Arbitrary Selective Rejection and Acceptence of Coincidences

[Jeff Leahy]

Just hope you like it chap.

Monty

The parrot or the Peanuts?

[Roy Corduroy]

Jeff,

How much of Aaron Kosminski's known record are you willing to toss out to make your new theory work?

Roy

[Jeff Leahy]

Jeff,

How much of Aaron Kosminski's known record are you willing to toss out to make your new theory work?

Roy

I've stated on the record, that I'm prepared to through every previously held belief on the subject OUT and start again if necessary..

THe key is two separate events. March 18989. and Feb 1891

Yours Jeff

PS I trust those 'looking in' appreciate its my ass on the line here

[Batman]

Hi Jeff

I actually accept your account of things as quite logically coherent.

Robert shined some light also.

At the same time I find the Rubelow's idea of Salder a really novel mental intrigue for me.

Good luck and do your best Jeff.

Thanks,

Batman

[Scott Nelson]

My Cohen article, Jeff...is it worthy of a screenplay?

[Jonathan H]

Jeff,

If you find Aaron Kosminski in private asylum records for March 1889, well that's great.

But don't be too disappointed if you don't because you will not be the first led astray by Macnaghten's public relations campaign.

Try and pause to consider why Macnaghten wrote two two versions of his report. One was never sent to the Home Office and the other was disseminated to the public via cronies.

For public consumption, Jeff.

Just think if the Kosminski family recognized their member? Would that not be disturbing and embarrassing?

But could they recognize their Aaron? In the following, Griffiths, 1898:

“Concerning two of them the case was weak, although it was based on certain colourable facts. One was a Polish Jew, a known lunatic, who was at large in the district of Whitechapel at the time of the murders, and who, having afterwards developed homicidal tendencies, was confined to an asylum. This man was said to resemble the murderer by the one person who got a glimpse of him – the police-constable in Mitre Court.”

They would not because their Aaron was not seen by a cop at a crime scene, or to their knowledge never alleged to have been. Nor had he developed homicidal tendencies by simply raising a knife to his relation. Nor had he been--by implication--sectioned at the time of the Kelly murder, as it was over two years later.

Another factor to consider is that the report(s) set up an "awful glut" litmus test, and supposedly the trio qualify for this test but Cutbush does not.

Why not?

Because the jobber was out and about and functioning after the mind-shattering Kelly horror for a considerable time, years in fact.

Whereas 'Kosminski' collapsed into solitary vices and had to sectioned within a few months. Perhaps because he had destroyed his mind in Miller's Ct.

In other words, if you discover that Aaron Kosminski was out and about and functioning for years after Kelly he cannot be the Ripper.

He is the same as Cutbush--exonerated.

Of course the test is a shell game. It's not real.

Macnaghten already believed, rightly or wrongly, that the Ripper was Druitt based on information received years later.

Its relevance here is that Macnaghten was backdating Kosminski's incarceration--and his taking a knife to his sister--because if he did not do this then 'Kosminski' would not make the list.

It was still so weak he felt he had to throw in a fictional detail--the sighting by a Bobbie, that shoehorned the suspect into the 1888 investigation.

You are quite wrong to say that Macnaghten knows nothing about the identification as he starts the concept. Or are you arguing it was just a coincidence that Mac thought, wrongly, a cop had witnessed the Polish suspect at a murder scene while there really was a Jewish witness who had seen Kosminski at a murder scene.

Are you saying that it is just a coincidence that Anderson says there was an unsatisfactory confrontation regarding a Jewish witness and that Sims in 1907 also says that there was an unsatisfactory confrontation, regarding a cop witness?

[Jeff Leahy]

Jeff,

If you find Aaron Kosminski in private asylum records for March 1889, well that's great.

But don't be too disappointed if you don't because you will not be the first led astray by Macnaghten's public relations campaign.

Try and pause to consider why Macnaghten wrote two two versions of his report. One was never sent to the Home Office and the other was disseminated to the public via cronies.

I'm an editor. So it makes sense to me that MacNaughten drew up a draft, The abberconway version.

And then edited it down for a more precise Memo

In that order

For public consumption, Jeff.

Just think if the Kosminski family recognized their member? Would that not be disturbing and embarrassing?

But could they recognize their Aaron? In the following, Griffiths, 1898:

“Concerning two of them the case was weak, although it was based on certain colourable facts. One was a Polish Jew, a known lunatic, who was at large in the district of Whitechapel at the time of the murders, and who, having afterwards developed homicidal tendencies, was confined to an asylum. This man was said to resemble the murderer by the one person who got a glimpse of him – the police-constable in Mitre Court.”

Well yes I think they would, if Griffiths is repeating what he knows via MAcNaughten…

Because at Large refers to when he became insane (Autumn of terror) and MArch 1889, when he was at large. After that I believe he spent much of his time at an asylum in Surrey…aloud out for periods of time

Once he's been there over a year the Asylum isn't to keen to have him back. So a more permanent solution needs to be found. He's taken to the work house 12th July 1890, but for some reason they refuse to keep him…Problem

So another solution is required?

Note that at this time they claim he has been insane for 2yrs which takes us back to the Autumn of terror, summer 1888.

