Arbitrary Selective Rejection and Acceptence of Coincidences

[Jeff Leahy]

In this case, it's the ability approach a victim, get them to come away with him, and render them helpless before they even knew they should be alarmed. Jack the Ripper was no genius, but he was planning and was using subtlety. Which is where someone with the judgement of a second grader is going to fail every time.

Well I'm not convinced that these women would have put up much of a fight they were venerable (Sorry Robert this is an auto spell check i mean von er able)

Stride and Eddows possibly had more fight in them. But the attacks would have been sudden and with much power.

If you think about the Stride attack, the one witnessed by schwartz, then this is a man walking up to someone arguing and attacking. It doesn't involve much sophistication.

I also wonder if he is a 'Night watchman' of some sought. If these women are already aware of him. I think some might have been

"See what a jolly new bonnet I've got, I'll soon get my doss money"

Which Is why I say that psychosis doesn't mean a person cannot be a murderer. Of course they can. It means they can't be THIS particular murderer. They also couldn't have done what H.H. Holmes did, what Dahmer did, what Bundy did. Their frontal lobes were intact, and they could execute elaborate plans. Chase, Mullin, even Gein couldn't do that. Their murders looked different.

On November 16, 1957, Plainfield hardware store owner Bernice Worden disappeared, and police had reason to suspect Gein. Worden's son told investigators that Gein had been in the store the evening before the disappearance, saying he would return the next morning for a gallon of anti-freeze. A sales slip for a gallon of anti-freeze was the last receipt written by Worden on the morning she disappeared.[16] Upon searching Gein's property, investigators discovered Worden's decapitated body in a shed, hung upside down by ropes at her wrists, with a crossbar at her ankles. The torso was "dressed out like a deer".[17] She had been shot with a .22-caliber rifle, and the mutilations were made after her death.

Why would he be in a private facility early into his immigration to England, but within four years be in public asylums? His living situation would be far more important at his final facility than his first. What would be the reasoning for that, and why would they stop paying?

Well these are the questions we need to get answered. There must be a connection somewhere. But I don't think they did stop paying. Even when Aaron entered Colney Hatch there is some evidence they continued to contribute. The Family erected an elaborate grave stone with the name Kosminski. They clearly cared.

The only masturbation known of was self reported, and he was simply asked if he had ever masturbated. There is nothing to suggest he ever did it in public, or ever did it front of his family. Nor is there any evidence he did it an unreasonable amount. And there is no evidence his family ever knew what he did behind closed doors.

You asked what Reason they might have used to have him committed. I'm simply pointing out there are many. Almost anything. But Masturbation would have been an easy one.

Says McNaughton. But it is interesting that when delusional, when lucid, nobody ever reported that kind of attitude. It should have been in his psychiatric file. It would have come up in the almost 30 years he was in an asylum. It didn't. So all that we know is that Mcnaughton say it was so, but it was not backed up either by the subject, his family, or even his care providers.

Well MacNaughten only knew about what was said up to MArch 1889. Trust me, it makes sense..

Well in theory Anderson would also have known that Kosminski had not in fact died. People misremember details.

They do indeed miss remember details. What they don't do is forget the broad 'thrust' of what happened. And Anderson would not lie for personal kudos.

We don't know that. Kosminski was writing about things that happened before he even joined the Yard. And he gets quite a bit wrong about Druitt. He is not some infallible prophet. He's a third hand source.

I presume you want MacNaugten here, and I don't think Begg would agree he''s a third hand source. I've always considered MacNaughten very important. A primary source, in that he had the info in front of him and wrote /prepared a report. But he wasn't on the ground, neither was Anderson, but they are Primary.

But even if we knew that to be true, we have no idea what they base that off of. There are any number of perfectly understandable behaviors that look bad when seen once by someone with zero cultural sensitivity. He certainly didn't do anything remotely criminal, or they would have arrested him.

Yep I agree. The man described by Cox, there was no proof. And I believe thats what the file Macnaughten read actually said. So MacNaughten plumbed for Druit.

There is no consensus as to who Cox is talking about. But the details don't match McNaughten's details on Kosminski. Nor does his account match with what we know to be fact about Kosminski.

He reports that the suspect was forced into an asylum in Surrey. Which means that he certainly thought he knew what happened to the suspect.

Theres no consensus because no ones ever considered the possibility that Aaron went into an Asylum more than once. I think he was in and out of the private asylum in Surrey…he must have been as we know where he is in December 1889 and July 1890.

But he doesn't go into the public asylum in Feb 1891.

Two different events

Looking is worthwhile, but I would doubt very much that you find those records. Someone as ill as Kosminski does not walk out after a week or two.

ITs going to be like looking for a needle in a Hay stack but I have some help, and lets see why happens. MAny thanks for the support

Yours Jeff

[Errata]

I noticed the other day that one of the bugler killers were out and advertising on dating sites. But 10-11 year olds are also capable of murder.

Physically we are talking about Having the strength of a man. And psychotic people can have great strength. My understanding is that people with psychosis can and do commit murders. Jack required little skill….as Bond says ..only the skills of a butcher… or possibly someone one who occasionally helped out in a butchers shop.. 'He occupied several shops in the area'

We have know idea how functional Aaron Kosminski would have been if he were the ripper. But the possibility remains.

It's not about physical or even emotional ability to kill. Anyone can kill given the right tools. A toddler can stab someone to death. And it's not even about skill.

In this case, it's the ability approach a victim, get them to come away with him, and render them helpless before they even knew they should be alarmed. Jack the Ripper was no genius, but he was planning and was using subtlety. Which is where someone with the judgement of a second grader is going to fail every time.

They cannot help but immediately act on impulse.

Shutting down the frontal lobe doesn't prevent people from killing.

Shutting down the frontal lobe prevents certain kinds of killing. The kinds that require subtlety, blending, waiting for an opportunity to open up. Strategic planning is out.

Which Is why I say that psychosis doesn't mean a person cannot be a murderer. Of course they can. It means they can't be THIS particular murderer. They also couldn't have done what H.H. Holmes did, what Dahmer did, what Bundy did. Their frontal lobes were intact, and they could execute elaborate plans. Chase, Mullin, even Gein couldn't do that. Their murders looked different.

This would only be required if he were entering a Public Asylum. Private Asylums like Holloway had guests or boarders. THey were free to come and go. And run unto a system known as 'Alienism'. Fresh air and lovely environments. Relaxing Seaside convalescents…

Why would he be in a private facility early into his immigration to England, but within four years be in public asylums? His living situation would be far more important at his final facility than his first. What would be the reasoning for that, and why would they stop paying?

The only reason you'd need would be enough money (Which the Kosminski's had) and a good reason…he masturbated.

The only masturbation known of was self reported, and he was simply asked if he had ever masturbated. There is nothing to suggest he ever did it in public, or ever did it front of his family. Nor is there any evidence he did it an unreasonable amount. And there is no evidence his family ever knew what he did behind closed doors.

Kosminski had a strong hatred of women… it had to come from somewhere, the Batty Street bloody shirt? The man who attacked a woman with a knife in Brick lane?

Says McNaughton. But it is interesting that when delusional, when lucid, nobody ever reported that kind of attitude. It should have been in his psychiatric file. It would have come up in the almost 30 years he was in an asylum. It didn't. So all that we know is that Mcnaughton say it was so, but it was not backed up either by the subject, his family, or even his care providers.

Then why does MacNaughten say he went in an Asylum in MArch 1889?

If he had the later Asylum records he would have known he went in Colney Hatch in Feb 1891….

Well in theory Anderson would also have known that Kosminski had not in fact died. People misremember details.

So your theory doesn't add up. Everything MAcNaughten knew about Kosminski dates before MArch 1889. Its that simple.

We don't know that. Kosminski was writing about things that happened before he even joined the Yard. And he gets quite a bit wrong about Druitt. He is not some infallible prophet. He's a third hand source.

I think the idea that Kosminski had a great hatred of women came from him being watched and followed. It was the opinion of those who watched him

But even if we knew that to be true, we have no idea what they base that off of. There are any number of perfectly understandable behaviors that look bad when seen once by someone with zero cultural sensitivity. He certainly didn't do anything remotely criminal, or they would have arrested him.

