Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Is Kosminski still the best suspect we have?

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

  • Can someone point me to a photograph of William Grant Grainger please? I can’t recall seeing it.
    Regards

    Sir Herlock Sholmes



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

    ”Baroni licitum est dicere troglodytam”

    Comment


    • Well this is a fine state of affairs. When the first inventor of a time machine says to us "OK chaps, I'll just nip back and sort out this JtR stuff for you. Just give me a description of your prime suspect that I can show the police.....what....you don't have a description.... of your PRIME suspect.....what have you people been doing all this time? How embarrassing.

      Cheers, George

      Comment


      • To summarise, we have amongst the senior police of the time:

        Anderson saying: you can relax, we found JtR. The family were worried about him being JtR and put him in an asylum and he died shortly afterwards.

        Macnaghten saying: you can relax, we found JtR. The family were worried about him being JtR and his body was found in the Thames.

        Abilene saying: you can't relax, we don't have the foggiest idea who JtR is. For any new murders with a similar MO we'll bring in previous witnesses to have a look at the latest JtR suspect.

        Littlechild saying: JtR wasn't Dr D, he was Dr T (Tumbelty) and he has left the country.

        Since this is a Kosminski thread, my opinion is that Schwartz was Anderson's witness and he identified Kosminski as BSM. I am not sure that Kosminski followed through to kill Stride and I am even less convinced that he was JtR. I'm looking at the case against Tumblety at present and am wondering if he may have been Pipeman in the Stride case?

        Cheer, George
        Last edited by GBinOz; 07-27-2021, 02:05 AM.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post

          Mention of Druitt as a suspect tends to get some gnashing their teeth, wailing and rending their garments but he’s the most interesting suspect for me. There’s a lot going on in any full reading of events surrounding Druitt. No ‘evidence’ of guilt of course which is what those that dismiss him usually say but what ‘evidence’ is there against anyone? There’s lots of stuff to keep someone with an open mind interested.
          Now then Herlock, asking for evidence is considered a reasonable thing to do. Don't deny it my friend, I've seen you ask it of others. .........just a friendly bagging.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by GBinOz View Post

            Now then Herlock, asking for evidence is considered a reasonable thing to do. Don't deny it my friend, I've seen you ask it of others. .........just a friendly bagging.
            True enough George What I mean though is that there’s no solid evidence against anyone. With Druitt we have things like Henry Farquharson a West of England MP. A story appeared in the Bristol Times on Feb 11th 1891 saying that an MP (unnamed at the time) was saying that he knew who Jack the Ripper was. He was the son of a surgeon who committed suicide. Druitt was the son of a surgeon who committed suicide and was from Dorset. This is before the MM of course.

            We also have a possible link to the Crawford letter with a letter written by Druitt’s aunt where she tells her daughter that she’s visited Cavendish Square (where Crawford lived) and that she felt that she’d never be free of this ‘encumbrance.’ We can’t say what this ‘encumbrance’ was of course but JH calls the letter ‘angst-filled’ so it appears to have been a serious problem. It could have been unrelated to Monty of course but it’s still an intriguing possibility.

            Then there’s the minutes of the 21st December meeting of the Blackheath Club where, in his absence, Monty was removed as Honorary Treasurer and Secretary because he’d ‘gone abroad.’ This might of course be connected to the Blackheath School where Druitt had got into some serious trouble, and so ‘gone abroad’ was a face saver but we don’t know what that trouble was? Of course we can’t read too much into this but again it’s intriguing and at least raises plausible possibilities.

            I think it might have been Dan Farson who said that it was Druitt’s unlikeliness as a suspect which makes him interesting and I agree. If MacNaghten was simply plucking 3 names out of thin air to throw under the wheels of the bus as ‘likelier suspects than Cutbush,’ why the hell would he choose Druitt of all people? He would have had his choice of any number of nonentities and ne’er do well’s so why name, in this rigorously class conscious society, a man of Druitt’s background? A man with no history of violence or criminality. A man who was related by marriage to one of his best friends. Because he died after Kelly? What about Mackenzie who was believed to have been a victim by his friend and mentor Munro and others? The argument that he was chosen purely because of when he died just doesn’t hold water. MacNaghten felt that he had solid reasons for believing Druitt guilty. Whether those reasons were justified we have no way of knowing.
            Last edited by Herlock Sholmes; 07-27-2021, 08:52 AM.
            Regards

            Sir Herlock Sholmes



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

            ”Baroni licitum est dicere troglodytam”

            Comment



            • "Another murder occasionally included among the Ripper cases is that of Martha Tabram, who was viciously stabbed to death on 7 August 1888. Her death coincided with the middle of Bournemouth Cricket Week, 4–11 August, in which Druitt was heavily involved, and was during the school holidays which Druitt spent in Dorset. On 1 September, the day after the murder of Nichols, Druitt was in Dorset playing cricket. On the day of Chapman's murder, he played cricket in Blackheath, and the day after the murders of Stride and Eddowes, he was in the West Country defending a client in a court case."

              On the day of Mckenzie's murder, Druitt was 6 feet under the ground.




