Is Kosminski still the best suspect we have?

[Herlock Sholmes]

Isnt it a fact that there is no corroboration to the entry regarding Druitt in the memo, and nothing in any other police files to make him a suspect, In fact I belive Abberline did rule him out but I cant find that newspaper report

So what we have is a document penned by MM setting out his own personal belief as to who the killer was based on what would appear to be nothing more than hearsay as far as Druitt is concerned.

As to the memo itself at the risk of being shot down in flames I will say yet again in my opinion is it unsafe to totally rely on.

If Kosminski was such a prime suspect in the first edition of the memo then why is his full name not disclosed
But in the second edition his full name is still not disclosed but wait MM then exonarates the Kosminki mentioned in the first edition

Further more staying with Kosminski if we are to believe the Swanson marginalia, this man Kosminski is still a suspect and is purportedy identified in what can only be described as a Mythical ID parade.

Now given MM was Swansons immediate superior in neither of the editions of the Memo does he mention this ID parade and the identification of Kosminski an important part that many researchers seek to heavily rely on in propping up Kosminski as a suspect.

If this ID parade had have taken place the word of its outcome would have spread like wildfire around Scotland Yard,Yet we do not see anyone else other than Anderson who makes a vague reference to it.

So what are we left with two unsafe editions of the MM
A question mark surrounding the Mythical ID parade
And a person of interest with a surname of Kosminki who may not even have been Aaron Kosminski

The old accpeted facts are creaking near to breaking point

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

Why do I have to keep repeating this….I’m not stating that its a fact that Druitt was the ripper so I’m not ‘relying’ on anything. The fact is that the MM exists. It’s real, it isn’t a forgery. So we mention it/quote it/refer to it, with judgment. So no one is totally relying on anything.

So we have

1. Mac was correct and Druitt was the ripper
or
2. Mac was given faulty information and Druitt wasn’t the ripper.
or
3. Mac was given what appeared to be strong evidence but Druitt still wasn’t guilty.
or
4. Mac just plucked Druitt’s name out of thin air.

My personal opinion is that number 2 is unlikely as Mac mentions Druitt’s family as the original source of the info via a third party so I’d have thought it unlikely that a family would deliberately try and fit up one of their own as the ripper.

I also think that 4 is unlikely. We have no reason to suspect Mac of lying and if he’d wanted to implicate an innocent man Druitt is just about the last person I could see him choosing.

So, for me, that leaves 1 and 3 and I don’t think that MacNaghten was an idiot.

Ive absolutely no qualms in saying that Druitt might have been the ripper. All that’s raised against him as a candidate is the “well there’s no evidence against him.” Ditto all other suspects. None are better than Druitt. He is, and will remain, a suspect until someone disproves him with evidence and not just bias.

[Trevor Marriott]

That wasn’t what I meant DM. All I meant was that if anyone had looked into to Druitt just after the memorandum there would have been far more chance of them finding information to eliminate him (if it existed) than someone like Kosminski. Because of Druitt’s station in life he’d have been far more likely to have left some kind of trail. Minutes of a meeting, guest list at a party, court appearance miles away etc. So Druitt was a risky choice if he was just picked at random as some suggest.

Isnt it a fact that there is no corroboration to the entry regarding Druitt in the memo, and nothing in any other police files to make him a suspect, In fact I belive Abberline did rule him out but I cant find that newspaper report

So what we have is a document penned by MM setting out his own personal belief as to who the killer was based on what would appear to be nothing more than hearsay as far as Druitt is concerned.

As to the memo itself at the risk of being shot down in flames I will say yet again in my opinion is it unsafe to totally rely on.

If Kosminski was such a prime suspect in the first edition of the memo then why is his full name not disclosed
But in the second edition his full name is still not disclosed but wait MM then exonarates the Kosminki mentioned in the first edition

Further more staying with Kosminski if we are to believe the Swanson marginalia, this man Kosminski is still a suspect and is purportedy identified in what can only be described as a Mythical ID parade.

