Arbitrary Selective Rejection and Acceptence of Coincidences

[Ausgirl]

Ye gods no. Not medical training. Some first aid, some engineering. Our job was to free who we could free, and stop the bleeding of those we couldn't until an EMT got there. It was reaching under a concrete slab to tie a tourniquet or stuff gauze in a wound, but it was also finding the fulcrum point of an unstable structure, find where the debris was caught up, stabilizing a structure, jacking it up, or causing it to fall in the way we wanted it to.

This was immediately post 9/11 so people were terrified, and I was in a city at the time, and we had just learned a ton about crushing deaths... never came to anything. But I did use the training two years ago when a tornado collapsed a dairy on itself and we had to get the cows out. Not what I pictured when I signed up, but hey. I like cows.

***

The most crucial aspect of these crimes is that Jack could identify organs and connections by feel. That's not a surgical skill. Generally they cut so they can see the field, and they have a lot of light. Some surgeons might be able to do it because for whatever reason they have honed that skill, but it's not an ability surgeons have to have.

The ability to do this by feel is entirely dependent on a good imagination. When they feel something, they can see it in their head. They can get a visual map of the field by touch. That is a learned skill. Plumbers have it. archaeologists tend to have it, miners have it. Anyone can develop it, and it's a skill I can see Kosminski developing before emigrating. I can see a lot of people from the pale developing the skill. I have it. My fiance has it from being a cook. But this is the skill we need to find. Not surgical knowledge, not anatomical knowledge.

I think you're onto something here. It'd certainly explain how he could avoid slicing his own hands up in the dark, working as quickly as he did, and how he worked quickly at all in public places, the stress of potential discovery, through his own excitation, the lighting, etc etc.

But this also implies a deal of practise, no?

[Batman]

MacNaughten doesn't say that he says:

"Personally, after much careful & deliberate consideration, I am inclined to exonerate the last two, but I have always held strong opinions regarding number one."

So he doesn't have anything more than Careful &deliberate consideration. i.e. he read the file and drew the conclusion he did. I don't think he knew Ostrog was in prison or he would have ruled him out outright. He didn't.

How did you draw the conclusion he didn't know Ostrog was in prison?

Basically you are saying MacNaughton doesn't understand what an exhonouration is.

[Jeff Leahy]

It's interesting that on the one hand you dismiss the conspiracy theories (and rightly so) but then have a sort of mini-conspiracy to keep this off the desks of MacNaughton and other senior officers involved in the Whitechapel murders. I know you don't like that word, but the definition of the word conspiracy is congruent with suggesting inner secrets being withheld from senior officials by other officials/persons connected to the case here. I doubt that's even legal.

Even with that said if MacNaughton used the word exhonourated then that means he has evidence someone didn't do it, not that their guilt is doubtful, but there is something or things that means they can't have murdered whoever. So any further developments except for a collapse of the evidence that exhonourates them can't incriminate them. Ostrog was exhonorated for being in prison. Ostrog was arrested in Paris on 26 July 1888 and convicted on 14 November 1888. That's his exhonoration. Unless that evidence collapses he can't be JtR. Something with Kozminski caused MacNaughton to exhonourate him. Something as good as Ostrog's reasons.

MacNaughten doesn't say that he says:

"Personally, after much careful & deliberate consideration, I am inclined to exonerate the last two, but I have always held strong opinions regarding number one."

So he doesn't have anything more than Careful &deliberate consideration. i.e. he read the file and drew the conclusion he did. I don't think he knew Ostrog was in prison or he would have ruled him out outright. He didn't.

And while I would NOT call it a conspiracy theory. Anderson was the Assistant poise commissioner. I believe what was done was done as secretively as possible to avoid riots. A very real threat at the time and the reason the graffittee was destroyed.

I dont believe MacNaughten was much trusted by either Swanson or Anderson, Swanson writes some marginalia about him and I believe Anderson tried to get him put in uniform.

But suggesting that Anderson kept his own council about the ID does appear to be the case rather than a suggestion of conspiracy and of course Monroe also kept very quiet, returning to india in 1890. Did he learn something from Anderson, his 'Hot Potatoe' ?

And of course how embracing for liberal MP Montagu who had offered a large reward for the capture of the killer claiming it couldn't be one of his community,

A political Hot potato

Yours Jeff

[Errata]

So.. the illustration of why Jack needn't have had medical training comes from your own experiences with.. medical training?

