Arbitrary Selective Rejection and Acceptence of Coincidences

[Jonathan H]

Jeff, you've used material that backs my argument too:

'He was, however, placed in a lunatic asylum, and the series of atrocities came to an end.'

If he means Coles, well that is not Kosminski as he was already "safely caged" (anybody ever noticed how defensive that expression is), and if he means Kelly that does not fit Kosminski either, as he was out and about and functioning normally for years--just as Sims writes on Mac's behalf in 1907.

Same with the second source:

'Asked about these mysterious crimes, Mr. Sagar said, despite the many stories which are told, the police never had proof who committed them. ... After he was removed there were no more Ripper atrocities.'

And it is the same Kelly-Coles timing flaw.

And we have this:

‘Inspector Robert Sagar, who is just retiring from the City Police, is entirely at variance with Mr. George R. Sims as to the identity of “Jack the Ripper”. I see he has just stated, in an interview, that the City Police fully believed this man to be a butcher who worked in Aldgate, and was partly insane. It is believed that he made his way to Australia and there died.’

Aaron was not a butcher and did not die in Oz.

This hooray-he's-dead motif runs through all the alternate suspects, but only one was was actually deceased, and it was not Aaron Kosminski (unlike his fictional variant, 'Kosminski', who was stone dead soon after being sectioned in early 1889.)

Plus we have that unidentified policeman claiming in early 1892 to the "Western Mail" that they are still watching a suspect, day and night, since Coles' murder--and that he was definitely the fiend too.

Sound familiar?

[Monty]

To Monty

You're behind the times on all this.

There is no evidence that Kosminski -- or Cohen -- was put before any witness at all, let alone one who refused to testify on sectarian grounds.

There is just Anderson saying so in his memoirs-- never before in the extant record--at a time when an interview two years before shows, as Sudgen argued, that he was capable of all sorts of self-serving confusions and conflations.

Swanson backs him but the story may come just from Anderson, so back to square one. These are not annotations ever tested in any kind of public forum. Funny that, unless you were not sure what you were being told was really what happened and you just wanted to not embarrass the old man.

Henry Smith and Macnaghten both denounce the tale, the former explicitly and the latter implicitly. No other policeman back the story--period. Not even Swanson, in public. In fact nobody else, epriod. Yet it would have leaked like a sieve.

It's a myth.

Chris discovered a new Dagonet source from 1910 that shows that Macnaghten, via Sims, arguably went in hard against Anderson and his clumsy anti-Semitism. That means no identification either.

Evans and Rumbelow argued in 2006 a theory that explained all this; as a confusion with Lawende and Sadler (I would add Grant too) and the Sailor's Home.

I have never seen anybody counter it, with something more persuasive.

To Trevor

I agree.

To Jeff

Sagar was not talking about Kosminski, as he said no identification was possible, and Cox was not talking about Kosminski as he says no evidence was available, and it is 1891 and after Kosminski was incarcerated.

I know nothing.

Monty

[Jeff Leahy]

Jeff, you've used material that backs my argument too:

'He was, however, placed in a lunatic asylum, and the series of atrocities came to an end.

Yes and Sagar was talking about a Private Asylum, an event that happened in MArch 1889.

If he means Coles, well that is not Kosminski as he was already "safely caged" (anybody ever noticed how defensive that expression is), and if he means Kelly that does not fit Kosminski either, as he was out and about and functioning normally for years--just as Sims writes on Mac's behalf in 1907.

Sagar isn't talking about Coles, he's talking about Kelly but probably means Eddows.

Same with the second source:

'Asked about these mysterious crimes, Mr. Sagar said, despite the many stories which are told, the police never had proof who committed them. ... After he was removed there were no more Ripper atrocities.'

Yes thats exactly what I'm saying. Sagar is talking about a suspect followed up to March 1889.. At this time there is no proof the suspect was Jack the Ripper as Swansons ID doesn't happen until late 1890 almost two years after the event described by Sagar and Cox… The event recorded in the file that MacNaughten references in his memoranda.

So noone Abberline, Reid, NacNaughten, Sagar or Cox have any reason to believe that Kosminski is anything other than a credible suspect up to March 1889…

The event described by Swanson is a later event that happened in Secret, hence only Anderson and a small handful of officers at this time no about it.

And we have this:

‘Inspector Robert Sagar, who is just retiring from the City Police, is entirely at variance with Mr. George R. Sims as to the identity of “Jack the Ripper”. I see he has just stated, in an interview, that the City Police fully believed this man to be a butcher who worked in Aldgate, and was partly insane. It is believed that he made his way to Australia and there died.’

Aaron was not a butcher and did not die in Oz.[/QUOTE]

I covered this for you in an earlier post please check for detail… But the Seatle source for this is a reworking of an unknown source and is thus less reliable than the other three sources…

However if there were connections to Cohens in Butchers Row..There may of been a confusion between a group of men approximately the same age, from the same place (Kalish) and of similar trades (Taylors)

And Jacob Cohen went to South Africa, hence the muddle report

This hooray-he's-dead motif runs through all the alternate suspects, but only one was was actually deceased, and it was not Aaron Kosminski (unlike his fictional variant, 'Kosminski', who was stone dead soon after being sectioned in early 1889.)

