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 Trevor Marriott View Post

    But Macnaghten who was Swansons immediate superior makes no mention of any such ID parade in his later memorandum, and in a second memorandum having initially mentioned the name Kosminski as a likely suspect then states that he exonarates Kosminski. hardly corroboration of the marginalia, in fact quite the opposite

    I think you should be looking at who actually wrote the marginalia and when it was written!

    www.trevormarriott
    He doesn't quite clear Kosminski in the second version, rather, after listing the 3 suspects he considers more worthy of suspicion than Cutbush, he goes on to give his opinion as to which is to be preferred. The memorandums tend to come across as if the 3 he listed were selected from a larger pool and are given as examples of individuals who make better suspects than Cutbush, though one could be justified in presuming he chose what he considered the best three examples. He goes on to then state his opinion as to which of those three he considers the most likely (Druitt) but he does clarify that the case against him isn't proven (his truth at the bottom of the Thames statement). He also indicates that his suspicions against Druitt have grown over time, and that leaves me with the impression that the growth of his suspicions against Druitt are not because more evidence came forward to support that, rather, because he felt there were no more murders by JtR, and Druitt suicided shortly after Kelly's murder, the absence of any further murders and his suicide both seemed easy enough to explain as a result. I don't think, however, he was indicating there was a strong case against any of them really, rather these were just three men whom the police felt there was reason to look into for some reason but they had not fully exonerated them (if I recall correctly, he even says that Ostrog's whereabouts at the time of the murders was not known, so he didn't even have evidence that Ostrog was actually in the area at the appropriate time - not that that has ever been considered a barrier to suggesting someone as a suspect of course). In short, the purpose of the memorandum seems more about arguing how weak the case against Cutbush is, and that argument is illustrated by listing the three "better examples", rather than listing the 3 as if they were individuals against whom strong cases could be made. They are "relatively stronger cases than Cutbush's case" even if their cases were not strong in the absolute sense.

    - Jeff

    Comment


    • Trevor,

      who wrote the bible?

      The identification as I understand it was not at the high standerds you describe, there were difficulties which we don't know, and that Macnaghten didn't mention it maybe he didn't know of it, or that he only knew it was a falied atempt to bring evidence against Kosminski, we just don't know.

      You and Simon are using the fact that we don't know everything in order to disaprove the whole thing altogether.

      I already know who wrote the Marginalia.

      Macnaghten said he is a strong suspect, Trevor, not a likely suspect.


      The Baron

      Comment


      • Hi Baron,

        I would say that the bible was written by many people at different times.

        But I give up on who wrote the Swanson marginalia. There are just too many people from which to choose.

        Regards,

        Simon
        Never believe anything until it has been officially denied.

        Comment


        • Kosminsky is the best suspect that we have.

          If you know of a better suspect then please name him.

          Being a suspect doest meen he is convicted guilty.

          Against Kosminsky there is an identification and many sircumstances that we now after +130 years don't know.

          We wish there were more, thats why we see people worshiping a proven hoax, others promoting a witness as the lone murderer of every woman and her dog in Whitechapel, it is this state of lack of information and doubting in everything that shakes those beautiful minds and imaginations with desire to solve the case.

          They may have solved it back then.



          The Baron

          Comment


          • Hi Simon,

            I would like to know your opinion on the case of Israel Lipsky murdering Miriam Angel

            " In the event, the jury took only eight minutes to find Lipski guilty and he was sentenced to hang. The verdict, however, aroused immediate controversy and a press campaign to reprieve Lipski was orchestrated by William Thomas Stead, editor of the Pall Mall Gazette. Even Queen Victoria was said to be troubled by the prospect of Lipski being executed solely on the evidence that had been presented to the court.[3] As a result of this mounting public disquiet, the execution was postponed for one week while Matthews and the trial judge, James Fitzjames Stephen, met to consider a reprieve. While they were meeting, however, Lipski allegedly broke down and made a full confession to the East End rabbi and community spokesman Simeon Singer, claiming that his motive had been robbery and not, as had been claimed by the prosecution, rape"


            Do you think he was guilty?!


            I believe this a key to solve this case and maybe all started after this conviction.


            The Baron

            Comment


            • Hi Baron,

              I know nothing about Israel Lipsky except that he murdered Miriam Angel and was thus executed for his trouble.

              What has this got to do with a retired policeman fingering someone called Kosminski for the Whitechapel murders?