Point taken though. I mean, most people can point to the general location of the heart, or the uterus. Possibly fewer could locate the kidneys easily or precisely. He did sort of hack them out, leaving half of this bit behind, literally rummaged around in the cavities for what he wanted.

Not a surgeon, I definitely think.

But *possibly* someone who'd dealt with bodies before, in some capacity. Them's some pretty bold and sure moves he had there, in the dark and under stress.

Ye gods no. Not medical training. Some first aid, some engineering. Our job was to free who we could free, and stop the bleeding of those we couldn't until an EMT got there. It was reaching under a concrete slab to tie a tourniquet or stuff gauze in a wound, but it was also finding the fulcrum point of an unstable structure, find where the debris was caught up, stabilizing a structure, jacking it up, or causing it to fall in the way we wanted it to.

This was immediately post 9/11 so people were terrified, and I was in a city at the time, and we had just learned a ton about crushing deaths... never came to anything. But I did use the training two years ago when a tornado collapsed a dairy on itself and we had to get the cows out. Not what I pictured when I signed up, but hey. I like cows.

***

The most crucial aspect of these crimes is that Jack could identify organs and connections by feel. That's not a surgical skill. Generally they cut so they can see the field, and they have a lot of light. Some surgeons might be able to do it because for whatever reason they have honed that skill, but it's not an ability surgeons have to have.

The ability to do this by feel is entirely dependent on a good imagination. When they feel something, they can see it in their head. They can get a visual map of the field by touch. That is a learned skill. Plumbers have it. archaeologists tend to have it, miners have it. Anyone can develop it, and it's a skill I can see Kosminski developing before emigrating. I can see a lot of people from the pale developing the skill. I have it. My fiance has it from being a cook. But this is the skill we need to find. Not surgical knowledge, not anatomical knowledge.

[Batman]

It's interesting that on the one hand you dismiss the conspiracy theories (and rightly so) but then have a sort of mini-conspiracy to keep this off the desks of MacNaughton and other senior officers involved in the Whitechapel murders. I know you don't like that word, but the definition of the word conspiracy is congruent with suggesting inner secrets being withheld from senior officials by other officials/persons connected to the case here. I doubt that's even legal.

Even with that said if MacNaughton used the word exhonourated then that means he has evidence someone didn't do it, not that their guilt is doubtful, but there is something or things that means they can't have murdered whoever. So any further developments except for a collapse of the evidence that exhonourates them can't incriminate them. Ostrog was exhonorated for being in prison. Ostrog was arrested in Paris on 26 July 1888 and convicted on 14 November 1888. That's his exhonoration. Unless that evidence collapses he can't be JtR. Something with Kozminski caused MacNaughton to exhonourate him. Something as good as Ostrog's reasons.

[Jeff Leahy]

Why should he have stopped at Match 1889?.

Because that is where i believe the file on Kosminski ended.

When he was placed in a Private Asylum in Surrey.

Anderson is approach by Kosminski' Sister after July 1890, when the family faii to get him admitted to a Public Asylum. This is done in private via the Earl of Crawford. And I believe Montagu acted as an intermediate.

A private deal was struck to protect the family and the East end from Riots…'Hot Potatoe'. So the ID was never recorded into the original file which ended March 1889.

Thus both MacNaughten and Anderson are in Accord and both men correct while reaching different yet logical conclusions.

Yours Jeff

[Batman]

The description of the man who attacked Ada Wilson fits blotchy face.

Okay. Yes, these early attacks attempted 'indoors' are interesting to me. The man I am after is the one Galloway saw and was identified by a PC but rejected as they where after Hutchinson's man at that stage.

If MacNaughten works from a file with info only up to March 1889. Then it contains only the info collected by the police survey lance at that time. And Cox is clear that at that time NO proof could be raised against the suspect.
Problem solved

Yours Jeff

Why should he have stopped at Match 1889?

The documented is dated Feb 14th-23rd 1894, a full 5 years later, depending on which version.

Yet clearly he was still active as Assistant Chief Constable in June 1889; he was later promoted to Chief Constable in 1890 and Assistant Commissioner (Crime) of the London Metropolitan Police from 1903 to 1913.

