Alternative kosminski family

[GUT]

When do you think Mary Kelly died? Two women, Elizabeth Prater, who lived directly above Kelly, and Sarah Lewis, heard someone cry out "Murder" at around 4 am. To Lewis it sounded more like a scream and she thought it came from Kelly's room. Hutchinson, by his account, was hanging around in the street, but was gone by around 2:45 am. So he claimed, anyway.

I get the impression that Hutchinson was not lying about his encounter with Mary Kelly and her "gentleman", the well-dressed man. Hutchinson had known Mary about three years and had either given or loaned her small amounts of money. Mary was reputed to have been an attractive woman and why shouldn't George Hutchinson have been an admirer? I think that, when a person sees something, the amount of his interest he has in what he is viewing will probably determine how much detail he will notice. Hutchinson was accustomed to gloom--everyone in the 19th Century was because the lighting was not that good indoors or out at night. But he was leaning against the street-lamp by the pub. So I assume there was enough light for him to get a good look at the man with Mary, especially if they passed by close to him. Also, the statement of Hutchinson strikes me as more truthful due to the dialogue he supplied. Hutchinson wasn't Charles Dickens and probably didn't have the kind of imagination that would prompt him to toss in a few lines in order to give more credence to his account. The questionable part is whether or not he actually saw this punter leave. Hutchinson says he didn't--and that is the part that gives Hutchinson, himself, an alibi.

We were talking about Lewis and Maxwell... Not hutch.

I am willing to take them at face value which puts Mary's murder later in the morning, at least until someone proves them wrong. Maxwell was unshaken in the witness box about what she saw.'

[Aldebaran]

Don't follow, either they both saw or her neither saw her seems the most logical explanation.

When do you think Mary Kelly died? Two women, Elizabeth Prater, who lived directly above Kelly, and Sarah Lewis, heard someone cry out "Murder" at around 4 am. To Lewis it sounded more like a scream and she thought it came from Kelly's room. Hutchinson, by his account, was hanging around in the street, but was gone by around 2:45 am. So he claimed, anyway.

I get the impression that Hutchinson was not lying about his encounter with Mary Kelly and her "gentleman", the well-dressed man. Hutchinson had known Mary about three years and had either given or loaned her small amounts of money. Mary was reputed to have been an attractive woman and why shouldn't George Hutchinson have been an admirer? I think that, when a person sees something, the amount of his interest he has in what he is viewing will probably determine how much detail he will notice. Hutchinson was accustomed to gloom--everyone in the 19th Century was because the lighting was not that good indoors or out at night. But he was leaning against the street-lamp by the pub. So I assume there was enough light for him to get a good look at the man with Mary, especially if they passed by close to him. Also, the statement of Hutchinson strikes me as more truthful due to the dialogue he supplied. Hutchinson wasn't Charles Dickens and probably didn't have the kind of imagination that would prompt him to toss in a few lines in order to give more credence to his account. The questionable part is whether or not he actually saw this punter leave. Hutchinson says he didn't--and that is the part that gives Hutchinson, himself, an alibi.

[GUT]

According to the doctors, Mary Kelly should have been dead by 8 am when Maxwell claims to have seen her. Ditto for Lewis having spotted her in the pub. Maxwell can have been mistaken and so can Lewis--but Lewis was a man. There is no way Maxwell can have been the Ripper, so there was no reason for her to lie. But Lewis is not beyond suspicion. Because he was a man and he was in the area. He told the police two women besides him had seen Mary in a pub. That seems suspicious--unless no one had any real sense of when Kelly was murdered.

http://www.casebook.org/witnesses/w/Maurice_Lewis.html

Don't follow, either they both saw or her neither saw her seems the most logical explanation.

[Aldebaran]

How can Maxwell be telling the truth and Lewis living?

And what reason do you say Lewis had to lie.?