              Regards,

              Simon
              Never believe anything until it has been officially denied.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by The Baron View Post
                Trevor,

                The identification as I understand it was not at the high standerds you describe, there were difficulties which we don't know, and that Macnaghten didn't mention it maybe he didn't know of it, or that he only knew it was a falied atempt to bring evidence against Kosminski, we just don't know
                If the police wanted to try to identify the killer and secure a conviction they would have adhered to the identification guidleines as set out by Sir Howard Vincent in the police codes. It is highly unusual both then and now for a suspect to be taken to a witness for the purpose of conducting an Id parade. The police have to form a parade of at least 8 persons of similar description a logistical nitemare for them away from a police station.

                To convey a suspect to a location where an ID was taking place would have involved a number of police officers of different ranks who would have had to have been present when the ID parade took place and would have known of the positive ID outcome. Do you not think it is strange that no other officer other than Swanson mentions such an important event in the Ripper investigation over the ensuing years.

                Macnaghten would have had to authorise it so he must have known about it if in fact it took place.

                There is no mention by Major Smith in assisting the Met in keeping watch on the suspect day and night as the marginalia suggests do you not think he would have known all about it

                If you have a copy of my book "jack the Ripper-the real truth" there is a complete chapter on the Swanson marginalia and the reasons why I suggest it is flawed.

                The Marginalia is as reliable as a chocolate teapot

                www.trevormarriott.co.uk

                Comment


                • This is from the police code of 1984 - A confrontation is where the suspect is directly confronted by the witness. This procedure may be used when it is not possible to arrange a video identification, identification parade, or group identification.

                  Could something similar not have happened in 1888 were a suspect refuses to attend an ID parade

                  Also I wrote this in a previous post - In connection with the arrest of a lunatic at Holloway, it appears that he has been missing from his friends for some time now. The detectives have been very active in prosecuting their inquiries concerning him, and it is believed the result, so far, increases their suspicion. He is at present confined in the asylum at Grove-road, Bow.

                  There are at present three cases of suspicion. 1. The lunatic Isensmith a Swiss arrested at Holloway who is now in an asylum at Bow & arrangements are being made to ascertain whether he is the man who was seen on the morning of the murder in a public house by Mrs Fiddymont.

                  In the early hours of 12 September Isenschmid was arrested and taken to Holloway Police Station. Judged insane, he was sent to the Islington Workhouse and from thence, the same day, to Grove Hall Lunatic Asylum, Fairfield Road, Bow.

                  [Sounds familiar with Kosminski]

                  Dr Mickle, resident medical officer at Grove Hall, was so concerned about his patient’s health that he declined to permit the witnesses to confront him. [Again Kosminski] On 19 September, the date of our last police report on Isenschmid, the doctor was still obdurate and we do not know whether Mrs Fiddymont and her witnesses ever did identify the suspect.

                  Abberline himself, in a report of 19 September, let that particular cat out of the bag. There he suggests that the chief police surgeon or one of the divisional surgeons be requested to contact Dr Mickle in order to expedite arrangements for the witnesses to see Isenschmid because ‘time is of the greatest importance in this case, [Kosminski being sent to the asylum in a very short space of time] not only with regard to the question of identity, but also for the purpose of allaying the strong public feeling that exists.’

                  Regards Darryl

                  Comment


                  • Thats how I understand it too Darryl, it was a confrontation of a suspect and a witness.

                    Trevor,

                    the Marginalia is reliable enough to make Kosminski a suspect, not a convicted murderer, Swanson knows about the case more than all of us combined, and more than anyone at all, I don't have reasons to doubt his words.


                    There was a suspect-witness confrontation.



                    The Baron

                    Comment


                    • Hi Daryl
                      see below


                      Originally posted by Darryl Kenyon View Post
                      This is from the police code of 1984 - A confrontation is where the suspect is directly confronted by the witness. This procedure may be used when it is not possible to arrange a video identification, identification parade, or group identification.

                      Could something similar not have happened in 1888 were a suspect refuses to attend an ID parade

                      Is there any evidence to support this ?

                      Even in 1888 the police cannot simply drag someone off the street or from anywhere and subject that person to any form of ID procedure.
                      if they are looking to consider a prosecution against any person then they have to abide by the guidelines. In order for the procedure to be legal the suspect would have to have been arrested and this is where this whole Kosminski issue falls flat, There is no record or any mention in any other document that Kosminski was ever arrested or interviewed


                      Also I wrote this in a previous post - In connection with the arrest of a lunatic at Holloway, it appears that he has been missing from his friends for some time now. The detectives have been very active in prosecuting their inquiries concerning him, and it is believed the result, so far, increases their suspicion. He is at present confined in the asylum at Grove-road, Bow.

                      There is no evidence that Kosminski was at the time of this mythical Id parade incarcerated in an asylum if that had have been the case the police would not have returned him to an address outside of the asylum after the parade

                      In the early hours of 12 September Isenschmid was arrested and taken to Holloway Police Station. Judged insane, he was sent to the Islington Workhouse and from thence, the same day, to Grove Hall Lunatic Asylum, Fairfield Road, Bow.

