Arbitrary Selective Rejection and Acceptence of Coincidences

[pinkmoon]

Yes I agree , it is speculative…but thus is any suspect theory ripperology.

I can only say that I am re-evaluating the sources about Kosminski and Cohen

Starting form scratch in 2015…

And I've checked with Martin Fido (After all he is the father of this research)

And he has at least said that its worth while research (I suggest given that he has only checked Public asylum records and there is contemporary source records that 'The Suspect' did indeed enter a private asylum).

Trusting this clarify's

Yours Jef

Thank you again for your reply I still feel though if the old Bill had anything on poor Kosminski then we would know I think the fact he picked up a knife made the police look at him .

[Jonathan H]

No, Jeff

To Errata

A thoughtful post.

My theory is that Macnaghten misled the other police (and George Kebbell) as nearly all their suspects are supposedly deceased whilst only his actually was six foot under.

Nobody here agrees with me. Worse it is regarded as a slur against the character and professionalism of this police chief.

To Jeff

No, Jeff, I was not suggesting that Begg agrees with me! This is one of your worst ever bits of shameless distortion. I have always made it clear that Begg politely and firmly believes I am quite wrong about Macnaghten.

No, Jeff, Sagar was not watching Kosminski, but a butcher in Aldgate who emigrated to Australia after being released from a private asylum (I suppose you are going to ask me to look up records here to prove it was really Aaron on vacation?)

No, Jeff, Sims is a primary source for the posthumous investigation into Druitt, and into the incarceration of Kosminski, albeit second-hand.

No, Jeff, Fido was not just looking at public asylum records in early 1889 because of what Macnaghten wrote but because that is also where Anderson implicitly places the timing of the sectioning of his Polish suspect. That the Polish madman was sectioned just once is the only element the sources agree on.

No, Jeff, the Sims piece of 1907 shows that data about Kosminski was being deliberately reshaped by Sims; now the suspect lives alone, does not practice chronic self-abuse, worked in a hospital in Poland, and was sectioned by the state, not family, and was only a silhouette to the cop witness. He is also not the alternative to the Drowned Doctor as that place is reserved for an American medico suspect.

No, Jeff, Macnaghten is aware in 1898, 1903 and 1907 that Aaron Kosminski was still alive--at the same time Anderson was telling his son he was deceased, and Swanson believed he was deceased. It has nothing to do with switching asylums. It is just that Mac was correct something you are unable to face because the house of cards collapses--yet you are dangerously trying to use the same chief, who debunked the Polish suspect, as your proof that the same man went in to a private asylum in 1889?!

No, Jeff, I was not claiming you were in any way connected to Russell Edwards. Rather, you were against the shawl because you had been told it was an Edwardian table-cloth, then you switched sides when you discovered other Kosminski-advocates were, awkwardly, putting one foot in the DNA wagon--until the wheels fell off (thanks to Chris). Now you are trying to resuscitate that deflated balloon by claiming, of all things, that Macnaghten is a reliable source, e.g. the same top cop who pointedly rejected Kosminski in favor of another (who was really deceased).

Desperate times, Jeff ...

[pinkmoon]

Yes I agree , it is speculative…but thus is any suspect theory ripperology.

I can only say that I am re-evaluating the sources about Kosminski and Cohen

Starting form scratch in 2015…

And I've checked with Martin Fido (After all he is the father of this research)

And he has at least said that its worth while research (I suggest given that he has only checked Public asylum records and there is contemporary source records that 'The Suspect' did indeed enter a private asylum).

Trusting this clarify's

Yours Jef

I've read Martin fidos book and I was very impressed with his research I just can't see Kosminski been our killer and as for the mix up over the identity of David Cohen I just can't see it what I can see though is the police keeping the Jew angle quite to avoid any tensions arising with the locals .

[Batman]

No I am communicating with people with new ideas that expand upon Robert houses book. Robert is clearly attached to a single asylum theory

We are saying that Kosminski enter the asylum on more than one occasion.

i.e. from December 1888 until February 1991

Rip up everything you have ever believed before…

2015 here we come!

Yours Jef

Are you sure House doesn't say Kozminski was in and out of several different asylums?

I think that's the core revelation of his book IMO.

[Jeff Leahy]

To Jeff

No, Jeff, I was not suggesting that Begg agrees with me! This is one of your worst ever bits of shameless distortion. I have always made it clear that Begg politely and firmly believes I am quite wrong about Macnaghten.

Yes that is as I understand.

No, Jeff, Sagar was not watching Kosminski, but a butcher in Aldgate who emigrated to Australia after being released from a private asylum (I suppose you are going to ask me to look up records here to prove it was really Aaron on vacation?)

