Continuation of “Possibility for the Seaside Home”

[Elamarna]

I don't understand what you're driving at.

Maybe you have misunderstood what I wrote.

My point was simply that if Swanson knew about an identification and wrote down what he knew, why couldn't Warren do the same?

I'm not talking about any particular time limit.

Ok, Swanson was apparently writing after the identification took place.

For Warren to have known of such it would have to have occurred before he resigned.

Few have suggested that was the case.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

Your research apoears to be limited, much seems to be based on very old desertations on this site.

You have not heard of Messirah, and it's possible significance, thats fine, look it up.

Are you aware that Messirah was very actively practiced amongst new arrivals from the east.

(EL AMARNA to me, 10-31-2022, 07:40 PM, # 70)


I'm sorry, but I don't think I have heard of Messirah.

(My reply to EL AMARNA, 11-01-2022, 12:01 AM, # 78)


You have not heard of Messirah, and it's possible significance, thats fine, look it up.

(EL AMARNA to me, 11-01-2022, 05:47 AM, # 92)



I did look it up but couldn't find it.

if you want someone to look something up, then you really have to spell the name of the subject you want him to look up correctly!

I finally found it a few minutes ago.

It is Mesirah, not Messirah.

Although the word Messiah is an English version of the Hebrew word, in truth there is no such thing as a double 's' in the Hebrew language.

[Elamarna]

Are you aware that Messirah was very actively practiced amongst new arrivals from the east.

(EL AMARNA to me, 10-31-2022, 07:40 PM, # 70)


I'm sorry, but I don't think I have heard of Messirah.

(My reply to EL AMARNA, 11-01-2022, 12:01 AM, # 78)


You have not heard of Messirah, and it's possible significance, thats fine, look it up.

(EL AMARNA to me, 11-01-2022, 05:47 AM, # 92)



I did look it up but couldn't find it.

if you want someone to look something up, then you really have to spell the name of the subject you want him to look up correctly!

I finally found it a few minutes ago.

It is Mesirah, not Messirah.

Although the word Messiah is an English version of the Hebrew word, in truth there is no such thing as a double 's' in the Hebrew language.

A typo, probably autocorrect on the phone.
I didn't notice the misspelling.

The user name is contracted, it's Elamarna, not EL Amarna, minor point but might throw up odd results in a search.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

A typo, probably autocorrect on the phone.
I didn't notice the misspelling.

The user name is contracted, it's Elamarna, not EL Amarna, minor point but might throw up odd results in a search.

I see.

You think your auto-correct anticipated the word 'Messiah'?

I wrote El Amarna, without checking your screen name first, because El (more correctly Al) is the definite article in Arabic.

But I shall remember the distinction.

[Elamarna]

I see.

You think your auto-correct anticipated the word 'Messiah'?

I wrote El Amarna, without checking your screen name first, because El (more correctly Al) is the definite article in Arabic.

But I shall remember the distinction.

The auto correct on my phone throws up some very odd spellings for words it appears not to know.

It's spelt correctly on the slide show in the podcasts section which was done on the laptop over a year ago.

[Pontius2000]

It took me about 30 seconds to find the phenomenon of mesirah even with the extra s. If it took you over a week, I’d have to guess you weren’t looking very hard.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

It took me about 30 seconds to find the phenomenon of mesirah even with the extra s. If it took you over a week, I’d have to guess you weren’t looking very hard.

You can put on my end-of-term report: 'Needs to try harder'.

[Pontius2000]

You can put on my end-of-term report: 'Needs to try harder'.

Goes without saying. Does the term end soon?

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

Goes without saying. Does the term end soon?

I think that's up to the headmaster.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

There is a plethora of doubt about the marginalia as to what is set out in the marginalia, the history of how it came to be offered to the press, and how as you say the only two who knew about it are Anderson and Swanson. All of this and much more is set out in a lengthy chapter in my book "Jack the Ripper-The real Truth

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

Am I right that the original version of Anderson's writing about the alleged suspect was somewhat different from the final version?

