Is Kosminski the man really viable?

[Fisherman]

Simon:

"Anderson writing on 7th March 1891 to the Medical Superintendent at Colney Hatch regarding George Hall should not be construed as an endorsement of the belief that Scotland Yard may have informed the asylum that it believed Aaron Kosminski to have been the Ripper."

What if Anderson instead was looking for confirmation; I harbour mistakes against the man, can you tell me if he is consistent with a man who would kill and eviscerate? Would he be capable of such a thing?

In June -92, Anderson says that it is impossible to believe the Ripper killings were the acts of a sane man- they were those of a maniac revelling in blood. To me, the first part would have said "It was not the work of a sane man" if Anderson had known by then. Saying that it was impossible to believe means that he has tried but failed, the way I read it; and why try if he knew the killerīs identity?

The best,
Fisherman

[Simon Wood]

Hi Fisherman,

Anderson "was looking for confirmation" of what?

Regards,

Simon

[Fisherman]

That would be any suspicions he could have been harbouring against Kosminski at that early stage. Maybe one or more of the circs MacNagthen was to mention in the memoranda had surfaced at that stage, giving rise to an interest on behalf of Anderson, I donīt know. Just thinking aloud here.

Of course, it is claimed that the Seaside Home business was the clincher - but what if it wasnīt? What if Anderson was looking for more, and had doubts in March? Or am I being totally off here...?

The best,
Fisherman

[Simon Wood]

Hi Fisherman,

You and the SY5 are all totally off, if, as you posit, Crossmere was the Ripper.

Regards,

Simon

[robhouse]

Hi Rob,

Anderson writing on 7th March 1891 to the Medical Superintendent at Colney Hatch regarding George Hall should not be construed as an endorsement of the belief that Scotland Yard may have informed the asylum that it believed Aaron Kosminski to have been the Ripper.

After all, exactly two months later, on 7th May 1891, Macnaghten wrote an almost identical letter regarding Michael Ostrog to Dr. T. Claye Shaw, Principal and Medical Superintendent at Banstead Lunatic Asylum, Surrey.

And we all know where Ostrog was during the Whitechapel murders.

Regards,

Simon

Simon,

I am not claiming that this letter proves anything at all. That said, I have always assumed that Anderson probably would have informed the superintendant at CH asylum that Kozminski was a suspect. I believe he would have told the man "in confidence", and under instructions to not let this become known to the general population of the asylum or even the lower level employees.

It was interesting (to me anyway) to see confirmation that, at least, Anderson was in direct communication with the Sup'td of the asylum within a month of Kozminski's admission to Colney Hatch.

Your point is taken. It seems clear that the Convict Supervision Office at the MET kept track of "criminal lunatics" as a matter of procedure. I will admit that it came as a surprise to me that Criminals were admitted to Colney Hatch at all, as I would have assumed they would be in Broadmoor. My assumption is that Broadmoor was for more serious criminal cases, or more dangerous criminals.

RH

[Fisherman]

Simon:

"You and the SY5 are all totally off, if, as you posit, Crossmere was the Ripper."

Okay, thanks for telling me, Simon - I owe you one!

the best,
Fisherman

[Wickerman]

Hi Harry - yes, 'with difficulty' might mean that Kosminski resisted physically; or perhaps alternatively it might mean that the identification was difficult to arrange - perhaps because it was a covert operation.

Quite so Sally!
The police continually dealt with lunatics and awkward people so why did Swanson make a specific point about this transfer? - because the paperwork was out of the ordinary?, it was difficult to arrange and perhaps as a consequence was kept quiet?

But is there any surviving official paperwork connected with any identification (or identification attempt)? Unless I'm missing something, we're reliant on press reports even for the identification of Pizer by Violenia/Violina.

You are quite right but the police did not make special arrangements in those cases (Piser/Violenia). The media often had a reporter stay at both Leman St. and Commercial St. waiting for the next break, this may be why such extra precautions were taken with Kosminski, assuming what we read is correct.

They took him elsewhere for an I.D. but they had no legal authority to do so, unless there was a medical professional on duty at the Seaside Home?
In that case may they circumvent the law by having Houchin? make out transfer papers to "whom it may concern" in residence at the Seaside Home under the pretext of gaining a second opinion? The Mile end Inst. would actually move him, not the police?
How else could they move him without arresting him first?
(just shooting in the dark here)

Regards, Jon S.

[Casebook Wiki Editor]

John Malcolm has read many of Anderson's religious writings, so he might be able to answer this more specifically.

