Is Kosminski still the best suspect we have?

[Trevor Marriott]

questione

Again you put complete faith in a story from a dodgy lawyer talking to a compulsive liar and yet you deride a man (MacNaghten) who appeared to have been highly regarded by all. Not biased at all re you Trevor.

How was his Lawyer dodgy? he was no more dodgy than MM and Anderson who should have all been singing from the same song sheet but we know that wasnt the case, apart from Swanson they were both full of bull and bluster trying to make names for themselves. and in Swansons case someobe trying to make a name for him

Ask yourself why would his lawyer make up this story what could he possibly gain from it? 8 years after the WM murders

He would have risked being questioned about the research he had conducted into the movements of Feigenbaum and risked someone checking them and proving him to be lying.

If you say he was dodgy, why out of all the unsolved murders in and The UK and The US did he pick the WM to question Feigenbaum about,

To find out more about Feigenbaum you really should spend some of you pocket money and buy a copy of my book and read the lengthy chapter on Feigenbaum follow the link

http://www.trevormarriott.co.uk/jack-ripper-real-truth/

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Scott Nelson]

Are you taking Sagar's recollections of surveillance of an unnamed suspect as evidence Kozminski was watched?

No, I wasn't referring to Sagar or Butchers Row. I was simply trying to shoehorn the Swanson Marginalia with Aaron Kosminski's workhouse and asylum confinement record.

[Trevor Marriott]

Hold it one minute, your comparison is way off mark.
Feigenbaum was not a murderer in 1888, just like Druitt.

If he was responsible for one some or all of the WM he was, and as a merchant seaman who knows where he might have killed. by his own admission he suffered from a malady that every so often manifested itself and made him want to kill women

You need to know what Feiganbaum was doing in 1888 to compare him with Druitt.

He was working as a merchant seaman for the Nordeutscher Line and had been so for many years, The same Merchant Line that had ships docked in London on the dates of the WM,

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Trevor Marriott]

Can you resist the urge to overkill your accusations?
Druitt is not a Prime Suspect, he is a potential suspect.
Kozminski is also not a Prime Suspect, he is the same - a potential suspect.
For the sake of Rob H.'s book, Kozminski was apparently Anderson's Prime Suspect, but not Scotland Yard's Prime Suspect. I take issue with that.

They are not potential suspects they are either persons of interest, suspects, or prime suspects.

How can you even start to catergorize Aaron Kosminski when we dont even know the real identity of the Kosminski named in the MM and the Marginalia

How come Feiganbaum isn't listed by anyone in official documents?

Because Feigenbaum was as far as we know not reported to the British Police as a suspect because of legal client confidentiality that Lawton was under and after his execution the same situation would have prevailed as did with Druitt, although as stated there was more circumstantial evidence against Feigenbaum than Druitt.

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Wickerman]

No it was not a typo, you said exactly this:


Yet the Seaside Home at Hove only opened the next year in March 1890.
So, is this another case of faulty recollection by Swanson?


You don't want to acknowledge your error I don't care, no point arguing with you.

Swanson recollection was better than yours.



The Baron

You just don't read posts too well do you.

Feiganbaum?

[Wickerman]

I think in the case of Aaron Kosminski, he was identified and watched at his brother's house before being taken to the workhouse for a second time on February 4, 1891.

Scott.
Are you taking Sagar's recollections of surveillance of an unnamed suspect as evidence Kozminski was watched?

This was also Sugden's conclusion as well. Thus Swanson's marginalia note that in "a very short time" after being watched, he was sent back to the workhouse. So the identification proceeding and surveillance occurred a few days prior to February 4th.

Isn't this an assumption?
We don't know who Sagar was watching, or if it was Kozminski, why he would be anywhere near Butchers Row.

[The Baron]

Are you serious?
You've been waiting four days for me to confirm your reply?
Of course the year was wrong, it was a typo. The subsequent point about Swanson is then negated.
That was my post #928, in your reply #929 I see you completely missed it, perhaps you are not reading the posts?

Likewise with post #936, if you had read that one you would have known the year was a simple typo. In that post I had "1890" as the year Kozminski first came to Mile End Workhouse.



You knew it was a typo.

So, lets get back to my point.
What was Feiganbaum doing in 1888?
What does his criminal record say his status was?

I can wait four days if you prefer.

No it was not a typo, you said exactly this:


Yet the Seaside Home at Hove only opened the next year in March 1890.
So, is this another case of faulty recollection by Swanson?


You don't want to acknowledge your error I don't care, no point arguing with you.

Swanson recollection was better than yours.



The Baron

[Darryl Kenyon]

Also MM says that Druitt WAS sexually insane. Yet in his auto he describes the term as someone who derives pleasure from killing and uses Dr Cream as an example I believe. He also may mean ultra violence as well as far as I remember. So following on from that he is either saying that Druitt was a killer. Which of course there is no evidence for, unless you believe he meant he was the ripper. But if that is the case the evidence would be cast iron and not a circumstantial theory.
So that leaves us with ultra violence. This is purely conjecture but could that be the serious trouble he got into ? Sado masochistic tendencies towards his pupils. Maybe ?
Regards Darryl

[Wickerman]

How about you acknowledge your error and wrong information first and answer my post #940?!

