Packer and Schwartz

[Jeff Leahy]

Swanson:

"And after this identification which suspect knew, no other murder of this kind took place in London"

"after the suspect had been identified at the Seaside Home" ... and he knew he was identified

I know it is crazy but everytime when I read these lines I think Swanson talking about two incidents.

The first: 9 November 1888 when the witness had a good view of "Kosminski". And Kosminski knew he was identified and no other murder of this kind took place because "Kosminski" stopped killing woman after he was seen by a witness.

The second: In the second half of 1890 the police had found this witness (by detective-sergeant Happenstance, however...) and an ID took place at the Seaside Home.

The Seaside Home witness? In this case it must have been the Millers Court.

You've lost me...who is Happenstance?

[curious4]

Hello

The main problem I have with Kosminski (or anyone like him) is that he was known to be mentally unbalanced. His odd behaviour (picking up bread from the ground and eating it, possibly muttering to himself etc) would attract attention. Gossip travels surprisingly quickly, the grapevine being at least as fast as the internet, so word would have got round. He was exactly the kind of person who was suspected to be the killer. Why then would a potential JTR victim allow herself to be taken into a lonely spot with such a man?

Best wishes
C4

[S.Brett]

You've lost me...who is Happenstance?

A fictional person who found a witness by chance. In Germany we say "Kommissar Zufall". You come across an evidence by chance. For example, a man is talking to a Policeman in plain clothes about the Ripper murders when he is a witness in another case.

[S.Brett]

Hello

The main problem I have with Kosminski (or anyone like him) is that he was known to be mentally unbalanced. His odd behaviour (picking up bread from the ground and eating it, possibly muttering to himself etc) would attract attention. Gossip travels surprisingly quickly, the grapevine being at least as fast as the internet, so word would have got round. He was exactly the kind of person who was suspected to be the killer. Why then would a potential JTR victim allow herself to be taken into a lonely spot with such a man?

Best wishes
C4

Hi Gwyneth,

In 1888 Aaron Kozminski picking up bread from the ground and eating it, possibly muttering to himself? In 1891 he did it, maybe end of 1890 but 1888?

No one really knows...

Karsten.

[Jeff Leahy]

Hello

The main problem I have with Kosminski (or anyone like him) is that he was known to be mentally unbalanced. His odd behaviour (picking up bread from the ground and eating it, possibly muttering to himself etc) would attract attention. Gossip travels surprisingly quickly, the grapevine being at least as fast as the internet, so word would have got round. He was exactly the kind of person who was suspected to be the killer. Why then would a potential JTR victim allow herself to be taken into a lonely spot with such a man?

Best wishes
C4

Hello C4

If Kozminski is the man described by Cox, he certainly wasn't picking up bread from the gutter at this time.1888. He was going for long walks abroad..

He was able to give evidence in Dec 1889 at his trial (Walking the dog) and say 'Kozminski is hard to spell'

Schizophrenia is a cyclicur illness hitting the suffer in waves that slow get stronger typically lasting 18-22 weeks..about the length of the 'autumn of terror'

Kozminski was admitted to the workhouse in July 1890 and released presumably because they didn't think he was mad..

We have know idea how long he had been 'eating from the gutter' in Feb 1891... He wasn't considered incurable until his transfer Leavesdon 1894

Trust that helps

Yours Jeff

[Abby Normal]

Hello

The main problem I have with Kosminski (or anyone like him) is that he was known to be mentally unbalanced. His odd behaviour (picking up bread from the ground and eating it, possibly muttering to himself etc) would attract attention. Gossip travels surprisingly quickly, the grapevine being at least as fast as the internet, so word would have got round. He was exactly the kind of person who was suspected to be the killer. Why then would a potential JTR victim allow herself to be taken into a lonely spot with such a man?

Best wishes
C4

I agree with this. Eventhough we don't know exactly what mental state he was in in 1888, I think it fair to say he was probably a little to odd looking or strange acting to fool a victim to feel safe enough to go with him to a secluded area especially at the height of the ripper scare.

also, apparently "he hadn't attempted any work for years" might say something about this, at the very least did he even have the money or werewithall to solicit a prostitute?

and I find it hard to believe someone like Mary Kelly, or stride, who were not in desperate staits, would have wasted their time with a character like kosminski.

however, its possible, and if kosminski was the ripper, I think his severe mental illness was the cause of the end of the murders and not the cause of the murders.

