Packer and Schwartz

[Jonathan H]

Dear Lynn

I see my name has been thrown into the mix.

Aaron Kosminski and David Cohen both exhibit features which might make them Anderson's (and Swanson's) suspect.

In my opinion they both cancel each other out, because a third top cop, Macnaghten, can be shown to know more than Anderson and Swanson; e.g. that "Kosminski" is a fictional variation of a real person, Aaron Kosminski.
And be shown that he knew this man was still alive and out and about for a considerable time after the Kelly murder.

The abbreviation "Kosminski", begins with Macnaghten in the meager extant record.

Anderson in 1908 confuses the Tory Henry Matthews with the Liberal William Harcourt. On the other site there was an hilarious attempt to hold the line sing the word 'the' instead of 'then', and that if the latter p;roved correct then the whole Anderson-Swanson-Kosminski edifice would collapse.

It was 'then'.

No apology, no concession.

Cox in the 1906 source specifically denies the Kosminski solution; he is talking about a suspect closely followed after the Coles murder.

Sagar was talking about a suspect who went to Australia and passed away.

There was no double incarceration of Aaron Kosminski as the data Macnaghten refers to -- apart from the date -- is the same as in 1891.

By 1907, Mac and Sims have given Aaron Kosminski yet another fictional make-over.

They did this, I argue, because the real killer, Montague Druitt -- who unlike "Kosminski" really was deceased -- was related, by a marriage, to a very close friend of both gentlemen and had to be protected.

I would like to take this opportunity to thank those who are giving my revisionist theory a go, at various locations around the globe:

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Jack-Ripper-Case-Solved-1891-Hainsworth-ebook/dp/B017DZQS82/ref=zg_bs_5435458031_18

http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/bestsellers/digital-text/5435458031/ref=pd_zg_hrsr_kinc_2_6_last

http://www.amazon.com/Jack-Ripper-Case-Solved-1891/dp/0786496762

[c.d.]

well if someone recognized him, than yeah I think he would probably not continue with that particular victim. Being recognized means your seen by someone that knows who you are.

if you meant just seen by someone than yeah, it wouldn't be enough to deter him.

That would seem to indicate major league cojones. If apprehended as a result of Schwartz's description (and possibly the Pipe Man as well) and given the short time that elapsed between Schwartz's citing and Stride's death, that could be enough to put a rope around his neck.

c.d.

[S.Brett]

[

no she did not. he returned because after spending considerable time and perhaps money on her he lost his temper in a fit of anger and then went back to her.

Thanks!

PC Smith: "the couple appeared sober"

Schwartz (Star): "he noticed some distance in front of him a man walking as if partially intoxicated"... "The half-tipsy man halted and spoke to her"...

Within 15 minutes the man is half-tipsy and partially intoxicated. Is it possible?

[Abby Normal]

[

QUOTE=S.Brett;359368]Yes Abby, this seems to have been the case... if he was the man seen by PC Smith (12.30 am) why he returned to Stride at 12.45 am?

Did she not want to go with him into a dark area?

no she did not. he returned because after spending considerable time and perhaps money on her he lost his temper in a fit of anger and then went back to her.

[S.Brett]

I think the only witness who got a pretty good look at him was Schwartz, maybe PC smith...

Yes Abby, this seems to have been the case... if he was the man seen by PC Smith (12.30 am) why he returned to Stride at 12.45 am?

Did she not want to go with him into a dark area?

Where has the man been seen with Stride by PC Smith (12.30 am) at 12.45 am? PC Smith described the man as being about 28 years of age. No one stated an age younger than 28. In 1888 Aaron Kozminski was 23 years old.

Oh, I think I was wrong. Packer stated 25-30.

[Jeff Leahy]

yes, more than likely Torso man was a different killer I agree. Chapman wasn't till many years later, but I don't rule him out either.

Cream?!? no.

In the back of my mind, back in the 70's.. I believe that social deprivation and poor policing gave rise to a number of serial killers, at the same time, in Mexico City...

Which raises the question are serial killers also a product of environment

After all there are no JtR on the streets of London today

Just a thought

Yours Jeff

[Abby Normal]

I'm not convinced he would stop simply because he thought he had been recognised...

Surely a combination of factors?

Yours Jeff

well if someone recognized him, than yeah I think he would probably not continue with that particular victim. Being recognized means your seen by someone that knows who you are.

if you meant just seen by someone than yeah, it wouldn't be enough to deter him.

[Abby Normal]

Hi Abby

Strangely we know there were other serial killers in the area in a comparatively short space of time, whether or Not Chapman and Cream were Jack the Ripper they were still serial killers...

I tend to think there was a separate Torso killer and that Coles was killed by Sadler, but thats just a personal perspective

Yours Jeff

yes, more than likely Torso man was a different killer I agree. Chapman wasn't till many years later, but I don't rule him out either.

Cream?!? no.