I quote:


I will only add that when the individual whom we suspected was caged in an asylum, the only person who had ever had a good view of the murderer at once identified him, but when he learned that the suspect was a fellow-Jew he declined to swear to him.


(Blackwood’s Magazine, Part VI, March 1910)



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.


(The Lighter Side of My Official Life, Chapter IX, 1910)


It is quite clear from the original version that Anderson has the suspect in a mental asylum at the time of his identification.
That seems to suggest that the identification itself took place in a mental asylum.
There is of course no mention of a Seaside Home.

Either Anderson got it right and Swanson imagined a Seaside Home, or Swanson knew more about the case than Anderson did, which would be amazing.

If the identification actually took place, as so many people seem to believe, why is it that the only two people who have ever mentioned it said it happened in different places?

[The Baron]

"The man in appearance strongly resembled the individual seen by the City PC near Mitre Square"


However Kosminski looked like, he was identified, and he strongly resembled the individual seen by the City PC.


TB

[Elamarna]

Am I right that the original version of Anderson's writing about the alleged suspect was somewhat different from the final version?

I quote:


I will only add that when the individual whom we suspected was caged in an asylum, the only person who had ever had a good view of the murderer at once identified him, but when he learned that the suspect was a fellow-Jew he declined to swear to him.


(Blackwood’s Magazine, Part VI, March 1910)



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.


(The Lighter Side of My Official Life, Chapter IX, 1910)


It is quite clear from the original version that Anderson has the suspect in a mental asylum at the time of his identification.
That seems to suggest that the identification itself took place in a mental asylum.

That's one interpretation of the original, but it's just that ONE INTERPRETATION.

There is of course no mention of a Seaside Home.

Either Anderson got it right and Swanson imagined a Seaside Home, or Swanson knew more about the case than Anderson did, which would be amazing.

Why do you find that Amazing ?
Anderson was the head of CID , responsible for many Cases.

Swanson was specifically appointed by the then commissioner Warren to coordinate and oversee the case.
He had daily meetings with the city police.
He received all the reports from the Met police on the ground
He stayed with the case for its duration. Making the entries on the limited records that survive.

I strongly suspect that Swanson knew far more about than anyone else.

If the identification actually took place, as so many people seem to believe, why is it that the only two people who have ever mentioned it said it happened in different places?

Not that's just your interpretation.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

If the identification actually took place, as so many people seem to believe, why is it that the only two people who have ever mentioned it said it happened in different places?

Not that's just your interpretation.


You think that it is possible that Anderson didn't know that the identification took place at the Seaside Home?

He published two versions, but still couldn't get it right?

He couldn't have checked with Swanson first?

[Elamarna]

If the identification actually took place, as so many people seem to believe, why is it that the only two people who have ever mentioned it said it happened in different places?

Not that's just your interpretation.


You think that it is possible that Anderson didn't know that the identification took place at the Seaside Home?

He published two versions, but still couldn't get it right?

He couldn't have checked with Swanson first?

Pardon?

It's my contention that in neither accounts does Anderson say where the identification took place. He gives no information in the public domain with regards to the location or the name of the suspect.

Its your interpretation of Blackwoods that it took place in an asylum, as I said your interpretation.

Many would not agree with that interpretation .

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

In his first version, Anderson says that the suspect was already in an asylum at the time that the identification took place.

That means either that the identification took place in the asylum or that the suspect was taken somewhere else for the purpose of being identified.

The way Anderson puts it, it looks as though the identification took place in the asylum, although he doesn't say so explicitly.

When the reader says so, you say it's only his interpretation.

He misread what Anderson wrote!

Didn't Anderson realise that the way he worded it, it would look as though he was implying that the identification took place in the asylum?

What actually stopped him from saying where the identification took place?

He couldn't check with Swanson before committing pen to paper?