He then says that although the police had many people under observation at the time of the murders, it was not until Kelly's death that they "seemed to get upon the trail", when investigations made by "several of our cleverest detectives" indicated that a man living in the East End was "not unlikely to have been connected with the crimes"

***

Finally he says that he has no evidence as to whether the murderer is alive or dead.

There is no consensus as to who Cox is talking about. But the details don't match McNaughten's details on Kosminski. Nor does his account match with what we know to be fact about Kosminski.

Speculation...Thats probably because he didn't know that Kosminski was placed in a private asylum in March 1889.. and would be back on the streets from time to time, as private asylums are only designed for short term stays.

He reports that the suspect was forced into an asylum in Surrey. Which means that he certainly thought he knew what happened to the suspect.

And it was quite a shock for Matin Fido who also expected to find Kosminski in MArch 1889, he never checked the Private Asylum records.

Looking is worthwhile, but I would doubt very much that you find those records. Someone as ill as Kosminski does not walk out after a week or two.

[Jeff Leahy]

We know that when someone is delusional, their frontal lobe goes out the window. Whether they have delusions about sentient butterflies or whether that have delusions about world domination. It doesn't matter. The frontal lobe is shut down. Which makes them a rampaging 10 year old in terms of judgement and planning.

I noticed the other day that one of the bugler killers were out and advertising on dating sites. But 10-11 year olds are also capable of murder.

Physically we are talking about Having the strength of a man. And psychotic people can have great strength. My understanding is that people with psychosis can and do commit murders. Jack required little skill….as Bond says ..only the skills of a butcher… or possibly someone one who occasionally helped out in a butchers shop.. 'He occupied several shops in the area'

We have know idea how functional Aaron Kosminski would have been if he were the ripper. But the possibility remains.

So Kosminski checked in to the asylum in 1889. In order to do that he had to be evaluated and get a certificate of health from the court.

This would only be required if he were entering a Public Asylum. Private Asylums like Holloway had guests or boarders. THey were free to come and go. And run unto a system known as 'Alienism'. Fresh air and lovely environments. Relaxing Seaside convalescents…

The only reason you'd need would be enough money (Which the Kosminski's had) and a good reason…he masturbated.

If McNaughton had a file on Kosminski, I don't know what he could have had before 1889.

The police followed a number of suspects. Cox and Sagar describe a man who occupied various premises…. THe previous email posted information on Isac Kosminski possibly being connected to butchers Row

Kosminski had a strong hatred of women… it had to come from somewhere, the Batty Street bloody shirt? The man who attacked a woman with a knife in Brick lane?

McNaughton file was most likely triggered by the certificate of health motion. And it's possible he was watching all of those. But that document is the only one that has the story of Kosminski pulling a knife on his sister. Which as far as we know is the only example we have of any kind of threat against women. There is actually a very good reason that Kosminski might have avoided women while delusional, but it would not have been violent. Emphatic, but not violent. So McNaughton has to have that certificate. It's the only thing that makes sense. And when that certificate was issued, Kosminski was not yet being followed. So any reports on his behavior previous to the certificate would simply have pointed out his madness.

To be frank, I can't think McNaughton had anything on him prior to 1889. And he couldn't have had a great deal on him until the mid 1890s. Getting to know someone like Kosminski is not a one interview affair. It take years to map out conditions, motivation, drives, needs, personality etc. So the Asylum probably didn't have a decent sized file on him until he had been there a couple years.

Then why does MacNaughten say he went in an Asylum in MArch 1889?

If he had the later Asylum records he would have known he went in Colney Hatch in Feb 1891….

So your theory doesn't add up. Everything MAcNaughten knew about Kosminski dates before MArch 1889. Its that simple.

As for his "great hatred of women", I think that's a misinterpretation based on minimal facts. That's just my take on it. However, if he was a misogynist, that would not have come out until Colney Hatch. He was a solitary individual, he was not social, and asylums were not especially co-ed. It would have been hard to see him interact with a woman. So that would have to come out through conversation, which mean he had to be talking to the doctors, which takes a bit of time. Trust needs to be built, and back then it was 10 times harder.

Except it seems like McNaughton already had that impression before he could have gotten detailed records. Which is why I think the statement is suspect.

As for the connections between Kosminski and the investigation, I honestly have no idea. I would have thought that if an identification took place, it would not have been hard for two agents to follow the right guy. I mean, someone would have pointed him out to them. If they got it wrong then that's a three stooges level failure that really needs to admired. So the question is, did they follow the right guy, and if not why not? I mean, really not hard. Or were they not ever trying to follow Kosminski, but some other guy. And if it's some other guy, then there doesn't need to be a connection to Kosminski.

I think the idea that Kosminski had a great hatred of women came from him being watched and followed. It was the opinion of those who watched him

He then says that although the police had many people under observation at the time of the murders, it was not until Kelly's death that they "seemed to get upon the trail", when investigations made by "several of our cleverest detectives" indicated that a man living in the East End was "not unlikely to have been connected with the crimes"

Further on he adds that the opinion of most of the officers who were watching the man was that he "had something to do with the crimes". He is convinced that the motive was revenge on womankind, not "a lust for blood", and that the murderer, like his victims, belonged to the "lowest class".

"The man we suspected was about five feet six inches in height, with short, black, curly hair, and he had a habit of taking late walks abroad. He occupied several shops in the East End, but from time to time he became insane, and was forced to spend a portion of his time in an asylum in Surrey."

Cox adds that he was on duty in the street where the suspect had his place of business for nearly three months after the last murder (presumably meaning that of Kelly). The officers allayed the suspicions of the Jewish inhabitants of the street by telling them that they were factory inspectors investigating the exploitation of children by tailors and capmakers. They had the use of a house opposite the suspect's shop, and often visited it in disguise, posing as customers.

He then relates how he shadowed the man one night. Waiting until the man had left the street before emerging, he followed him to Leman Street, where he visited a shop which was the abode of known criminals, then to St George's in the East, where he accosted a woman, then to the neighbourhood of "the model lodging-house", where he met another woman and walked with her before pushing her away and returning home.

Cox comments that the crimes ceased as soon as the man was put under observation, and that he soon "removed from his usual haunts and gave up his nightly prowls". But then he adds that "not the slightest scrap of evidence" could be found against him, and that the police continued to investigate the crimes long afterwards. He concludes by saying that the crimes are as much a mystery as they were "fifteen years ago", that the theories of amateur detectives are based on nothing more than surmise, and that the murderer will be identified only if he confesses and proves himself guilty, or if he kills again and is caught red-handed. Finally he says that he has no evidence as to whether the murderer is alive or dead.

Speculation...Thats probably because he didn't know that Kosminski was placed in a private asylum in March 1889.. and would be back on the streets from time to time, as private asylums are only designed for short term stays.

It wasn't until the Earl of Crawford introduced Matilda Kosminski to Anderson that the attempted ID took place. At a Private Asylum Seaside home…in an attempt to get him convicted and in Broadmoore… this failed and the Hatch was the second best thing…

But only Anderson and Swanson ever knew of Kosminski entering Colney Hatch in Feb 1891… Cox is clear that nothing was fond on the man they followed….and thats what MacNaughten believed and why he preferred Druit..

And it was quite a shock for Matin Fido who also expected to find Kosminski in MArch 1889, he never checked the Private Asylum records.

Yours Jeff

[Errata]

Dr Lars Davidson was fairly clear that without a proper psychotic one to one assessment. Theres just know way of knowing that for certain. All we have is the probability that Aaron Kosminski was suffering a form of schizophrenia.

Exactly how it would manifest itself isn't certain.

All we can say is that on rare occasions schizophrenics can become dangerous. And that their are many examples of serial killers who suffer this condition. Also serial killers associated with bizarre sexual mutilation are often suffering, a form of schizophrenia.

Its pretty general i know but what we can't say is because Kosminski may have suffered 'psychosis' he would not have been capable of murder, simply goes against the grain of everything I've studied about serial killers per ce.