According to the doctors, Mary Kelly should have been dead by 8 am when Maxwell claims to have seen her. Ditto for Lewis having spotted her in the pub. Maxwell can have been mistaken and so can Lewis--but Lewis was a man. There is no way Maxwell can have been the Ripper, so there was no reason for her to lie. But Lewis is not beyond suspicion. Because he was a man and he was in the area. He told the police two women besides him had seen Mary in a pub. That seems suspicious--unless no one had any real sense of when Kelly was murdered.

http://www.casebook.org/witnesses/w/Maurice_Lewis.html

[GUT]

Thanks, Robert. You are a rock star! This is from the dissertation:

"I suggest that after using Lawende in the attempt to identify Sadler, the police learned from Lawende that Levy knew more than he’d revealed. In all probability Lawende was irate at the time of the Sadler identification because of the police pressure he experienced over the past two years and wanted an end to it. I think that Levy had probably recognized the man seen with the woman at the passage, knew him as someone who worked in Butcher’s Row and knew him to be related to Martin Kosminski. Not wanting to implicate Martin Kosminski, he’d refused to give evidence in 1888. In 1891 he is contacted and taken to see a suspect. He recognizes the man, but refuses to give evidence. He then decides to get away and moves."

That's the relevant passage, to save someone else time. A man named George Hutchinson, a friend of Mary Kelly, claimed to have seen her disappear with a well-dressed man, who looked Jewish and was carrying a parcel. This man had a " thick gold chain" on his person, probably his watch chain. That's a bit prosperous for Aaron Kosminski! After that, Kelly was seen again, but the opinion is she ought to have been dead by the time Caroline Maxwell and Maurice Lewis spotted her. Can they both have been mistaken? And, yet, only one of them, the man, could possibly have had a reason to lie as to when he had seen her on the day she was discovered. Any chance of Lewis being a suspect?

How can Maxwell be telling the truth and Lewis living?

And what reason do you say Lewis had to lie.?

[Aldebaran]

To judge from the electoral registers, Martin started off in Shoreditch and worked his way up via Islington to the west end (living at Berners Street in the west rather than Berner Street in the east). His daughter Jessie made a name for herself in the world of music.

Martin Kosminski was linked to Levy, but no other connection between him and the Ripper case is known.

http://www.casebook.org/dissertations/rip-ckl.html

Thanks, Robert. You are a rock star! This is from the dissertation:

"I suggest that after using Lawende in the attempt to identify Sadler, the police learned from Lawende that Levy knew more than he’d revealed. In all probability Lawende was irate at the time of the Sadler identification because of the police pressure he experienced over the past two years and wanted an end to it. I think that Levy had probably recognized the man seen with the woman at the passage, knew him as someone who worked in Butcher’s Row and knew him to be related to Martin Kosminski. Not wanting to implicate Martin Kosminski, he’d refused to give evidence in 1888. In 1891 he is contacted and taken to see a suspect. He recognizes the man, but refuses to give evidence. He then decides to get away and moves."

That's the relevant passage, to save someone else time. A man named George Hutchinson, a friend of Mary Kelly, claimed to have seen her disappear with a well-dressed man, who looked Jewish and was carrying a parcel. This man had a " thick gold chain" on his person, probably his watch chain. That's a bit prosperous for Aaron Kosminski! After that, Kelly was seen again, but the opinion is she ought to have been dead by the time Caroline Maxwell and Maurice Lewis spotted her. Can they both have been mistaken? And, yet, only one of them, the man, could possibly have had a reason to lie as to when he had seen her on the day she was discovered. Any chance of Lewis being a suspect?

[Robert]

To judge from the electoral registers, Martin started off in Shoreditch and worked his way up via Islington to the west end (living at Berners Street in the west rather than Berner Street in the east). His daughter Jessie made a name for herself in the world of music.

Martin Kosminski was linked to Levy, but no other connection between him and the Ripper case is known.

http://www.casebook.org/dissertations/rip-ckl.html

[Aldebaran]

Thanks. The reason I asked is that I found a Martin Kosminski at about the same time as the murders living in the West End and attending the Central Synagogue. His was not a bad address and I could find no connection for him to the Kosminski/Abrahams family living in the Whitechapel district. And yet a Martin Kosminski came up in this thread.

