Who Was Anderson’s Witness?

[Herlock Sholmes]

Some doubt that this identification ever took place of course but the two names that tend to crop up as candidates are Lawende and Schwartz. I’d be interested to hear opinions of how they can be assessed (pros and cons) or if other candidates can be suggested? We know that he was apparently Jewish but that’s it.

[Wickerman]

Well Herlock, I'm likely on the side of those who doubt Anderson's I.D. took place as described.
I guess not knowing when the I.D. occurred is the first major hurdle, Kozminski theorists might choose to place it in 1890, but that's only trying to make the evidence fit the theory.

The problem I have with Schwartz being Anderson's witness is, if the I.D. didn't happen around Oct-Nov. 1888, then how did they find him to take him for an I.D.
The police didn't have any mysterious system to find people in those days, especially renters. If we can't find him today (one recent possibility on Howards List?) with all our access to records the police in the day wouldn't have had it any easier.

Lawende is a different matter, and the police could find him at a moments notice, because he ran a business - he had a business address. It appears the police used him in 1891 to try I.D. Sadler, but failed, then again early in 1895 to I.D. Grainger, but no action taken by police.
So it seems Lawende was the 'go-to' witness for any I.D. by the police at that time. So, he must be the leading candidate for those who believe an I.D. did take place something along the lines as Anderson described.

[GBinOz]

Hi Herlock,

The doubt doesn't just revolve around the who but also the where and the when. The Seaside Home opened in March 1890, but was Swanson referring to the boarding houses that had been used since 1887. How believable is it that they would take a bound suspect to Brighton for questioning? Joseph Levy was considered to be suspiciously quiet about what he saw but recent research has indicated that he may have been a neighbour in Butcher's Row to Jacob Levy, if not a cousin.

That said, my opinion for today is that Schwartz was Anderson's witness and that he identified Kosminski as the suspect seen in the altercation with Stride, but that doesn't prove Kosminski killed her. I also believe that Fido may have been on the right track when he suggested that the suspect Kosminski was a case of mistaken identity for Martin Kaminsky/ David Cohen. That aside, the Best & Gardner, Smith, Packer know as Parcelman, the suspect with the strange eyes that is also common to the Brittania Man, Bethnal Green Botherer (BGB) suspect for MJK may have moved on Stride after Kosminski/Kaminski departed.

Cheers, George

[Herlock Sholmes]

Well Herlock, I'm likely on the side of those who doubt Anderson's I.D. took place as described.
I guess not knowing when the I.D. occurred is the first major hurdle, Kozminski theorists might choose to place it in 1890, but that's only trying to make the evidence fit the theory.

The problem I have with Schwartz being Anderson's witness is, if the I.D. didn't happen around Oct-Nov. 1888, then how did they find him to take him for an I.D.
The police didn't have any mysterious system to find people in those days, especially renters. If we can't find him today (one recent possibility on Howards List?) with all our access to records the police in the day wouldn't have had it any easier.

Lawende is a different matter, and the police could find him at a moments notice, because he ran a business - he had a business address. It appears the police used him in 1891 to try I.D. Sadler, but failed, then again early in 1895 to I.D. Grainger, but no action taken by police.
So it seems Lawende was the 'go-to' witness for any I.D. by the police at that time. So, he must be the leading candidate for those who believe an I.D. did take place something along the lines as Anderson described.

It’s certainly strange to say the least that there’s no mention of this identification anywhere except for Anderson’s personal writing. What reason could there have been for such a complete absence of evidence in the records? The other point that’s always bothered me is why The Seaside Home? If it was on the coast what possible reason could they have had for using it? If, for whatever reason, they didn’t want to use a police station surely they could have found somewhere within the City or even in the suburbs?

[erobitha]

Anderson & Monro were never ones for playing with a straight bat.

[Darryl Kenyon]

It’s certainly strange to say the least that there’s no mention of this identification anywhere except for Anderson’s personal writing. What reason could there have been for such a complete absence of evidence in the records? The other point that’s always bothered me is why The Seaside Home? If it was on the coast what possible reason could they have had for using it? If, for whatever reason, they didn’t want to use a police station surely they could have found somewhere within the City or even in the suburbs?

Hi Herlock
In the Swanson Marginalia, Swanson mentions an ID. Also MM alludes to someone seeing the killer when he mentions a City PC, possibly getting confused with a City witness. And Sagar says about the Butchers row suspect that ID was impossible.Could he have meant because the witness didn't testify ?
All contentious I know, But
Regards Darryl

[Darryl Kenyon]

My own view, which I know I have mentioned before is that Lawende was the witness and the attempted ID took place at a Seamans mission or Sailors home in Whitechapel sometime not long before Kosminski was sent to the workhouse.
Regards Darryl

[Darryl Kenyon]

Lawendes description - "Had the appearance of a Sailor" Where better to give the ID some veracity by placing it in a Sailors refuge. Where the witness could have been confronted with several seamen/sailors before Kosminski . All guess work I know
Regards Darryl

[Herlock Sholmes]

Lawendes description - "Had the appearance of a Sailor" Where better to give the ID some veracity by placing it in a Sailors refuge. Where the witness could have been confronted with several seamen/sailors before Kosminski . All guess work I know
Regards Darryl

It certainly makes more sense to me than taking him all the way to the coast Darryl. Unless he’d said “ I’ll identify him for you as long as I get a ride on the donkeys.”

[Herlock Sholmes]

Hi Herlock
In the Swanson Marginalia, Swanson mentions an ID. Also MM alludes to someone seeing the killer when he mentions a City PC, possibly getting confused with a City witness. And Sagar says about the Butchers row suspect that ID was impossible.Could he have meant because the witness didn't testify ?
All contentious I know, But
Regards Darryl

Hi Darryl,

Its possible but it’s certainly a bit strange that Sagar appeared so confident yet they couldn’t charge him. As he was allegedly sent to an asylum wouldn’t that be because he was to insane to plead?

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.”

Maybe if it was Lawende he’d actually said that the suspect might have been the man he’d seen with Eddowes but he wasn’t certain enough to say yes? And might the officer in charge have suspected might have been holding back because the suspect was Jewish (even though it was probably not the case) Maybe it was something said in frustration but they were really hoping that this was there man?

[Columbo]

Kind of hard to say. I've starting to have my doubts if it really happened. The excuse for not revealing the name(s) of the people involved doesn't hold water for me.

[Scott Nelson]

The butcher, Joseph Levy, and his wife retired to Brighton in the early 1900s. Which leads one to wonder if they could have been there years earlier on holiday.

[Herlock Sholmes]

The butcher, Joseph Levy, and his wife retired to Brighton in the early 1900s. Which leads one to wonder if they could have been there years earlier on holiday.

The suspect being in Brighton in the first place is an interesting suggestion Scott. I just find it a stretch that the police would take a suspect so far just for privacy reasons.

[Herlock Sholmes]

The problem I have with Schwartz being Anderson's witness is, if the I.D. didn't happen around Oct-Nov. 1888, then how did they find him to take him for an I.D.
The police didn't have any mysterious system to find people in those days, especially renters. If we can't find him today (one recent possibility on Howards List?) with all our access to records the police in the day wouldn't have had it any easier.

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.

[erobitha]

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.

Another problem is that they were unlikely to have found Schwartz. No-one in modern times has. Maybe he left a forwarding address which was not the one given in his statement?