My background was after all researching this area in the UK and re-constructing murders for TV.

That's not at all what I'm saying. And Dr. Lars Davidson is correct. Without a one on one assessment, we can't know everything that was going on in his head when he was delusional. But for this particular problem, we don't have to.

We know that when someone is delusional, their frontal lobe goes out the window. Whether they have delusions about sentient butterflies or whether that have delusions about world domination. It doesn't matter. The frontal lobe is shut down. Which makes them a rampaging 10 year old in terms of judgement and planning.

If we do not believe that the Ripper was a rampaging 10 year old (and we don't) then we must believe that whoever killed these women was not delusional at the time. Sane, for all intents and purposes.

What I am saying, and I think Dr. Lars Davidson would agree, is that when someone with delusions is not delusional, their delusions do not affect them. The delusions do not drive a person once they are no longer delusional. It's the "What happens in Vegas stays in Vegas" principle.

So my friend Dave has a delusional disorder not otherwise specified, which means no one know what happened and why he got sick. But his delusions are about mole people terrorists digging up from the earth and destroying the world... it's actually pretty fascinating if deeply weird. But while he is delusional, he will not go downstairs, he will not set foot on the ground. He thinks the mole people will snatch him. Food has to be delivered, it's a big thing with him. However, when the delusions stop, he goes downstairs. He goes outside. He plays Ultimate Frisbee. He knows that he thought mole people were out to get him, he remembers being terrified. But it's like it happened to someone else. Whatever he believed while sick he does not believe while well. But the day comes when the delusions come back, and it's like he never had a lucid period.

So what I'm saying is this. Kosminski was clearly delusional. For whatever reason. But whatever his beliefs and idea were when he was delusional stop when the delusions stop. When he does not have delusions, he does not act on any information he thought he had while he was delusional. So even if in his delusional state he thought killing whores would cure him, when the delusions stop he no longer believes he is sick, because the delusion is gone. And if he is longer sick, he no longer needs a cure. Which means he no longer has any reason to kill prostitutes. Unless he just wants to because he is a serial killer, but then his delusions have nothing to do with that. If he believed killing women was necessary while he was sick, he would have lunged after them while he was sick. It would have been messy and obvious, and it wouldn't look like the Ripper.

People think they are irresistible when they are drunk, and they act on that belief. When they sober up, the belief is gone, and their behavior is no longer based on a false belief. Same principle.

What happens in a delusional state goes into box A. What happens during a lucid state goes into box B. And despite remembering the facts in each box, never the twain shall meet. Nothing from box A bleeds into box B and vice versa.

If he was not delusional when he killed these women, whatever was in box A can be tossed out of consideration. It doesn't factor in. So we don't need to know his diagnosis, or even what his delusions were. In fact, they can only muddy the waters. What we need to figure out is why a sane Kosminski would be a serial killer. An insane killer didn't commit these particular crimes. So whatever Kosminski thought while he was delusional doesn't matter. It stays in Vegas, so to speak. His illness did not inform his killing. Something else did. Something that likely preceded his illness by several years.

So When we talk about Kosminski as a suspect, let's talk about him as a sane man. Let's put his illness aside. It may have stopped him from killing eventually, but other than that it is a piece of trivia, like whether he was ever exposed to TB. Interesting fact, not pertinent to the discussion.

But just getting back to MacNaughtens claim that 'He had a strong hatred of women' Its my 'opinion' that the evidence supports the view that MacNaughten formed this opinion by what was known about him between Nov 1888 and March 1889. And this opinion was derived from a file created on a man the police followed at this time. I think this file was widely known to the police but at this time no proof against Kosminski was fourth coming i.e. it was long before the Seaside Home ID. Inspector Abberline was transferred about the same time this suspect entered the asylum.

***

IS this the missing link between Kosminski and the man watched by Cox and Sagar?

Yours Jeff

So Kosminski checked in to the asylum in 1889. In order to do that he had to be evaluated and get a certificate of health from the court. If McNaughton had a file on Kosminski, I don't know what he could have had before 1889. Kosminski could have been spotted on the street at any time and have been tagged the way a biologist tags a whale, but all they would have would be observations of his behavior. Which at that point was fairly benign. And there were a lot of crazy people living on the street at that point, so since nothing particularly links him to the crimes, except for an identification that hadn't happened yet, this would have to be part of some kind of sweep. Probably looking for mad people and watching them. But there was nothing to see.

McNaughton file was most likely triggered by the certificate of health motion. And it's possible he was watching all of those. But that document is the only one that has the story of Kosminski pulling a knife on his sister. Which as far as we know is the only example we have of any kind of threat against women. There is actually a very good reason that Kosminski might have avoided women while delusional, but it would not have been violent. Emphatic, but not violent. So McNaughton has to have that certificate. It's the only thing that makes sense. And when that certificate was issued, Kosminski was not yet being followed. So any reports on his behavior previous to the certificate would simply have pointed out his madness.

To be frank, I can't think McNaughton had anything on him prior to 1889. And he couldn't have had a great deal on him until the mid 1890s. Getting to know someone like Kosminski is not a one interview affair. It take years to map out conditions, motivation, drives, needs, personality etc. So the Asylum probably didn't have a decent sized file on him until he had been there a couple years.

As for his "great hatred of women", I think that's a misinterpretation based on minimal facts. That's just my take on it. However, if he was a misogynist, that would not have come out until Colney Hatch. He was a solitary individual, he was not social, and asylums were not especially co-ed. It would have been hard to see him interact with a woman. So that would have to come out through conversation, which mean he had to be talking to the doctors, which takes a bit of time. Trust needs to be built, and back then it was 10 times harder.

Except it seems like McNaughton already had that impression before he could have gotten detailed records. Which is why I think the statement is suspect.

As for the connections between Kosminski and the investigation, I honestly have no idea. I would have thought that if an identification took place, it would not have been hard for two agents to follow the right guy. I mean, someone would have pointed him out to them. If they got it wrong then that's a three stooges level failure that really needs to admired. So the question is, did they follow the right guy, and if not why not? I mean, really not hard. Or were they not ever trying to follow Kosminski, but some other guy. And if it's some other guy, then there doesn't need to be a connection to Kosminski.

[pinkmoon]

One of my friends had an elder brother who was schizophrenic some days he was the nicest sweetest person on the planet but on some days he was just dangerous when he was in his dangerous mode I would say he would have been capable of anything sadly or luckly depends on which way you look at it he committed suicide if he hadn't I'm pretty certain he would have committed murder at some stage.

[Jeff Leahy]

So the idea that Kosminski killed because of anything that may have happened in his delusional episodes is false.

Dr Lars Davidson was fairly clear that without a proper psychotic one to one assessment. Theres just know way of knowing that for certain. All we have is the probability that Aaron Kosminski was suffering a form of schizophrenia.

Exactly how it would manifest itself isn't certain.

All we can say is that on rare occasions schizophrenics can become dangerous. And that their are many examples of serial killers who suffer this condition. Also serial killers associated with bizarre sexual mutilation are often suffering, a form of schizophrenia.

Its pretty general i know but what we can't say is because Kosminski may have suffered 'psychosis' he would not have been capable of murder, simply goes against the grain of everything I've studied about serial killers per ce.

My background was after all researching this area in the UK and re-constructing murders for TV.

No part of the process of these murders had anything to do with his illness, except perhaps the stopping part. Which would make schizophrenia the hero of this story, not the evil.

I've never tried to make a case that schizophrenia is anything other than a medical condition. Good and evil are largely a religious construct.

But just getting back to MacNaughtens claim that 'He had a strong hatred of women' Its my 'opinion' that the evidence supports the view that MacNaughten formed this opinion by what was known about him between Nov 1888 and March 1889. And this opinion was derived from a file created on a man the police followed at this time. I think this file was widely known to the police but at this time no proof against Kosminski was fourth coming i.e. it was long before the Seaside Home ID. Inspector Abberline was transferred about the same time this suspect entered the asylum.

