Is Kosminski still the best suspect we have?

[Trevor Marriott]

Your nonsense isn’t worthy of comment. Same old fingers-in-your-ears parroting of the same old stuff. I keep telling you that I’m relying on NOTHING but ignore it and keep on with the same old stuff. It’s impossible to discuss anything sensibly with you because all that you do is make pronouncements and expect everyone else to doff their caps and agree. Other posters might occasionally agree with you if you tried saying something sensible.

Druitt is and will remain a suspect. Feigenbaum was in another country and so can be dismissed as a suspect or even a person of interest. He should be completely ignored. And you favour the man in another country.

Enough said.

Oh, and this ‘person of interest’ ‘suspect’ crap is a joke created by you to dismiss suspects that aren’t called Feigenbaum.

Druitt is a suspect. Feigenbaum is not.

Get a life, and stop posting posts that deflect away from the orginal post a favourie trait of yours

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Herlock Sholmes]

. Incidentally, thankyou for the recent small accolade, took me a little by surprise

[Herlock Sholmes]

In the above, doesn't the last line paying attention to Asylums also add weight more in favor of Druitt than Kozminski?

I’d say so Wick. Mention of ‘private’ lunatic asylums doesn’t say Kosminski to me.

[Wickerman]

In the above, doesn't the last line paying attention to Asylums also add weight more in favor of Druitt than Kozminski?

[Wickerman]

I agree that, while certainly not conclusive in any way, this sounds more like Druitt than Koz. “A terrible family disgrace” seems more in line with something that a family like the Druitt’s might be sensitive to. The reaction from society.

Incidentally, thankyou for the recent small accolade, took me a little by surprise.

Yes, I thought I should look up the original press article, just to avoid the odd potential typo. So here it is from 27 Dec. 1888.

[Herlock Sholmes]

For me, Druitt is the type of suspect I think we are looking for. I don't promote him personally as my suspect, I admit, aside from suspicions there isn't a lot going for him.

My preferred suspect, or Person of Interest (because I don't really know anything about him) is the character who was standing outside the Britannia on the night Kelly was murdered. Others call him the Bethnal Green Botherer, but that incident isn't related to the Ripper murders. He just accosted two women the Wednesday prior.
According to Mrs Kennedy, Kelly was right there with this 'Britannia-man' around 3:00am, and 45 minutes later screams of 'murder' were heard in Millers Court.

Here's another press report that may refer to either Kozminski (according to Robert House), or Druitt.

The Dublin Express London correspondent gives as the latest police theory concerning the Whitechapel murderer that he has fallen under the strong suspicion of his near relatives, who, to avert a terrible family disgrace, may have placed him out of harm's way in safe keeping. As showing that there is a certain amount of credence attached to this theory, detectives have recently visited all the registered private lunatic asylums and made full inquiries as to the inmates recently admitted.
Dec. 1888.

If you are familiar with Mac's writings concerning the "from private information, etc" you can see a parallel in this newspaper article. Robert House believes this refers to the Kozminski family keeping Aaron indoors basically on house arrest, in their view.
Whereas, in my view the wording reads more like the suspect being placed away from society & away from the press.
It more suits the suspicions over Druitt than Kozminski, especially as the close family friends (Tuke family) had their own asylum in Cheswick, where they housed Druitt's mother in later years.
As Druitt's body was found in the vicinity of the Tuke's asylum, there are some who think this is where the family placed him for observation.

I agree that, while certainly not conclusive in any way, this sounds more like Druitt than Koz. “A terrible family disgrace” seems more in line with something that a family like the Druitt’s might be sensitive to. The reaction from society.

Ive always understood doubts. I’ve always understood that some don’t see him as much of a suspect but I’ve never understood why some get so hot under the collar at the mere mention of Druitt and why they are so keen to discard him. As RJ once said, I don’t understand how some can be so incurious about Druitt. Even if it’s only a “what if,” it’s a pretty significant one. “What if” the private information that Mac received was genuine and correct?” We can’t prove that it was but equally we can’t assume that it wasn’t but that’s exactly what some do. They basically just say “well Mac was just a liar,” with no evidence that he was a liar. Or that Mac was just some dimwit that didn’t know his a*#e from his elbow contrary to what everyone that knew him said about him.

If others want to dismiss Druitt because it suits them (because they have there own suspect) that’s up to them. I prefer to keep an open mind because for me, Druitt has more going for him than the other named suspects IMO.

[Wickerman]

In my years of Ripperology, I’ve never once been drawn to Druitt as a suspect.

Perhaps I just haven’t read a good book on the subject (if one exists?).

As far as I know, the case against Druitt hinges on some secret intel Mac was privy to? Without knowing precisely what that information was, we cannot determine its value.

It’s not enough to give Mac the benefit of the doubt simply because he was a police officer, because we know full well the police of the time held erroneous beliefs, Mac included.