Ah yes a Butchers premise in Algate. What did Anderson say 'his people''

Who were Aarons people?

And which one of the Cohen's went to South Africa?

No, Jeff, Sims is a primary source for the posthumous investigation into Druitt, and into the incarceration of Kosminski, albeit second-hand.

Simms wasn't on the ground and to my knowledge won't have had direct access to any of the police files. So everything he writes must have come from another source. Obviously we don't know how he recorded this information or how accurately. MacNaughten is the most likely source, chatting at the club, MAcNaughten remembering the file he has seen when writing the Cutbush memo. A couple of glasses to brandy and lurid tales of Jack the ripper?

No, Jeff, Fido was not just looking at public asylum records in early 1889 because of what Macnaghten wrote but because that is also where Anderson implicitly places the timing of the sectioning of his Polish suspect. That the Polish madman was sectioned just once is the only element the sources agree on.

Then why does Sagar say Private Asylum. And what do you make of the Dublin News article. What the sources say is that he entered the asylum in March 1889. And its clear that Kosminski enter the asylum in Feb 1891.

So we have two events that in my opinion are actually two.

There is nothing in what anybody says that excludes that possibility.

No, Jeff, the Sims piece of 1907 shows that data about Kosminski was being deliberately reshaped by Sims; now the suspect lives alone, does not practice chronic self-abuse, worked in a hospital in Poland, and was sectioned by the state, not family, and was only a silhouette to the cop witness. He is also not the alternative to the Drowned Doctor as that place is reserved for an American medico suspect.

Deliberately is your interpretation. It just seems to me that Simms knows a little more but is slowly getting things muddled as he isn't working from original source material.

No, Jeff, Macnaghten is aware in 1898, 1903 and 1907 that Aaron Kosminski was still alive--at the same time Anderson was telling his son he was deceased, and Swanson believed he was deceased. It has nothing to do with switching asylums. It is just that Mac was correct something you are unable to face because the house of cards collapses--yet you are dangerously trying to use the same chief, who debunked the Polish suspect, as your proof that the same man went in to a private asylum in 1889?!

No, MacNaughten really knows very little as he's only ever referenced the file covering up to March 1889. And at this time he doesn't no what eventually happened to the suspect apart from the fact he was placed in an asylum and has no reason to suppose he is dead…none, zilch.

However given the little information he has, and from private info, presumably faquharson he naturally favours Druit. Theres no need to a cover up or any deception. He simply believes what he believes because he knows nothing about Swanson and Andersons ID suspect, who was also Kosminski

No, Jeff, I was not claiming you were in any way connected to Russell Edwards. Rather, you were against the shawl because you had been told it was an Edwardian table-cloth, then you switched sides when you discovered other Kosminski-advocates were, awkwardly, putting one foot in the DNA wagon--until the wheels fell off (thanks to Chris). Now you are trying to resuscitate that deflated balloon by claiming, of all things, that Macnaghten is a reliable source, e.g. the same top cop who pointedly rejected Kosminski in favor of another (who was really deceased).

Desperate times, Jeff ...

Look I'll state this one more time and then can we drop it. I believed the Shawl was fake because when I researched it back in 2004 I was told it was screen printed. And as the screen printing porocess didnt start until Edwardian Times it could NOT have been authentic…. That was my position. When the Shawl and Dna hit the headlines I contacted Russell Edwards and he confirmed it had been re-examined by an expert who claims it was created through some kind of wood block printing process and given the design was possibly much older. I therefore conceded I had been in error. If Doctor Jari has credible DNA evidence then whether we like it or not, provenance or not, then those claims need to be taken seriously as Dr Jari is a respectable scientist. But I don't claim to understand anything about DNA. Personally I'd like further tests on the material itself. I'm not satisfied that the dating of the material by 'expert' based on the 'design' is enough by it self to establish the material date of origin. But the Material and the DNA are two separate questions. And it has absolutely nothing to do with me. Why should it. My current interest is in Private Asylum records in Surrey and any attached Convalescent Seaside Homes.

Yours Jeff

[Jeff Leahy]

Are you sure House doesn't say Kozminski was in and out of several different asylums?

I think that's the core revelation of his book IMO.

You could be correct on this. It might be something he has raised.

What I think I'm trying to say that is a new theory, is that there were two completely separate events.

That Kosminski entered a Private Asylum (Possibly on several occasions starting as early as Dec 1888) but being put out of harms way for several months in March 1889. This was the file that MacNaughten accessed.

Rob House also mentions the Crawford letter, however Crawford only sat on the sweat shop committee until April 1888. I'm postulating that Matilda Kosminski was introduced to Crawford via Montagu the Whitechapel MP. This might also give a connection to Shaftsbury and Holloway.