Just over two years later Abberline retired:

On 11 June 1892, The East London Observer carried an article entitled, “Presentation To A Well-Known Detective.” The subheading read, “Chief Inspector Abberline Retires from the Service And is the Recipient of a Presentation.” The occasion was a retirement dinner given to Abberline on 8 June 1892, at the Three Nuns Hotel on Aldgate-High Street. This ceremony was so popular that a large public crowd stood outside the hotel during the ceremony, hoping perhaps, to get a glimpse of the great detective. The Three Nuns Hotel is significant because it was the scene of several incidents related to the Whitechapel Murders. The location of the hotel is also interesting because of its proximity to certain businesses run by local tradesmen, many of whom were present at the hotel to honor Abberline during his retirement ceremony.

Note that this article indicates (speculates) that the Three Nuns was close to businesses that were watched….

The Three Nuns was close to Butchers Row… So this matches claims made by Robert Sagar…

Amoungst those local business men from 'Butchers Row' was 'I' Abrahams. Part of the Kalish community.

"so tradesmen in attendance included several individuals who worked in the immediate vicinity of the Three Nuns Hotel.6 Isaac Davis presided over the ceremony. His brother-in-law was Henry Nathan, a butcher who had a shop at no. 46 Aldgate-High Street, across the street in Butchers’ Row. Two other butchers were in attendance that night, J(James) Hawkins and F(Frederick) Louisson, both of whom also had shops in Butchers’ Row, at nos. 55 and 57, respectively. Also present were: J(Joseph) Levy, a tailor who ran a shop at no. 79 Aldgate-High Street, down the street at the corner of the Minories; Levy’s father-in-law, H(Henry) Gluckstein, who had a tobacco shop at no. 13 in the hotel with a man named Salmon; I(Isaac) Abrahams, Henry’s brother-in-law, a cigar maker residing at 212 Whitechapel Road; and Frederick W. Ayers, the landlord of the hotel."

IS this the missing link between Kosminski and the man watched by Cox and Sagar?

Yours Jeff

[Errata]

From: "But I've always argued that if Aaron Kosminski was Jack the Ripper, then schizophrenia could have been the reason the murders suddenly stopped. His inability to function as the illness increased simply preventing his ability to function."



Yeah I don't get that final paragraph, and I've certainly not been told anything that up-holds it?

My understanding and Statistic seem to uphold is that: The early stages of Scizophrenia are the most dangerous... potentially

That early schizophrenic attacks are more functional than later Schizophrenic attacks.

And Lastly while schizophrenics are NOT dangerous on rare occasions they can become so…

This is presumably because of other factors like …high sociopathic and Psycopathic inherent behaviour symptoms…but also environmental and genetic factors…

So basically we don't know…but the possibility remains and Aron CAN NOT be ruled out based on previously theorised speculation

I accept we know very little about Aaron Kosminski, but on the little we know we can not rule out him having committed these crimes

So then we go back to the sources…in poticular Anderson…. AAnd Anderson would NOT have LIED for personal kudos

That is inequivacabal ..bollocks i can't spell… it just simply is

Yours Jeff

It's the difference between a symptom and a disease. Schizophrenia is a disease with many symptoms. Delusions are one of those symptoms.

Being delusional is like being dead. You are or you aren't. Being Schizophrenic is not. Because of the other symptoms.

Other symptoms of schizophrenia can and do wax and wane in intensity or period. But a person's lucidity is not affected. They know what is real and what isn't. They may lose certain vital functions, but they are aware, in the present, and generally rational.

The reason new schizophrenics are potentially more dangerous is because they are undiagnosed. They don't know what's happening. They are certainly unmedicated. Even in the sixties there was no appreciable difference between a new schizophrenic and a longstanding one. A lack of effective medication. Frontal lobe symptoms occur before delusions. And a sudden inability to plan or put facts together ruins a person's judgement. They do things that aren't safe because the part of their brain that makes judgement calls is damaged. Early days tend be more dangerous to a schizophrenic, not to those around the schizophrenic.

There are a very few schizophrenics who have never been anything other than violent. Their delusions demand it. Kosminski wasn't that guy.

There is also a small amount of the schizophrenic population that becomes violent for no reason after a period of non violence. Well, it's not no reason, we just don't know what it is. Delusions can change, and sometimes they change to something dark and violent. Any number of things can do that, we just don't know what does. An increase in hallucinations could do it, a bad experience, a change in chemistry, lots of things. But it's rare. Delusions tend to stick to themes. And it's always a change towards violence. Never a change away from violence.

What happens far more often is that a schizophrenic with non violent delusions is provoked to violence by something. Often the victim of the violence. Most schizophrenic violence is a one off, or the equivalent of a temper tantrum. Something happens, something that we don't perceive as deserving violent retaliation (or sometimes something you too would punch a guy for), and the schizophrenic is so threatened that they feel they have no choice other than to react violently. Threatening schizophrenics is a bad idea. As is abusing them. Both happen with appalling regularity. But sometimes it's just challenging a perception. I was threatened by a schizophrenic friend who had complex religious delusions, because by being Jewish he thought I was calling him a liar. He didn't touch me. In fact he ran. But he was seriously upset. And I know a PRN who was attacked by a schizophrenic patient because she told him that if he didn't stay on his meds he was going to be hospitalized again. He took a swing, shoved her down and ran out the door. And she acknowledges that it was her fault. She accidentally threatened him. She was trying to tell him that if he didn't stay on his meds he was going get more unstable until he had to go into the hospital. He heard that if he didn't take his pills she was going to lock him up again. She phrased it poorly. I'm confident that Kosminski pulled a knife on his sister because she unknowingly threatened him. And he didn't attack.

I don't disagree that schizophrenia does not preclude Kosminski being the killer. It makes it more unlikely, but not impossible. But that means he did it while he was lucid. Reasonable, aware, able to think clearly. His judgement would likely still have been compromised, but he was not influenced by any delusion. He knew what was real. While he was delusional, he could not commit these crimes.

So the idea that Kosminski killed because of anything that may have happened in his delusional episodes is false. They had nothing to do with it. If he was the Ripper, his motives were born of a clear mind. Not at all affected by his disease. And I cannot think of a scenario where the motives of a clear mind were executed by a damaged frontal lobe. So it's not like he might never have killed except for executive function blinking out. He would have. What creates a serial killer is not the act of murder. It's the planning of the murder. Everybody fantasizes about killing someone. I've mentally killed my sister a hundred times. The line is crossed when it gets specific and fetishized. At that point a person will kill if they can kill. So if Kosminski was the Ripper, his illness is nothing more than an interesting sidebar. It didn't motivate him, it didn't make him want to do it, it didn't make him do it. He was a serial killer in his mind likely before he was a schizophrenic, and he was a fully functional serial killer during the weeks he was not insane. No part of the process of these murders had anything to do with his illness, except perhaps the stopping part. Which would make schizophrenia the hero of this story, not the evil.

[Jeff Leahy]

From: "But I've always argued that if Aaron Kosminski was Jack the Ripper, then schizophrenia could have been the reason the murders suddenly stopped. His inability to function as the illness increased simply preventing his ability to function."

And technically there is no reason that cannot be true, but his delusions will not have factored into the murders. Other possible symptoms maybe given the nature of the frontal lobe damage, but not the psychosis. He would have been completely lucid.

Yeah I don't get that final paragraph, and I've certainly not been told anything that up-holds it?

My understanding and Statistic seem to uphold is that: The early stages of Scizophrenia are the most dangerous... potentially

That early schizophrenic attacks are more functional than later Schizophrenic attacks.

And Lastly while schizophrenics are NOT dangerous on rare occasions they can become so…

This is presumably because of other factors like …high sociopathic and Psycopathic inherent behaviour symptoms…but also environmental and genetic factors…

So basically we don't know…but the possibility remains and Aron CAN NOT be ruled out based on previously theorised speculation

I accept we know very little about Aaron Kosminski, but on the little we know we can not rule out him having committed these crimes

So then we go back to the sources…in poticular Anderson…. AAnd Anderson would NOT have LIED for personal kudos

That is inequivacabal ..bollocks i can't spell… it just simply is

Yours Jeff

[Errata]

Yeah bu Kosminski didnt wake up one day at twenty two and suddenly be like this. Schizophrenia is a development his illness progressed. Eventually into Catatonic state…

Its what he was like before the illness struck. And then when it first started to effect him mixed with drugs or alcohol….thats a very different a functioning human being to the one you describe.

