Who Was Anderson’s Witness?

[Wickerman]

One point against Lawende must be this:

“I have given a description of the man to the police. I doubt whether I should know him again.”

Do you think he might have been told to say that?

If you remember in court Crawford suggested Lawende give no further details of the suspects description.

And, that the police sequestrated Lawende away with expenses paid, they don't do that for every witness.

Plus, the description he gave, published by police:

"At 1.35 a.m., 30th Sept., with Catherine Eddows, in Church-passage, leading to Mitre-square, where she was found murdered at 1.45 a.m., same date, a man, age 30, height 5ft 7 or 8in., complexion fair, moustache fair, medium build; dress, pepper-and-salt colour loose jacket, grey cloth cap, with peak of the same material, reddish neckerchief tied in knot; appearance of a sailor."

c/w the possibility it was him who the police turned to in two later I.D.'s (Sadler & Grainger).
There's a great deal of reliance being paid to Lawende if he couldn't really know the suspect again.

[Wickerman]

Another issue with Schwartz as the witness is that the suspect that he’d seen (the stocky BS Man) doesn’t compare with the slight figure of Kosminski.

I don't know Kozminski's build, but if BS-man was Jewish I'd have expected Schwartz to have included that in his description.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Do you think he might have been told to say that?

If you remember in court Crawford suggested Lawende give no further details of the suspects description.

And, that the police sequestrated Lawende away with expenses paid, they don't do that for every witness.

Plus, the description he gave, published by police:

"At 1.35 a.m., 30th Sept., with Catherine Eddows, in Church-passage, leading to Mitre-square, where she was found murdered at 1.45 a.m., same date, a man, age 30, height 5ft 7 or 8in., complexion fair, moustache fair, medium build; dress, pepper-and-salt colour loose jacket, grey cloth cap, with peak of the same material, reddish neckerchief tied in knot; appearance of a sailor."

c/w the possibility it was him who the police turned to in two later I.D.'s (Sadler & Grainger).
There's a great deal of reliance being paid to Lawende if he couldn't really know the suspect again.

I think there’s every chance now you’ve reminded me of the above quote. It’s hardly one of someone he’d hardly seen.

Not a bad description of Monty there Wick

[Herlock Sholmes]

I don't know Kozminski's build, but if BS-man was Jewish I'd have expected Schwartz to have included that in his description.

Sugden says:

“His weight, recorded in May 1915, was only seven stone eight pounds and ten ounces, which suggests that he was small and slight of stature (he was said to have been in good bodily health as late as 1916).”

Sounds like he was close to a jockey’s build.

[GBinOz]

Sugden says:

“His weight, recorded in May 1915, was only seven stone eight pounds and ten ounces, which suggests that he was small and slight of stature (he was said to have been in good bodily health as late as 1916).”

Sounds like he was close to a jockey’s build.

Living on tap water and bread from the gutter will do that to you.

Cheers, George

[Darryl Kenyon]

Do you think he might have been told to say that?

If you remember in court Crawford suggested Lawende give no further details of the suspects description.

And, that the police sequestrated Lawende away with expenses paid, they don't do that for every witness.

Plus, the description he gave, published by police:

"At 1.35 a.m., 30th Sept., with Catherine Eddows, in Church-passage, leading to Mitre-square, where she was found murdered at 1.45 a.m., same date, a man, age 30, height 5ft 7 or 8in., complexion fair, moustache fair, medium build; dress, pepper-and-salt colour loose jacket, grey cloth cap, with peak of the same material, reddish neckerchief tied in knot; appearance of a sailor."

c/w the possibility it was him who the police turned to in two later I.D.'s (Sadler & Grainger).
There's a great deal of reliance being paid to Lawende if he couldn't really know the suspect again.

Totally agree . He noticed his reddish neckerchief for instance
Regards Darryl

[Darryl Kenyon]

We simply do not have a description of Kosminski in 1888 so Schwartz cannot be dismissed on that point.
But I do favour Lawende because 1 - Swanson said that there was time for Liz to have been attacked by someone else in an internal memo. Thus casting some doubt that BS was the killer. 2 - The witness was likely to have been a City witness because he was watched by City police, thus probably being the killer of Kate [ a crime on their territory ]. If we argue it is because he lived in City police territory, then I doubt he would have been brought by Met police to the ID.
Regards Darryl

[erobitha]

We simply do not have a description of Kosminski in 1888 so Schwartz cannot be dismissed on that point.
But I do favour Lawende because 1 - Swanson said that there was time for Liz to have been attacked by someone else in an internal memo. Thus casting some doubt that BS was the killer. 2 - The witness was likely to have been a City witness because he was watched by City police, thus probably being the killer of Kate [ a crime on their territory ]. If we argue it is because he lived in City police territory, then I doubt he would have been brought by Met police to the ID.
Regards Darryl

Which then begs the question, if it was a City of London ID then why did Major Smith never talk of it? He was not afraid to wax lyrical about all manner of things in his later memoirs. Surely a positive ID of the murderer would be such a thing he would include to mention? Unless it happened in 1901 or later - after he retired.

In fact, he did state:
"There is no man living who knows as much of those murders as I do; and ... I must admit that, though within five minutes of the perpetrator one night, and with a very fair description of him besides, he completely beat me and every police officer in London; and I have no more idea now where he lived than I had twenty years ago..."

He had no clue who JtR was.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Couldn’t we also ask why MacNaghten hadn’t heard of this positive identification?

[Harry D]

But if Lawende had identified Kosminski in all but name, why did they reuse him for the Sadler and Grainger IDs?

Was it simply a formality, or was the Kos ID so hush-hush that the left hand didn’t know what the right hand was up to?

[Herlock Sholmes]

Living on tap water and bread from the gutter will do that to you.

Cheers, George

True George, but as it was claimed that in 1916 he was in good bodily health wouldn’t that preclude dramatic weight loss? Leaving his 1915 weight of less than 8 stone as likely to have been his natural weight? It’s not a given of course but I tend to agree with Sugden on this that it wa at least likely that Kosminski was slightly built. I mentioned him being of jockey stature in an early post but this is from the jockey Frankie Dettori:

"I am 5 ft 4 inches (1.63 m) and weigh 9 st 9 lb (61 kg) (135 lbs) but I have to sometimes go down to 8 st 6 lb (54 kg) (118 lbs).

So Dettori, at the time of the interview was 5’4” and 2 stone lighter than Kosminski.

[Herlock Sholmes]

But if Lawende had identified Kosminski in all but name, why did they reuse him for the Sadler and Grainger IDs?

Was it simply a formality, or was the Kos ID so hush-hush that the left hand didn’t know what the right hand was up to?

Those 2 ID’s do seem a waste of time Harry. It’s this lack of any mention of an ID that’s an issue that’s hard to find a reasonable explanation for.

[Trevor Marriott]

Those 2 ID’s do seem a waste of time Harry. It’s this lack of any mention of an ID that’s an issue that’s hard to find a reasonable explanation for.

Or believe ?

So would you say that is is unsafe to rely on?

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Herlock Sholmes]

Or believe ?

So would you say that is is unsafe to rely on?

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

Id certain say that we can’t simply accept anything here as proven. Unanswered questions and doubts exist. I don’t think that we can dismiss it though. I’d certainly say ‘treat with caution.’

[Herlock Sholmes]

What about the suggestion that the witness might have been Joseph Levy who thought he had seen his relation Jacob?