Continuation of “Possibility for the Seaside Home”

[Elamarna]

I have just finished listening to it.

Although the narrator tends to the view that, because he is reported to have cooperated with the police in later identification attempts, Lawende would not have refused to testify against a Jewish suspect, he does not mention the fact that he testified against a Jewish suspect in 1876.

I'm sure that that is at least the third time that I've mentioned this on this forum, so I don't know whether it yet qualifies to be an obsession, but I suggest that it should be enough to rule out Lawende.

As for Jacob Levy, I believe he was 5 foot 3 inches tall, whereas Lawende's suspect was 5 ft 7 to 5 ft 8 ins tall.

In my opinion, that discussion reinforces my submission that there really is no reason to suppose that the Anderson-Swanson story is true.

The Narrator is myself.
That I didn't mention the earlier case is an omission on my part. But if I had included it, it would simply further support the conclusion I suggest.
I don't consider Lawende is the witness, he doesn't actually make the top 3 does he?

That you wish to believe Anderson and Swanson lied or invented the account is your choice and your right.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

Is that a supposition or a fact?

And what exactly makes it nonsensical?

The only part you quoted was as follows:

Someone else made a similar point - although more politely than you - that he had met two European Jews after the Second World War and they were not recognisably Jewish.

What was wrong with what I wrote?

[DJA]

My post was ......

Absolute nonsense.

Could you please clarify whether you are saying that your own post was absolute nonsense or that I have said absolute nonsense?

The latter.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

You talked and talked and didn't give any answer to my two questions, exactly as I've expected.

-You were not able to give specific details how a young jew in his 20s looks like, instead you posted some pic of newly arrived men, being provided with a frugal meal, as if Kosminski in 1888 must have looked someting like that, a very poor quality pic that gives no details what so ever.

-And you failed to give the slightest of info how a Sailor must have looked like, Do you know why Lawende said "has the apearence of a sailor" ? Why didn't he say he IS a sailor? You know why? Because he was more clever than some biased and fixed new age 'researchers' and gave only his impression which could have been right or wrong



Do those people look jewish to you?
-from the Dailymail



TB

You seem to be wanting to pick a fight with me.

Perhaps you would be so good as to explain why.

As for the two photos which you have attached, what exactly is your point?

Are you saying that the people in the photographs were Jewish but don't look Jewish?

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

My post was ......

Absolute nonsense.

I grew up with post WW2 Jewish refugees,two whom rented rooms in our home.

One son,Thomas, was my best friend.

Only one,Mr Distelman,would meet your criteria.Lovely man who rode a motor bike.


My name is Dave. You cannot reach me through Debs email account


In fact my family resided diagonally opposite an enormous mansion owned and run by Jews for refugee Jews of WW2.

Both my late mother and I have been employed by Jews.

Most would have no idea any were Jews,unless they told you.
That included Mr Distelman.

My post was ......

Absolute nonsense.

Could you please clarify whether you are saying that your own post was absolute nonsense or that I have said absolute nonsense?

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

Here you are

https://www.casebook.org/podcast/listen.html?id=311

Its based on accepting the Identification took place, and then who fits the criteria.

Jewish, what they saw would convict and a fes MORE.

I was surprised how low Lawende come out if I am honest.

But it's simple my opinion, not fact

Steve

I have just finished listening to it.

Although the narrator tends to the view that, because he is reported to have cooperated with the police in later identification attempts, Lawende would not have refused to testify against a Jewish suspect, he does not mention the fact that he testified against a Jewish suspect in 1876.

I'm sure that that is at least the third time that I've mentioned this on this forum, so I don't know whether it yet qualifies to be an obsession, but I suggest that it should be enough to rule out Lawende.

As for Jacob Levy, I believe he was 5 foot 3 inches tall, whereas Lawende's suspect was 5 ft 7 to 5 ft 8 ins tall.

In my opinion, that discussion reinforces my submission that there really is no reason to suppose that the Anderson-Swanson story is true.

[DJA]

Couple more,the first is from the 1950s.

[DJA]

Thanks.

If I can work out how to do that, I will in future.

No sweat.

The drawing was done in 1891.

The 'photo is from 1910.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

A better view of PI's photos .....

Thanks.

If I can work out how to do that, I will in future.

[DJA]

A better view of PI's photos .....

[The Baron]

You talked and talked and didn't give any answer to my two questions, exactly as I've expected.

-You were not able to give specific details how a young jew in his 20s looks like, instead you posted some pic of newly arrived men, being provided with a frugal meal, as if Kosminski in 1888 must have looked someting like that, a very poor quality pic that gives no details what so ever.