No he didn't. At 22 (if we follow standard progression) he wasn't delusional yet. He would be starting to lose memory and social skills, start to isolate. Schizophrenia is a cocktail of symptoms, the most spectacular being the delusions. But nobody starts with delusions. His initial symptoms would be related to executive function and socialization. Essentially straight neurological symptoms, as opposed to emotional symptoms.

At around 24, he would be isolated, have no motivation to speak of, and beginning to have hallucinations. Typically the first hallucination reported is auditory, and is describe as being like a hum. Annoying, and scary since they cannot find the source of the hum, but benign as far as hallucinations go. But it is not a delusion. It does not alter beliefs or personality. Judgement at this point is pretty impaired. Other initial hallucinations include shadows, a feeling of cold, or something smelling awful. Believing that the hallucination has significance, believing in a story we have concocted about the hum that is not true is delusion. Simply hearing the hum and being annoyed by it is normal.

By 25 he would be having full blown delusions. Delusions are false beliefs, hallucinations are false perceptions. If you believe the world will end if you sneeze, that is a delusion. If you see someone who isn't actually there, that is a hallucination. Delusions change people. And they are binary. On or off. Like a light switch. If they are on, they are fully on. It doesn't matter how early in the disease it is, how long the delusional cycle has been going on, how old you are, nothing. It's on. The belief is there. It is as on as it is 9 years later. The only change is the length of of the cycle, and the length of the periods of lucidity. But if the delusion is off, it's off. The belief no longer exists.

So let's pretend you wake up one night, and you see someone running through the back yard and vault the fence to get out. And you notice that your back door is slightly open. You believe that someone was in your house, and clearly they were there for a reason. You start to search to see if anything is missing, or if anything creepy is going on.

The belief that someone was in your house is on. Not wavering, not flickering, not slowly getting stronger. Guy fleeing and open back door leads to only one conclusion. Break in. This is what you believe, and you believed in the second you realized the back door was open.

Now let's say that right before you call the cops, you get a phone call from your neighbor. He tells you that his idiot son was trying to get in before curfew, so he cut through your yard. Your neighbor is pretty sure that he trampled some rose bushes, and he tells you that you should calculate what replacing them will cost and he'll pay it. And he apologizes for the noise the kid made banging over the fence. Your partner wakes up when the phone rings, and when you tell her what the call was about, she remembers that she probably didn't close the back the door when she let the dog in because he bowled her over and broke a glass.

You no longer think someone was in your house. That belief is off. You know why you saw what you saw. You know the kid. He's good people, if suffering from the debilitating brain damage associated with being 15.

Do you continue looking for missing items, or do you go back to bed?

The belief is on or off. Delusions are no different. The belief exists or it doesn't.

Schizophrenia is a multifaceted disease. Symptoms of Schizophrenia can show up as early as the late teens. But those symptoms are not delusions. Those come later. It's like the flu. The first symptom of the flu is probably a scratchy throat. The defining symptom of the flu is feeling so sick you are afraid you might NOT die. At that point, who knows if your throat is scratchy, because boy is that the least of your problems. All diseases evolve. The first symptoms are rarely the defining symptoms. When the defining symptom shows up, the person has been sick for awhile, and has been showing other symptoms. Just not the one that makes it obvious what the disease is. Schizophrenia is no different. By the time delusions show up, the person has been symptomatic for years. The disease evolves. It progresses. But the severity of delusions does not evolve.

Because no one is slightly delusional. On or off.

But I've always argued that if Aaron Kosminski was Jack the Ripper, then schizophrenia could have been the reason the murders suddenly stopped. His inability to function as the illness increased simply preventing his ability to function.

And technically there is no reason that cannot be true, but his delusions will not have factored into the murders. Other possible symptoms maybe given the nature of the frontal lobe damage, but not the psychosis. He would have been completely lucid.

[Batman]

Robert Napper is the best example of a paranoid schizophrenic with Asperger's who went a long time without being caught even though his mother had called the police on him over a rape he admitted to her doing.

He is also believed to be the Green Chain Rapist.

He is obviously a case of Diminished responsibility.

[Jeff Leahy]

First of all, being a serial killer is not a mental illness. It's a crime. And generally serial killers clock in as perfectly sane. Absolutely unacceptable, but perfectly sane. Which isn't to say they don't have issues. Clearly they do. But being abused as a child, experiencing a traumatic event, or even being ragingly inappropriate in just about everything you do is not a mental illness. Even sociopathy is barely a mental illness. Out of all the sociopaths in the world, less than 10% are mentally ill. In order for a behavior or a state of mind to be a mental illness, it has to cause dysfunction. And the vast majority of sociopath's get along just fine.

So I say all of this because there's a lot of gray area here, and we can't really make it any more black and white. It's just not.

Doesn't this depend when they are caught? They might have been perfectly functional and only slightly delusional when they committed the crime and frothing at the mouth barking when apprehended two years later.

Jeff:

Your partner's ex was manic. And paranoia is one of the major manifestations of mania. But during mania the frontal lobe is supressed. While I'm sure he plotted and planned and in general behaved like a cartoon villain, I would bet that his ability to execute was severely compromised. We actually spend a good portion of our lives without a fully functioning frontal lobe. They don't finish developing until we are about 28. Now the deficit of executive function during psychosis, or mania, or depression etc. Is pretty severe. If we trace back our own development, it puts at about the level we had when we were 8-10 years old. A 10 year old can plan. He just can't plan well, and his execution tends to be even worse. Thus the cartoon villainy. Paranoid schizophrenics have many plans. But it's worth pointing out that many of these plans boil down to a tinfoil hat (and yes, many actually do that, and no, I don't know where they all got the idea). Drawings of intricate machinery, flow charts, maps, and it looks impressive. But generally it's nonsense. They are not actionable plans.

I must stress that we are talking about someone diagnosed with bi-polar not schizophrenia. This person also work high up in Education and believed himself to be a 'Dr' (philosophy) although it later transported it had all been fiction, he only been to cambridge on one day. He was certain capable of using a photocopy machine and tipex but I would have said higher functioning than 10. But all the big plans usually back fire. Over spending, forgetting to add tax. But I get basically what you are saying.

When we talk about functionality in a schizophrenic, we are talking about their ability to live their normal life. But it has nothing to do with the strength of the delusion or the strength of the sufferer. It has to do with the nature of the delusion. A person who believes he is Superman cannot be functional. No matter how much they fight, no matter how long it takes for the delusion to completely take over. Being Superman is a binary state. You are, or you aren't. And being Superman is the antithesis of leading a normal life. You can't interact with people, because you are talking to them like you are Superman. You engage in very risky behaviors, you can't stay at your job. Being Superman is a full time thing. It changes you. It changes everything. Even if it's a generally mild delusion with no life threatening behavior, you cannot function in you old life.

Yeah but I again go back to the severity of the delusion. Schizophrenic attacks happen in waves or episodes each getting stronger over a period of time. So while I accept that as these attacks get stronger, inhibiting the ability of the supposed killer to function and commit the crime. We still don't know how server that first attack was or what was in his head.

Most delusions are like this. In order to be this new person, whether it be Superman, the guy who has to prepare for the aliens, or even the guy who accidentally breathes fire, you cannot function in your old life. But very very rarely a person has a delusion that does not contradict their current identity. Bob is still Bob, he still has the same job and responsibilities, he just has extra work he has to do. Fill notebooks with information, compose a symphony, examine the full moon for signs of decay, and if it is found, start the magic chanting to restore it. Whatever. He gets weirder, I'm not going to lie, but he can remain functional. Kosminski's delusions could not allow him to remain functional. He was dying, he had disgusting rules to follow to be cured, he was omniscient. He could not socialize like that. He couldn't work with those delusions. He was unemployable in that state. He wasn't functional. Dying is terrifying. Nobody puts off a cure for dying just so they can attend family meals, or walk a beat. Wrong kind of delusion for him to continue his old life.