Now given MM was Swansons immediate superior in neither of the editions of the Memo does he mention this ID parade and the identification of Kosminski an important part that many researchers seek to heavily rely on in propping up Kosminski as a suspect.

If this ID parade had have taken place the word of its outcome would have spread like wildfire around Scotland Yard,Yet we do not see anyone else other than Anderson who makes a vague reference to it.

So what are we left with two unsafe editions of the MM
A question mark surrounding the Mythical ID parade
And a person of interest with a surname of Kosminki who may not even have been Aaron Kosminski

The old accpeted facts are creaking near to breaking point

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Wickerman]

Daily News 3 Sept;
"The husband visited the mortuary, and on viewing the corpse, identified it as that of his wife, from whom he had been separated eight years. He stated that she was nearly 44 years of age, but it must be owned that she looked nearly ten years younger, as indeed the police at first described the body."

True Joshua, but that may be due to a different cause. My wife always talks about sleeping on your back is better for the skin, it lessens the wrinkles. So her body lain on it's back would look facially different. A similar comment was made with Stride too when her body was in the mortuary.

I can't speak for the lighting in a mortuary, but the point of this exchange was that in general gaslight being a softer light than daylight hides the wrinkles, for both men & women.
Gaslight makes people look younger, all the witnesses who discovered the bodies of Nichols, Chapman, Eddowes & Stride, estimated these women as looking younger than they actually were.

Kelly was different as her discovers knew her, they had an idea how old she was.

The point being, as this is a general rule for the human face, regardless of gender, any 23 year old suspect seen in gaslight is more likely to have looked younger (like a teenager?), not older (like, middle-aged).

[erobitha]

Past authors of the Druitt theory have investigated this apparent contradiction, which according to psychologists is precisely what we would expect. Schizophrenia or Bi-polar patients quite regularly switch personality as if their other half didn't exist, in the eyes of the outsider.

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.

[Herlock Sholmes]

So does The Baron just pop up out of nowhere to have a dig at me or am I imagining it? Well we can first look at the Does The Killer Scope Out Locations Before He Kills Thread shall we? I made this innocuous post.

“I struggle with the idea of the killer being too familiar with the locations though as this would introduce the added risk of being recognised.”

Ignoring the 8 other posters who posted before me The Baron chirped in with this…

“Thats because you don't go deep enough with your ideas, and simply/usually stop at your first impression.

You speak of the added risk of being recognised, but then, will he keep killing at the same area, again and again and again and again and....... ?

You see, thats where your 'logic' turns against you.

And whether you struggle or not, you like it or not, the killer WAS in Whitechapel, he walked there, he talked there, he met women there, he killed there, and this is the only fact you would have!”

One post directly at me then silence on the remaining 16 pages of thread!


Then I started a thread purely to post a link to a Podcast on Druitt after I’d been asked to by author Jon Hainsworth. I posted the link and nothing more. Only one response. Guess who? Yup, The Baron


“A man who didn't set a foot in Whitechapel..”


Just can’t resist it.

On the Cautious Cadosch thread he waited 53 posts in, ignoring all others to home in on me.


And even on the thread started by Al Bundy who was concerned when I hadn’t posted for months, what was The Baron’s post when I returned?

“Another Druitt believer..........

Just don't throw yourself in a river like him

The Baron”

Nice.

It’s also very noticable how many digs he has at Wickerman whenever Druitt gets mentioned. He just can’t help himself. Wick posted this…

“I do think it was PC Smith whom Macnaghten meant when he wrote about the only witness who saw the killer, "was the City PC in Mitre Square".

He misremember Berner st. for Mitre Sq.”


He doesn’t even mention Druitt but Baron just can’t help himself when it comes to his Monty obsession….

“And Druitt was Not the suspect, and will never be.”


And finally….


Conspiracy Theories thread post #17 by The Baron…


“Was there anything at all in the Macnaughten Memorandum that is not wrong?!