[Abby Normal]

I think after killing Nichols and Chapman, maybe Tabram, the Ripper knew that no one had seen him. In this case (Stride) there were witnesses, Schwartz and Pipeman, but did they see him properly? The Ripperīs sense ("his instinct"), what told it? Maybe he thought Schwartz and Pipeman come back with the police. The only witness might have been Stride and he killed her because she is a witness now (with a good view of him). But did it make sense to go to another victim (Eddowes) if a witness (Schwartz, Pipeman) had a good view of him? In my opinion the Ripper was a man who would have stopped after someone had a good view of him.

I don't think so. If they didn't know him, even a good view of him dosnt help much. all he is is some nobody talking to a woman.

I think the only witness who got a pretty good look at him was Schwartz, maybe PC smith, and Like I said, its probably why stride only wound up with a cut throat and not mutilated.

[S.Brett]

I'm not convinced he would stop simply because he thought he had been recognised...

Surely a combination of factors?

Yours Jeff

I am convinced that the Ripper was a "risk taker". While sitting in Church Lane and wipping his hands he found out (“under protection of of the Russian Consulate" and ”he knows the movements of all mankind”) no one had seen him. Maybe, he had a unique perception better than yours and mine.

[Jeff Leahy]

I think after killing Nichols and Chapman, maybe Tabram, the Ripper knew that no one had seen him. In this case (Stride) there were witnesses, Schwartz and Pipeman, but did they see him properly? The Ripperīs sense ("his instinct"), what told it? Maybe he thought Schwartz and Pipeman come back with the police. The only witness might have been Stride and he killed her because she is a witness now (with a good view of him). But did it make sense to go to another victim (Eddowes) if a witness (Schwartz, Pipeman) had a good view of him? In my opinion the Ripper was a man who would have stopped after someone had a good view of him.

I'm not convinced he would stop simply because he thought he had been recognised...

Surely a combination of factors?

Yours Jeff

[S.Brett]

Not until he started roughing up stride. And when he did he scared him off.
and its probably him noticing Schwartz and perhaps the noise from the club and perhaps the PC who had just passed him by and perhaps Diemshitz that caused stride to only have a cut throat and not further mutilations.

I think after killing Nichols and Chapman, maybe Tabram, the Ripper knew that no one had seen him. In this case (Stride) there were witnesses, Schwartz and Pipeman, but did they see him properly? The Ripperīs sense ("his instinct"), what told it? Maybe he thought Schwartz and Pipeman come back with the police. The only witness might have been Stride and he killed her because she is a witness now (with a good view of him). But did it make sense to go to another victim (Eddowes) if a witness (Schwartz, Pipeman) had a good view of him? In my opinion the Ripper was a man who would have stopped after someone had a good view of him.

[Jeff Leahy]

well, we cant rule out that torso murderer and the ripper were different men. theres many similarities and as Debra Arif has pointed out the similarities between the way Jacksons and Kellys flaps of skin were removed from her abdomen are uncanny.

smith was probably done by a gang, but the ripper could have been one of them. Tabram and Mackenzie were most likely ripper victims and coles was probably killed by Stadler.

I doubt there were many unknown murderers on the loose. even though the east end was a violent place, murder of women by knife by unsubs was very rare. see Poster Colins stats on this. in 1888 it spiked up seven from only several murders the years before and after.

Hi Abby

Strangely we know there were other serial killers in the area in a comparatively short space of time, whether or Not Chapman and Cream were Jack the Ripper they were still serial killers...

I tend to think there was a separate Torso killer and that Coles was killed by Sadler, but thats just a personal perspective

Yours Jeff

[Abby Normal]

We do not know how many murderers were on the loose. Maybe, there was another serial killer (Torso murders) and if the Ripper killed the C5 only, there were still the murderers of Smith, Tabram, Mackenzie and Coles.

well, we cant rule out that torso murderer and the ripper were different men. theres many similarities and as Debra Arif has pointed out the similarities between the way Jacksons and Kellys flaps of skin were removed from her abdomen are uncanny.

smith was probably done by a gang, but the ripper could have been one of them. Tabram and Mackenzie were most likely ripper victims and coles was probably killed by Stadler.

I doubt there were many unknown murderers on the loose. even though the east end was a violent place, murder of women by knife by unsubs was very rare. see Poster Colins stats on this. in 1888 it spiked up seven from only several murders the years before and after.

[Abby Normal]

Thank you Abby,

Very small in your opinion but it is not impossible?

I think it is very likely (80:20) that BS Man was the Ripper/her killer but I am not entirely convinced. The Ripper killed Nichols on the pavement, perhaps he attacked Emma Smith "in the middle of the street" and so I think it is possible that he attacked Stride in the same way. The Ripper killed in the morning hours (3-6 am, "Smith", "Tabram", Nichols, Chapman, Kelly) and before 1.00 am (Stride) it was unusual. This early time of day connected Stride and Eddowes (1.35 am) and Eddowes was certainly a victim of Jack the Ripper. Did he not notice the man behind his back (Schwartz)?

Karsten.

Not until he started roughing up stride. And when he did he scared him off.
and its probably him noticing Schwartz and perhaps the noise from the club and perhaps the PC who had just passed him by and perhaps Diemshitz that caused stride to only have a cut throat and not further mutilations.