              The Baron

              Comment


              • It’s pointless for you to keep resorting to this desperation. Tabram and Mackenzie were not definite ripper victims. They might have been; they might not have been. So the very best that you can say is “if either of them were proven to have been victims then Druitt couldn’t have been the ripper.”

                If….

                And so as you’ve had explained to you a hundred times these 2 cannot be used to eliminate Druitt. Anyone can of course say “I’m convinced that Mackenzie was a victim and so I eliminate Druitt on that basis,” because that’s an opinion. It cannot be stated as a fact though.

                None of Druitt’s cricket playing eliminates him much as you’d like it to.
                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

                  and the day after the murders of Stride and Eddowes, he was in the West Country defending a client in a court case

                  .... after he fried and ate tother piece of Kidne he took from one women .. it was very nise

                  Tother half he prasarved and put it in his pocket while he was defending his client in a court





                  The Baron

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by The Baron View Post


                    .... after he fried and ate tother piece of Kidne he took from one women .. it was very nise

                    Tother half he prasarved and put it in his pocket while he was defending his client in a court





                    The Baron
                    You can read the part where it says the “on the day after….” can’t you?

                    It means the next day.

                    They occurred on different days.

                    Not at the same time.

                    Murder….train journey….Court.

                    Very simple stuff Baron. You’re wasting your time on this (and everyone else’s for that matter)
                    Regards

                    Sir Herlock Sholmes



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

                    ”Baroni licitum est dicere troglodytam”

                    Comment


                    • I realise that I'm about 6 years late to this thread but yes, Kosminski is about the least poor on a rather poor list of suspects we have in the 21st century. Any further insights into his viability could only really come from either contemporary police records (in so far as some previously undiscovered ones still exist) or from Leavesden Asylum records which MAY still exist in the private collections of the descendants of some former staff from '94-'19.

                      Apart from that, I am quite intrigued by the Letchmere/Cross situation but given that he was no suspect at the time and seems to have subsequently disappeared from history, the chances of any records that would help in investigating him are somewhere in the region of "absolutely nothing". So for this reason, Kosminski remains about the only person who could be considered a viable suspect.

                      Cheers.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Svensson View Post
                        I realise that I'm about 6 years late to this thread but yes, Kosminski is about the least poor on a rather poor list of suspects we have in the 21st century. Any further insights into his viability could only really come from either contemporary police records (in so far as some previously undiscovered ones still exist) or from Leavesden Asylum records which MAY still exist in the private collections of the descendants of some former staff from '94-'19.

                        Apart from that, I am quite intrigued by the Letchmere/Cross situation but given that he was no suspect at the time and seems to have subsequently disappeared from history, the chances of any records that would help in investigating him are somewhere in the region of "absolutely nothing". So for this reason, Kosminski remains about the only person who could be considered a viable suspect.

                        Cheers.
                        Hi Svensson,

                        Although I favour Druitt of the named suspects I certainly wouldn’t say that he was definitely the man. Kosminski definitely needs to be considered and further info could be out there somewhere.
                        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

                          What I mean though is that there’s no solid evidence against anyone.
                          Hi Herlock,

                          These are the wisest words you have spoken. I have observed that on this forum there are those who:

                          1. Are rusted on to their opinions, will not change, regardless of evidence presented, and resort to endless repitition to make their points.

                          2. Have no researched opinions but are happy to heckle from the sidelines anyone that does.

                          3. Are here for the courteous exchange of ideas without resort to personal attacks or ridicule of opinions.

                          I need to add a comment here to Herlock, that while my little rant is based on your comment, it is in no way directed at you.

                          Cheers, George

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post

                            Hi Svensson,

                            Although I favour Druitt of the named suspects I certainly wouldn’t say that he was definitely the man. Kosminski definitely needs to be considered and further info could be out there somewhere.
                            do we actually know how many runs Druitt scored the day after the murder..? The more runs, the less the likelyhood that he spent the night before running around East London with bloody hands. Unless he managed to get some kip on the train but given how shaky and noisy those old trains were, I rather doubt it.....

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by GBinOz View Post

                              Hi Herlock,

                              These are the wisest words you have spoken. I have observed that on this forum there are those who:

                              1. Are rusted on to their opinions, will not change, regardless of evidence presented, and resort to endless repitition to make their points.

                              2. Have no researched opinions but are happy to heckle from the sidelines anyone that does.

                              3. Are here for the courteous exchange of ideas without resort to personal attacks or ridicule of opinions.

                              I need to add a comment here to Herlock, that while my little rant is based on your comment, it is in no way directed at you.

                              Cheers, George
                              No problem George.
                              Regards

                              Sir Herlock Sholmes



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

                              ”Baroni licitum est dicere troglodytam”

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Svensson View Post

                                do we actually know how many runs Druitt scored the day after the murder..? The more runs, the less the likelyhood that he spent the night before running around East London with bloody hands. Unless he managed to get some kip on the train but given how shaky and noisy those old trains were, I rather doubt it.....
                                If Druitt was a serial killer can we expect him to act in the same way that a normal person would? How do we know how much sleep he required as different people require different amounts? Can we say for anything like certain that he couldn’t have slept on the train?
                                Regards

                                Sir Herlock Sholmes



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

                                ”Baroni licitum est dicere troglodytam”

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X