Kosminski and Victim DNA Match on Shawl

[dropzone]

That was the picture I always had as well, but it's a little more complicated than that isn't it? Do we know he masturbated in public? Or did he just get busted by his sister or brother-in-law a couple of times? And even the eating from the gutter -- did he do this all the time? It makes it sound like he was drooling idiot crawling around in the gutter all time, but we don't know do we? Was it an isolated thing during one of his spells? Apparently he believed he was being poisoned so this is more like a tin foil hat paranoia thing that made him go dumpster-diving it sounds like. Like drinking out of the bird bath because you think the tap water is poisoned with fluoride.

I'm not saying I'm convinced that Kos is the man, because I'm certainly not. But I do think that many people, myself included, have often overlooked him due to this exaggerated picture of his mental problems and I think Rob has done a great job of demonstrating that. He deserves more consideration than he often gets.

I haven't read Rob outside this thread, but you make good points.

[Theagenes]

there are a lot more reasons why people say it "never existed"

I was admittedly being a little snarky for fun, but what would the other reasons be? It doesn't appear in the drawing (of course neither do many of her other clothes). A Sotheby's person or perhaps someone at the V. & A. Museum declared it to be an Edwardian table runner after looking at a photo, or least someone told told that to someone at some point. It's a little unclear. There's lots of in, lot's of outs, lots of what-have-yous.
Did I forget anything?

Joking aside, that lack of it appearing on the list is the biggest problem provenience-wise, but it's hardly a deal-breaker that trumps the DNA, should it hold up as some people are trying to pretend.

[GUT]

No it doesn't. Just makes him the most likely suspect by far.

Long way from Solved, if having sex with a prossie makes him our best suspect, it just shows how weak it all is. IMHO.

[christoper]

What the police (or Anderson) "knew" is not really the issue. Kozminski was not charged with a crime. Legally speaking he was innocent, and would have been treated like any other inmate. If the police went to extraordinary (and extralegal) measures to have Kozminski "taken care of" somehow, I certainly do not know. But as I have written before, IF they did, it certainly would have been kept very quiet.

Keep in mind also, that the majority of Kozminski's asylum records are missing, probably destroyed or discarded. We have his Colney Hatch entries, then a 16 year gap where we know nothing.

RH

As I understand it, libel laws would have prevented them from saying "this is JtR" or even "he is suspected of...". Probably the best the police could do is say--'Keep an eye on this one--and inform us if he is ever released" (and who knows if the institution would follow through..)

[mickreed]

He was listed as "Not Dangerous" on a "Statement of Particulars" at the time of his entry to Colney Hatch. This was a form, and the question was probably asked of whoever brought him there, which means, in all likelihood his brother Woolf. In other words, Woolf was asked "Is your brother dangerous?" to which he replied "No." The asylum, in all likelihood, had no idea he was dangerous. Or no more than other patients they had. Even at Leavesden there were dangerous inmates. And let's not forget that he threatened to attack his own sister with a knife, and threw a chair at an asylum attendant. And that, according to Macnaghten, he had "strong homicidal tendencies." And, as has been pointed out, many serial killers are model inmates, quite, docile etc.

RH

Hi Rob

Well, I've just ordered your book on Amazon. I look forward to its arrival. But in the meantime …

I know that procedures in the late-nineteenth century were not what they are now, but surely you'd expect the police, if they were convinced that their 'Kosminski' was our Aaron Kosminski, to have a word with the authorities. After all, they 'knew' their Kosminski was in an asylum, even if the dates of his incarceration and death don't match Aaron's.

I'll buy the throwing of a chair as a sign of something less than total docility, and the knife incident doesn't sound good, although the cops shot a young kid dead a couple of years back, only about 400 yards from where I'm sitting now, for threatening them with a knife. According to many witnesses (it was in the street on a busy afternoon) the kid wasn't doing any such thing - just holding a bread knife which he'd just picked up in a coffee shop, and looking confused and terrified.

