Is Kosminski still the best suspect we have?

[PaulB]

Hi Colin,

Because of the reluctant witness the ID confrontation did not enable the police to confirm they had the right man.

So the cops banged up Kosminski for life on the basis of exactly what?

Regards,

Simon

Hi Simon,
Needless to point out I'm sure, but it was a positive identification, so the police did confirm they had the right man. Also, the cops didn't bang Kosminski up for life. His family did. (assuming it was Aaron Kosminski)

[The Good Michael]

If we are talking about an era where just a bit of graffiti had to be erased for fear of some kind of uprising, imagine either a scenario of Kosminski going to trial or Kosminski being arrested and pronounced not guilty be reason of insanity. Wouldn't either scenario be unsettling for all of London? In one case we'd have an uncontrollable mob (remember Pizer), and in the other we'd have...an uncontrollable mob. What would a good solution be for the officials at the time? It would be exactly what is purported (by some) to have happened; a lock-up without a thought about release.

Mike

[Amanda]

Doesn't seem logical..

Official record of committal,
"... (b) Facts communicated by others, viz.:-
Jacob Cohen 51 Carter Lane St Pauls, City of London says that he goes about the streets and picks up bits of bread out of the gutter & eats them, he drinks water from the tap & he refuses food at the hands of others. He took up a knife & threatened the life of his sister. He says that he is ill and his cure consists in refusing food. He is melancholic, practises self-abuse. He is very dirty and will not be washed. He has not attempted any kind of work for years..."

No mention of "facts communicated by" the police.

Jacob Cohen, apparently didn't think the fact that he was "Jack the ripper" worthy of mention either.

Either Aaron Kosminski wasn't thought to have been jtr when he was committed or we're moving into the world of conspiracy theories and cover ups.

Hi Dusty,
I'm trying to imagine the scenario where a filthy man, regularly seen eating from the gutter and in many ways anti-social, would get close enough to a woman walking the streets to murder her...
To me this presents many questions:

1) "Refusing food at the hands of others" may suggest that Kosminski was not in the habit of approaching others, and was perhaps afraid of interaction, why then would he be conversing with a prostitute (I presume some conversation must have taken place prior to the murders, otherwise there may have been loud screams of fright) ?

2) Lack of food on a regular basis would result in physical weakness, which is surely not a trait of JtR?

3) Aaron Kosminski's appearance is noted as very dirty (and will not be washed) which is extremely inconsistent with descriptions given of suspects in the area (if we are to believe Hutchinson) , surely a dirty person running away from a crime scene would be very noticeable?

For my mind, the JtR murders seem to have been premeditated and carefully executed with regard to location, victims and opportunity, an unemployed migrant with sanity issues would surely not be capable of such planning?

Amanda

[PaulB]

Because the answers to your question lies with the answers to mine.

Not forgetting good old Hans Christian who spins a yarn about such an important event as this ID, that he forgets to mention where it took place, who the witness was and more importantly who the suspect was.

Its time this man Anderson was taken off his pedestal

The answer to my question lies within my answers to yours? That's too cryptic for me, even by your standards. Anyway, there are no answers anywhere. You have NOT cited pertinent procedures.

As for Anderson, perhaps you would provide the evidence that Anderson "forgot" to mention those things.

Of course, Anderson didn't have to mention them, and would have been in serious trouble if he did. I'm not a policeman, Trevor, but even I know that you can't name someone as Jack the Ripper who was never arrested, charged, tried and convicted of the crime.

[PaulB]

Hi All,

Just a point.

Thomas Cutbush was arraigned and appeared at the London County Sessions.

Although not absolutely insane, he was considered incompetent to plead and thus ordered to be detained during Her Majesty's pleasure.

Regards,

Simon

And thus he was never convicted of the crime of which he was accused, which upset his family because they believed that had it gone to trial they would have been able to produce evidence that he was innocent. They would then have been able to place him in a private asylum where they believed he would receive better treatment.

It is probable that precisely the same fate would have awaited Kosminski if the witness had agreed to testify, but, for whatever reason, he returned to his home and was committed by his family, thus avoiding further police action.

[Jonathan H]

To PaulB

When you say the 'police' had their man, you mean just Anderson and Swanson--right? Who were supported by no other police. In fact, were both specifically and implicitly rejected by other police of the day.

The key to the Marginalia is the additional claim that the suspect admitted he was 'Jack the Ripper'.

The tale had to have something extra once Mentor brought up the Beck miscarriage of justice; in which a dozen witnesses were proven to be sincerely mistaken.

A single witness is pathetic, unless the suspect confesses.

