If Mackenzie was indeed a Ripper victim, which named Ripper suspects are eliminated?

[Lewis C]

We don't need police records.

If Cohen had been a suspect, we could expect at least someone to have mentioned it.

The same goes for Kaminski.

It is not just an issue of whether Macnaghten confused Kaminski and Kosminski but whether Swanson did the same.

What are the chances that both officers made the same mistake and, furthermore, since Swanson presumably discussed the case with Anderson, all three made the same mistake about names?

Where is the evidence that Kaminski was ever in an asylum?

If we don't have the records, then we don't know whether someone was mentioned in those records.

[Lewis C]

Piser had alibis for the murders of Nichols and Chapman, which at that time were the only murders in the series.

You're right. I may have been thinking of Jacob Isenschmid when I said Pizer. But anyway, I believe that anyone that we know couldn't have killed Nichols, Chapman, or Eddowes has probably already been discounted as a suspect.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

I agree with this, except that as a practical matter, I can't think of any plausible suspect that could have committed some of the Nichols/Chapman/Eddowes murders but couldn't have committed all of them. I think this is the reason John Pizer has already been eliminated as a suspect. If I'm not mistaken, he doesn't have an alibi for Nichols or Chapman, but he does for Eddowes.

Piser had alibis for the murders of Nichols and Chapman, which at that time were the only murders in the series.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

Most of the records are lost, so we have no idea if most of the hundreds of current suspects were suspects at the time.



The same Macnaghten who got Druiit's age profession, residence, and date of death wrong?

The same Macnaghten who was wrong about Kosninski's date of being put in asylum and behavior?

Mixing up the names Kosminski and Kaminsky, if that's what he did, was a trivial error in comparison.

We don't need police records.

If Cohen had been a suspect, we could expect at least someone to have mentioned it.

The same goes for Kaminski.

It is not just an issue of whether Macnaghten confused Kaminski and Kosminski but whether Swanson did the same.

What are the chances that both officers made the same mistake and, furthermore, since Swanson presumably discussed the case with Anderson, all three made the same mistake about names?

Where is the evidence that Kaminski was ever in an asylum?

[Lewis C]

I think Stacker is really onto something with this idea. I would imagine that this approach has been looked at before but could I suggest a slightly different approach to Stackers idea. I think there would be few people who would disagree that Eddowes and Chapman were murdered by the same person. So applying Stackers approach are there any suspects who could be removed from being able to have been responsible for those two. To make it even better perhaps include Nicholls who seems another definite victim. There seems to be too much debate re the other victims for them to be included. Perhaps I am just going round in circles and there are more able people who can do the research/maths for this but I hope you see what I mean. Perhaps we cant eliminate anyone for the Chapman/Eddowes murders. Any thoughts

I agree with this, except that as a practical matter, I can't think of any plausible suspect that could have committed some of the Nichols/Chapman/Eddowes murders but couldn't have committed all of them. I think this is the reason John Pizer has already been eliminated as a suspect. If I'm not mistaken, he doesn't have an alibi for Nichols or Chapman, but he does for Eddowes.

[Fiver]

If Cohen was the suspect, then there would be a record somewhere of a Cohen being a suspect.

Most of the records are lost, so we have no idea if most of the hundreds of current suspects were suspects at the time.

One can reasonably expect senior police officers to get the name of a suspect right.

The same Macnaghten who got Druiit's age profession, residence, and date of death wrong?

The same Macnaghten who was wrong about Kosninski's date of being put in asylum and behavior?

Mixing up the names Kosminski and Kaminsky, if that's what he did, was a trivial error in comparison.

[Losmandris]

I am more and more inclined to see Mackenzie as a ripper victim. When I was back in London I had a wander down old castle alley. The old façade of the washrooms has been preserved which is great (considering how much has been pulled down in the area in recent times). It is right next to Goulston street and slap bang in between Mitre Square and Whitechapel. So the murder happened in the right area, that's for sure. Lots of similarities, so to me, its very possible. As I have no particular suspect in mind I am completely open to AM's inclusion as a victim of the same murderer.

I think the horror committed in Miller's court has always clouded judgements. Thinking that it was some kind of crescendo, rather than the fact, that probably for the first time the murderer was not disturbed. Which coincidently I believe was the case with Mackenzie. I think the murderer, whether the same man or not was interrupted somehow during the murder, fleeing before he could carry out more injuries.

In the grand scale of things i.e. serial killers MOs. The space between the killing of MJK and AM is comparatively short. If anything the spaces between the murders committed previously were unusually short. So it is perfectly possible I reckon.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

* Best known fit for the Kosminski mentioned by Macnaghten and Swanson.
* Known to be violent.
* Murders stopped shortly after he was incarcerated.



