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 Herlock Sholmes View Post

    Kosminski is in the top tier of suspects but an identification which we have no evidence for is not direct evidence

    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?


    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?!

    "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.



    The Baron

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Abby Normal View Post
      there both valid suspects you sillies!!!
      I concur, Abby!

      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.
        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!!

        Comment


        • 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."

          Comment


          • Originally posted by The Baron View Post



            -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.

            Regards

            Sir Herlock Sholmes



            "Tis but a part we see, and not a whole."

            ”Baroni licitum est dicere troglodytam”

            Comment


            • Originally posted by The Baron View Post


              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.

              Regards

              Sir Herlock Sholmes



              "Tis but a part we see, and not a whole."

              ”Baroni licitum est dicere troglodytam”

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Ms Diddles View Post

                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.
                Regards

                Sir Herlock Sholmes



                "Tis but a part we see, and not a whole."

                ”Baroni licitum est dicere troglodytam”

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Joshua Rogan View Post
                  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

                  Regards

                  Sir Herlock Sholmes



                  "Tis but a part we see, and not a whole."

                  ”Baroni licitum est dicere troglodytam”

                  Comment


                  • 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.”

                    Last edited by erobitha; 07-21-2021, 11:50 AM.
                    "When the legend becomes fact... print the legend"
                    - The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance (1962)

                    Comment


                    • 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.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Damaso Marte View Post
                        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.
                        Regards

                        Sir Herlock Sholmes



                        "Tis but a part we see, and not a whole."

                        ”Baroni licitum est dicere troglodytam”

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by erobitha View Post
                          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.
                          Regards

                          Sir Herlock Sholmes



                          "Tis but a part we see, and not a whole."

                          ”Baroni licitum est dicere troglodytam”

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by erobitha View Post
                            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.
                            Regards, Jon S.

                            Comment


                            • 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.

                              Last edited by Herlock Sholmes; 07-21-2021, 01:14 PM.
                              Regards

                              Sir Herlock Sholmes



                              "Tis but a part we see, and not a whole."

                              ”Baroni licitum est dicere troglodytam”

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Wickerman View Post

                                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.
                                "When the legend becomes fact... print the legend"
                                - The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance (1962)

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X