Continuation of “Possibility for the Seaside Home”

[DJA]

Thanks for the statistics.

Perhaps you could also provide the statistics for the percentage of sailors that have been Jewish, and also the percentage of blond sailors that have been Jewish.

Both the men running for Israeli prime minister are blonde

[Varqm]

Here you again making jumps of logic between two different issues.
And assuming that the suspect was obviously recognisable as being Jewish.

Let's break it down into clear steps.

1. Anderson is talk about the actual identification, when he says the witness identified the suspect immediately.

2. He recognised the suspect when confronted by him at the Identification as the man he had seen in the past committing some act.
We are not told what that act was, but are told it would result in conviction

3. Anderson does not say the witness instantly recognises the suspect as being jewish, at the Identification. That is your interpretation.
It is possible that he did, it's also possible he didn't and it took some minutes.
However, we don't know and to suggest we do or that you can extrapolate one event from the other is again speculation.

4. None of which means that the witness recognised the suspect as jewish when he witnessed the event to start with.

I see little point in this ping pong, we fundamentally disagree not just on the interpretation of evidence, but on how to present an argument.

Do we know if the witness said or spoke to Anderson or whoever that he could identify the suspect but would not testify against him.Or it was just a read by the police,by the witness's reaction.
Remember nobody in the inquests said she/he could identify JTR.Not the Duke street trio or Long,witnesses who saw JTR with the victim closest in time to the murders.Witnesses farther from TOD,only Mary Ann Cox said she could,PC Smith, James Brown could not.Marshall,Gardner, Best not either,I think,and not one is Jewish.

[Elamarna]

Hi Steve,

I often wonder if Aaron may have been committed under the name "Abrahams", that being the name he gave at his dog muzzle court appearance.

Cheers, George

Possible, and I know that's been checked too George, but no results so far.

[GBinOz]

People have looked, Jeff Lahey for one.
So far nothing
Steve

Hi Steve,

I often wonder if Aaron may have been committed under the name "Abrahams", that being the name he gave at his dog muzzle court appearance.

Cheers, George

[Elamarna]

And the witness probably didn't instantly recognise the suspect as being Jewish.

Here is what Robert Anderson claimed:

I will merely add that the only person who had ever had a good view of the murderer unhesitatingly identified the suspect the instant he was confronted with him ; but he refused to give evidence against him.

He was able to identify Kosminski 'instantly' - the very same word you used!

So according to Anderson, the witness was able to recognise Kosminski INSTANTLY, but you doubt that he was able to recognise him INSTANTLY as being Jewish!

How long do you think it took him?

Here you again making jumps of logic between two different issues.
And assuming that the suspect was obviously recognisable as being Jewish.

Let's break it down into clear steps.

1. Anderson is talk about the actual identification, when he says the witness identified the suspect immediately.

2. He recognised the suspect when confronted by him at the Identification as the man he had seen in the past committing some act.
We are not told what that act was, but are told it would result in conviction

3. Anderson does not say the witness instantly recognises the suspect as being jewish, at the Identification. That is your interpretation.
It is possible that he did, it's also possible he didn't and it took some minutes.
However, we don't know and to suggest we do or that you can extrapolate one event from the other is again speculation.

4. None of which means that the witness recognised the suspect as jewish when he witnessed the event to start with.

I see little point in this ping pong, we fundamentally disagree not just on the interpretation of evidence, but on how to present an argument.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

[QUOTE=The Baron;n799014]

Thats not how I understand Anderson, the witness immediately recognised the suspect as the man he saw, not that he was a jew.


TB

I made the point that the story about the alleged witness refusing to testify on the ground that the suspect was Jewish is not credible because if that had been true, he would not have come forward in the first place.

Members retorted that the witness may not have recognised the suspect as being Jewish until he met him at the seaside home.

According to Anderson, the witness recognised the suspect the instant he saw him at the seaside home.

What does that mean?