I'm still curious that his trade is given as a 'Hairdresser' and we've been revisiting this (I noted some interesting posts on this by Roy)

But while were going back and looking at the sources:

http://www.jtrforums.com/showthread.php?t=11566

I posted the original documents relating to the admission of Kozminski to the Mile End Workhouse in February 1891
For the sake of completeness I thought it appropraite to post also the records relating to Kozminki's earlier admission in the same institution in July 1890.
The first record is the admission record for 12 July 1890 and reads as follows:
Mile End Old Town
Admissions
Day of the Month: (July) 12th
Day of the Week: Saturday
Next meal after Admission: S (i.e. Supper)
Name: KOSORIMSKI (sic) Aaron
Calling, if any: Hairdresser
Religious Persuasion: Hebrew
When born: 1865
Class for diet: 1 (i.e. Able Bodied men)
Number affixed to the pauper's clothes: 425
By whose order admitted: Whitfield
Date of the order of admission: (July) 12th
Cause of seeking relief: 2y Insane (written faintly underneath Destitute 2y Insane)
Marital Status: Single

http://www.jtrforums.com/showthread.php?t=18941&page=2

Yours Jeff

[Jonathan H]

Jeff,

You didn't answer my question about whether it was a coincidence? That's your prerogative of course.

Both Rumbelow and Fido speculated that Aberconway was written second, and I agree.

But regardless of the order in which they were composed Macnaghten chose to disseminate the so-called draft version, in which Ostrog would not recognize himself, the Kosminski's would not recognize Aaron and the Druitts would, of course, recognize their Montie--but nobody else would.

[Batman]

Description of Kozminski he 30, 5' 5'' with short black curly hair.

Schwartz suspect - age about 30 ht, 5 ft 5 in. comp. fair hair dark, small brown moustache, full face, broad shouldered, dress, dark jacket & trousers black cap with peak, had nothing in his hands.

That's not such a bad fit with the limited data.

The thing I find interesting is this.

In order for the Swanson Schwartz identification to work, Stride is a victim of JtR.

For anti-Stride people, this means Kozminski killed Stride but not the others.

[Chris]

Note that at this time they claim he has been insane for 2yrs which takes us back to the Autumn of terror, summer 1888.
...
Cause of seeking relief: 2y Insane (written faintly underneath Destitute 2y Insane)

That "2y" is a misreading of "Qy" - "Query".

[Jeff Leahy]

Description of Kozminski he 30, 5' 5'' with short black curly hair.

Schwartz suspect - age about 30 ht, 5 ft 5 in. comp. fair hair dark, small brown moustache, full face, broad shouldered, dress, dark jacket & trousers black cap with peak, had nothing in his hands.

That's not such a bad fit with the limited data.

Cox "The man we suspected was about five feet six inches in height, with short, black, curly hair"

Also to consider if Aaron Kosminski did first enter a private asylum in Dec 1888 just for a few days, might they have shaved his hair and gotten him clean? Thus when he reappeared on the street he looks different as his hair is growing back 'Short and Curley'

Not that I'm suggestion any connection to his profession but hair is surely one of the easiest things to change?

In order for the Swanson Schwartz identification to work, Stride is a victim of JtR.

For anti-Stride people, this means Kozminski killed Stride but not the others.

Yes a number of prominent Ripper theorists have excluded Stride including Don Rumblow. Her murder is certainly more problematic as a ripper victim, which is why I believe so many favour the Lawende conclusion.

Frankly Blackwells time of death leaves it in little doubt in my mind that Schwartz does witness the murder, and the man he see's is the same man seen near Mitre Square.

Did a policeman see a suspect before entering Mitre sq? The timings leave it as a possibility

Many thanks
Yours Jeff

[Chris]

But regardless of the order in which they were composed Macnaghten chose to disseminate the so-called draft version, in which Ostrog would not recognize himself, the Kosminski's would not recognize Aaron and the Druitts would, of course, recognize their Montie--but nobody else would.

Couldn't that have been just because the Aberconway version was the one he had in his possession, while the official version was filed away somewhere in the police records?

[Robert]

Jeff, if Aaron was admitted to a private asylum in spring 1889, then he could not have been there for over a year. This is because he was walking a dog at the end of 1889. And in mid-1890 he has his workhouse admission. Then in early 1891 he has his Colney Hatch admission.

[Jeff Leahy]

That "2y" is a misreading of "Qy" - "Query".

Yes I've noted this in the thread, a 'O' sometimes written as a 2 and Chis George seems to confirm this…

But isn't that even more odd? Is it being suggested that the patient might not be insane? Which is why he is released in three days?

Yours Jeff

[Jeff Leahy]

Jeff, if Aaron was admitted to a private asylum in spring 1889, then he could not have been there for over a year. This is because he was walking a dog at the end of 1889. And in mid-1890 he has his workhouse admission. Then in early 1891 he has his Colney Hatch admission.

Yes agreed. I'm suggesting that the private asylum was used on and off.

He first entered December 1888. Longer stay March 1889. Out late 1889 back in early 1890 but it had been made clear that they could no longer coup. These Private asylums were only designed as short stay answers.

Once it was clear Aaron wasn't getting better there wouldn't be much they could do..

It may also be that Aaron made improvement at first. Once he was cut off from the catalyst, alcohol, its what you would expect.

Schizophrenia is an illness that comes and goes. Like waves. People with Bi polar also have these manic phases. and again alcohol effects them in a different way to you or I , they are often compulsive and obsessive.

Yours Jeff

PS This link takes you to rob Houses original Colney hatch photos just incase anyone following hasn't seen them: http://forum.casebook.org/showthread.php?p=240418
The letter from Sir Robert Anderson is interesting and something I had not seen before