[Robert]

As regards Kosminskis in general, Scott Nelson is pretty clued up about them. He has for instance mentioned Isaac Kosminski, who was living in Goulston St in 1891.

Martin was a furrier. Chris George wrote an article about him for Ripperologist #42, but it doesn't seem to be online. I'm sure he'd send it to anyone interested.

[Aldebaran]

Who was Martin Kosminski?

[wolfie1]

point taken, but if we work from the idea we are looking for "kos" something as a suspect, eliminating non starters is obviously a good move, it means no detours at a later date to check out.

s

As an on again, off again, poster on this forum I have been somewhat bemused by the reluctance of some to totally discount any other Kosminski family or persons, simply because they are not associated with Aaron K.

The police did not provide a first name, only surname. Others have made the suspect fit the facts.

As a researcher in another field of history I am well aware that mistakes are made, facts overlooked. One comment made years ago could be forgotten over time, yet that one comment published in a dusty old book, could well be the breakthrough clue that no one believes simply because it is an older comment from a long dead author.

New texts and laying of 'clues and meaning' over the years have enabled theorists to develop an industry of books, personalities and an entire industry built on the certain fact that everyone wants to solve the case, yet no one will let the case be solved.... and so the JTR industry continues to spin.

My only interest in this case is not as a Ripperologist but as a personal link to the Kosminski name and for my own family's sake, I would be more than pleased to have anyone other than a Kosminski or Kaminsky named as JTR.

[Elamarna]

point taken, but if we work from the idea we are looking for "kos" something as a suspect, eliminating non starters is obviously a good move, it means no detours at a later date to check out.

s

[Errata]

People tend to have certain kinds of surnames, the most popular being place names, profession names, and rank names. It's why there are so many Bakers and Taylors out there. They were all at one point bakers or tailors. Most Jews have these kind of names as well. Schrieber, Schneider, Goldstein, Levi or Levy, Cohen, Kaminsky, Schulman.

Kosminski is a place name. Kosmin, I think maybe is in the Ukraine? Maybe Western Germany? Maybe both? Any name with -ski at the end of it essentially means "from". So Kosminski is from Kosmin. So there would be several unrelated families with this last name, and borders get crazy in that region the further back you go, but it was a region with a reasonable population of Jews, most of whom ended up in the Pale. And those in the Pale ended up in either London or New York, later Galveston of all places. So it's entirely possible that was another unrelated family named Kosminski in London at that time.

[Elamarna]

Hello, I know of another Kosminski family that ripper researchers have not researched in depth. Not Cohen, not Martin etc.

This Kosminski family lived at Chicksand St 1888 1891 , the street near Flower and Dean St. Chicksand St is also identified as within the geographic circle profiled by other researchers.

My previous posts have detailed this family.

To date I have not heard any evidence to discount this family from potential links to either Aaron Kosminki or any other Kosminski family known to have lived in Whitechapel at that time.


I do not know what links, if any, this family will have with Beggs theory of another Jewish family that fits the known profile.

The desc of this man have changed their surname and do not wish to have contact with researchers.

Names and details of this family are searchable via my other posts.

PM if you require further information.

Hi

thank you, i will have a look.

Steve

[wolfie1]

another Kosminski family

thanks Jeff,

that was the sort of thing i was looking for.

steve

Hello, I know of another Kosminski family that ripper researchers have not researched in depth. Not Cohen, not Martin etc.

This Kosminski family lived at Chicksand St 1888 1891 , the street near Flower and Dean St. Chicksand St is also identified as within the geographic circle profiled by other researchers.

My previous posts have detailed this family.

To date I have not heard any evidence to discount this family from potential links to either Aaron Kosminki or any other Kosminski family known to have lived in Whitechapel at that time.


I do not know what links, if any, this family will have with Beggs theory of another Jewish family that fits the known profile.

The desc of this man have changed their surname and do not wish to have contact with researchers.

Names and details of this family are searchable via my other posts.

PM if you require further information.