Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Is Kosminski still the best suspect we have?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Wickerman View Post

    I don't believe Schwartz could so easily have recognised BS-man as a Jew, or that would have been in his statement.
    He was clearly describing a gentile.


    What are you even talking about??!

    and who suggested that the witness knew the suspect was a jew before the identification took place?


    You are writing just for the hell of it, smoke and mirrors.. nothing more, you have nothing



    The Baron

    Comment


    • Originally posted by The Baron View Post





      Ostrog is better!



      The Baron
      Ostrog was in jail in France at the time of the murders !!!!!!!!!

      www.trevormarriott.co.uk

      Comment


      • .

        Who from your list of witnesses above is the one who had ever had a good view of the murderer?!

        If no one, then why bringing them here?!

        The witness spoken of, had a good view of the murderer and he unhesitatingly identified the suspect
        For a start Baron it’s a very well known fact, and just as relevant today, that witnesses can be mistaken. We might also ask, if the killer was definitely identified why wasn’t it announced? Why didn’t Anderson name him? All we have is Swanson. Kosminski was of the lowest class at the time. A man incarcerated in an asylum and who died in an asylum. Why did no one at anytime later simply announce him as the killer? Why did Swanson keep quiet on the subject for the rest of his life? Was this nobody so worthy of protection that the Police were happy to continue being the men that couldn’t catch the ripper?

        There are questions to answer on every suspect. Kosminski is a valid suspect. He might have been the ripper.

        As none of us know who the murderer actually was then how can we say for certain who saw him? This is the problem. You keep stating your opinions as if they are proven facts when anyone can see that they aren’t. No one else is doing that. None of us are saying that Druitt was definitely guilty only that there is a possibility and because he was named by a very senior police officer that he has to be considered seriously. Of course MacNaghten might have felt that the evidence against Druitt at the time was strong but he might still not have been the ripper but any suggestion that he simply plucked Druitt’s name out of thin air just because he died after the Kelly murder doesn’t hold water. He could have chosen any number of random people who would have appeared to have been a more likely suspect because of their history. But he didn’t. He named Druitt. Why?

        Because he felt that he had good reason to.
        Regards

        Sir Herlock Sholmes



        “Conspiracy theorists, she knew, were paranoid by definition, and usually with good reason – they were indeed being watched, largely because they were standing on an upturned bucket, haranguing the sheeple about their wingnut delusions.”

        “If you argue with a madman, it is extremely probable that you will get the worst of it; for in many ways his mind moves all the quicker for not being delayed by the things that go with good judgment.”

        Comment


        • .
          Or are we going down that road where we claim age is hard to determine at night?
          It certainly is, Nichols, Chapman, Eddowes & Stride were estimated to look younger than their real age due to their bodies being found by people who didn't know them - unlike Kelly.
          So at night the recorded evidence appears to suggest people look younger in poor light. Which means our middle-aged suspect was likely older than he looked, not 10 years younger
          Ill echo Wick’s question. Please post a reference to where the victims were said to look younger than they were. I’ve certainly seen it written that they looked older than their actual ages due to drink and their harsh lifestyles but not younger. I’m guessing that you’re simply making this up. I’m also guessing that you won’t answer this question.
          Regards

          Sir Herlock Sholmes



          “Conspiracy theorists, she knew, were paranoid by definition, and usually with good reason – they were indeed being watched, largely because they were standing on an upturned bucket, haranguing the sheeple about their wingnut delusions.”

          “If you argue with a madman, it is extremely probable that you will get the worst of it; for in many ways his mind moves all the quicker for not being delayed by the things that go with good judgment.”

          Comment


          • . Comparing orange to apple and women to men
            I wonder if there are any scientists who can confirm this theory?

            Baron reckons that light reacts differently on men than it does on women?

            You heard it here folks.
            Regards

            Sir Herlock Sholmes



            “Conspiracy theorists, she knew, were paranoid by definition, and usually with good reason – they were indeed being watched, largely because they were standing on an upturned bucket, haranguing the sheeple about their wingnut delusions.”

            “If you argue with a madman, it is extremely probable that you will get the worst of it; for in many ways his mind moves all the quicker for not being delayed by the things that go with good judgment.”

            Comment


            • . The witness spoken of, had a good view of the murderer and he unhesitatingly identified the suspect
              Name the witness and provide evidence for the claim.
              Regards

              Sir Herlock Sholmes



              “Conspiracy theorists, she knew, were paranoid by definition, and usually with good reason – they were indeed being watched, largely because they were standing on an upturned bucket, haranguing the sheeple about their wingnut delusions.”

              “If you argue with a madman, it is extremely probable that you will get the worst of it; for in many ways his mind moves all the quicker for not being delayed by the things that go with good judgment.”

              Comment


              • Originally posted by The Baron View Post


                I don't know who the witness was, Schwarz or someone else.. One thing I know as stated by Sir Anderson, a witness that had a good view of the murderer, and Swanson built his notes upon this too, so it has been corroborated.

                Even you cannot tell, if some of the men I know are in their 23 or 30..

                That is a sure thing.



                The Baron
                That’s your idea of a sure thing is it?

                Why didn’t Anderson name him?

                Why didn’t Swanson name him (apart from the Marginalia?)

                Schwartz suspect used an anti-Semitic insult which doesn’t fit the Jewish Kosminski.

                Like Druitt Kosminski had no real history of violence.

                I still accept Kosminski as a suspect though. If only you could be unbiased too.
                Regards

                Sir Herlock Sholmes



                “Conspiracy theorists, she knew, were paranoid by definition, and usually with good reason – they were indeed being watched, largely because they were standing on an upturned bucket, haranguing the sheeple about their wingnut delusions.”