It means he looked pretty much the same as when he'd seen him before.

If he had looked in any way different, he would have had to take longer to identify him, perhaps many minutes.

So what could have looked different about him?

He couldn't suddenly have started looking Jewish - could he?

[The Baron]

[QUOTE=Elamarna;n799009]

As you know, the story goes that when the witness met Kosminski at a seaside home, he immediately realised that Kosminski was Jewish.

Thats not how I understand Anderson, the witness immediately recognised the suspect as the man he saw, not that he was a jew.


TB

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

And again the man seen by Lawende may not be the suspect.
Lawende may not be the witness.
And the witness probably didn't instantly recognise the suspect as being Jewish.
You call it all hogwash, that's YOUR opinion and Your choice, all people are asking is that you don't present your opinion as the only credible opinion.
As I said going round in circles.

And there I will stop.

And the witness probably didn't instantly recognise the suspect as being Jewish.

Here is what Robert Anderson claimed:

I will merely add that the only person who had ever had a good view of the murderer unhesitatingly identified the suspect the instant he was confronted with him ; but he refused to give evidence against him.

He was able to identify Kosminski 'instantly' - the very same word you used!

So according to Anderson, the witness was able to recognise Kosminski INSTANTLY, but you doubt that he was able to recognise him INSTANTLY as being Jewish!

How long do you think it took him?

[The Baron]

Thanks for the statistics.

Perhaps you could also provide the statistics for the percentage of sailors that have been Jewish, and also the percentage of blond sailors that have been Jewish.

Not now, I am just enjoying throwing one of your 'evidences' out of the window.


TB

[Elamarna]

[QUOTE=PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1;n799005]


So this is the new leaf you've turned over?

Blond (male) or blonde (female), also referred to as fair hair

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blond

The evidence is that the man seen in Church Passage was a blond sailor.



Given we have NO idea of Aaron Kosminski's physical appearance, not even his height. All we have is his weight at death, Such comparisons as you attempt to make are futile.

What you call a futile comparison is a necessary comparison.

There is a remarkable willingness on this forum to attach credence to the story of the unnamed witness who supposedly identified Kosminski as the murderer.

As you know, the story goes that when the witness met Kosminski at a seaside home, he immediately realised that Kosminski was Jewish.

As you know, I don't believe this story at all and it is true I've described it as hogwash, but I can honestly say that it has received a more sympathetic treatment on this forum than my idea that the murderer was a sailor.

The problem is this: if you are going to entertain the idea that the man with fair hair and with the appearance of a sailor was Kosminski, then how can he possibly have been instantly recognised by the mystery witness as someone of obviously Jewish appearance?



Sorry the evidence does not say the man is a blond sailor. That is your interpretation of the statement.
Going round the same point Over and over doesn't change it.

Again the man seen by Lawende may not be the suspect.
Lawende may not be the witness.

And the witness probably didn't instantly recognise the suspect as being Jewish.
You call it all hogwash, that's YOUR opinion and Your choice, all people are asking is that you don't present your opinion as the only credible opinion.

As I said going round in circles.

And there I will stop.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

"From extensive investigations of the color of the hair and eyes of the school-children in Germany, Virchow has shown that the Jews have not maintained their type in as pure a state as has been generally supposed. Of 75,377 Jewish children examined, only 46.83 per cent were brunettes having both dark hair and dark eyes; 11.17 per cent were blonds having light hair and light-colored eyes; and 42 per cent were of the mixed type having either dark hair with fair eyes, or vice versa. In Austria, according to Schimmer, 32 to 47 per cent (according to the province) of the Jewish children are pure brunettes, and 8 to 14 per cent are pure blonds. In Bulgaria, Wateff has found that only 49.57 per cent of Jewish children are brunettes, while 8.71 are blonds and 41.72 are of mixed type; and even in North Africa, where the dark type predominates among the Jews, 76.40 per cent are brunettes, 4.62 per cent are blonds, and 18.98 per cent are of mixed type."

https://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/5944-expression

TB

Thanks for the statistics.