[curious4]

Hello Karsten, Jeff

I can see I shall have to look at Kosminski again. Not convinced though.

Hello Abby

Exactly. :-)

Best wishes
Gwyneth

[Jeff Leahy]

however, its possible, and if kosminski was the ripper, I think his severe mental illness was the cause of the end of the murders and not the cause of the murders.

Good afternoon Abbey, I agree

Schizophrenia typically starts in late teens early twenties. I recently posted a new study which suggests it has something to do with the point the body stops growing. Certainly scientists here in the UK claim to be analysing its causes and effects at long last, although the drugs available haven't changed in forty years and shorten life expectation.

But schizophrenics are NOT dangerous, infact more likely to be a danger unto themselves... So if Kozminski was the killer, we'd also expect underlining personality disorders...and on this analysis it would be almost impossible to include or exclude any suspect..(psychosis being the bye product of many illnesses and edictions)

However the bizarre nature of the killing suggest to me someone with a deeply disturbed mind and destorted perspective of the world..an extremely rare combination which I'd suggest fairly unique to its time frame and environment...There haven't been any such killings in a long time in the UK (Dis-embowlments on the street that is) Which is why I personally think this kind of killing more like a modern Spree killing... But thats rather off track of the witness thread..

Many thanks


Yours Jeff

[S.Brett]

The schizophrenia shows the disorganized killer. It existed in the background of Jack the Ripper. He was mentally disturbed (paranoid schizophrenia/ hebephrenic schizophrenia or a mixed form).

Robert Ressler ("I Have Lived In The Monster" by Robert K.Ressler & Tom Shachtman):

"It also seemed clear to me that the Ripper had been a "disorganized" killer'..."who was mentally deranged and becoming more so with each victim"

I do not know if John Douglas and Roy Hazelwood agreed with Ressler regarding a possible suicide but in Robert House´s book "Jack the Ripper And The Case For Scotland Yard´s Prime Suspect" you will see what Roy Hazelwood, John Douglas and Laura Richards have to say.

Hello Abby!

also, apparently "he hadn't attempted any work for years" might say something about this, at the very least did he even have the money or werewithall to solicit a prostitute?

Between March 1889 and February 1891 = almost two years...

however, its possible, and if kosminski was the ripper, I think his severe mental illness was the cause of the end of the murders and not the cause of the murders.

Ressler again:

"If the killer was deranged and becoming progressively more so, it is likely that he might well have gone off the deep end entirely"..."so crazed that he could no longer even commit crimes"

You are correct but the Cox suspect "worked" (Cox: "very soon he removed from his usual haunts and gave up his nightly prowls") for months after the Kelly murder. Maybe, the suspect could no longer commit crimes after about March 1889. But before March 1889? The reason for this: He might have known that he is shadowed or he knew he was identified by a witness, a witness not known to the police before the second half of 1890.

Karsten.

[Jeff Leahy]

He might have known that he is shadowed or he knew he was identified by a witness, a witness not known to the police before the second half of 1890.

Karsten.

Yes I agree

it would be wrong to assume that because he suffered schizophrenia he was stupid or dumb, schizophrenics can be highly intelligent and above average intelligence...

But a troubled childhood would explain much

Yours Jeff

[Michael W Richards]

All this discussion seems to me to indicate that some people have moved on to profiling a killer despite the fact that the five murders within the Canonical Group have not been linked by killer, or MO, or Victimology. Not all 5 women were killed in the same fashion, obviously. And knives are hardly a watermark for any particular signature or methodology, they were simply the cheapest and most available weapon of the period. If you study violent crimes of the era you will find that knives were involved in a high percentage of them, but clearly, they are not all not attributed to a single killer.

The Ripper legend is just a lot of hype, lots of speculation, and comes from a distinct lack of strictly independent review of each particular crime for its components and its attributes.