Yeah bu Kosminski didnt wake up one day at twenty two and suddenly be like this. Schizophrenia is a development his illness progressed. Eventually into Catatonic state…

Its what he was like before the illness struck. And then when it first started to effect him mixed with drugs or alcohol….thats a very different a functioning human being to the one you describe.

The best way to think about is like this. Let's take a mentally ill man who suffer from neurochemical storms of any kind. Schizophrenia, Mania, severe Depression, panic attacks, Unipolar, Scizoaffective, etc. etc. We'll go with mania. We'll call him Frank.

When Frank is not manic, he is a man. Like any other man. When he is manic, he is a paranoid, angry, indestructible giant 8 year old. Second grader from hell. There's shouting, violence, petulance, expansiveness, zero impulse control.

When Frank is manic, he is a bully. He plans elaborate punishments for those who thwart him when he can't do anything, but when he actually sees those people he just ends up charging like a bear on 'roids. He talks incessantly. He hasn't really slept in a few days. He actually stamps his feet in anger, lashes out at everyone, and engages in such terror tactics as throwing temper tantrums, destroying everything in sight, and physical harm and threats.

When Frank is not manic he is kind of self involved, doesn't really pay attention to other people, pleasure driven, and has a 70% chance of using drugs or alcohol. He also takes no responsibility for his actions when manic, because while he can remember (and he can, he's lied a few times about that) he can't emotionally connect with that Frank. He can't explain why he did what he did, and he's not interested in having a conversation about something he thinks he can't change.

Anyone with straight Bipolar has been Frank at least once. Maybe not for long, but it's happened. Anger plus a non functional frontal lobe equals Frank. The 8 Year Old From Hell. His brain is adult, his threats are adult, but his skills are anything but.

So if we look at the crimes of Jack the Ripper, some element of stealth, control, the ability to stalk or hunt, the wherewithal to stop and run... which is more likely? A man, much as any other man, or an 8 year old in a big body? A child who is clearly not okay.

They didn't run, they didn't scream. They didn't perceive him as dangerous. He did not punish these women. He didn't beat the crap out them. He had a goal and a purpose, but had the presence of mind to give those things up and go in order to not get caught. He didn't brag to anyone. He knew what he was doing was not okay, even when he was doing it. Jack wasn't a genius and he wasn't some criminal mastermind. But his executive function was intact.

People with mood disorders, schizophrenia, etc. do commit crimes. They commit murders. A couple of times they have been serial killers. But they don't commit these murders.

Well of course they do commit murders. And those murders are often more like spree killing in modern times. In 1888 the environment was very different and I believe Aaron Kosminski had access to lots of local shops where he could slip quickly out of site. And who is going to notice the odd spot of blood if he's watching a butchers shop? A stpree killing that lasted 18 weeks about the length of a psychotic episode.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1158908/Schizophrenic-serial-killer-murdered-people-attack-inspired-horror-film-failed-NHS.html

Flick through google and you'll find many such attacks today…spree killings.

Disorganized

Disorganized serial killers are unpredictable and act without a strict plan, which can make them just as difficult to catch as organized killers. These killers attack based on opportunity, usually close to where they live (usually have no vehicle). They too have murderous fantasies, but their fantasies are very vague and incomplete compared to those of an organized killer. Disorganized killers are often socially inept and are either unemployed or have a low skilled job. They make no effort to hide what they have done, and do not attempt to to clean up the crime scene. They use weapons found at the scene and often ‘overkill’, leaving the bodies of their victims mutilated. If a disorganized killer takes a souvenir, it is most likely a body part.

TYPOLOGIES

There are four common typologies of serial killers:
Visionary Killer: This killer feels compelled to kill because of ‘voices’ in their heads or visions that tell them to do so. For example, Herbert Williams Mullin claimed to hear voices that told him a disastrous earthquake was imminent, but he could save California through murder. Mullin killed thirteen people in an effort to ‘save California’. It was later determined that Mullin suffered from paranoid schizophrenia.
Mission Oriented Killer: These individuals feel that it is their duty or mission to kill certain kinds of people. For example, Ted Kaczynski, commonly referred to as the Unabomber, started a bombing campaign in an effort to save the environment, which he felt was being destroyed around him. He targeted places that were creating ‘high technology’ such as universities and airlines. Kaczynski’s bombs killed three people and injured twenty-three.
Power-Control Killers: These killers seek complete control over their victims. Sexual activity is almost always involved in these cases. John Wayne Gacy,“The Clown Killer”, would fall into this category. Gacy murdered and raped 33 teenage boys, burying 26 of them in the crawl space of his home.
Hedonistic Serial Killers: This is the most common type of serial killer. These individuals kill for the thrill and enjoyment they get from the act of killing. There are three subtypes of hedonistic killers:
Hedonistic comfort killers: Killing victims provides the killer with some sort of comfort; usually money. Dorthea Puente ran a boarding house in California where she killed her elderly tenants and buried them in the backyard so she could claim their social insurance checks.
Hedonistic lust killers: The serial sexual predator; fantasy plays a large role and their satisfaction depends on the amount of torture and mutilation they inflict on their victims. Jeffrey Dahmer is one of the best-known hedonistic lust killers. He searched for a beautiful, submissive, and eternal lover. Dahmer killed 17 men and boys in this search for his perfect lover; his murders involved rape, torture, dismemberment, necrophilia, and cannibalism (so that a part of his victims would stay with him forever).
Hedonistic thrill killers: Their primary thrill is to create fear and death. The act is usually not sexual and is not drawn out over period of time, they are solely interested in the kill. Hedonistic thrill killers often work in teams. The notorious “Zodiac Killer” claimed to be responsible for 37 murders but investigators have only been able to pinpoint 7 victims, two of which survived. The Zodiac killer sent taunting letters to the police, and was never caught or identified.

But I've always argued that if Aaron Kosminski was Jack the Ripper, then schizophrenia could have been the reason the murders suddenly stopped. His inability to function as the illness increased simply preventing his ability to function.

Yours Jeff

[Errata]

Hi Errata
IF (big if-but lets assume)he was the ripper, do you think he killed while he was in the delusional state or while he was not?

Personally my idea is that IF he was the ripper, His mental illness is what eventually caused him to stop, not the other way around.

I don't see how he could have killed while having an episode-mainly because the killer was so adept at knowing when to kill, how to kill so efficiently and how to avoid detection and escape mere seconds from being caught. Too perceptive, controlled and on top of things, so to speak.

That and I find it very hard to believe that at the height of the ripper scare, someone in the throws of a schizophrenic/delusional episode could have appeared normal enough to make a woman feel safe into going into a secluded spot with him for sex.

So, do you think its possible he committed these crimes while having an episode, or while he was not? Which is more likely in your opinion?

I'm going to combine you and Jeff on this answer because it goes together.

First of all, being a serial killer is not a mental illness. It's a crime. And generally serial killers clock in as perfectly sane. Absolutely unacceptable, but perfectly sane. Which isn't to say they don't have issues. Clearly they do. But being abused as a child, experiencing a traumatic event, or even being ragingly inappropriate in just about everything you do is not a mental illness. Even sociopathy is barely a mental illness. Out of all the sociopaths in the world, less than 10% are mentally ill. In order for a behavior or a state of mind to be a mental illness, it has to cause dysfunction. And the vast majority of sociopath's get along just fine.

So I say all of this because there's a lot of gray area here, and we can't really make it any more black and white. It's just not.

Jeff:

Your partner's ex was manic. And paranoia is one of the major manifestations of mania. But during mania the frontal lobe is supressed. While I'm sure he plotted and planned and in general behaved like a cartoon villain, I would bet that his ability to execute was severely compromised. We actually spend a good portion of our lives without a fully functioning frontal lobe. They don't finish developing until we are about 28. Now the deficit of executive function during psychosis, or mania, or depression etc. Is pretty severe. If we trace back our own development, it puts at about the level we had when we were 8-10 years old. A 10 year old can plan. He just can't plan well, and his execution tends to be even worse. Thus the cartoon villainy. Paranoid schizophrenics have many plans. But it's worth pointing out that many of these plans boil down to a tinfoil hat (and yes, many actually do that, and no, I don't know where they all got the idea). Drawings of intricate machinery, flow charts, maps, and it looks impressive. But generally it's nonsense. They are not actionable plans.

