Could the Police Really Have Kept Kosminski's Incarceration a Secret?

[Sally]

Sally
When I checked Flemmings asylum records I was struck by how many other patients were released back into the community. I didn't keep notes however.

Ta Ed - that's interesting to know. I shall bear that in mind. In the case of this person, I wonder if it might have been in his interests to stay where he was.

But I digress.

Thanks for getting back to me.

[Lechmere]

Sally
When I checked Flemmings asylum records I was struck by how many other patients were released back into the community. I didn't keep notes however.

Abby
I don't think its really very clear when the supposed ID of Kosminski took place - i.e. before or after his admittance to the asylum. And there is absolutely no evidence to suggest he was under any sort of investigation at the time of the Double Event or at all during the period the actual murders were committed.

[GUT]

G'day Mr Lucky

It's really more to do with 'moral understanding' rather than any overt legal understanding.

Sorry if my original post was unclear but yes it is the inability to morally understand the illegality of your actions.

I was involved in a case where the killer dd some horrendous things and a plea of insanity was looking good till we found that she had taken steps to hide certain things and that was enough to show that she knew what she had done was illegal.

[Mr Lucky]

Hi GUT

The legal test for insanity being that they not be able to tell the illegal nature of their actions.

I know what you're getting at, but ignorance of the law is no defence! It's really more to do with 'moral understanding' rather than any overt legal understanding. Strangely, before some one tried to assassinate George III and parliament changed the law and introduce the notion of detained at his Majesty's pleasure, an insanity verdict was equivalent to an acquittal, as it amounted to a failure to establish 'mens rea' or guilty intent.

Later on in the 1840's the M'naghten rules were formed;-

"at the time of the committing of the act, the party accused was labouring under such a defect of reason, from a disease of the mind, as not to know the nature and quality of the act he was doing; or, if he did know it, that he did not know he was doing what was wrong." R v. M'Naghten, 1843

[Abby Normal]

G'day Sally



If a person is found not guilty by reason of insanity, and later found to be sane, they were still held at Her Majesty's pleasure, which in effect meant they were only released when the Home Office [I think it is the Home Office but may be wrong] says so, usually that was never. If they were found to be recovered and released they could not be tried again.

On the other hand if they were in an asylum and thus not tried it may be possible to try them later, however if they were insane [insanity being a legal term not a medical one] at the time of the offense they could not be convicted no matter what their later condition.

The legal test for insanity being that they not be able to tell the illegal nature of their actions.

Hi gut
Thanks.
As I mentioned before, he had not been committed to the asylum yet at the time of the ID so they could have charged him if they really thought they had their man.

And besides, he was being investigated for the murder of eddowes which was in 1888, several years before he was even sent to the workhouse so the police prosector could argue he was not yet insane at the time of the murder, let alone at the time of the ID.

The police did not move forward because they had nothing on him, but a failed ID attempt , not because he was crazy.

[GUT]

G'day Sally

Presumably once he was committed, it would've been up to medical staff to decide on whether he was sane or not.

Presumably a person found insane who was also a convicted criminal at the time would have been released into police custody if they were later deemed sane?

If a person is found not guilty by reason of insanity, and later found to be sane, they were still held at Her Majesty's pleasure, which in effect meant they were only released when the Home Office [I think it is the Home Office but may be wrong] says so, usually that was never. If they were found to be recovered and released they could not be tried again.

On the other hand if they were in an asylum and thus not tried it may be possible to try them later, however if they were insane [insanity being a legal term not a medical one] at the time of the offense they could not be convicted no matter what their later condition.

The legal test for insanity being that they not be able to tell the illegal nature of their actions.

[Abby Normal]

Presumably once he was committed, it would've been up to medical staff to decide on whether he was sane or not.

Presumably a person found insane who was also a convicted criminal at the time would have been released into police custody if they were later deemed sane?

Hi Sally
Thanks! I Beleive at the time of the ID he had not been sent to the asylum yet, he was still at the workhouse or had been released from the workhouse.

[Sally]

It's not up to the police to decide whether someone is insane. It's up to the courts.

Presumably once he was committed, it would've been up to medical staff to decide on whether he was sane or not.

Presumably a person found insane who was also a convicted criminal at the time would have been released into police custody if they were later deemed sane?

[GUT]

G'day Abby

It's not up to the police to decide whether someone is insane. It's up to the courts. If the police thought they had a viable ripper suspect they would have arrested, charged and gone to trial and let the courts decide. Just like today.

I've never bought the notion that the police would not have followed through because they thought ah what the heck, he's crazy, can't do a thing about it, screw it. Nonsense.

One word

Exactly!

[Abby Normal]

It's not up to the police to decide whether someone is insane. It's up to the courts. If the police thought they had a viable ripper suspect they would have arrested, charged and gone to trial and let the courts decide. Just like today.

I've never bought the notion that the police would not have followed through because they thought ah what the heck, he's crazy, can't do a thing about it, screw it. Nonsense.

People get out of asylums, released, escape etc. they would have done everything in there power to put him away. And take credit. And least of all lose track of him.

Koz was just another suspect that went nowhere, that a naturally boastful man, tried to take claim for many years later.

[GUT]

G'day Sally

I'm interested in your contention that lunatics were often released back into the community - have you examples of this happening?

I only ask because I've been looking at somebody committed to Colney Hatch who was there for the remainder of his life - over 20 years [which come to think of it probably seemed like a long old time to him]. It's difficult to say from his case notes why he was retained for so long - he doesn't seem to have been that crazy as far as I can see and was no danger to the public.

I'm pretty sure it depends how they got there. IE James Kelly would have been sent to Broadmoar [wasn't it] to await Her Majesty's pleasure as he was a convicted criminal. Someone merely sent to an asylum because of being mentally unstable would have the chance of release.

In fact I seem to recall that Aaron himself had been in and out before his final commitment.

[Sally]

I think Erratas suggestion of events is most likely to be near to the truth

Incidentally lunatics did get better and were often released back into the community. That could have happened to Kosminski. So he wasn’t put in a place he couldn’t get out of.
And of course Kosminski did live on for quite a long time in the asylum (for you Sally).

Ay Ay Ed! How's the book coming along?

Time is relative - is 20 years a long time? I'd forgotten that he lived for so long, actually - think I was mixing his longevity up with somebody else's there.

I'm interested in your contention that lunatics were often released back into the community - have you examples of this happening?

I only ask because I've been looking at somebody committed to Colney Hatch who was there for the remainder of his life - over 20 years [which come to think of it probably seemed like a long old time to him]. It's difficult to say from his case notes why he was retained for so long - he doesn't seem to have been that crazy as far as I can see and was no danger to the public.

Examples gratefully received.

[GUT]

G'day Mike

Gut, yet it appears part of the reason his sentence was commuted, as I said, was because of 1883 act combined with the petition for clemency. The fact is, Kosminski could have been tried, and if found insane, sentenced to life.

Mike

I thought that the only sentence if found insane was to be held at Her [or His] Majesty's pleasure.

Which in most cases amounted to life anyway and the Monarch seems not to have thought about them again.

[Lechmere]

I think Erratas suggestion of events is most likely to be near to the truth

Incidentally lunatics did get better and were often released back into the community. That could have happened to Kosminski. So he wasn’t put in a place he couldn’t get out of.
And of course Kosminski did live on for quite a long time in the asylum (for you Sally).

[lynn cates]

life

Hello Sally.

"the expectation by family and police officials may have been that he wouldn't live for long anyway - which proved to be the case."

Did he not live on for many years?

Cheers.
LC