I even believe Cutbush is a better suspect than the other three suspects mentioned there”


Errr Kosminski was on that list? So Cutbush is a better suspect than him? Ok.


……..




Try and ditch your obsession with me Baron it just makes you continually spew out Druitt-related garbage. And try and add at least a modicum of balance and it would be good if you could stop stating your opinions as facts.

[Wickerman]

Regarding Druitt, does not his Cricket trip to Bournemouth rule him out? Was he confirmed as being in Bournemouth?

Also the likelihood of him playing a game of cricket just hours after the murder of Annie Chapman just does not sit well with me.

”The last major match he played was a single innings game against the Christopherson brothers, in which he took 3 for 38 in a 22-run win. In this game, Stanley Christopherson dismissed him and later Druitt returned the compliments. Significantly, the match was played on September 8, and started a few hours after the second Whitechapel murder.”

Past authors of the Druitt theory have investigated this apparent contradiction, which according to psychologists is precisely what we would expect. Schizophrenia or Bi-polar patients quite regularly switch personality as if their other half didn't exist, in the eyes of the outsider.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Regarding Druitt, does not his Cricket trip to Bournemouth rule him out? Was he confirmed as being in Bournemouth?

Also the likelihood of him playing a game of cricket just hours after the murder of Annie Chapman just does not sit well with me.

”The last major match he played was a single innings game against the Christopherson brothers, in which he took 3 for 38 in a 22-run win. In this game, Stanley Christopherson dismissed him and later Druitt returned the compliments. Significantly, the match was played on September 8, and started a few hours after the second Whitechapel murder.”

Nothing rules him out Erobitha. You may think it unlikely that he played cricket just hours after a murder but serial killers don’t behave as we do.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Herlock Sholmes appears to be arguing that because the police considered Druitt a top suspect, they must have looked into the cricket stuff and ruled it out as an alibi, and must have also had access to evidence we do not that was compelling to them even in the face of the cricket schedule.

While, surely, the police had access to evidence that we do not have, and must have looked into the backgrounds of their suspects in ways that have not been preserved in the historic record, I'm not sure I am willing to assume that they looked into all of this as thoroughly as he is confident they did.

That wasn’t what I meant DM. All I meant was that if anyone had looked into to Druitt just after the memorandum there would have been far more chance of them finding information to eliminate him (if it existed) than someone like Kosminski. Because of Druitt’s station in life he’d have been far more likely to have left some kind of trail. Minutes of a meeting, guest list at a party, court appearance miles away etc. So Druitt was a risky choice if he was just picked at random as some suggest.

[Damaso Marte]

Herlock Sholmes appears to be arguing that because the police considered Druitt a top suspect, they must have looked into the cricket stuff and ruled it out as an alibi, and must have also had access to evidence we do not that was compelling to them even in the face of the cricket schedule.

While, surely, the police had access to evidence that we do not have, and must have looked into the backgrounds of their suspects in ways that have not been preserved in the historic record, I'm not sure I am willing to assume that they looked into all of this as thoroughly as he is confident they did.

[erobitha]

Regarding Druitt, does not his Cricket trip to Bournemouth rule him out? Was he confirmed as being in Bournemouth?

Also the likelihood of him playing a game of cricket just hours after the murder of Annie Chapman just does not sit well with me.

”The last major match he played was a single innings game against the Christopherson brothers, in which he took 3 for 38 in a 22-run win. In this game, Stanley Christopherson dismissed him and later Druitt returned the compliments. Significantly, the match was played on September 8, and started a few hours after the second Whitechapel murder.”

[Herlock Sholmes]

Daily News 3 Sept;
"The husband visited the mortuary, and on viewing the corpse, identified it as that of his wife, from whom he had been separated eight years. He stated that she was nearly 44 years of age, but it must be owned that she looked nearly ten years younger, as indeed the police at first described the body."

Cheers Joshua

[Herlock Sholmes]

To be fair, Herlock, I'm 100% certain that I recall reading that Polly Nichols appeared ten years younger than her actual age. No time to dig for sources but I'll have a look later.