If anything happened to Kozminski he would have known about it, given it was his #2 suspect in his list. Obviously whatever happened had him conclude that Kozminski should be exhonourated.

[Jeff Leahy]

Dr. Brown is on the record as saying he believed JtR was a medical student. This means someone with more than just anatomical knowledge. Why would he hold a belief that conflicted with expert witness testimony? The answer is that it doesn't conflict because its contained within his explanation. You just don't want him to say 'medical knowledge' or 'medical student' but he says both and yes, many students of medicine where looked into because of this.

I think its the level of 'expertise' that is important. A student would be less expert than a surgeon who by nature would be a qualified expert. Someone used to cutting up animals could be a student doctor. But could be a vet or butcher. Dr Brown would have understood the difference and when pushed declined to indicate a person with expertise.

So he sits between Philips and Bond.

Dr. Bond also said 'no anatomical knowledge'. Nothing. If you agree with Dr. Bond and see no reason to contradict him, then you obviously reject that JtR had anatomical knowledge. That means everything he did and obtained was by accident.

I think Jack was suffering schizophrenia, so whatever his 'Design' it won't have been logical to you or I.

To some modern day historians maybe, but everyone at the scene including Swanson's detailed report gives reasons why they believed it to be the hand of the ripper. Including why it would have been wiped away by locals, why it is fresh, what its intensions where and how nobody living there could account for it.

Fido, who you mentioned above has explained it is double cockney. Is Aaron speaking/writing in double cockney? Why is he attacking Jews with it if he is one?

The jews are the men that will not be blamed for nothing?

Perhaps he was translating from German?

Martin Fido who you brought up as the source to start with.

I've never met two ripperologist who agree on everything. I quote Fido and Rumblow, both have voiced opinions that Stride may not have been a victim. Surprisingly I usually quote Tom Wescott, I don't agree with Tom on everything but on Stride he seems to be pretty good. Actually even Begg has voiced concerns about Strides inclusion.

I'm happy to stand by my own conclusion based on Blackwells estimated time of death.Stride was a ripper victim. There was NOT a different knife used.

Robert House has covered details about the possible prior asylum periods. So he can't have killed Coles etc. Maybe its true and he was. Who knows?

I've not actually read Robs book and should do so soon. However I believe my new theory answers most of the timing problems. If it concurs with what Rob says then thats great. Rob is an excellent ripperologist.

Why should someone who suspects Blotchy follow Ada Wilson? Who is 'Blotchy' to you BTW?

The description of the man who attacked Ada Wilson fits blotchy face.

MacNaughton dealt the deathknell in my books to the Kozminski hypothesis...

A to Z page 328 Abberconway version..

MacNaughton - "Now I think about it I'm inclined to exonerate the other two but have suspicions about the first etc.."

He exhonourated Kozminski and Ostrog. EXHONOURATED them. Not just set them aside. They can't be suspects at all if exhonourated. Exhonouration means PROVEN to be innocent, not just 'doubt' over their guilt.

Abberline also said that claims about JtR being 'put away' where untrue.

OK yes. Here we are in total agreement. And thats why I believe my MArch 1889 theory is correct.

If MacNaughten works from a file with info only up to March 1889. Then it contains only the info collected by the police survey lance at that time. And Cox is clear that at that time NO proof could be raised against the suspect.

And thats why I think MacNaughten was correct to dismiss Kosminski. Because he based his reasoning on what he knew up to March 1889.

He knew nothing about the ID described by Swanson in the Marginalia which was a completely separate event almost two years after Cox and Sagar first followed him, and none of these men knew what happened to the man who went into a private asylum….zilch, nothing not a sausage.

But Anderson did. Two separate events March 1889 and Feb 1891.

Problem solved

Yours Jeff

[lynn cates]

different

Hello Jeff. Thanks.

"That said Mylett and Coles weren't mutilated so its possible other reasons can be drawn."

Interruptions, perhaps?

"Stride is different."

Indeed. But, of course, as you have shown, differences can be discounted as serial killers may vary greatly their MO's.

Cheers.
LC

[Batman]

1. There is no evidence of medical knowledge at the earlier attacks. Millwood, Smith or Tabram. I don't think there is enough information to conclude at Nichols. At Chapman Dr Philips believed there was expertise shown (But its possible this was in Daylight) at Eddows, And medical students became a popular theory at the time, many were investigated but to our knowledge none were charged, so when pushed Brown was less fourth coming simply saying 'anatomical ' knowledge.