-And you failed to give the slightest of info how a Sailor must have looked like, Do you know why Lawende said "has the apearence of a sailor" ? Why didn't he say he IS a sailor? You know why? Because he was more clever than some biased and fixed new age 'researchers' and gave only his impression which could have been right or wrong



Do those people look jewish to you?
-from the Dailymail



TB

[Trevor Marriott]

Thanks for the quote, it's a different page on kindle.

As I suspected it's the Grainger case Abby

It's simply a press report, so i suspect we will disagree on its significance.

It's dated 7th may 1895.
One issue is that is after Its being hinted that the killer is in an asylum and died.
Such seems to therefore suggest that while Lawende may have been used for some IDs he was not THE Witness.

Its been debated a number of times here and elsewhere, there is no consensus that it puts the matter to bed. For some it does i accept, for many it does not.



Steve

I don't see how Lawende could have been the witness, if we are to believe Swanson the Met organised the parade but Lawende was a City witness I see no reason why the Met would have undertaken the trouble to organise this parade when they would stand to gain nothing from it, and besides Kosminski was living within the Met district so if he had been regarded as a viable suspect the Met would have taken the lead, another reason to not believe in the content of the marginalia.

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Elamarna]

Hi El
Thanks! Of course its not established fact, but for myself Im satisfied that lawende was the seaside witness. The police seemed to think him reliable-He was at the inquest, could speak English and was used at another ID. None of which can be said of schwartz. The Pall mall snippet seals it for me.

However, I have not heard your podcast-can you point me in the right direction? Better yet-is there a transcript of the podcast so I can read?
I keep an open mind and have been swayed in the past.

Thanks El!

Here you are

https://www.casebook.org/podcast/listen.html?id=311

Its based on accepting the Identification took place, and then who fits the criteria.

Jewish, what they saw would convict and a fes MORE.

I was surprised how low Lawende come out if I am honest.

But it's simple my opinion, not fact

Steve

[Kattrup]

I never said that everyone has to agree with me.

My contention - that Inspector Abberline was right and the use of the word 'Lipski' was anti-Jewish and that it was directed at Schwarz - is credible.

But suggesting - as one member did - that a religious Jew might have shouted a well-known anti-Semitic insult at a fellow-Jew is not credible.

Excellent! Your contention is not a fact, but it is indeed credible.

Just continue like that and there’s no problem

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

So answer these two questions:

-How a young jew in his 20s in 1888 looks like

-And how a sailor looks like

I want specific details that makes it impossible for anyone to mistake


TB

Newly-arrived men are provided with a frugal meal at the Poor Jew’s Temporary Shelter in around 1885. It began in Church Lane, Whitechapel. Sir Samuel Montagu and others took it over and provided a building in Leman Street to give a home for new arrivals for up to two weeks. It eventually sheltered up to 4,000 immigrants each year.







Jewish tailoring workshop in London’s East End, circa 1910




I'm still looking for photos from that place and period.


Lawende was considered by the police in 1888 to be a reliable witness and, as I already mentioned, he gave evidence for the prosecution in the trial of a fellow Jew for murder in 1876.

Somehow, he's considered to be a plausible candidate for the man who supposedly made the identification at the seaside home, even though it is claimed that he refused to testify against a fellow Jew - which is not a credible proposition.

But somehow, when I suggest that he actually knew what he was talking about when he said that the man had the appearance of a sailor, and that it is therefore reasonable to think that he was a sailor, my remarks are shot down.

I have provided a photograph of Jewish tailors and I'm sure there are plenty more to be found, but you won't find pictures of Jewish sailors, and I doubt very much that you will find a single picture of a single Jewish sailor.

What's happening on this forum is that perfectly reasonable inferences from the evidence made by me are being questioned and even derided, but extremely fanciful and even incredible suggestions attract no criticism whatsoever or even scepticism except from me!

Let us at least credit Lawende with knowing how sailors dressed.

He didn't say that the man had a Jewish appearance.

He didn't say that he was wearing any distinctive Jewish clothing.

It is being suggested by an author here that the man seen by Lawende may have been wearing a Jewish skull cap underneath his cap and Jewish fringes, hidden from view (naturally) when in London but prominently displayed when he knows that the police are trying to get him identified as an infamous murderer.

Then we are told that it's possible that at a police identification he spoke Yiddish; maybe he could have made it easier for everyone by speaking Yiddish to Lawende as he went past!