For me, Druitt is the type of suspect I think we are looking for. I don't promote him personally as my suspect, I admit, aside from suspicions there isn't a lot going for him.

My preferred suspect, or Person of Interest (because I don't really know anything about him) is the character who was standing outside the Britannia on the night Kelly was murdered. Others call him the Bethnal Green Botherer, but that incident isn't related to the Ripper murders. He just accosted two women the Wednesday prior.
According to Mrs Kennedy, Kelly was right there with this 'Britannia-man' around 3:00am, and 45 minutes later screams of 'murder' were heard in Millers Court.

Here's another press report that may refer to either Kozminski (according to Robert House), or Druitt.

The Dublin Express London correspondent gives as the latest police theory concerning the Whitechapel murderer that he has fallen under the strong suspicion of his near relatives, who, to avert a terrible family disgrace, may have placed him out of harm's way in safe keeping. As showing that there is a certain amount of credence attached to this theory, detectives have recently visited all the registered private lunatic asylums and made full inquiries as to the inmates recently admitted.
Dec. 1888.

If you are familiar with Mac's writings concerning the "from private information, etc" you can see a parallel in this newspaper article. Robert House believes this refers to the Kozminski family keeping Aaron indoors basically on house arrest, in their view.
Whereas, in my view the wording reads more like the suspect being placed away from society & away from the press.
It more suits the suspicions over Druitt than Kozminski, especially as the close family friends (Tuke family) had their own asylum in Cheswick, where they housed Druitt's mother in later years.
As Druitt's body was found in the vicinity of the Tuke's asylum, there are some who think this is where the family placed him for observation.

[Harry D]

In my years of Ripperology, I’ve never once been drawn to Druitt as a suspect.

Perhaps I just haven’t read a good book on the subject (if one exists?).

As far as I know, the case against Druitt hinges on some secret intel Mac was privy to? Without knowing precisely what that information was, we cannot determine its value.

It’s not enough to give Mac the benefit of the doubt simply because he was a police officer, because we know full well the police of the time held erroneous beliefs, Mac included.

[Herlock Sholmes]

that

i am sure we will just as long as you keep coming out with the crap in making Druitt one of the prime suspects

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

Your nonsense isn’t worthy of comment. Same old fingers-in-your-ears parroting of the same old stuff. I keep telling you that I’m relying on NOTHING but ignore it and keep on with the same old stuff. It’s impossible to discuss anything sensibly with you because all that you do is make pronouncements and expect everyone else to doff their caps and agree. Other posters might occasionally agree with you if you tried saying something sensible.

Druitt is and will remain a suspect. Feigenbaum was in another country and so can be dismissed as a suspect or even a person of interest. He should be completely ignored. And you favour the man in another country.

Enough said.

Oh, and this ‘person of interest’ ‘suspect’ crap is a joke created by you to dismiss suspects that aren’t called Feigenbaum.

Druitt is a suspect. Feigenbaum is not.

[Trevor Marriott]

Shall I try one last time to try and penetrate the thick fog confusion and misunderstanding which pervades your every post? Ok, here goes....

I HAVE NEVER STATED THAT DRUITT WAS DEFINITELY GUILTY AND SO VERY OBVIOUSLY I AM NOT RELYING ON ANYTHING. I AM NOT RELYING ON THE MM AS YOU FATUOUSLY AND TIRESOMLY KEEP REPEATING. PLEASE TRY AND ALLOW THIS VERY SIMPLE IDEA TO SINK IN.

What I am saying, and what any reasoned, unbiased, non-deranged person should be able to accept is that we have no concrete reason to dismiss the MM as you and your parrot does. Questions...yes, maybe doubts....ok, fine. But if you try and dismiss them as irrelevant or suggest that they should be ignored then you are wrong and you are not only wrong but dishonestly wrong.

If there is any doubt then that makes the document unsafe

Even if there's only a 10% chance of Mac's private info being correct then any reasonable poster has to accept that there's at least a possibility that Druitt might (note that I'm saying 'might') have been guilty. But you and your little pal prefer to dismiss him simply because you don't want to take a fair minded view. You prefer to promote a suspect that can't even be shown to have been in the country!!! And you have the unmitigated nerve to try and dismiss Druitt.!!

But if it unsafe, how do you prove what is safe and what is unsafe to rely on?

There are posters on here who are by no means promoters of Druitt but they are reasonable and fair minded enough to at least consider him.

I agree he must be considered but not as a suspect but a person on interest

You and The Baron are 'lost causes' of bias. Fortunately some take a more reasoned, open-minded and sensible approach.