                      [Sounds familiar with Kosminski]

                      But not subjected to an Id parade

                      Dr Mickle, resident medical officer at Grove Hall, was so concerned about his patient’s health that he declined to permit the witnesses to confront him. [Again Kosminski] On 19 September, the date of our last police report on Isenschmid, the doctor was still obdurate and we do not know whether Mrs Fiddymont and her witnesses ever did identify the suspect.

                      There is no evidence to show that Kosminski was in an asylum prior to being taken to this mythical Id parade, also my reply above also applies to this !

                      Abberline himself, in a report of 19 September, let that particular cat out of the bag. There he suggests that the chief police surgeon or one of the divisional surgeons be requested to contact Dr Mickle in order to expedite arrangements for the witnesses to see Isenschmid because ‘time is of the greatest importance in this case, [Kosminski being sent to the asylum in a very short space of time] not only with regard to the question of identity, but also for the purpose of allaying the strong public feeling that exists.’

                      There is nothing in this report to show that the request was not to simply organise an official ID parade

                      Regards Darryl
                      www.trevormarriott.co.uk
                      Last edited by Trevor Marriott; 02-19-2022, 04:38 PM.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by The Baron View Post
                        Thats how I understand it too Darryl, it was a confrontation of a suspect and a witness.

                        Trevor,

                        the Marginalia is reliable enough to make Kosminski a suspect, not a convicted murderer, Swanson knows about the case more than all of us combined, and more than anyone at all, I don't have reasons to doubt his words.


                        There was a suspect-witness confrontation.

                        The Baron
                        Well you need to take those rose tinted spectacles off they are clouding your judgment

                        www.trevormarriott.co.uk

                        Comment


                        • "This man in appearance strongly resembled the individual seen by the City P.C. near Mitre Square" - Macnaghten 1894

                          "One was a Polish Jew, a known lunatic, who was at large in the district of Whitechapel at the time of the murder, and who, having afterwards developed homicidal tendencies, was confined to an asylum. This man was said to resemble the murderer by the one person who got a glimpse of him - the police-constable in Mitre Court. " - Griffiths, 1898

                          "A police officer met a well dressed man of Jewish appearance coming out of the court. Continuing on his patrol he came across the woman's body." Sagar 1905.

                          "The policeman who got a glimpse of Jack in Mitre Court said, when some time afterwards he saw the Pole, that he was the height and build of the man he had seen on the night of the murder." - Sims (1907) - source is probably Griffiths.

                          "One man only, a policeman, saw him leaving the place in which he had just accomplished a fiendish deed, but failed, owing to the darkness, to get a good view of him. A little later the policeman stumbled over the lifeless body of the victim." - Sims


                          James Blenkingsop - standing watch over some street improvements in St. James Place, when a well dressed man approached and asked, “Have you seen a man and a woman go through here?” Blenkingsop replied that he had seen some people pass by, but added, “I didn’t take any notice.” The man then went away.

                          "I feel sure we knew the man, but we could prove nothing. Eventually we got him incarcerated in a lunatic asylum, and the series of murders came to an end" - Sagar 1905


                          "We had good reason to suspect a certain man who worked in 'Butcher's-row,' Aldgate," he said, "and we watched him carefully. There was no doubt that this man was insane, and after a time his friends thought it advisable to have him removed to a private asylum. After he was removed there were no more Ripper atrocities." -Sagar 1905


                          "There were several other officers with me, and I think there can be no harm in stating that the opinion of most of them was that the man they were watching had something to do with the crimes" - Cox 1906



                          Kosminski was confronted for identification two times, one by a fellow jew, and one by a City PC.


                          Kosminski is the best suspect we have.




                          The Baron
                          Last edited by The Baron; 02-19-2022, 07:45 PM.

                          Comment


                          • Hi Baron,

                            Sims was not what you might call a reliable source.

                            On 11th February 1907 Macnaghten wrote to Sims—

                            “. . . It may also save you the trouble of research if I give you the times & places of Jack the Ripper’s pleasantries.”

                            There followed the locations, dates and names of the five canonical victims, which Sims used in his 22nd September 1907 article for Lloyds Weekly News.

                            It does seem incredible that, nineteen years after the event, Sims had not got these basic facts to hand.

                            Regards,

                            Simon
                            Never believe anything until it has been officially denied.

                            Comment


                            • Hi Simon,

                              I agree.


                              The Baron

                              Comment


                              • On top of all that, Baron, Kosminski's family probably interfered with the identification and confinement proceedings, causing the police to either botch up the whole process, or severely limiting what they (police) legally could have done to secure a conviction.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X