So a threat perceived is not necessarily a threat intended.

I'm agnostic on Kosminski's guilt, or innocence. Look forward to the book.

[Theagenes]

Long way from Solved, if having sex with a prossie makes him our best suspect, it just shows how weak it all is. IMHO.

Being one of the cops leading suspects already and then having sex with one of the victims and having physical evidence that shows certainly would make him the best suspect by far. But yes it also because none of the other suspects have any physical evidence linking them to one of the victims in this way (unless you count Joseph Barnett I guess).

[robhouse]

I do think this is problem with Kosminski, While he may have appeared docile once confined, if the Met police knew he was the killer, you think they would have gotten rid of him quietly. Could he have been lobotomized, chemically or physically?

It seems possible, although there is certainly no evidence that this happened. Lobotomies came later, in the 1930s, but Kozminski could have been kept in a permanent state of sedation with so-called "chemical restraints" such as hyoscyamine or chloral nitrate.

RH

[robhouse]

Hi Rob

Well, I've just ordered your book on Amazon. I look forward to its arrival. But in the meantime …

I know that procedures in the late-nineteenth century were not what they are now, but surely you'd expect the police, if they were convinced that their 'Kosminski' was our Aaron Kosminski, to have a word with the authorities. After all, they 'knew' their Kosminski was in an asylum, even if the dates of his incarceration and death don't match Aaron's.

I'll buy the throwing of a chair as a sign of something less than total docility, and the knife incident doesn't sound good, although the cops shot a young kid dead a couple of years back, only about 400 yards from where I'm sitting now, for threatening them with a knife. According to many witnesses (it was in the street on a busy afternoon) the kid wasn't doing any such thing - just holding a bread knife which he'd just picked up in a coffee shop, and looking confused and terrified.

So a threat perceived is not necessarily a threat intended.

I'm agnostic on Kosminski's guilt, or innocence. Look forward to the book.

I have thought about this a good deal. In my opinion, the police would have gone to extralegal measures to make sure Kozminski was taken care of somehow. But I don't really want to get into the deep end of speculation here.

I take your point about the knife threat, but remember, we don't know anything about this incident... how serious it was. These things can go both ways. The incident may have been very serious, hence his family finally deciding to have him put away. Whether the police were involved is unknown, but I wouldn't be surprised. Also remember, the police certainly knew a lot more about Kozminski than we do now, and Anderson at least was convinced he was the Ripper. Swanson may also have been convinced.

RH

[Tom_Wescott]

I didn't say the provenance of the shawl didn't matter. You do have a habit of twisting my words. I specifically said that IF the DNA findings were solid - meaning that the DNA of Eddowes and Kosminski was on the shawl - then the provenance wouldn't be as important as some people perceive it. We would have to accept that somehow an apron with the DNA on it of a murder victim and a leading suspect in her murder passed into the hands of Amos Simpson's family, despite the fact that there was no immediate acceptable explanation of how that happened.

In other words, you can't dismiss the DNA evidence (assuming it is solid) just because the received provenance is crap.

It's not a habit of mine, Paul. I just dabble in twisting your words! I'm learning much from Chris 'Twisty Magee' Phillips, though.

If the DNA checks out then we need to question who put the DNA on that shawl, because the shawl didn't come from Mitre Square. I would feel a lot better about all this if someone could produce a document from the Simpson family dating back even a century. Forget 1888, give me 1910, 1920. A family photo with the shawl in it, a diary mentioning it, SOMETHING other than a guy showing up post-Diary in the 90s going 'Hey, this shawl was Eddowes''.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Jonathan H]

As I wrote.

This is the only way the "Kosminski" theory can be upheld: by flatly ignoring primary sources, not secondary ones, that contradict it.

[mickreed]

Keep in mind also, that the majority of Kozminski's asylum records are missing, probably destroyed or discarded. We have his Colney Hatch entries, then a 16 year gap where we know nothing.