That Anderson met Matilda Kosminski in secret. Ask Swanson do we have anything on a chap called Kosminski? Swanson said yes and with difficulty, set up an ID at a Convalescent Seaside Home in a private asylum. This was only known to Swanson and Anderson and a handful of detectives sworn to secrecy.

When it failed it was thought best to keep track on him in a public Asylum. This was agreed with the family for political reasons.

Swanson kept track via Dr Seward who confused Cohen and Kosminski when Kosminski had actually been transferred to Leavesdon.

This is simply a revisiting of work done by Martin Fido, Paul Begg, Stewart Evans, Rob House, Rob Clack, Chris Philips, Chris Scot and Debra Ariff (Hopefully haven't missed anyone) and contains interesting new work by a German researcher. It is the nature of Ripperology to build on those who have gone before.

Trust that clarify's

Yours Jeff

[Jonathan H]

Ill take that as an apology to myself and Begg, mealy-mouthed as it is.

You still shamelessly break it up into bits, how youthful of you.

Sagar's suspect went to Australia after being incarcerated, and died there, so it was not Aaron Kosminski.

Unless ...

By the way I forgot to deal with Harry Cox.

You are wrong about him too, Jeff. He is writing about events in 1891, not 1889, and he also asserts that there was no proof against this man, there was nothing police could actually do--not even arrest him. That's not your Kosminski, is it, who had a star witness against him, and who even admitted by his manner at the alleged identification that he had been tumbled. Shame about that Judas witness, but at least the swine croaked soon after.

Except, to ruin a good yarn, he hadn't, had he?

Macnaghten knew that Kosminski had been sectioned much later than the so-called canonical murders--and was functioning in between--whereas Anderson and Swanson know no such thing. Macnaghten knew he was alive and not deceased, no matter how you frantically try and spin this, Jeff, and he knew it as late as 1907.

Macnaghten via Sims (who knew a lot more about the real Kosminski than Anderson or Swanson) also gave it to Anderson, with both barrels, about the rubbish of a Hebrew witness and/or a Hebrew community shielding the Polish madman:

"The Referee", Dagonet in "Mustard and Cress", April 17th, 1910:

“It was only the other day that the late esteemed head of the C.I.D. caused a storm of indignation among the King’s Jewish subjects by stating that JACK THE RIPPER was a Jew, and that the Jews knew who he was and assisted him to evade capture.

The statement went beyond ascertained facts. The mad Polish Jew, to whom Sir Robert refers, was only one of three persons who were each strongly suspected of being the genuine Jack. The final official record, which is in the archives of the Home Office, leaves the matter in doubt between the Polish Jew, who was afterwards put in a lunatic asylum, a Russian doctor of vile character, and an English homicidal maniac, one Dr.-----, who had been in a lunatic asylum.

In these circumstances it was certainly indiscreet of Sir Robert to plump for the Polish Jew, and to imply that many of the Jewish community in the East End were accessories after the fact. …

ANDERSON’S FAIRY TALES.

There is no truth to the rumour that in the course of further romantic revelations to be expected from Sir Robert we shall learn … The name of the eminent Jewish financiers who assisted Jack the Ripper to evade arrest.’

Why did Sims not quite Griffiths to say that there had been a possible witness, but that was a Gentile policeman?

Because that bit of propaganda was being retired.

For example, Macnaghten backs this stance in his 1914 memoirs; by deflating the notion of a cop witness to anything. It is Mac who had set in motion the whole idea of a witness to Kosminski that Anderson's fading yet self-serving memory then mixed and matched with Lawende and Sadler (sand the Sailor's Home) and allegedly affirming to William Grant.

Macnaghten also writes in 1914 that there were no other witnesses of note. That is not literally true, but the point here is that he was denouncing Anderson's account of four years previous--e.g. the Ripper was not a Jew, not detained by the state and not the subject of a positive identification, and police were clueless about the real killer whilst he was alive and for years after he was deceased.

[Jeff Leahy]

Sagar's suspect went to Australia after being incarcerated, and died there, so it was not Aaron Kosminski.

Anderson talks about 'his people'. Sagar watched a number of premises connected to Kosminski. These were occupied by suspects. Aaron Eventually became the main interest. It was cohen who went to South Africa not Australia.

By the way I forgot to deal with Harry Cox.

You are wrong about him too, Jeff. He is writing about events in 1891, not 1889, and he also asserts that there was no proof against this man, there was nothing police could actually do--not even arrest him. That's not your Kosminski, is it, who had a star witness against him, and who even admitted by his manner at the alleged identification that he had been tumbled. Shame about that Judas witness, but at least the swine croaked soon after.