Dr. Brown is on the record as saying he believed JtR was a medical student. This means someone with more than just anatomical knowledge. Why would he hold a belief that conflicted with expert witness testimony? The answer is that it doesn't conflict because its contained within his explanation. You just don't want him to say 'medical knowledge' or 'medical student' but he says both and yes, many students of medicine where looked into because of this.

And later at the Kelly murder and having studied the other reports Browns being detailed, Bond concluded No medical knowledge required, and I see no reason to contradict him.

Dr. Bond also said 'no anatomical knowledge'. Nothing. If you agree with Dr. Bond and see no reason to contradict him, then you obviously reject that JtR had anatomical knowledge. That means everything he did and obtained was by accident.

2. The goulston Street Graffitti has never been ignored. Its simply ambiguous. Actually I've speculated with interest that member of the Kalish community lived above where the apron was found. But the writing could mean anything and Aaron's brother indicated that Aaron had difficulty with spelling.

To some modern day historians maybe, but everyone at the scene including Swanson's detailed report gives reasons why they believed it to be the hand of the ripper. Including why it would have been wiped away by locals, why it is fresh, what its intensions where and how nobody living there could account for it.

Fido, who you mentioned above has explained it is double cockney. Is Aaron speaking/writing in double cockney? Why is he attacking Jews with it if he is one?

3.Who says Stride was not a victim?

Martin Fido who you brought up as the source to start with.

She was murdered at a location where Aaron grew up. Personally I believe she is the most important attack linking Aaron.

Possibly yes from Robert House's analysis seems that is what he is saying.

4 I believe Aaron entered a Private Asylum in Surrey in March 1889 for a longer period than previously.

Robert House has covered details about the possible prior asylum periods. So he can't have killed Coles etc. Maybe its true and he was. Who knows?

Ah then you include Ada Wilson? and a medical student is a possibility given what Dr Brown Says…

Why should someone who suspects Blotchy follow Ada Wilson? Who is 'Blotchy' to you BTW?

However to go down this line of reasoning you have to ignore what the two most important policemen involved in the case say… Sir Ropert Anderson is quite clear 'A definitively ascertained FACT' and Fido says 'he would not lie for personal Kudos. The Ato Z says the following:

MacNaughton dealt the deathknell in my books to the Kozminski hypothesis...

A to Z page 328 Abberconway version..

MacNaughton - "Now I think about it I'm inclined to exonerate the other two but have suspicions about the first etc.."

He exhonourated Kozminski and Ostrog. EXHONOURATED them. Not just set them aside. They can't be suspects at all if exhonourated. Exhonouration means PROVEN to be innocent, not just 'doubt' over their guilt.

Abberline also said that claims about JtR being 'put away' where untrue.

[Jeff Leahy]

Hi Lynn

Just to add to that. And much of it has nothing to do with my belief Aaron Kosminksi the best suspect. It would be easier to lose McKenzie if that were the case…

I believe that Jacks Mind set was the same in all the attacks I site but the MO altered greatly.

I'm giving a lecture in London on 7th March on the Hammersmith Nude victims and draw similar conclusion very different MO's and death causes.

I believe Chapman was attacked from the front and more probably Nichols, Stride, Eddows from behind, kelly from the front with a sheet thrown over her head. I've also entertained that Jack might have used a ligature of some kind in some of the attacks. It has know particular bearing other than Jack experimented with how to kill these women and if that were the case Mylett can't be ruled out totally. I just incline to discount rather than count her in…

Just a further thought

Yours Jeff

[Jeff Leahy]

Hello Jeff. I note with interest that you include, as victims, ALL between Smith and McKenzie. Although I obviously disagree, at least that is consistent. Your argument is that a single killer may vary methods (which is quite true--as far as it goes) and so you dismiss variations.

But I can never understand how you can then dismiss Coles? Surely she is more like, say, Stride, than Smith is?

Cheers.
LC

I see the murders as a progression. Millwood would fit an early attack, as I see this type of murderer.

On balance I think this type of mutilation crime extremely rare… So Mckenzie has to be included, although caveat not as clean as the first series.