When we talk about functionality in a schizophrenic, we are talking about their ability to live their normal life. But it has nothing to do with the strength of the delusion or the strength of the sufferer. It has to do with the nature of the delusion. A person who believes he is Superman cannot be functional. No matter how much they fight, no matter how long it takes for the delusion to completely take over. Being Superman is a binary state. You are, or you aren't. And being Superman is the antithesis of leading a normal life. You can't interact with people, because you are talking to them like you are Superman. You engage in very risky behaviors, you can't stay at your job. Being Superman is a full time thing. It changes you. It changes everything. Even if it's a generally mild delusion with no life threatening behavior, you cannot function in you old life.

Most delusions are like this. In order to be this new person, whether it be Superman, the guy who has to prepare for the aliens, or even the guy who accidentally breathes fire, you cannot function in your old life. But very very rarely a person has a delusion that does not contradict their current identity. Bob is still Bob, he still has the same job and responsibilities, he just has extra work he has to do. Fill notebooks with information, compose a symphony, examine the full moon for signs of decay, and if it is found, start the magic chanting to restore it. Whatever. He gets weirder, I'm not going to lie, but he can remain functional. Kosminski's delusions could not allow him to remain functional. He was dying, he had disgusting rules to follow to be cured, he was omniscient. He could not socialize like that. He couldn't work with those delusions. He was unemployable in that state. He wasn't functional. Dying is terrifying. Nobody puts off a cure for dying just so they can attend family meals, or walk a beat. Wrong kind of delusion for him to continue his old life.

Abby and Jeff:

The best way to think about is like this. Let's take a mentally ill man who suffer from neurochemical storms of any kind. Schizophrenia, Mania, severe Depression, panic attacks, Unipolar, Scizoaffective, etc. etc. We'll go with mania. We'll call him Frank.

When Frank is not manic, he is a man. Like any other man. When he is manic, he is a paranoid, angry, indestructible giant 8 year old. Second grader from hell. There's shouting, violence, petulance, expansiveness, zero impulse control.

When Frank is manic, he is a bully. He plans elaborate punishments for those who thwart him when he can't do anything, but when he actually sees those people he just ends up charging like a bear on 'roids. He talks incessantly. He hasn't really slept in a few days. He actually stamps his feet in anger, lashes out at everyone, and engages in such terror tactics as throwing temper tantrums, destroying everything in sight, and physical harm and threats.

When Frank is not manic he is kind of self involved, doesn't really pay attention to other people, pleasure driven, and has a 70% chance of using drugs or alcohol. He also takes no responsibility for his actions when manic, because while he can remember (and he can, he's lied a few times about that) he can't emotionally connect with that Frank. He can't explain why he did what he did, and he's not interested in having a conversation about something he thinks he can't change.

Anyone with straight Bipolar has been Frank at least once. Maybe not for long, but it's happened. Anger plus a non functional frontal lobe equals Frank. The 8 Year Old From Hell. His brain is adult, his threats are adult, but his skills are anything but.

So if we look at the crimes of Jack the Ripper, some element of stealth, control, the ability to stalk or hunt, the wherewithal to stop and run... which is more likely? A man, much as any other man, or an 8 year old in a big body? A child who is clearly not okay.

They didn't run, they didn't scream. They didn't perceive him as dangerous. He did not punish these women. He didn't beat the crap out them. He had a goal and a purpose, but had the presence of mind to give those things up and go in order to not get caught. He didn't brag to anyone. He knew what he was doing was not okay, even when he was doing it. Jack wasn't a genius and he wasn't some criminal mastermind. But his executive function was intact.

People with mood disorders, schizophrenia, etc. do commit crimes. They commit murders. A couple of times they have been serial killers. But they don't commit these murders.

[Abby Normal]

Hi Errata
IF (big if-but lets assume)he was the ripper, do you think he killed while he was in the delusional state or while he was not?

Personally my idea is that IF he was the ripper, His mental illness is what eventually caused him to stop, not the other way around.

I don't see how he could have killed while having an episode-mainly because the killer was so adept at knowing when to kill, how to kill so efficiently and how to avoid detection and escape mere seconds from being caught. Too perceptive, controlled and on top of things, so to speak.

That and I find it very hard to believe that at the height of the ripper scare, someone in the throws of a schizophrenic/delusional episode could have appeared normal enough to make a woman feel safe into going into a secluded spot with him for sex.

So, do you think its possible he committed these crimes while having an episode, or while he was not? Which is more likely in your opinion?

[Jeff Leahy]

That's true. Early onset is getting more and more common, which is one of the big arguments for environmental factors. And sadly childhood onset is getting more common, thought still very rare. And there are few things in this life more tragic than a 7 year old girl terrified of herself.

I agree. I guess to claim its on the increase you'd require accurate population increase and schizophrenic numbers. And as we've already agreed there also appears to be considerable world wide variations.

My understanding is however that there was a statistical spike in Victoria period.

There is a very real cyclical aspect to Schizophrenia. Delusion is followed by recovery, which is followed by lucidity, which is followed by delusion again. But there is a point when the structural collapse is such that recovery and lucidity are gone. The brain just shrinks to the point that regular synaptic pathways are just snarled.

Yes. This is pretty much what I was described in typical on set on the condition in people early twenties. And the decent into Catatonic state averages about ten years, which would roughly fit what is known about Kosminski. This time at Leavesdon and called sometimes 'burn out'

This was caveated by the fact that modern schizophrenics can be treated and medication exists today to prevent this.

But functionality is a different beast. There are very high functioning schizophrenics. I work with a few. Their delusions don't require a lot of action. They hold jobs, have friends, live their lives. They are delusional, but it doesn't affect them most of the time. It's rare, but it happens.

Again I totally agree. Isn't the Russel Crow film a true story about a schizophrenic who obtains a nobel Prize?

But thats sort of what I've been arguing. That we have no way of knowing Kosminski's functionality in early 'Psychotic' attacks, if indeed he had them.

I've only ever said Kosminski can't be dismissed as a ripper suspect given what is known.

What I've been speculating is the man watched by Sagar and Cox who entered a Privte Asylum in March 1889 might have been Aaron Kosminski. A man who from time to time became insane…

This fits with what we have discussed about schizophrenia. And the man they describe, if the same man, is highly functional at this time.

Delusion will override judgement every time. Otherwise it would not be a catastrophic disease. The recovery period is odd. It is an almost blank state. It's very like waking up and trying to piece together a dream that makes no sense. The delusion is gone. The belief driving the behavior is gone. The recovery period is when judgement comes back online, and a the schizophrenic is trying to make sense of what they remember. Persistent delusions make it easier, and eventually a person gets to the point where the recovery period is very short. They know what happened because it's what always happens. But during the recovery period, the sufferer is pretty quiet. Almost dreamy. Not paying attention. They are in their head trying to piece things together. But they are perfectly sane. And during lucidity they are not delusional, not hallucinating, they are perfectly normal.

Sounds like a bad trip. And I don't disagree with you. But we simply have no way of knowing or ever knowing the extent or severity of Aaron's attacks.

The experts I've spoke to both suggest simply that he suffered a form of schizophrenia.

So the only time their behavior is affected by their delusion is when they are delusional.

Your describing a 'psychotic' attack. And schizophrenics can experience psychosis and this is recognised as dangerous. However psychosis can happen in many mental states or be created by drugs and alcohol.

Mark Dixie committed a one off ripper style attack (Also a possible double event) and he claimed he was suffering psychosis from over indigence in cocaine and weed.