I think there may have been a similar reference to Liz Stride, but I'm less sure of that.

It does seem counter-intuitive that someone living that lifestyle could look younger than their years, so I recall being surprised by that myself.

Estimating age can be really difficult even in broad daylight, in my experience.

I had a flatmate who used to get asked for ID when buying alcohol even when she was 37!!!

Lucky girl!!

You’re right Ms D. It was my error.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Contradicting yourself in one small sentence, Kosminski is in the top tier of suspects, yet you disprove the identification as a direct evidence because you dont have evidence for... unbelievable, if there was no identification, then Kosminski is not a top tier suspect, understand?

Even the most elementary reason flies over your head. Kosminski is a suspect. This doesn’t make him guilty. We have to assess. He was named by Swanson so he’s a top tier suspect (IMO) but we cannot prove that the identification was accurate. The witness might have been mistaken.

And we have evidence for the Identification, it has been mentioned by the top tier and the head of the police system of the time! Maybe you would be happier if you could watch a video recording of the whole identification wouldn't you?!

If you feel that it’s case closed then why do you bother coming on here to waste everyone’s time. Apart from trolling as a hobby of course.

"anyone who says “Druitt definitely wasn’t the ripper” is an idiot."


What is your definition of the ripper?! some prositutes in Whitchapel have been murdered and suffered a throat cut and an abdominal mutilations.


Jack the Ripper was a general name given to the unknown murderer that had done this, Mckenzie was one of those victim, she suffered a throat cut and an abdominal mutilation, same area same victimology, the ripper killed her, Druitt was dead, Druitt was not the Ripper, Druit was somewhere else when Tabram and Chapman lost their lives as far as the evidence shows.

Nice piece of wriggling. How many more victims are you going to try and lump in?

You can say that Mackenzie was a ripper victim as many times as you like but it won’t make it true. You’re just being dishonest in trying to manipulate who was a victim and who wasn’t simply because of your childish obsession with trying to eliminate Druitt. Your only interest in doing this of course is to have a go at me for personal reasons (and let’s face it, you’re not the only obsessive poster to do that)

Mackenzie and Tabram are not proven victims of the same hand that killed the c5. So your point is pointless. As ever.

The Baron

Where was Druitt supposed to be when Chapman died? Waste your time if you want to but it is absolutely, physically impossible to exonerate Druitt or to give him an alibi. Doesn’t mean that he was guilty of course. It’s called taking an honest approach. A foreign concept to you.

[Herlock Sholmes]

-Don't run away, you are not finished here just yet, tell me, do you still believe the women looked older than they were, or you will choose to be guided again from a fellow Druittis and change your belief exactly to the contrary, that the women looked younger than they were?!


Besides, you claim that in a previous thread I didn't accept that most people didn't own watches, could you show me or anyone a post or a quote where I said that?

Or you are making this up ?!

Gotcha again!

Read and learn, is my advice to you.



The Baron

Its like trying to debate the subject with a toddler.

Firstly, if some individuals at the time said that they thought that the victims looked younger than they actually were then that was simply their opinion. Witnesses can be mistaken as I’ve told you. They might indeed have looked younger than they actually were to some but it’s generally accepted that the women could often look older than they actually were due to their harsh lifestyles.

Secondly, I’m not checking back through months of posts. But I’ll add another one. You and Fishy (what a pair!) wouldn’t accept that estimating TOD’s at that time was completely unreliable even though we all know it to have been the case.

Big difference. I made a minor error because I misread a post. Hardly the end of the world. I didn’t try to deny it as you would have done.

And yes, if Wickerman tells me something I believe him because a) he knows what he’s talking about, and b) he’s not a liar.

[Joshua Rogan]

Daily News 3 Sept;
"The husband visited the mortuary, and on viewing the corpse, identified it as that of his wife, from whom he had been separated eight years. He stated that she was nearly 44 years of age, but it must be owned that she looked nearly ten years younger, as indeed the police at first described the body."