                “If you argue with a madman, it is extremely probable that you will get the worst of it; for in many ways his mind moves all the quicker for not being delayed by the things that go with good judgment.”

                Comment


                • Originally posted by The Baron View Post



                  What are you even talking about??!

                  and who suggested that the witness knew the suspect was a jew before the identification took place?


                  You are writing just for the hell of it, smoke and mirrors.. nothing more, you have nothing



                  The Baron

                  Schwartz BS Man wasn’t Jewish. Kosminski was.

                  How is that an ‘identification?’
                  Regards

                  Sir Herlock Sholmes



                  “Conspiracy theorists, she knew, were paranoid by definition, and usually with good reason – they were indeed being watched, largely because they were standing on an upturned bucket, haranguing the sheeple about their wingnut delusions.”

                  “If you argue with a madman, it is extremely probable that you will get the worst of it; for in many ways his mind moves all the quicker for not being delayed by the things that go with good judgment.”

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post

                    Ill echo Wick’s question. Please post a reference to where the victims were said to look younger than they were. I’ve certainly seen it written that they looked older than their actual ages due to drink and their harsh lifestyles but not younger. I’m guessing that you’re simply making this up. I’m also guessing that you won’t answer this question.


                    Actually it is Weckerman who said this and suggested that the women looked younger than they were, not me.



                    Now you will go back and withdraw your post...

                    Gotcha!

                    May I suggest you try to read and understand before you rush post ?! I am sure I asked you this many times..



                    The Baron

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post

                      I'm guessing that you're simply making this up.

                      You mean Wickerman is simply making this up?!



                      Apology would be wise.



                      The Baron

                      Comment


                      • And Kosminski is the best suspect in the case, he is the only person in history that we have a direct evidence against, the seaside identification.



                        The Baron
                        Last edited by The Baron; 07-21-2021, 08:43 AM.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by The Baron View Post



                          Actually it is Weckerman who said this and suggested that the women looked younger than they were, not me.



                          Now you will go back and withdraw your post...

                          Gotcha!

                          May I suggest you try to read and understand before you rush post ?! I am sure I asked you this many times..



                          The Baron
                          . Gotcha!
                          You really are pathetic aren’t you?

                          There is a huge difference between you and me and it’s your complete lack of integrity. Whenever I make an error I admit them and hold my hands up. Everyone makes mistakes. Which I do now - I was mistaken on that point (although it would have been easier to differentiate if you could use the quote function properly.) But when you make one (and you make them in every post) you don’t acknowledge them.

                          I won’t forget in a previous thread when you and Fishy wouldn’t accept that most people didn’t own watches and clocks at that time. You never apologised about being wrong about that piece of childishness no matter how many times it was mentioned.

                          The problem is that your posts are such unmitigated balderdash that it’s hard to read them without shaking your head and laughing so it’s easy to miss one piece of nonsense amid the flood of nonsense.
                          Last edited by Herlock Sholmes; 07-21-2021, 09:04 AM.
                          Regards

                          Sir Herlock Sholmes



                          “Conspiracy theorists, she knew, were paranoid by definition, and usually with good reason – they were indeed being watched, largely because they were standing on an upturned bucket, haranguing the sheeple about their wingnut delusions.”

                          “If you argue with a madman, it is extremely probable that you will get the worst of it; for in many ways his mind moves all the quicker for not being delayed by the things that go with good judgment.”

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by The Baron View Post
                            And Kosminski is the best suspect in the case, he is the only person in history that we have a direct evidence against, the seaside identification.



                            The Baron
                            Which is your opinion.

                            Not a fact.

                            These however, are facts…..

                            The location of the Seaside Identification hasn’t even been identified.
                            The witness hasn’t been identified.
                            Anderson never mentioned Kosminski.
                            We know that witnesses can be mistakes.

                            Kosminski is in the top tier of suspects but an identification which we have no evidence for is not direct evidence. Saying ‘I don’t think that Druitt was the ripper is fine,’ but anyone who says “Druitt definitely wasn’t the ripper” is an idiot.
                            Last edited by Herlock Sholmes; 07-21-2021, 09:07 AM.
                            Regards

                            Sir Herlock Sholmes



                            “Conspiracy theorists, she knew, were paranoid by definition, and usually with good reason – they were indeed being watched, largely because they were standing on an upturned bucket, haranguing the sheeple about their wingnut delusions.”

                            “If you argue with a madman, it is extremely probable that you will get the worst of it; for in many ways his mind moves all the quicker for not being delayed by the things that go with good judgment.”

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post



                              You really are pathetic aren't you?

                              There is a huge difference between you and me and it's your complete lack of integrity. Whenever I make an error I admit them and hold my hands up. Everyone makes mistakes. Which I do now - I was mistaken on that point (although it would have been easier to differentiate if you could use the quote function properly.) But when you make one (and you make them in every post) you don't acknowledge them.

                              I won't forget in a previous thread when you and Fishy wouldn't accept that most people didn't own watches and clocks at that time. You never apologised about being wrong about that piece of childishness no matter how many times it was mentioned.

                              The problem is that your posts are such unmitigated balderdash that it's hard to read them without shaking your head and laughing so it's easy to miss one piece of nonsense amid the flood of nonsense.


                              -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

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by harry View Post
                                What is obvious,when considering the number of persons who have been named as suspects,is that we need a means of defining what 'Suspect' means. Especially so,when writing of the Whitechapel killings,and the fact that police investigating those killings,held a view that there were no suspects.

                                Agree Harry, even Macnaghten has been introduced as a ripper suspect!

                                Although I grant you he would make a better suspect than Druitt or Maybrick for example.

                                But we need to use the word 'Suspect' more wisely I would say.



                                The Baron

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X