Why Wasn't Hutchinson used to try to ID Kosminski?

[Abby Normal]

The spanner in the works is that Lawende was a City Police witness. It was the Met that supposedly conducted and organised the ID parade, why would they do that unless they were going to also use one of their own witnesses i.e. Schwartz, and what followed thereafter as written in the marginalia also doesn't make sense.

More nails in the coffin of the marginalia

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

theres nothing wrong with the marginalia. either with the ID-although theres some question of where it took place and who was the witness. Now they might not have been able to get away with that sort of thing ,but this was over 120 years ago. although they still do things today that are questionable.

for example. when I was about 14 I was playing ball in field in my community when a cop car pulled up and he called us all over. He asked where were we a half hour ago-we were there then still playing ball. He said that some woman in the adjoining neighborhood had her house vandalized by a boy that apparently fit my description. The cop ordered me in the cop car and drove me to the womans house to see if she could ID me. luckily she did not. I had nothing to do with it. while there the cop got another call and took off made we walk over a mile home. total bullshit. that was in 1979.

nothing so crazy about what they did in the koz ID. In a sense they even apparently did it the right way-which is bringing witness to the suspect, unlike what happened to me.

[rjpalmer]

when I was about 14 I was playing ball in field in my community when a cop car pulled up and he called us all over. He asked where were we a half hour ago-we were there then still playing ball. He said that some woman in the adjoining neighborhood had her house vandalized by a boy that apparently fit my description. The cop ordered me in the cop car and drove me to the womans house to see if she could ID me. luckily she did not. I had nothing to do with it. while there the cop got another call and took off made we walk over a mile home. total bullshit. that was in 1979.

And in recounting the story back at the station-house twenty years later, the cop in question stated there was no doubt whatsoever as to your guilt. The lady unhesitatingly identified you, but then withdrew her claim when she found out you were only 14?

In other words, you're going to trust the cop whose very methods you call into question and call "b.s."?

[Trevor Marriott]

theres nothing wrong with the marginalia. either with the ID-although theres some question of where it took place and who was the witness. Now they might not have been able to get away with that sort of thing ,but this was over 120 years ago. although they still do things today that are questionable.

for example. when I was about 14 I was playing ball in field in my community when a cop car pulled up and he called us all over. He asked where were we a half hour ago-we were there then still playing ball. He said that some woman in the adjoining neighborhood had her house vandalized by a boy that apparently fit my description. The cop ordered me in the cop car and drove me to the womans house to see if she could ID me. luckily she did not. I had nothing to do with it. while there the cop got another call and took off made we walk over a mile home. total bullshit. that was in 1979.

nothing so crazy about what they did in the koz ID. In a sense they even apparently did it the right way-which is bringing witness to the suspect, unlike what happened to me.

But they didnt they took the suspect to the witness !!!!!!!!!!! shake a leg Abby

and modern ID methods today are fairly watertight

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[PaulB]

There is plenty of evidence to show why the ID parade could not have happened in the way described in the marginalia.

More to show it didn't happen than it did.

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

The argument with you has been had ten times over. You never listen, never undrstand. As you know only too well, you are wrong.

[PaulB]

thanks paul
agree. while i question andersons conclusion of a definietly ascertained fact i equally question Sugdens conclusion of "exhonerating" koz. Ive always felt that Koz was a viable suspect. hes the only suspect that has any kind of direct tangible evidence against (eyewitness/ID), was definitely in the area and local and did threaten his sister with a knife (which I beleive is probably the incident that brought him to the attention of the police).

I'd like to think it was threatening his sister that brought Kosminski to the attention of the police, but domestic disturbances, even very violent ones, seem to have been a commonplace, so I wonder if the police would have given a second thought to such a threat by Kosminski. If such a thing happened, it seems more likely to me to have been the reason the family gave as a reason for wanting Kosminski certified. Given that the police seem to have gone to a lot of trouble to have Kosminski identified, I suspect that they would have a lot more to go on than someone just making a threat with a knife that apparently came to nothing. That's just a feeling, of course.

