Is Kosminski the man really viable?

[robhouse]

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

Actually, it is not an error at all. I knew you were going to post this response. So your contention is that Aaron Kozminski is not the Kosminski mentioned by Swanson and Macnaghten.

Fine. Best of luck to you

Rob

[robhouse]

Incidentally, this implies that you accept the fact the "Kosminski" was indeed a prime suspect, was mentioned in documents related to the crimes etc. Is that correct?

RH

[Monty]

Schitzo?

What an archaic ill educated word, bordering on the offensive.

Monty

[Robert]

Hi Phil

I can't think of any bearded men mentioned in connection with the murders, unless you count the Sims-like coffee stall man. Of course, Aaron may have been grooming himself in 1888. This might have made him more acceptable to streetwalkers, but would also imply that his illness wasn't as far advanced in 1888.

[Phil Carter]

Actually, it is not an error at all. I knew you were going to post this response. So your contention is that Aaron Kozminski is not the Kosminski mentioned by Swanson and Macnaghten.

Fine. Best of luck to you

Rob

My contention is simple Rob.

Aaron Kosminski is innocent of being the Prime Suspect of the Whitechapel murders.
A 2nd contention is that he has known known connection with such murders.

If you can't read.. then don't try to put words into other people's mouths.

Whoever Swanson mentioned..

I have said this before and I will say it again.. I simply believe that Swanson was regailing and expanding on Anderson's suspect and Anderson's theory.
He left out and got wrong details that anyone au fait with would never have forgotten. Like what actually happened to this mass murderer and how long he actually lived.

Yes, I can live with that.


Phil

[Phil Carter]

Schitzo?

What an archaic ill educated word, bordering on the offensive.

Monty

Then you will of course arrest the poster that used it before me.

Next!

[robhouse]

Schitzo?

What an archaic ill educated word, bordering on the offensive.

Monty

Hi Neil,

Phil is generally offensive. But what I find most offensive is that he keeps stating things that a demonstrably wrong... like his repeated assertions that Kozminski was "feeble-minded" or as he put it, an "imbecile" in a colloquial sense, whatever that means. He has no proof of this but that doesn't of course stop him from posting it over and over.

Rob

[robhouse]

My contention is simple Rob.

Aaron Kosminski is innocent of being the Prime Suspect of the Whitechapel murders.
A 2nd contention is that he has known known connection with such murders.

If you can't read.. then don't try to put words into other people's mouths.

Whoever Swanson mentioned..

I have said this before and I will say it again.. I simply believe that Swanson was regailing and expanding on Anderson's suspect and Anderson's theory.
He left out and got wrong details that anyone au fait with would never have forgotten. Like what actually happened to this mass murderer and how long he actually lived.

Yes, I can live with that.


Phil

Your contention is not simple at all. It is borderline incoherent. I don't even think that you know what you are contending at this point.

Let's be quite clear... do you accept that "Kosminski", whether Aaron or not, was a major suspect in the case?

If so, then the only remaining issue is whether Aaron Kozminski was "Kosminski". If not, then you are just deciding to throw out 3 separate sources, and major sources, that refer to him specifically in connection with the case.

Honestly Phil, I have much better things to do with my time than waste it arguing with you. I am not interested in your opinions to be frank, because you have showed yourself to not be a very thoughtful or insightful person.

RH

[Phil Carter]

Hi Neil,

Phil is generally offensive. But what I find most offensive is that he keeps stating things that a demonstrably wrong... like his repeated assertions that Kozminski was "feeble-minded" or as he put it, an "imbecile" in a colloquial sense, whatever that means. He has no proof of this but that doesn't of course stop him from posting it over and over.

Rob

Here we go... the personal stuff come flooding out when an author is put into a corner he can't get out of in public.. really Rob.....so demonstably uneducated that is...tut tut

Oh..and goad away.. with help from anyone... it wont work.

You have the gall to talk of PROOF!!!!!!

You name a man, Aaron Kosminski as a most likely person to have murdered 5 women, on the evidence of?..

Sorry.. NO evidence...

All without proof.


Good grief.


Phil

[Monty]

Right Phil,

So its ok to use an offensive word if someone has used it prior to yourself?

Is that your defence?


Rob,

Indeed. There is a lack of understanding with regards mental illness shown by Phil. A lot of his arguement, as ever, is based on his uninformed opinion.

Its a forum, and is entitled to his opinion.

Monty

[Phil Carter]

Your contention is not simple at all. It is borderline incoherent. I don't even think that you know what you are contending at this point.

Let's be quite clear... do you accept that "Kosminski", whether Aaron or not, was a major suspect in the case?

If so, then the only remaining issue is whether Aaron Kozminski was "Kosminski". If not, then you are just deciding to throw out 3 separate sources, and major sources, that refer to him specifically in connection with the case.

Honestly Phil, I have much better things to do with my time than waste it arguing with you. I am not interested in your opinions to be frank, because you have showed yourself to not be a very thoughtful or insightful person.

RH

No I do NOT accept Kosminski to be a major suspect in the case.

A minor one, at best. With a stretch of the imagination and a twist of the possible.

Therefore, the remaining issue is not applicable


Phil

[Phil Carter]

Right Phil,

So its ok to use an offensive word if someone has used it prior to yourself?

Is that your defence?


Rob,

Indeed. There is a lack of understanding with regards mental illness shown by Phil. A lot of his arguement, as ever, is based on his uninformed opinion.

Its a forum, and is entitled to his opinion.

Monty

'Wassup Monty..lost your whipping boy now Trevor has been banned?

Sorry...find someone else..oooh..and while you are at it... tell your mates the same.

I aint biting..

Have a good evening.

[Casebook Wiki Editor]

I suggest either Cream or Carroll would have far better success luring women to their death than Kosminski, and you can even add Tumblety to the list!

We don't know that to be true.

How would we access what the man was like circa 1888? We have some glimpses as to his mental state later on but Kos at the time of the Whitechapel murders is an enigma. And he only needed to "get it together" for interactions with prostitutes who themselves were eager for work and somewhat the worse for drink.

Since Macnaghten failed to cite a verifiable authority for the comments about hatred of women and homicidal tendencies, his statements have little value.

MM was not writing an academic paper but an internal memorandum. His statements have tremendous value; we just need to understand their context.

I can't either since I haven't read it,

You and Errata are truthful enough to state you have not read Rob House's book; others aren't.

It's clear from comments that he is "debating" with people that claim to have read it, but obviously have not.

Astounding really - 80+ page thread on a suspect with a recent well written 355 page book on said suspect with citations up the yin yang, and its most virulent detractors clearly have not bothered to read it. In an academic setting they would flunk; here they just press "Submit Reply".

[Phil Carter]

Hi Phil

I can't think of any bearded men mentioned in connection with the murders, unless you count the Sims-like coffee stall man. Of course, Aaron may have been grooming himself in 1888. This might have made him more acceptable to streetwalkers, but would also imply that his illness wasn't as far advanced in 1888.

Hello Robert,

Indeed. That is a fair point in need of consideration. If indeed Aaron Kosminski was in finer fettle, so to speak, in 1888, then how can a man who's demeanour that is further away from the unkept, melancholic, vice-ridden one we know of, who had not a record of violence at that time, to anyone, be regarded as dangerous?.

best wishes

Phil

[Casebook Wiki Editor]

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.

I shall show this to the police in the event I try to carve someone up.

He threatened to kill his sister.

Call me old fashioned but I take that as a red flag.