I am bringing this question over from another thread, on which it had only peripheral bearing. Itīs all about the so called Seaside Home identification and a problem that attaches to it.
The Met took their witness to the Seaside home. Ask Stewart Evans and heīll say it happened in 1891. Ask Rob House, and he will suggest July 1890.
In February of 1891, Frances Coles was killed, on Met territory. Subsequently, Lawende was brought in to try and identify Thomas Sadler as the man from Church Passage.
So we have an identification that was a moral success, according to Anderson, at the approximate same time. If it was Lawende who was the witness, then he pointed his finger at a 25-year old Jew and said "It was him".
And still, we are to believe that the same police force thought it credible that he would point out a 50 year old British sailor...?
How could he do that, if he had already made it clear that a 25-year old Jew was who he saw in Church passage? Why would the Met even try it, since there could have been no chance of making it work?
So either the identification was a complete failure if the witness was Lawende (goodbye Aaron Kosminski!) or the witness was NOT Lawende.
Any takers?
The best,
Fisherman
The Met took their witness to the Seaside home. Ask Stewart Evans and heīll say it happened in 1891. Ask Rob House, and he will suggest July 1890.
In February of 1891, Frances Coles was killed, on Met territory. Subsequently, Lawende was brought in to try and identify Thomas Sadler as the man from Church Passage.
So we have an identification that was a moral success, according to Anderson, at the approximate same time. If it was Lawende who was the witness, then he pointed his finger at a 25-year old Jew and said "It was him".
And still, we are to believe that the same police force thought it credible that he would point out a 50 year old British sailor...?
How could he do that, if he had already made it clear that a 25-year old Jew was who he saw in Church passage? Why would the Met even try it, since there could have been no chance of making it work?
So either the identification was a complete failure if the witness was Lawende (goodbye Aaron Kosminski!) or the witness was NOT Lawende.
Any takers?
The best,
Fisherman
Comment