Liz Stride is a perfect example of that argument. There is absolutely no reason based on the evidence specific to the murder itself to surmise that Liz Stride was killed by a serial mutilator. Which by appearances is a legitimate profile for the person who killed Polly and Annie. The only reasons for surmising Liz was killed by the same man are based on geographical and calendar considerations, as well as an unsophisticated approach to evidence interpretation.

To concoct a serial killer profile using victims that fairly clearly do not fit into the legitimate established killer profile created by previous kills is much like building a house on sand. Eventually the flawed substructure will reveal itself under stress.

Cheers

[S.Brett]

Yes I agree

it would be wrong to assume that because he suffered schizophrenia he was stupid or dumb, schizophrenics can be highly intelligent and above average intelligence...

But a troubled childhood would explain much

Yours Jeff

Correct!

Here an example of a man suffering from schizophrenia:

http://www.vice.com/read/this-is-what-developing-acute-schizophrenia-is-like-009

But a schizophrenic with homicidal tendencies and mutilation fantasies leaves such crime scenes as in the case of Jack the Ripper.

Thomas Müller:

http://channel.nationalgeographic.com/videos/mutilation-fantasy/

[Jeff Leahy]

All this discussion seems to me to indicate that some people have moved on to profiling a killer despite the fact that the five murders within the Canonical Group have not been linked by killer, or MO, or Victimology. Not all 5 women were killed in the same fashion, obviously. And knives are hardly a watermark for any particular signature or methodology, they were simply the cheapest and most available weapon of the period. If you study violent crimes of the era you will find that knives were involved in a high percentage of them, but clearly, they are not all not attributed to a single killer.

The Ripper legend is just a lot of hype, lots of speculation, and comes from a distinct lack of strictly independent review of each particular crime for its components and its attributes

Cheers

Well absolutely not!

What you say is none sensical

Everything we know, logically, pionts to a singular serial killer based in the area, this has been concluded by most of the great ripperologist from Begg & fido to Evans & Rumkblow...

The killer simply lived in and around the community...other theories are at least, well hogwsh

What you are choosing to ignore is the men on he ground..those who actuaully investigated the story...had several theories that solved the crime

They knew what happened!

But they appear to have come to different conclusions?

What is being purposed here is an answer why the various police officers believed what they did....

Thats not to say Kozminski was the ripper, simply that there is only one suspect based on the known evidence

'Kozminski was the suspect'

Think about it?

Yours Jeff

PS yes we've moved on because we've been studying this a lot longer than you and there is only one possibility

[c.d.]

"The only reasons for surmising Liz was killed by the same man are based on geographical and calendar considerations, as well as an unsophisticated approach to evidence interpretation."

Well I'll be damned. Apparently a good number of us have been using an unsophisticated approach. No wonder we are not getting anywhere. Now where can we find someone who uses a sophisticated approach? I think I can guess.

c.d.

[Wickerman]

All this discussion seems to me to indicate that some people have moved on to profiling a killer despite the fact that the five murders within the Canonical Group have not been linked by killer, or MO, or Victimology.

Hi Michael.
There are sufficient commonalities between the murders of Nichols, Chapman, Eddowes & Kelly to indicate the same hand being at work. However, it is true to say that not everyone agrees.
The fact there is disagreement does not mean the commonalities do not exist.

The Ripper legend is just a lot of hype, lots of speculation, and comes from a distinct lack of strictly independent review of each particular crime for its components and its attributes.

Well, apart from the fact that no-one truly believes the killer actually named himself, then yes, "Jack the Ripper" as a nom de plume is part of the hype surrounding these murders.
To take this argument a step further and suggest that there was no common hand at work is becoming a little tiresome, there is really nothing to be gained by pursuing that line of argument.

Liz Stride is a perfect example of that argument. There is absolutely no reason based on the evidence specific to the murder itself to surmise that Liz Stride was killed by a serial mutilator.

Personally, I don't disagree with that.
The murder of Stride finds its parallel in the later murders of Coles & McKenzie, and we have no firm indication from any of those murders that they were all killed by the same person, even less that they were killed by the same hand that struck down Nichols, Chapman, Eddowes & Kelly.