Manic depression and Bipolar are the same disease. They renamed it because they found out it was not so black and white. And some Bipolar people do have psychotic breaks. The neurochemical storm shuts down the frontal lobe and a person is left delusional and hallucinating. Usually during a manic state, and if they "come down" from the mania the psychosis will end. But there is also schizoaffective disorder, which is like the bastard stepchild of Bipolar and Schizophrenia...

This is most interesting. Simply because we've had these discussions and Catrin describes symptoms (In a diagnosed bi-polar) very similar to those described in schizophrenia. The problem she has, is the person in question was self medicating with many types of proscribed drugs and mixing with alcohol. So she may simply be describing drug induced 'psychosis'

That said we are also dealing with high levels of 'Grandious' and religious mania. ANd split personality which she describes as the 'gollum'

But what it illustrates is the point you made in an earlier post. That its often very difficult to tell various conditions apart, they can carry vary similar symptoms.

We've both speculated that were possibly looking at a single spectrum that encompasses a number of areas of the brain. There are psychiatrists arguing syndromes. I gather the Americans have built a super brain scanner that night answer some of these questions.

But neither here nor there. What you are describing with the trucks is not a delusion, unless he thought that they were aliens. Nor is it a hallucination, because it actually happened. It's a manifestation of mania. People with Mania can become expansive, love everybody, they can feel indestructible, they can feel like a god. Some need to to fight. Others need to ****. But most of the time, especially because mania blocks sleep, they get really paranoid and confrontational. He saw the trucks as a defiance of HIS law. How dare they? Who the hell do these people think they are? He became confrontational. An alpha dog urinating on a wall to mark his territory. The state can lead to severe abuse in the home, and if that was the case, I'm very sorry for your partner. That's nowhere near okay. Men with full blown mania can be very scary. But it's not psychosis. It's the dopamine and adrenaline surge boosting the testosterone to intolerable levels. It creates the Uber-d ick.

Yes I gather she spent many hours locked in her bedroom and I've witnessed the temper explosions. The ability to argue black is white. But as i said there was more than simple obsessive behaviour, believing your going to have a child who is the new messiah when your wives shad a hysterectomy being another.

But again this comes back to every individual case being vary different and usually very complex.

My partners currently writing and studying the history of the 1845 lunacy act and researching this area victorian mental health. Her background (When she wasn't an actress) was with young offenders and also Autistic and Aspergers children. So I can only assure you anything we produce together will be vary sympathetic to both sufferers and family.

If Kosminski became obsessed these women because of Mania, then his delusions have nothing to do with it. Unfortunately for your theory, Mania is another one of those things that shuts down the frontal lobe. In your own example, this guy did not plot elaborate revenge on the trucks, he didn't stalk them, he charged over there and got in their face. Classic.

I can assure you plotting and paranoia were also part of his repertoire.

But as I said every case is unique, and we are comparing two separate conditions, even though I readily accept the possibility of cross over.

Thats for a psychietrist to resolve and for that they'd require One to one with a patient.

We know that Jack surprised these women. They didn't scream, didn't run... they had no idea it was coming. I would imagine that those truck drivers knew you'r partner's ex was coming before they even saw him. It's like letting loose a bear. Regargless of whether or not he attacks, a bear makes an entrance. So Kosminski acting on a delusion is out, and Kosminski acting in a manic fit is out.

Without an accurate diagnosis anything is possible. We know serial killers are rare. We know mutilation sexual attacks are very rare indeed.

But we also know from the vary few examples that schizophrenics can on very rare occasions become…well very dangerous.

That might be a little chicken and egg. But to some extent without accurate statistical information examples of other schizophrenic serial killers is all we have….and thats complicated, don't forget that experts recent diagnosed Ian Brady as Schizophrenic.

My current interest is Harold Jones?

If he was just a creepy stalker who plotted elaborate and humiliating punishment for those who crossed him, I would probably expect more than just women to be killed, but if he is unsure of his own survival against another male, then yeah sure. It would not be the result of a mental illness, but it would be the result of "issues" which Kosminski had in spades. It's a motive that could apply to any pseudo authority figure in Whitechapel who might walk around feeling thwarted. It opens up a new suspect class. It points to a different type of killer, which Kosminski might be a part of. It's point the finger directly at him specifically.

Possibly but we know hardly anything about Aaron Kosminski or his illness.

So I'd argue that the period known as the autumn of terror is about the same length of time we associate with early 'psychotic' episodes.. during psychosis schizophrenics can become dangerous and for that reason Aaron can't be ruled out, even though his later records describe him as harmless…indeed that is what should be expected as schizophrenics are basically harmless, and as you have pointed out more a potential threat to themselves

But if that's the case, his mental illness is off the table. It's not making him kill, it's not driving his behavior. If anything it's inhibiting his behavior. If he is creepy stalker with an axe to grind, that's not mental illness. That's just who he is. So I would expect all talk of his mental illness as anything other than what possibly stopped the killings to cease.

Well yes, but as I said before we all score on the sociopathic and psychopathic scale… We after all require bankers.

So its reasonable to assume people with mental health also score on these scales.

So schizophrenia alone doesn't make someone a serial killer. There could be lots of reasons that happens..

Wasn't it Woody Allan who said Crossing a Road might be more dangerous than flying but I do that as well?

I'm mentally ill. I'm bipolar. It's why I see something I think I recognize in Kosminski. And yes. Bipolar people have killed. I won't be one of them, I've been under control since I was 14. So if you ever hear that I killed my fiance, it won't be because of my mental illness. It will be because he has kept me up with his snoring for The. Last. Time. I have a temper because I am half Scottish. Not because I'm bipolar. So one of the reasons I chime in on the mental illness discussions is to try and keep things real.

I didn't know. Thats a very brave admission, hats off to you for your honesty.

Clearly my partner also thinks there are similarities to bi-polar and schizophrenia. THere are a great many high functioning people with bi-polar Steven Fry jumping to mind.

For what its worth my partner and I are both Dyslexic and we both write for a living… interestingly we can both spot each others spelling errors and our condition manifests itself in very different ways.

Your partner had a right to fear her ex. And ironically not because he was bipolar. She should have feared him because he did not have enough regard for her to get himself under control. To get medicated, to see a therapist, to give up the high of the mania so that he wouldn't hurt her or others. That was his job and he failed. It was like living with a meth addict. Something was poisoning everything, and he could have controlled it, but he didn't want to give up something that made him feel good.

Yes you hit the nail on the head. His ego loved putting her down. It wasn't physical violence but control.

There are a lot of beliefs out there about mental illness that aren't true. And all they do is engender fear. It helps no one. It certainly doesn't help someone like me who has watched every person she ever informed of her bipolar take a step back in fear. Mental illness has rules. When I get depressed I don't walk through a department store naked shouting for King George III. No one would expect me to. Because everyone accepts that Depression has rules. But every mental illness has rules. Even schizophrenia. Perhaps not as many rules as would make us comfortable, but A+B=C. You have to know what A and B are, but they will always equal C. And not everything is controlled by a mental illness.

Yes I get this. The condition itself doesn't make someone dangerous, and most people learn to deal with and over come, and should be admired and congratulated for doing so.

I'm certainly not suggesting Kosminski was Jack the Ripper simply because he suffered schizophrenia. I believe it because thats what Anderson and Swanson tells us and they were in the position to know more than anyone else. I'm saying that schizophrenia don't rule him out of their belief being correct.

If you want to know why someone with unipolar depression likes romantic comedies so much, you want to look at the fact that she is a girl. Not that she is unipolar.

Yeah but as Woody Allan says 'she does that as well'

Many thanks

Yours Jeff

[Jeff Leahy]

Errata

*UCK ME…Twelve years posting on **** social media and various forums. And that is the most honest reply I think, I've ever had.

I printed out a copy of your post and discussed with my partner. She was very moved. THank you so much.

As I said our best friend is Bi-polar…and we'd both trust him with our lives and yes even our wallets….its all about individuals, not mental health.

I will reply in detail tomorrow but we'd both like to thank you for such an open and honest post, this was very brave of you and stuck many cords in Catrin's experiences.

Not that I agree with you on Kosminski. But mental health is such an open and complex subject.

Many Many thanks

Jeff and Catx