RH

I've waded through 3 of his books; as you know there are a lot more than that. He was a Messianic Christian and folks of that ilk have a special affection for Israel and the Jewish people for what should be obvious reasons. (I hope they are obvious....if not re-read Revelations) At least today's Messianics are....and I suspect this is one area of thought that changes slowly.....

[Phil Carter]

You are quite right but the police did not make special arrangements in those cases (Piser/Violenia). The media often had a reporter stay at both Leman St. and Commercial St. waiting for the next break, this may be why such extra precautions were taken with Kosminski, assuming what we read is correct.

They took him elsewhere for an I.D. but they had no legal authority to do so, unless there was a medical professional on duty at the Seaside Home?
In that case may they circumvent the law by having Houchin? make out transfer papers to "whom it may concern" in residence at the Seaside Home under the pretext of gaining a second opinion? The Mile end Inst. would actually move him, not the police?
How else could they move him without arresting him first?
(just shooting in the dark here)

Regards, Jon S.

Hello Jon,

Plus, if I may make so bold, the time gap.

Just how many people did they arrest or take in to X amount of local police stations for questioning and to check out?

Yet X amount of time between Aug 1888 and 1895, this one, special case, warranted such possible illegal attention without an arrest warrant?

All that fuss about a poor Polish Jew who as we know him, had no record for even striking a woman?

I just cannot believe it... for what is getting on for what must be a hundred different reasons.

best wishes

Phil

[Monty]

I've waded through 3 of his books; as you know there are a lot more than that. He was a Messianic Christian and folks of that ilk have a special affection for Israel and the Jewish people for what should be obvious reasons. (I hope they are obvious....if not re-read Revelations) At least today's Messianics are....and I suspect this is one area of thought that changes slowly.....

Sir Robert Andersons books are available on Kindle for those who are interested.

Monty

[Phil H]

The "with difficulty" could mean a number of things - and DSS knew what he meant.

I suspect it does not involve force - and the word was it not was "sent" not taken".

The difficulty IMHO, more likely relates to arrangements with the staff of the Seaside Home and (maybe) for Kosminski's family to take him there. The family after all took him to the Workhouse with his hands tied behind his back. Thus the "with difficulty" is simply adminstrative and makes the point that the arrangements were out of the ordinary and took extra care. I would also not rule out that City police were responsible for the journey which might have caused additional complications.

If, as I now begin to surmise, Anderson had been alerted to the possibility of Kosminski as Eddowes killer (he having been seen in the 1889 court case), and the city (Cox) having watched and followed him, Anderson and Swanson may have thrown out the rule book and have been engaging in a little private detective work. (Anderson was after all well versed in the "secret" world.) Using the City boys as their agents would have helped distance themselves from what was being done and allowed an element of deniability.

I still can't work out who the witness was, but I believe that he may only have emerged in 1889 and be someone we haven't heard of. The Jewish element escapes me at present. I think Sagar's suspect may be wrapped up with this too (Kosminski).

Just ideas I'm playing with.

Phil H

[Fleetwood Mac]

The "with difficulty" could mean a number of things - and DSS knew what he meant.

I suspect it does not involve force.

I suspect it does for two reasons at least:

1) The family took him to the asylum with his hands tied behind his back. I'd be slightly disappointed in the event my family tied me up and walked me down to the local asylum for no more than going about my normal day-to-day business. Clearly, force was a necessary tool to walk this fella down the street and his family had reached a point where there weren't many other options - suggests that he was an usually difficult customer.

2) The familiy giving up on the fella suggests Kosminski has flipped at this point. Assuming that's the case, and Kos is spending the better part of the day picking fish heads off the floor because he thinks it's a better option than a home cooked meal served with a napkin and on a table with clean cuttlery, then I doubt he's going peacefully with a group of strangers; police strangers at that. If I were paranoid, the last thing I'd want is the police turning up inviting me to a secret location for reasons they were unwilling to divulge.

[Simon Wood]

Hi Phil H,

Offenders have traditionally been "sent" to prison, but this does not mean they are trusted to make their own way to the gates of Parkhurst or Wormwood Scrubs.

"Sent" in our context means taken.

Regards,

Simon

[Wickerman]

"Sent" in our context means taken.

Regards,

Simon

Hi Simon.

I think we are testing possibilities here. Without being too blunt Swanson writing "sent by us" could mean the police (SY?) organized/initiated even orchestrated the move, but apart from providing an escort, did not actually handle the patient themselves.

Regards, Jon S.

[Wickerman]

Hi Phil H,

Offenders have traditionally been "sent" to prison,...

Yes but Simon, the police do not send anyone to prison. The judge or the jury do this, not the police. The police are only a tool of the judiciary.

Regards, Jon S.