If Cohen was the man called Kosminski by Macnaghten and Swanson, then he was suspected.



They were writing years later from memory. For example, in describing Druitt, Macnaghten was incorrect about Druitt's age, profession, residence, and date of death. Compared to that, mixing up the names Kaminsky and Kosminski is a trivial error.

Well, I admire Elamarna's self-restraint: when I equated Cohen with Kaminski, an idea once promoted by Fido and which is still being stated as fact on some websites, I was corrected, but it seems you are accorded the privilege of using it.

If Cohen was the suspect, then there would be a record somewhere of a Cohen being a suspect.

Getting the name of a suspect wrong is not, as you say, a trivial error.

One can reasonably expect senior police officers to get the name of a suspect right.

As neither Cohen nor Kaminski had any known relatives in the East End of London, can you explain why Swanson thought the suspect lived at his brother's house and that his brother's house was under constant surveillance?

Or is that yet another understandable mistake made because of writing years later from memory?

[New Waterloo]

I think Stacker is really onto something with this idea. I would imagine that this approach has been looked at before but could I suggest a slightly different approach to Stackers idea. I think there would be few people who would disagree that Eddowes and Chapman were murdered by the same person. So applying Stackers approach are there any suspects who could be removed from being able to have been responsible for those two. To make it even better perhaps include Nicholls who seems another definite victim. There seems to be too much debate re the other victims for them to be included. Perhaps I am just going round in circles and there are more able people who can do the research/maths for this but I hope you see what I mean. Perhaps we cant eliminate anyone for the Chapman/Eddowes murders. Any thoughts

[John Wheat]

* Throat cut with a knife.
* Body mutilated.
* Clothing pulled up.
* Victim's body lying on their back.
* Dr Bond thought Mackenzie was killed by the Ripper.
* Commissioner Monro thought Mackenzie was killed by the Ripper.

Points against are far less mutilation than previous cases and neither Dr Phillips nor Robert Anderson thought that Mackenzie was killed by the Ripper.

I lean towards Mackenzie being killed by someone who tried to imitate the Rippers MO, but I don't think we can completely rule her out.

Fair enough.

[Fiver]

Why is David Cohen - a raving lunatic - considered to be someone who could have been the Whitechapel Murderer?

* Best known fit for the Kosminski mentioned by Macnaghten and Swanson.
* Known to be violent.
* Murders stopped shortly after he was incarcerated.

Why did the police show no interest in Cohen if he was such an obvious suspect?

If Cohen was the man called Kosminski by Macnaghten and Swanson, then he was suspected.

If he was Macnaghten's and Swanson's suspect, why could they not get his name right?

They were writing years later from memory. For example, in describing Druitt, Macnaghten was incorrect about Druitt's age, profession, residence, and date of death. Compared to that, mixing up the names Kaminsky and Kosminski is a trivial error.

[jerryd]

* Throat cut with a knife.
* Body mutilated.
* Clothing pulled up.
* Victim's body lying on their back.
* Dr Bond thought Mackenzie was killed by the Ripper.
* Commissioner Monro thought Mackenzie was killed by the Ripper.

Points against are far less mutilation than previous cases and neither Dr Phillips nor Robert Anderson thought that Mackenzie was killed by the Ripper.

I lean towards Mackenzie being killed by someone who tried to imitate the Rippers MO, but I don't think we can completely rule her out.

Fiver.

I would add that not only was her throat cut once, but twice, as in three of the C5. The location of her murder was right in the heart of the Ripper crimes.

[Fiver]

Why would anyone assume that Mackenzie was a ripper victim?

* Throat cut with a knife.
* Body mutilated.
* Clothing pulled up.
* Victim's body lying on their back.
* Dr Bond thought Mackenzie was killed by the Ripper.
* Commissioner Monro thought Mackenzie was killed by the Ripper.

Points against are far less mutilation than previous cases and neither Dr Phillips nor Robert Anderson thought that Mackenzie was killed by the Ripper.

I lean towards Mackenzie being killed by someone who tried to imitate the Rippers MO, but I don't think we can completely rule her out.

[Lewis C]

I suppose the question was better phrased in the title of the thread than in the first post of the thread.

[John Wheat]

If we were to assume that Mackenzie was a Ripper victim, then that means that anyone who could not have killed her could not have been the ripper. Who among the named suspects would this include?

Why would anyone assume that Mackenzie was a ripper victim?