Lost causes who point out the flaws in documents you seek to heavily rely on flaws which make them unsafe to totally rely on

Ok, no that I've explained my position you and Baron are free again to disregard it to spout the same old inaccurate and biased guff.

that

i am sure we will just as long as you keep coming out with the crap in making Druitt one of the prime suspects

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Losmandris]

I believe that Koz met with the Victorian/Edwardian ideas of what the kind of person to carry out these kind of murders was i.e. the lunatic. Koz certainly fitted that particular bill, however we now know that the majority of serial killers tend to appear completely normal and often do raise any suspicions. As mentioned earlier in the thread, it is very likely that JtR was able to ingratiate himself with his victims. I don't think that Koz would have been capable of this, therefore he comes pretty far down the list for me, of course, always possible but remote, I reckon.

[Wickerman]

That is definitely evident in people who suffer a psychosis condition but the murders were not frenzied acts of psychosis. Despite the gore and horror the killer was methodical in how he killed. To switch personalities as suggested is not impossible - he could have had a multiple personality disorder.

Perhaps I worded it too literally.
We do have modern cases where a serial killer has, within hours, returned to his normal daily routine following a murder.
I think the idea of a murderer being overcome by grief, or perhaps brooding for hours after a murder is more to do with Hollywood than reality.
I know the train timetables were studied and it shows it was possible for Druitt to make the journey with time to spare.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Its another example of those who readily and with out question accept the old accepted facts from 132 years ago and are so immersed in beliving all that they read from back then they cant, or wont accept that these facts how now been proven to be unsafe.

some cannot understand the differences between a person of interest, a likely suspect, and a prime suspect

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

Shall I try one last time to try and penetrate the thick fog confusion and misunderstanding which pervades your every post? Ok, here goes....

I HAVE NEVER STATED THAT DRUITT WAS DEFINITELY GUILTY AND SO VERY OBVIOUSLY I AM NOT RELYING ON ANYTHING. I AM NOT RELYING ON THE MM AS YOU FATUOUSLY AND TIRESOMLY KEEP REPEATING. PLEASE TRY AND ALLOW THIS VERY SIMPLE IDEA TO SINK IN.

What I am saying, and what any reasoned, unbiased, non-deranged person should be able to accept is that we have no concrete reason to dismiss the MM as you and your parrot does. Questions...yes, maybe doubts....ok, fine. But if you try and dismiss them as irrelevant or suggest that they should be ignored then you are wrong and you are not only wrong but dishonestly wrong.

Even if there's only a 10% chance of Mac's private info being correct then any reasonable poster has to accept that there's at least a possibility that Druitt might (note that I'm saying 'might') have been guilty. But you and your little pal prefer to dismiss him simply because you don't want to take a fair minded view. You prefer to promote a suspect that can't even be shown to have been in the country!!! And you have the unmitigated nerve to try and dismiss Druitt.!!

There are posters on here who are by no means promoters of Druitt but they are reasonable and fair minded enough to at least consider him.

You and The Baron are 'lost causes' of bias. Fortunately some take a more reasoned, open-minded and sensible approach.

Ok, no that I've explained my position you and Baron are free again to disregard it to spout the same old inaccurate and biased guff.

[Herlock Sholmes]

"Yes,' said Mr. Abberline, "I know all about that story. But what does it amount to? Simply this. Soon after the last murder in Whitechapel the body of a young doctor was found in the Thames, but there is absolutely nothing beyond the fact that he was found at that time to incriminate him. A report was made to the Home Office about the matter, but that it was 'considered final and conclusive' is going altogether beyond the truth."



There is absolutely nothing!


And yet you find a few people after some 130 years from the crimes, who know better about the case than Abberline ever did, to say Druitt is the best suspect that we have!!!


Its amazing, the possibilities and devesities of human brain are unlimited.


Druitt was just an arbitrary name picked to fit a theory of a lonely man.



The Baron

Your opinion can safely be ignored. Please go and troll somewhere else.

[Trevor Marriott]

"Yes,' said Mr. Abberline, "I know all about that story. But what does it amount to? Simply this. Soon after the last murder in Whitechapel the body of a young doctor was found in the Thames, but there is absolutely nothing beyond the fact that he was found at that time to incriminate him. A report was made to the Home Office about the matter, but that it was 'considered final and conclusive' is going altogether beyond the truth."



There is absolutely nothing!


And yet you find a few people after some 130 years from the crimes, who know better about the case than Abberline ever did, to say Druitt is the best suspect that we have!!!


Its amazing, the possibilities and devesities of human brain are unlimited.


Druitt was just an arbitrary name picked to fit a theory of a lonely man.



The Baron

Its another example of those who readily and with out question accept the old accepted facts from 132 years ago and are so immersed in beliving all that they read from back then they cant, or wont accept that these facts how now been proven to be unsafe.

some cannot understand the differences between a person of interest, a likely suspect, and a prime suspect

www.trevormarriott.co.uk