[GUT]

G'day Amanda

Hi Dusty,
I'm trying to imagine the scenario where a filthy man, regularly seen eating from the gutter and in many ways anti-social, would get close enough to a woman walking the streets to murder her...
To me this presents many questions:

1) "Refusing food at the hands of others" may suggest that Kosminski was not in the habit of approaching others, and was perhaps afraid of interaction, why then would he be conversing with a prostitute (I presume some conversation must have taken place prior to the murders, otherwise there may have been loud screams of fright) ?

That is IF he actually conversed with them beforehand and was not merely a sudden blitz attack.

3) Aaron Kosminski's appearance is noted as very dirty (and will not be washed) which is extremely inconsistent with descriptions given of suspects in the area (if we are to believe Hutchinson) , surely a dirty person running away from a crime scene would be very noticeable?

That is if anyone actually saw Jack.

[GUT]

I'm not a policeman, Trevor, but even I know that you can't name someone as Jack the Ripper who was never arrested, charged, tried and convicted of the crime.

G'day Paul

You can't....

There goes 90% of the ripper industry.

[PaulB]

To PaulB

When you say the 'police' had their man, you mean just Anderson and Swanson--right? Who were supported by no other police. In fact, were both specifically and implicitly rejected by other police of the day.

The key to the Marginalia is the additional claim that the suspect admitted he was 'Jack the Ripper'.

The tale had to have something extra once Mentor brought up the Beck miscarriage of justice; in which a dozen witnesses were proven to be sincerely mistaken.

A single witness is pathetic, unless the suspect confesses.

Hi Jonathan,
I don't know who I mean. I suppose that as the head of the CID Anderson would have been speaking for the police. But Macnaghten states that there were "many circs" which made "Kosminski" a suspect. We don't know what they were or who brought them to the fore. It's likely that there were others involved in investigating Kosminski, albeit they may not have been party to the identification.

Where did the suspect admit to having been Jack the Ripper? He knew he'd been identified, but we don't know what the witness saw. If it was Lawende then he would have seen the suspect talking with a woman identified by her clothing as Eddowes. Even if the suspect acknowledged that he was the man Lawende saw, that doesn't make him Jack the Ripper. It might have been enough to convince someone that the suspect was Jack the Ripper, and maybe with some justification (if we knew what other evidence the police had), but it remains to be seen whether such an acknowledged identification was tantamount to an admission.

The marginalia wasn't for publication.

[PaulB]

G'day Paul

You can't....

There goes 90% of the ripper industry.

Oh, more than 90% wouldn't you say?

[GUT]

Oh, more than 90% wouldn't you say?

I nearly said 99% but then thought of the few good guys.

[Chris]

I'm trying to imagine the scenario where a filthy man, regularly seen eating from the gutter and in many ways anti-social, would get close enough to a woman walking the streets to murder her...
To me this presents many questions:

But that describes his condition two and a half years after August 1888. The duration of the attack was then stated to be 6 months. (There is a note added later saying "6 years", but in view of his previous admission to the workhouse six and a half months earlier "Qy Inane" I think that's almost certainly an error.)

[Amanda]

Quite right..

But that describes his condition two and a half years after August 1888. The duration of the attack was then stated to be 6 months. (There is a note added later saying "6 years", but in view of his previous admission to the workhouse six and a half months earlier "Qy Inane" I think that's almost certainly an error.)

Hi Chris,
Yes, of course you're right. But still, to deteriorate to that stage within 2.5 yrs would surely still put his condition in 1888 as unstable?

Either Aaron Kosminski was always mentally unstable or it was a progression that worsened over time. I find it hard to believe that he was 'normal' in 1888, but then again, I don't suppose the JtR crimes could be classed as 'normal'.

Amanda

[GUT]

Hi Chris,
Yes, of course you're right. But still, to deteriorate to that stage within 2.5 yrs would surely still put his condition in 1888 as unstable?

Either Aaron Kosminski was always mentally unstable or it was a progression that worsened over time. I find it hard to believe that he was 'normal' in 1888, but then again, I don't suppose the JtR crimes could be classed as 'normal'.

Amanda

G'day Amanda

Could you really classify any serial killer as "Normal"?

And in any event "Waht is Normal"?

Some people even say I'm normal [not many mind you but some].

[Fisherman]

But that describes his condition two and a half years after August 1888. The duration of the attack was then stated to be 6 months. (There is a note added later saying "6 years", but in view of his previous admission to the workhouse six and a half months earlier "Qy Inane" I think that's almost certainly an error.)

In this context, it should be considered that Jacob Cohen says that Kosminski has not tried any form of work "for years", so even if I agree that there seems to be a correlation between the "six months" note and the previous admission, it is in no way a done deal.

Then again, there is the December 1889 unmuzzled dog thing, when Kosminski seems coherent enough, so we should not expect a man in a world of his own in 1888.

... but to take things a step further, I have always had trouble thinking that a man who stealthily killed a number of women in 1888, carving them up in the most horrendeous manner, would be meekly walking people´s dogs for them the year after ...

The best,
Fisherman