That said Mylett and Coles weren't mutilated so its possible other reasons can be drawn..

Stride is different. Because of her time of death it seems the killer was disturbed, probably by Schwartz and the killer took off…

So thats my reasoning..

I don't include Ada Wilson as its always seemed to me like a story of a prostitute arguing with a client.

I include Smith because of the geography and Inspector Drew's comments. Its also an attack on the genitalia that seems similar to the killers mind set.

I think Tabram is messy so the killer alters his MO with success on Nichols. He's learning where stuff is, what he wants and how to do it.

He has more time and light with Chapman, but can't remove her head, which I think he wanted to do… So he attacks the face also with Eddows and Kelly..

Kelly is different due to the circumstance he can fore fill the fantasy in his mind…

Yours Jeff

[Jeff Leahy]

I started this thread with its title for the same reasons I dropped accepting Kozminski last year. It is all accidentally removing kidneys, hearts and wombs, the Goulston Street Graffitti just per random, Stride no longer a victim, chance happening that we find someone entering an asylum just after MJK died.

Well I think I've given my response to those specific Questions:

1. There is no evidence of medical knowledge at the earlier attacks. Millwood, Smith or Tabram. I don't think there is enough information to conclude at Nichols. At Chapman Dr Philips believed there was expertise shown (But its possible this was in Daylight) at Eddows, And medical students became a popular theory at the time, many were investigated but to our knowledge none were charged, so when pushed Brown was less fourth coming simply saying 'anatomical ' knowledge. And later at the Kelly murder and having studied the other reports Browns being detailed, Bond concluded No medical knowledge required, and I see no reason to contradict him.

2. The goulston Street Graffitti has never been ignored. Its simply ambiguous. Actually I've speculated with interest that member of the Kalish community lived above where the apron was found. But the writing could mean anything and Aaron's brother indicated that Aaron had difficulty with spelling.

3.Who says Stride was not a victim? She was murdered at a location where Aaron grew up. Personally I believe she is the most important attack linking Aaron.

4 I believe Aaron entered a Private Asylum in Surrey in March 1889 for a longer period than previously.

My suspect of choice is Blotchy and or a medical student. It's on my profile.

Ah then you include Ada Wilson? and a medical student is a possibility given what Dr Brown Says…

However to go down this line of reasoning you have to ignore what the two most important policemen involved in the case say… Sir Ropert Anderson is quite clear 'A definitively ascertained FACT' and Fido says 'he would not lie for personal Kudos. The Ato Z says the following:

"its interesting that brown reports no trace of sexual connection and refers to the absence of secretion of any kind on the night, pointing to his possible expectation that premature ejaculation or Masterbation over the body might have occurred. this like bonds report and Anderson's remarks, points to a surprisingly confident and accurate recognition of practices of sadistic serial murderers; a sophisticated knowledge not possessed by the press or the junior police of the period."

When Serial killer Peter Sutcliff was apprehended he was wearing a bizarre self crafted garment of clothing. A sort of pair of long Johns with the crutch cut away, presumably to allow masturbation on cold winter evenings.

But the importance of Kosminski as a suspect is the weight of source evidence. Not any one single piece of evidence.

Yours Jeff

[Batman]

. I don't know who 'batman' advocates or doesn't as a suspect(s).

The first book I ever read on JtR was Martin Fido's long since out of publication "The Crimes and Trials of Jack the Ripper" back in the mid 80s which I read at the library several times in my teenage years. From the mid-1980s until the end of last year I was a Kozminski/Cohen believer.

Then I read Robert House and decided I didn't need Cohen anymore.

In between all the time I have read most of other popular books on the topic.

The place to start is with Philip Sugden. He is one who is championed by the main authors who are alive today.

I started this thread with its title for the same reasons I dropped accepting Kozminski last year. It is all accidentally removing kidneys, hearts and wombs, the Goulston Street Graffitti just per random, Stride no longer a victim, chance happening that we find someone entering an asylum just after MJK died.

My suspect of choice is Blotchy and or a medical student. It's on my profile.

[Batman]

THen why did Jack the Ripper use a seven inch sharp knife and not a scalpel as a surgeon would have done?

That's from Rumbelow. He believes this is JtRs knife. I haven't seem him say anything other than JtR used a type of amputation knife.