Are you serious?
You've been waiting four days for me to confirm your reply?
Of course the year was wrong, it was a typo. The subsequent point about Swanson is then negated.
That was my post #928, in your reply #929 I see you completely missed it, perhaps you are not reading the posts?

Likewise with post #936, if you had read that one you would have known the year was a simple typo. In that post I had "1890" as the year Kozminski first came to Mile End Workhouse.

Interesting fact, when admitted for the second time to the Mile End Workhouse in 1891 and certified insane, some notes on the form read:
Age at first attack: 25 years.
Duration of existing attack: 6 months (referring back to July 1890)
Which tells us Kozminski was not suffering this illness in 1888, as the "muzzled dog" incident tends to testify in 1889.

You knew it was a typo.

So, lets get back to my point.
What was Feiganbaum doing in 1888?
What does his criminal record say his status was?

I can wait four days if you prefer.

[Darryl Kenyon]

My problem with Macnaghten and Druitt is a very simple one - said to be a Doctor. By whom ? Somebody who obviously didn't know him personally. So is that who MM got his info off ?
It doesn't exactly fill you with confidence that he investigated Druitt thoroughly
Regards Darryl

[Scott Nelson]

I think in the case of Aaron Kosminski, he was identified and watched at his brother's house before being taken to the workhouse for a second time on February 4, 1891. This was also Sugden's conclusion as well. Thus Swanson's marginalia note that in "a very short time" after being watched, he was sent back to the workhouse. So the identification proceeding and surveillance occurred a few days prior to February 4th.

[Herlock Sholmes]

The gone with the wind classification strikes again!

According to it, any person that can be shown was in London 1888, be it a Queen, a Police officer, a Pope, anyone, is a beter suspect than a convicted murderer whose wherabout during the murders were unknown!

This old classifications and the minds behind it hadn't been updated since the Neanderthal!

Nevertheless it has a historical value, that shows the development of logical thinking!



The Baron

So any murderer, in any country, should be classed as a ripper suspect according to you.? Try thinking. When we were discussing Mackenzie you made a big noise about her being ‘same victimology.’ So why the different rules for Feigenbaum? His victim wasn’t a prostitute. She wasn’t killed in the street. She wasn’t mutilated. She was killed in a house and her son was present. The only similarity was that it was a knife murder. Until it’s PROVEN that he was in England and not 4,500 he’s a complete non-starter and NOT a valid suspect. You bleat and whine about Druitt being a few minutes walk away but you’ll back a suspect that was for all that we know 4,500 miles away.

How the hell have you got the nerve to comment? I raised 11 points which proved in black and white that you are a dishonest poster and you’ve avoided them as you always do when you’ve been caught out.

Everything that you say is white noise.

[Herlock Sholmes]

feigenbaum isnt even a person of interest. he cant even be placed in the country let alone the city. hes nothing-except a suspect in trevors eyes. Druit and koz were at least suspects to the police at the time.

Exactly

[The Baron]

Hold it one minute, your comparison is way off mark.
Feigenbaum was not a murderer in 1888, just like Druitt.

Feiganbaum only 'became' a murderer six years later in 1894.
Comparison's must be on the same level, or they are not comparable.
You need to know what Feiganbaum was doing in 1888 to compare him with Druitt.

How about you acknowledge your error and wrong information first and answer my post #940?!




(( Originally posted by Wickerman View Post
We all know that if we are to align Swanson's claim with the asylum records, the only time the suspect was "returned to his brothers house" was after a 4 day incarceration at the Mile End/Stepney Workhouse- July 12 - 15, 1889.
Yet the Seaside Home at Hove only opened the next year in March 1890.
So, is this another case of faulty recollection by Swanson? ))


And my answer:

Wrong.

Actually it is a case of faulty recollection by yourself.


Kosminski was admitted to Mile End Old Town Workhouse on 12 July 1890, three days later 15 July 1890 he was discharged into the care of his brother[-in-law], Wolf’s care.


12-15 July 1890


The Seaside Home at Hove was already open since March 1890


It helps when you first get your basic information right.



The Baron

[Wickerman]

Absolutely. Feigenbaum is a better suspect than Druitt, there is no comparison.

Feigenbaum is a convicted murderer, and we have the source and information that suggest him as a suspect.

The Baron

Hold it one minute, your comparison is way off mark.
Feigenbaum was not a murderer in 1888, just like Druitt.

Feiganbaum only 'became' a murderer six years later in 1894.
Comparison's must be on the same level, or they are not comparable.
You need to know what Feiganbaum was doing in 1888 to compare him with Druitt.