Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Is Kosminski the man really viable?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Wickerman View Post
    What other circumstance is alluded to by Swanson?
    Swanson doesn't say anything about circumstances at all. That's the point I'm making. The whole business about "one circumstance alone" is coming from you, not Swanson.

    Originally posted by Wickerman View Post
    Errata made no mention of Sagar, but of the "witness", Sagar was not a "witness".
    Yes, Hutchinson intruded, as he tends to do. But we were discussing Sagar, weren't we?

    Originally posted by Wickerman View Post
    If Sagar truly saw anyone leaving Mitre Sq. (Jewish or not), why was this not mentioned at the Inquest?
    Sagar didn't claim to have seen anyone himself; supposedly it was another officer/constable. I'm not suggesting the story is accurate, but nevertheless it might tell us something interesting about what Sagar thought.

    Comment


    • Hi All,

      Perhaps Robert Sagar was an avid reader.

      Mysteries of Police and Crime, Major Arthur Griffiths, November 1898—

      "One was a Polish Jew, a known lunatic, who was at large in the district of Whitechapel at the time of the murder, and who, having afterwards developed homicidal tendencies, was confined in an asylym. This man was said to resemble the murderer by the one person who got a glimpse of him—the police constable in Mitre Court."

      Sagar, Morning Leader, 9th January 1905—

      " . . . just before her [Eddowes] body was discovered a police-constable met a man of Jewish appearance hurrying out of the court."

      I just noticed that both accounts use the word "court".

      Regards,

      Simon
      Last edited by Simon Wood; 11-18-2012, 05:12 PM. Reason: added material
      Never believe anything until it has been officially denied.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Simon Wood View Post
        I just noticed that both accounts use the word "court".
        You may have a point there, particularly as one other version uses the odd phrase "coming out of the court near the square" [Daily News, 9 January 1905].

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Wickerman View Post
          So, as I said, in the case of Hutchinson "Jewish appearance" may not have intended ethnicity, but in the case of Sagar "Jewish appearance" does appear to intend ethnicity because it is repeated in three out of four reports.
          So, it's pretty safe to say that whatever this meant, it did not mean a full beard with forelocks, and fringes on the corners of his shirt, with a kippah visible under his outdoor hat. It referred either to his being dressed for an occupation associated with Jews, or to his having olive skin, and dark hair and eyes, or possibly both.

          Comment


          • Hi Chris,

            If Sagar was a Daily Mail reader he need not necessarily have bought a copy of Major Griffiths' book.

            On 7th May 1899 the Mitre Court reference was quoted in Max Pemberton's review of Mysteries of Police and Crime.

            Click image for larger version

Name:	MG 1.JPG
Views:	1
Size:	46.4 KB
ID:	664557
            Click image for larger version

Name:	MG2.JPG
Views:	1
Size:	26.5 KB
ID:	664558

            Regards

            Simon
            Never believe anything until it has been officially denied.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Lechmere View Post
              http://hansard.millbanksystems.com/c...t-of-friedrich

              It seems that Schumacher was arrested as a suspected person for being on the premises of Leman Street police station - like he was an intruder.
              I don't think it had anything to do with the Whitechapel murders.
              Thanks, Lechmere. I wonder how it came to be mentioned in Parliament.

              Regards, Bridewell.
              I won't always agree but I'll try not to be disagreeable.

              Comment


              • If the Polish Jew only developed homicidal tendencies afterwards then you'd think this would put him in the clear. After all, JTR was a pretty homicidal kind of fellow - and I am unanimous in that.

                Comment


                • Simon,
                  Isn't the person spoken about Chapman by the unknown detective? Married, in business, respected, but a beast? He was hung in 1903, but still off the streets by 1905. Still have a vote for Wensley, (ha,ha)but that is the one Abberline favored isn't it?
                  I confess that altruistic and cynically selfish talk seem to me about equally unreal. With all humility, I think 'whatsoever thy hand findeth to do, do it with thy might,' infinitely more important than the vain attempt to love one's neighbour as one's self. If you want to hit a bird on the wing you must have all your will in focus, you must not be thinking about yourself, and equally, you must not be thinking about your neighbour; you must be living with your eye on that bird. Every achievement is a bird on the wing.
                  Oliver Wendell Holmes

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Chris View Post
                    Swanson doesn't say anything about circumstances at all. That's the point I'm making. The whole business about "one circumstance alone" is coming from you, not Swanson.
                    Wouldn't it have been simpler to just agree with what I wrote earlier?
                    Quote:
                    As Swanson makes no mention of anything else but this eyewitness testimony then we cannot claim there were any other circumstances which connected Kosminski to a murder, before the date of the ID.

                    Macnaghten introduced the suggestion of many circs, but Swanson only talks about this one witness, who's evidence cannot be anything else but circumstantial, as we tend to agree that no-one ever saw the murderer caught in the act.
                    Ergo, Swanson only introduced one circumstantial argument against the suspect.

                    [Note: with reference to the Macnaghten Memoranda, who determined 'circs' to mean circumstances as opposed to circulars?
                    If circulars, ie police notices concerning specific suspects, this could be more condemning to Kosminski and, might suggest the police were keeping an eye on him 'before' the ID, while he was loose on the streets.
                    Are we sure 'circs' meant circumstances?]

                    Regards, Jon S.
                    Regards, Jon S.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Wickerman View Post
                      Wouldn't it have been simpler to just agree with what I wrote earlier?
                      Quote:
                      As Swanson makes no mention of anything else but this eyewitness testimony then we cannot claim there were any other circumstances which connected Kosminski to a murder, before the date of the ID.
                      Certainly it would have been simpler. But as what you wrote was so misleading, it would hardly have been helpful to anyone.

                      Swanson wrote nothing about the suspect being convicted on "one circumstance alone". Let's discuss what he actually wrote, rather than putting words into his mouth.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Wickerman View Post
                        Are we sure 'circs' meant circumstances?
                        I can speak only for myself, but yes.

                        Comment


                        • Mac

                          Hello Robert.

                          "If the Polish Jew only developed homicidal tendencies afterwards then you'd think this would put him in the clear. After all, JTR was a pretty homicidal kind of fellow - and I am unanimous in that."

                          Actually, I believe it was MAC who put him in the clear when he exonerated him.

                          Cheers.
                          LC

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Chris View Post
                            I can speak only for myself, but yes.
                            I thought it worth asking because many years ago, maybe ten or more, I'm pretty sure Stewart used the word circulars when we talked about this line in the Memorandum.

                            Circulars is more police terminology and officers might recognize the abbreviation 'circs' as a term often used in reports, so I wondered if this interpretation (circumstances) was the result of a consensus or just an alternate interpretation.

                            Regards, Jon S.
                            Regards, Jon S.

                            Comment


                            • Are we sure 'circs' meant circumstances?
                              It meant "circumcisions", Jon.

                              Further evidence of a police suspicion towards the Jewish community.

                              Comment


                              • "...many years indulgence in solitary vices...there were many circumlocutions connected with this man..."

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X