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 The Baron View Post



    Don't bother, Your's looks like anything except a respond





    The Baron
    Back to your old tricks of ignoring posts with questions that you can’t answer I see.
    Regards

    Sir Herlock Sholmes



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

    ”Baroni licitum est dicere troglodytam”

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post

      Back to your old tricks of ignoring posts with questions that you can’t answer I see.


      I suggest you do your homeworks and don't wait others to do it for you, at least read about Druitt, before you come here declaiming and introducing him as the best suspect that we have.

      I don't always have the time to educate you.

      "in 1972, two years before she died, Macnaghten's daughter Christabel, Lady Aberconway, told her friend Michael Thornton that in nominating Druitt her father was "only following the official line. The truth could make the throne totter." Thornton reported this in the Sunday Express in 1992"


      The man's own daughter didn't buy the Druitt theory, and she was right!



      The Baron

      Comment


      • Originally posted by The Baron View Post



        I suggest you do your homeworks and don't wait others to do it for you, at least read about Druitt, before you come here declaiming and introducing him as the best suspect that we have.

        I don't always have the time to educate you.

        "in 1972, two years before she died, Macnaghten's daughter Christabel, Lady Aberconway, told her friend Michael Thornton that in nominating Druitt her father was "only following the official line. The truth could make the throne totter." Thornton reported this in the Sunday Express in 1992"


        The man's own daughter didn't buy the Druitt theory, and she was right!



        The Baron
        Click image for larger version

Name:	0206d598a370e209b3779df09f068847.jpg
Views:	88
Size:	35.3 KB
ID:	763349
        "When the legend becomes fact... print the legend"
        - The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance (1962)

        Comment


        • Originally posted by The Baron View Post



          I suggest you do your homeworks and don't wait others to do it for you, at least read about Druitt, before you come here declaiming and introducing him as the best suspect that we have.

          I own and have read every book on Druitt unlike you. I’m even reading Jon Hainsworth’s updated book at the moment. I can also prove that I own these books. I doubt if you’ve read a single book on Druitt apart from books that make a mere mention of him. In fact I’d doubt that you’ve read many books on the subject of the ripper at all.

          I don't always have the time to educate you.

          Thats funny If you had time to make this useless post then you had time to answer my very short questions. But you haven’t.

          "in 1972, two years before she died, Macnaghten's daughter Christabel, Lady Aberconway, told her friend Michael Thornton that in nominating Druitt her father was "only following the official line. The truth could make the throne totter." Thornton reported this in the Sunday Express in 1992"


          The man's own daughter didn't buy the Druitt theory, and she was right!

          For Christ’s sake Baron please do something about your understanding of English. This doesn’t mean that she didn’t believe her father. Also, why do you take Michael Thornton as being 100% trustworthy but you believe MacNaghten wasn’t? You are showing your bias by your very selective quoting.

          The Baron
          Prove to everyone how you can categorically, 100%, without a shadow of doubt show that Druitt wasn’t the ripper.

          Prove to everyone how you can categorically, 100%, without a shadow of doubt show that Mackenzie was definitely a victim.

          You won’t be able to by the way.

          Timewaster.
          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


            How desperate you are Wickerman?! ... only because of this?!

            I was looking for a better respond than that, I may have misjudged you.


            "after the suspect had been identified at the Seaside Home where he had been sent by us with difficulty in order to subject him to identification, and he knew he was identified. On suspect's return to his brother's house in Whitechapel he was watched by police (City CID) by day & night.

            Kosminski was the suspect"
            Yes, we know what the Marginalia says, and what Sagar wrote, and Cox, we've known for a couple of decades, yet nothing has changed. No-one has located that Seaside Home, the only viable Home is the one too far away to be accepted, and of course Kozminski didn't die "shortly after" being committed to Colney Hatch.
            Swanson should also have known if the suspect was insane (as claimed) he couldn't be charged, therefore he couldn't hang. So, the witness would not have been "the means of (the) murderer being hanged".
            Swanson should have known this, but his memory was clearly faltering.

            Memorandums are unreliable, you should know that by now.

            You have also quoted Sagar yet he tells us the suspect was caged in a private asylum, but by his "friends", whereas Kozminski was committed to a public asylum and by his family.
            All the while you turn a blind eye to Sagar's recollection of that piece of apron found under a staircase in Dorset st....
            This is your 'reliable' source?