[The Baron]

I suspect that they would have a lot more to go on than someone just making a threat with a knife that apparently came to nothing. That's just a feeling, of course.

Yes Paul, this is not just a feeling, this is true.

Macnaghten noted that there were many circumstances that make Kosminski a strong suspect.


In addition:

-Kosminski had a great hatred of women, specially the prostitute class.

-Kosminski had homicidal tendencies.

-He resemble the man seen by the City PC near Mitre square.

All that mean one thing, there were intensive investigations concerning this suspect to arrive at these information above.

And he had been watched day by night.


Those who believe that Anderson and Swanson invented all of this out of the blue are no different in my book than those who believe the Mybrick diary is genuine.


The Baron

[c.d.]

Yes Paul, this is not just a feeling, this is true.

Macnaghten noted that there were many circumstances that make Kosminski a strong suspect.


In addition:

-Kosminski had a great hatred of women, specially the prostitute class.

-Kosminski had homicidal tendencies.

-He resemble the man seen by the City PC near Mitre square.

All that mean one thing, there were intensive investigations concerning this suspect to arrive at these information above.

And he had been watched day by night.


Those who believe that Anderson and Swanson invented all of this out of the blue are no different in my book than those who believe the Mybrick diary is genuine.


The Baron

I would say that there were probably investigations but we have no way of knowing how "intensive" they were.

c.d.

[Scott Nelson]

I would say that there were probably investigations but we have no way of knowing how "intensive" they were.

Probably very intensive. Inspector Cox said the police worked every clue to the bone during their investigations.

[c.d.]

Probably very intensive. Inspector Cox said the police worked every clue to the bone during their investigations.

Did they have the manpower to do that?

c.d.

[Scott Nelson]

For a period of time, yes. Extra manpower was drafted into Whitechapel from outside police divisions. But I don't recall for how long.

[c.d.]

For a period of time, yes. Extra manpower was drafted into Whitechapel from outside police divisions. But I don't recall for how long.

Right, but do we we know how many clues they had or even what they considered a clue or a lead? Every time some fool in a pub who had a couple of beers in him said "ah, those whores deserved what happened to them" did that launch a massive investigation?

Kosminski had a great hatred of women, specially the prostitute class.

-Kosminski had homicidal tendencies.


Those two statements could simply have come from one family member. I am not saying they did or that Kosminksi was not thoroughly investigated just that we simply don't know the extent of the investigation.

c.d.

[The Baron]

Those two statements could simply have come from one family member. I am not saying they did or that Kosminksi was not thoroughly investigated just that we simply don't know the extent of the investigation.

c.d.

Thats not what I get when reading Andersons .. ( they wouldn't give one of them )

The Baron

[c.d.]

But Baron do we have any way of knowing the extent of their investigation into Kosminski? Just because they allegedly attempted an identification of him doesn't necessarily mean that they did an extensive investigation of him. It might have been based on a little bit of information and a hunch that he was their man.

c.d.

[Trevor Marriott]

The argument with you has been had ten times over. You never listen, never understand. As you know only too well, you are wrong.

I can tell you I am not wrong everything about the so-called mythical ID parade is wrong both from a police perspective, from a practical perspective, and from an evidential perspective.

And the marginalia has not proved to have been conclusively penned by Swanson.

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Abby Normal]

And in recounting the story back at the station-house twenty years later, the cop in question stated there was no doubt whatsoever as to your guilt. The lady unhesitatingly identified you, but then withdrew her claim when she found out you were only 14?

In other words, you're going to trust the cop whose very methods you call into question and call "b.s."?

hi rj
i beleive youve missed my point completely. people use the argument that the ID was dodgy in terms of being not by the book to argue that it didnt take place. i was merely highlighting that if a dodgy ID like mine could happen in 1979 then a dodgy ID set up over 120 years ago could have taken place.