have close relatives who looked out for him, but who behaved in such strange ways, he caused enough anxiety to have him removed from the streets.

Aaron Kozminski was not an imbecile, and that IS a fact. No matter how many times I have repeated this, it still turns up time and time again.

RH

[Phil H]

FM - my answer was in my previous post.

Old men reminiscing in retirement are not on oath, and memory can be problematic. In particular, we do not, cannot know, quite how DSS's marginalia relate to Anderson's views. the lack of a forename for Kosminski is also in my view a snag.

It might be different if there was circumstantial support from other senior officials, but there is not. MM apparently was not convinced by what he had heard of the "Kosminski" case.

On an official file one could - perhaps - relate the events and comments to other material. The way we can trace some of the logic on the official files. It is also, per se, THE record.

I know how frustrating it is not simply to be able to accept Sir RA's and DSS's views and move on. But we cannot. To build any theory on that basis would be to construct something very unstable and capable of collapse at any point.

I would be more ready to accept the ID if there was more (even circumstantial) material to suggest AK was a real suspect - but there isn't. And Sir RA and DSS are wrong about his death date so could be in error about other things as well.

So sorry, no - if I was writing an academic paper, I would not do more than promote this ID material as a possibility. That shouldn't be a problem as it is not dissimilar to the state of affairs say in pre-history where the evidence is fragmentary. Conclusions have to be interim ones for the moment.

Phil H

[mklhawley]

I agree, we have powerful material which cannot be ignored. But it does not, as yet, constitute PROOF.

Phil H

Just as Stewart Evans and others have stated, we will never get conclusive proof. No one saw the murders and we are only guessing that any particular witness witnessed the actual killer.

Sincerely,

Mike

[Fisherman]

Fleetwood Mac:

"They were absolutely convinced they had their man.

Anderson claimed the diagnosis was proven right on every count.

Swanson's notes make it clear that suspect would have hanged and his name was Kosminski."

Yes, and MacNaghten, who placed his behind on the throne AFTER them, and who would have been privy to the material as such, including whatever it was Anderson and Swanson had on Kosminsky, was equally sure that HE had HIS man.
Curiously, though, it was not the same man...?

The best,
Fisherman

[Dr. John Watson]

Which begs the question, Phil, what exactly would constitute proof in your eyes?

You say an official file.

Not quite sure how the views of two senior policemen are reduced to lesser status because they are not in an official file. Presumably, we don't doubt that Swanson and Anderson penned those words, so what's the difference?

As a lapsed historian, doing other things these days, I would count the words written around the ID to be excellent source material . . . .

The Swanson marginalia may be "excellent source material," but it is not a document of record, such as a police report, witness statement, etc. It is rather the type of material usually referred to as "anecdotal" which has come to mean a statement or narrative of interest but of no conclusive or evidentuary value.

John

[Fisherman]

Phil:

"at least there is a demonstrable East End connection for Kosminski which does not exist for MJD or ostrog."

Partycrasher that I am, I could not resist this. An East End connection, no less. Two addresses where Aaron Kosminski may have stayed at some stage, and that are not far away from the killing fields.
Champagne on ice, bring out the caviar! And very deservedly so!

But it would have been nice to see somebody realize that there is something very much resembling an East End connection when it comes to Lechmere too. For some reson though, having dug up the adresses and workroutes that place him in extremely close connection to each and every one of the murder sites have not earned Edward much acclaim...?

Strange, is it not?

But before anybody tells me not to contaminate a thread as pure as this, I will take the advide ad notam in advance and leave the thread, taking Lechmere with me!

The best,
Fisherman

[mklhawley]

Phil:

"at least there is a demonstrable East End connection for Kosminski which does not exist for MJD or ostrog."

Partycrasher that I am, I could not resist this. An East End connection, no less. Two addresses where Aaron Kosminski may have stayed at some stage, and that are not far away from the killing fields.
Champagne on ice, bring out the caviar! And very deservedly so!

But it would have been nice to see somebody realize that there is something very much resembling an East End connection when it comes to Lechmere too. For some reson though, having dug up the adresses and workroutes that place him in extremely close connection to each and every one of the murder sites have not earned Edward much acclaim...?

Strange, is it not?

But before anybody tells me not to contaminate a thread as pure as this, I will take the advide ad notam in advance and leave the thread, taking Lechmere with me!

The best,
Fisherman

So, you're saying there's a 'lech' on the Fish, which is why you took him with you

[Phil H]

An East End connection, no less. Two addresses where Aaron Kosminski may have stayed at some stage, and that are not far away from the killing fields.

Fisherman - you can READ. I had wondered.

But it would have been nice to see somebody realize that there is something very much resembling an East End connection when it comes to Lechmere too.

But this thread is about Kosminski, Fish. Maybe you cannot read, after all.

For some reson though, having dug up the adresses and workroutes that place him in extremely close connection to each and every one of the murder sites have not earned Edward much acclaim...?

I have in fact expressed my interest in Cross/Lechmere as a candidate for Nichols and Chapman, maybe Eddowes several times - but I cannot take the case further than possible. He escaped notice at the time it seems, AK did not.

Edited to add: Hundreds of people each day must have passed along Hanbury St, rather less down Buck's Row (at that time of day). So the same could be said to apply to others.

Strange, is it not?

No because there is no evidence at all against Cross/Lechmere - merely supposition. Someone called Kosminski was named AT THE TIME (big difference) and is thus now being evaluated in this thread. We don't mention, Tumblety or Maybrick either save in passing.

Phil H