RH

When I left school in 1959, my first job was with the London County Council which ran Leavesden from 1930. I was in an entirely different department, but part of job involved going to the archives in the basement and bringing up files, some of which contained records going back to the early-nineteenth century at least (long pre-LCC). If I knew then what I know now …

I wonder whether other departments had similar archives, and what happened to them when the LCC became the GLC and then was finally abolished by Thatcher.

No doubt some went to what is now the LMA but did they all?

[Tom_Wescott]

As I wrote.

This is the only way the "Kosminski" theory can be upheld: by flatly ignoring primary sources, not secondary ones, that contradict it.

Koz has never been a convincing suspect, but he is a legit police suspect. Apparently, at one time Edwards thought Deeming (an absolute non-starter) a better suspect than Koz, but failing to get proper Deeming DNA, he moved on and hit pay dirt with Koz. I'll bet mtDNA strands of damn near every suspect could be pulled off the shawl, as many people who've had it and as many drawers, chests, and cars its sat in.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Theagenes]

I have thought about this a good deal. In my opinion, the police would have gone to extralegal measures to make sure Kozminski was taken care of somehow. But I don't really want to get into the deep end of speculation here.

I take your point about the knife threat, but remember, we don't know anything about this incident... how serious it was. These things can go both ways. The incident may have been very serious, hence his family finally deciding to have him put away. Whether the police were involved is unknown, but I wouldn't be surprised. Also remember, the police certainly knew a lot more about Kozminski than we do now, and Anderson at least was convinced he was the Ripper. Swanson may also have been convinced.

RH

And while I don't want to spoil the book, one of the things that was new to me was the possibility that he may have been being watched by the police as early as after the MK murder and that certain members of his family might have even been helping them keep tabs on him. I found that very interesting and compelling. It doesn't make him guilty, but it might mean that he was a stronger person of interest at the time than previously acknowledged and not just a wishful-thinking footnote in Anderson's memoirs years after the fact.

[robhouse]

When I left school in 1959, my first job was with the London County Council which ran Leavesden from 1930. I was in an entirely different department, but part of job involved going to the archives in the basement and bringing up files, some of which contained records going back to the early-nineteenth century at least (long pre-LCC). If I knew then what I know now …

I wonder whether other departments had similar archives, and what happened to them when the LCC became the GLC and then was finally abolished by Thatcher.

No doubt some went to what is now the LMA but did they all?

Very interesting. The Leavesden files may well have existed then. I doubt they do now. They certainly did not all go to the LMA. In fact there are some that still exist in a storage facility in London run by NHS, and it is uncertain what will happen to these files. They may actually be destroyed. But they do not (apparently) include Aaron's Leavesden files. Well, there are a couple files that mention his name... the Leavesden Death Register and the Creed Register. But the main patient records are gone... as far as I know. It is difficult for me to research this stuff being in the US.

RH

[Theagenes]

It's not a habit of mine, Paul. I just dabble in twisting your words! I'm learning much from Chris 'Twisty Magee' Phillips, though.

If the DNA checks out then we need to question who put the DNA on that shawl, because the shawl didn't come from Mitre Square. I would feel a lot better about all this if someone could produce a document from the Simpson family dating back even a century. Forget 1888, give me 1910, 1920. A family photo with the shawl in it, a diary mentioning it, SOMETHING other than a guy showing up post-Diary in the 90s going 'Hey, this shawl was Eddowes''.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

Well, there is the 1892 magazine article about the charwoman shopping around the shawl of one of the victims trying to get a collector of Ripper memorabilia to buy it. It's pretty ephemeral and the victim isn't named nor is there is there anything to connect it to the Simpson family, but it does suggest at least there was a purported victim's shawl that was kept as a souvenir and making the rounds. And more generally the article itself shows that there was an active collector's market for Ripperiana in the years after the murder. I still think there must be other items tucked away in private collections that could have DNA on them.

Here is the thread where it's discussed:

http://forum.casebook.org/showthread.php?t=5947