Perhaps you could also provide the statistics for the percentage of sailors that have been Jewish, and also the percentage of blond sailors that have been Jewish.

[The Baron]

"From extensive investigations of the color of the hair and eyes of the school-children in Germany, Virchow has shown that the Jews have not maintained their type in as pure a state as has been generally supposed. Of 75,377 Jewish children examined, only 46.83 per cent were brunettes having both dark hair and dark eyes; 11.17 per cent were blonds having light hair and light-colored eyes; and 42 per cent were of the mixed type having either dark hair with fair eyes, or vice versa. In Austria, according to Schimmer, 32 to 47 per cent (according to the province) of the Jewish children are pure brunettes, and 8 to 14 per cent are pure blonds. In Bulgaria, Wateff has found that only 49.57 per cent of Jewish children are brunettes, while 8.71 are blonds and 41.72 are of mixed type; and even in North Africa, where the dark type predominates among the Jews, 76.40 per cent are brunettes, 4.62 per cent are blonds, and 18.98 per cent are of mixed type."

https://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/5944-expression

TB

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

No you didn't.

He is described as fair haired, that is not blond.
And he was said to look like a sailor.

That does not make him a blond sailor.

It says he may have been, that's the difference.

Given we have NO idea of Aaron Kosminski's physical appearance, not even his height. All we have is his weight at death, Such comparisons as you attempt to make are futile.

Its not nic picking, you are stated that he WAS a blond sailor.

You claimed that he evidently was, that the evidence said it

Problem is, it doesn't

Why do you not see that?

So this is the new leaf you've turned over?

Blond (male) or blonde (female), also referred to as fair hair

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blond

The evidence is that the man seen in Church Passage was a blond sailor.



Given we have NO idea of Aaron Kosminski's physical appearance, not even his height. All we have is his weight at death, Such comparisons as you attempt to make are futile.

What you call a futile comparison is a necessary comparison.

There is a remarkable willingness on this forum to attach credence to the story of the unnamed witness who supposedly identified Kosminski as the murderer.

As you know, the story goes that when the witness met Kosminski at a seaside home, he immediately realised that Kosminski was Jewish.

As you know, I don't believe this story at all and it is true I've described it as hogwash, but I can honestly say that it has received a more sympathetic treatment on this forum than my idea that the murderer was a sailor.

The problem is this: if you are going to entertain the idea that the man with fair hair and with the appearance of a sailor was Kosminski, then how can he possibly have been instantly recognised by the mystery witness as someone of obviously Jewish appearance?

[Elamarna]

it's a reasonable deduction from the evidence that he was a sailor.

And it's a reasonable deduction from the evidence that he had fair hair.

As I explained previously, I had in earlier posts quoted exact words from the description on record.

The reaction was just as critical as yours, even though I didn't use the word 'Nordic'.

Now when I use the word Nordic just once, in order to contrast his appearance with that of Kosminski, who we are being assured must have had a Jewish appearance, people are objecting to the use of the word 'Nordic'.

It was shorthand for someone with fair hair and fair complexion.

I'm amazed at the nit-picking that's going on.

If I said that he looked African I could understand the outrage.

I described him accurately.

No you didn't.

He is described as fair haired, that is not blond.
And he was said to look like a sailor.

That does not make him a blond sailor.

It says he may have been, that's the difference.

Given we have NO idea of Aaron Kosminski's physical appearance, not even his height. All we have is his weight at death, Such comparisons as you attempt to make are futile.

Its not nic picking, you are stated that he WAS a blond sailor.

You claimed that he evidently was, that the evidence said it

Problem is, it doesn't

Why do you not see that?

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

Messages are normally considered on the forum's to mean private messages, not posts on a thread.

I have sent you NO messages

And now I suppose you're going to say you're not being pedantic.