Yes I always thought so too and that is the general concencious of experts on this. I now disagree. I'll leave it at that for now.

Except, to ruin a good yarn, he hadn't, had he?

Macnaghten knew that Kosminski had been sectioned much later than the so-called canonical murders--and was functioning in between--whereas Anderson and Swanson know no such thing. Macnaghten knew he was alive and not deceased, no matter how you frantically try and spin this, Jeff, and he knew it as late as 1907.

MAcNaughten only ever knew what was in the File unto MArch 1889

Macnaghten via Sims (who knew a lot more about the real Kosminski than Anderson or Swanson) also gave it to Anderson, with both barrels, about the rubbish of a Hebrew witness and/or a Hebrew community shielding the Polish madman:

Simms knew what NAcNaughten told him, possibly he even saw the file. I don't really know how much he knew, or what his sources were. However he clearly didn't know about the secret ID at a Seaside Home and both Anderson and Swanson did.

"The Referee", Dagonet in "Mustard and Cress", April 17th, 1910:

“It was only the other day that the late esteemed head of the C.I.D. caused a storm of indignation among the King’s Jewish subjects by stating that JACK THE RIPPER was a Jew, and that the Jews knew who he was and assisted him to evade capture.

Yep that exactly fits what I'm saying…That when Anderson talks about 'His People' he is referring to a specific group of people from a town in Poland.

The statement went beyond ascertained facts. The mad Polish Jew, to whom Sir Robert refers, was only one of three persons who were each strongly suspected of being the genuine Jack. The final official record, which is in the archives of the Home Office, leaves the matter in doubt between the Polish Jew, who was afterwards put in a lunatic asylum, a Russian doctor of vile character, and an English homicidal maniac, one Dr.-----, who had been in a lunatic asylum.

Clearly there were a number of suspects when they first started to investigate in 1888 following the House to House. Those suspects were slowly narrowed down.

In these circumstances it was certainly indiscreet of Sir Robert to plump for the Polish Jew, and to imply that many of the Jewish community in the East End were accessories after the fact. …

Anderson had given his word to protect the family. For political reasons it would have been unwise to risk riots. Matagu would have understood this..

However Anderson wasn't talking about Jews in general. He was talking about a community from Kalish. They protected one of their number who from time to time became insane. It was hardly their fault Aaron developed schizophrenia. They may have experienced this kind of thing before but it wasn't really understood….still isn't

ANDERSON’S FAIRY TALES.

There is no truth to the rumour that in the course of further romantic revelations to be expected from Sir Robert we shall learn … The name of the eminent Jewish financiers who assisted Jack the Ripper to evade arrest.’

Why did Sims not quite Griffiths to say that there had been a possible witness, but that was a Gentile policeman?

Jewish financiers? Interesting.

Was there a police witness? Its not impossible given the timings in Mitre Sq

Because that bit of propaganda was being retired.

For example, Macnaghten backs this stance in his 1914 memoirs; by deflating the notion of a cop witness to anything. It is Mac who had set in motion the whole idea of a witness to Kosminski that Anderson's fading yet self-serving memory then mixed and matched with Lawende and Sadler (sand the Sailor's Home) and allegedly affirming to William Grant.

Macnaghten also writes in 1914 that there were no other witnesses of note. That is not literally true, but the point here is that he was denouncing Anderson's account of four years previous--e.g. the Ripper was not a Jew, not detained by the state and not the subject of a positive identification, and police were clueless about the real killer whilst he was alive and for years after he was deceased.

Were sort of going over the same ground here. Swanson was quite clear in his Marginalia notes. He was a top detective, one of the best. The event he describes is specific and I believe we should take him at his word.

There is obviously an error if he thought Kosminski dead. But I've explained a possibility why he may have thought so… That Dr Seward treated both Cohen and Kosminski and may have muddled them when kosminski was later transferred…That would explain why Swanson believed what he did and why Anderson believed what he did…

Simms, Griffis, MacNaughten , Abberline, Ried etc etc. None of them knew about the ID or Kosminski going to Colney Hatch…only Swanson and Anderson new about this and it was kept hush for political reasons…Montagu.

Only Swanson mentions Colney Hatch by name. The rest only know an Asylum and they don't know where..

Yours Jeff

[Batman]

However in the end isn't Kozminski just a coincidental case of a public masturbator who was maybe on a watch list but who basically ended up in an asylum which sort of coincided with the end to the Ripper murders?

I don't even think that should be granted the title of circumstantial.