Plus we have that unidentified policeman claiming in early 1892 to the "Western Mail" that they are still watching a suspect, day and night, since Coles' murder--and that he was definitely the fiend too.

Sound familiar?

Sounds like more compacted twisting where none is required

Yours jeff

[Trevor Marriott]

I wasn't talking about his status as head of investigation, but more his role regarding Kosminski.

Monty

Did he have one?

Because even if you believe the contents of the marginalia it doesn't prove he was actively involved in what was written in that book.

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Chris]

Given some of the convoluted "confusion theories" that people have put forward, I'm surprised more hasn't been made of the similarities between Aaron Kozminski and Severin Klosowski.

Two Polish hairdressers called K...ski, born in neighbouring towns, who lived in the same street in London...

[Jeff Leahy]

Seattle Daily Times, 4th February 1905

The theory of the city police is that "Jack the Ripper" was a butcher who worked in "Butchers' Row," Aldgate, and was partly insane. It is believed that he made his way to Australia and there died. "The police are satisfied as to the identity of the man," remarked the inspector, "but what became of him we don't know.

I've just noted that the only account that mentions Sagar watched a butcher is the later 'Seattle' version for which the original 'Charming Man' version (Hopefuly not Morressey ) appear to be missing

Is this more to do with a Journalistic embellishment than fact?

There were after all a number of shops in Butchers Row and not all of them were abertoiurs or butchers..

Yours Jeff

[Chris]

I've just noted that the only account that mentions Sagar watched a butcher is the later 'Seattle' version for which the original 'Charming Man' version (Hopefuly not Morressey ) appear to be missing

The source of the Seattle Daily Times article is also quoted by the Gloucester Citizen of 9 January 1905 (posted by Jonathan earlier in this thread) - "I see he [Sagar] has just stated, in an interview, that the City Police fully believed this man to be a butcher who worked in Aldgate, and was partly insane. It is believed that he made his way to Australia and there died."

So I don't think there's any doubt that "butcher" and the statement about Australia originally appeared in an report of Sagar's retirement at around the same time as the others. Hopefully it will surface sooner or later as more newspapers are digitised.

[Jeff Leahy]

The source of the Seattle Daily Times article is also quoted by the Gloucester Citizen of 9 January 1905 (posted by Jonathan earlier in this thread) - "I see he [Sagar] has just stated, in an interview, that the City Police fully believed this man to be a butcher who worked in Aldgate, and was partly insane. It is believed that he made his way to Australia and there died."

So I don't think there's any doubt that "butcher" and the statement about Australia originally appeared in an report of Sagar's retirement at around the same time as the others. Hopefully it will surface sooner or later as more newspapers are digitised.

Hi Chris..Yes I had noted this but the 'Gloucester Citizen' is given as another variation of the original Four accounts.

So are you saying that this is also a re-working of a missing original?

They do after all seem at variance with the other three Newspaper accounts (Which also differ from each other), somewhat odd if they were given at the same time. I guess as my background is filming press junkets I'd visualised this as some sort of official event with press asking questions, although I must admit I like the idea of Sagar having one to many on retirement down the pub and spilling the beans..

But as I said there are more than just Butcher shops in Butchers row.

Yours Jeff

[Chris]

So are you saying that this is also a re-working of a missing original?

I think the Gloucester Citizen of 9 January 1905 was quoting the unknown source of the Seattle Daily Times. I think that source was probably also the basis of reports in the Sunday Chronicle of 8 January, and the Daily Mail of 9 January.

[Monty]

Did he have one?

Because even if you believe the contents of the marginalia it doesn't prove he was actively involved in what was written in that book.

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

Did the head of the investigation have an involvement in an I D parade regarding a supposed suspect?

Nah, he was completely oblivious.

Monty

[Trevor Marriott]

Did the head of the investigation have an involvement in an I D parade regarding a supposed suspect?

Nah, he was completely oblivious.

Monty

Now for once we are singing from the same song sheet- a bit worrying

[Chris]

Unfortunately there is no sarcasm emoticon.
:sarcasm:

[Jeff Leahy]

I think the Gloucester Citizen of 9 January 1905 was quoting the unknown source of the Seattle Daily Times. I think that source was probably also the basis of reports in the Sunday Chronicle of 8 January, and the Daily Mail of 9 January.

Ok Thanks for that, and lets hope the missing article turns up as you say..

I still find it rather odd that an interview given on apparently the same day can become so varied.

Perhaps the local was selling Fosters and after the tenth pint the short hand just got a little blurry Sarcasm excluded again

Many thanks
Yours Jeff

[Hunter]

You are a far better expert Hunter.

No way my friend. Your book is now on its way and I've asked everyone in the house (including the parrot) to stay quiet for a couple of days when it gets here... I may have to bribe the parrot with peanuts.

[Monty]

No way my friend. Your book is now on its way and I've asked everyone in the house (including the parrot) to stay quiet for a couple of days when it gets here... I may have to bribe the parrot with peanuts.

Just hope you like it chap.

Monty