            Then of course we have Cox claiming his suspect was committed to an asylum in Surrey, Mile End was not in Surrey, and Colney Hatch was in Barnet, North London. Interestingly, Cox described him as, ..."a mad, poverty stricken inhabitant of some slum in the East End."
            Yet Sagar says he was committed to a private asylum, at whose expense?

            Your sources don't even offer consistent circumstantial evidence, if Swanson, Sagar & Cox all refer to the same character, their evidence is expected to be consistent.

            If you could only calm down and analyze your sources rationally, you would see what others see, and you wouldn't be making an ass of yourself on a daily basis.

            Regards, Jon S.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post
              My apologies to Wick for responding to a post that was aimed at him.
              If there is anyone on this forum I can't trust to answer a post directed at me, it is yourself.
              You've actually, as they say, 'taken the words out of my mouth' on other subjects, on other threads, more times that you know.
              Regards, Jon S.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Wickerman View Post

                If there is anyone on this forum I can't trust to answer a post directed at me, it is yourself


                Agree, I can't trust him either.



                The Baron

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Wickerman View Post

                  If there is anyone on this forum I can't trust to answer a post directed at me, it is yourself.
                  You've actually, as they say, 'taken the words out of my mouth' on other subjects, on other threads, more times that you know.
                  Cheers Wick
                  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


                    Agree, I can't trust him either.

                    You even got this wrong


                    The Baron
                    Ill re-post this from Wick.

                    “If you could only calm down and analyze your sources rationally, you would see what others see, and you wouldn't be making an ass of yourself on a daily basis



                    Perhaps you wouldn’t have fallen for that joke about John Richardson being blind in one eye and having long hair hanging over his eyes.
                    Regards

                    Sir Herlock Sholmes



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

                    ”Baroni licitum est dicere troglodytam”

                    Comment


                    • Or this

                      “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.


                      A classic from someone proposing Kosminski.
                      Regards

                      Sir Herlock Sholmes



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

                      ”Baroni licitum est dicere troglodytam”

                      Comment


                      • And this work of genius


                        “And you have a rabbit in your house (which is only an assumption) and you want to feed it, you go to the kitchen, open the drawer, and you choose between all the knives there the broken one and no else to cut the carrot (which cannot be fed directly to the rabbit) and you so happened to forget it in your pocket which you usually don't carry there!”

                        plus this


                        “Tge rabbit is the key to solve this whole problem.

                        Feeding a rabbit at 4 am or so ?!”
                        Regards

                        Sir Herlock Sholmes



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

                        ”Baroni licitum est dicere troglodytam”

                        Comment


                        • Found it…

                          About John Richardson….

                          “He also had long hair on his face, one good eye, and suffered Epilepsy.”

                          And this was after Harry had told you that this was a joke.
                          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

                            Why would Rob House leave that last sentence off, in his book?
                            Did he think the same, - that it doesn't really align with his Kozminski suspect?

                            We have shown how wrong you were on different levels.

                            Druitt wrote "Since Friday I felt I was going to be like mother, and the best thing for me was to die"

                            That doesn't set well with a mad person who was incarcerated by force in safe keeping by his own family.


                            And you admitted it.


                            End of it.


                            In order to make this report fit Druitt, you have to make many hypotheses on too many levels, one of them is that Druitt"s brother killed him!!!

                            And that Kosminski's family doesn't afford a private asylum!!!!

                            And that He must have been looked away in a private asylum, although the press report said they were looking everywhere not only in private asylums

                            And that safe keeping must mean a private asylum


                            Too many hepotheses to even start to consider Druitt a possible fit for just one press report.


                            Rob House is right, that press report fit Kosminski better than any known suspect.

                            Your arguments are weak, you lose your case.


                            You better learn to live with it.



                            The Baron
                            Last edited by The Baron; 07-24-2021, 05:15 PM.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Wickerman View Post

                              If there is anyone on this forum I can't trust to answer a post directed at me, it is yourself.






                              The Baron

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Wickerman View Post

                                Memorandums are unreliable, you should know that by now.

                                Then stop pushing Druitt through our noses.



                                The Baron

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X