There is zero evidence for correlation except for the Swanson ID parade which has fundamentally flawed data on this.

A phantom Jew killer especially Hutchinson's sort, prevailed in the minds of Abberline and Swanson. This is obviously Swanson's suspect but he doesn't call him JtR? Why not? Legal issues in a private note? More like uncertainty. Abberline favoured Chapman eventually. So they split on this one.

[Jeff Leahy]

However in the end isn't Kozminski just a coincidental case of a public masturbator who was maybe on a watch list but who basically ended up in an asylum which sort of coincided with the end to the Ripper murders?.

Kosminski was almost certainly schizophrenic. And if he is the man described by Sagar and Cox then in the early stages of his illness ' He from time to time became insane' and this would fit with what modern experts know about schizophrenia.

If he was placed in a Private Asylum then they would have required a reason and interestingly Self Abuse is one of the critia on the list…so perhaps it was just convenient.

There is zero evidence for correlation except for the Swanson ID parade which has fundamentally flawed data on this. .

Well thats not quite the case as Swanson is writing Marginalia against Andersons written conclusions so they go together, if not supporting clearly Swanson accepts what Anderson is saying and appears to expand on what he is saying, confirming Kosminski is Andersons suspect (which had previously been thought to be Pizer)

A phantom Jew killer especially Hutchinson's sort, prevailed in the minds of Abberline and Swanson. This is obviously Swanson's suspect but he doesn't call him JtR? Why not? Legal issues in a private note? More like uncertainty. Abberline favoured Chapman eventually. So they split on this one.

Technically Kosminski was the suspect…he was never tried in a court of law and was innocent until proved guilty. Noone apart from Swanson and by association Anderson appear to have known about the ID at a Seaside Home. I suggest for political reasons and the potential of a very embraced Montagu and East end Riots that it was kept secret..

Its now known that the Kosminski family all moved shortly after he entered Colney Hatch. Another coincidence?

Yours Jeff

[Batman]

Well thats not quite the case as Swanson is writing Marginalia against Andersons written conclusions so they go together, if not supporting clearly Swanson accepts what Anderson is saying and appears to expand on what he is saying, confirming Kosminski is Andersons suspect (which had previously been thought to be Pizer)
Yours Jeff

Abberline's suspect was Chapman though. How could a man equal to that of Swanson in terms of on the ground investigation and knowledge, who worked with Swanson,reject Swanson's conclusions?

The answer is from the Abberline himself, who casts the darkest doubt over Kozminski being JtR. Abberline rejected stories that the ripper was locked up or commited suicide.

[Jeff Leahy]

Abberline's suspect was Chapman though. How could a man equal to that of Swanson in terms of on the ground investigation and knowledge, who worked with Swanson,reject Swanson's conclusions?

The answer is from the Abberline himself, who casts the darkest doubt over Kozminski being JtR. Abberline rejected stories that the ripper was locked up or commited suicide.

Well Swanson was in over all charge of the investigation. Abberline was bought in on the ground because his experience was invaluable. Both men were competent policeman.

However my answer to your question would be in what the police new in March 1889. And at that time despite watching or following the suspect they did not catch him red handed (Which must have been there hope) So given what was known about Kosminski then, then Chapman and Druit must have seemed like credible suspects or at least as credible as Kosminski.

Anderson Defintively ascertained Fact in my opinion was formed at a later time when a member of Kosminski's own family approached him and asked for help protecting the family from reprisals..

This, I believe, Anderson did in secret with Swanson and formed his opinion about the suspect being protected by his family.

Knowone but Swanson and Anderson and perhaps some other officers sworn to secrecy knew. I don't believe Abberline knew, hence his preference for Chapman which would seem reasonable with that senario

Yours Jeff

[robhouse]

Fido was not just looking at public asylum records in early 1889 because of what Macnaghten wrote but because that is also where Anderson implicitly places the timing of the sectioning of his Polish suspect.

You seem to think that if you just keep repeating this often enough, it will eventually become true.

[Scott Nelson]

Cox's suspect

He is writing about events in 1891, not 1889, and he also asserts that there was no proof against this man, there was nothing police could actually do--not even arrest him.

Actually Jonathan, we can fairly accurately date Cox's story from his description of starting watch on his man about a month after the last murder (Kelly), then for about three months -- to roughly February, or perhaps March 1889.

[Jeff Leahy]

Just to add to that…that I recently gave this some re-thought..

If Cox was indeed using the Sweating Inspector investigation as a cover, then it rather points to an earlier date.

The Sweating committee made its final report in April 1889 and published in August 1889

So I personally now believe Cox and Sagar are describing events after the Kelly murder until March 1889.

Yours Jeff