Schwartz v. Lawende

[Jeff Leahy]

Aaron was at large December 1889,

Good morning Karsten

Obviously I get that...but did the police know or suspect him at that time? Did they know he was out?

Perhaps kozminski went to court and know one connected him to the murders the previous year?

But I admit Sims is a problem to that statement, unless he simply later connects the information he gets as one event rather than two

Yours Jeff

[S.Brett]

OK but we also have the bloody shirt in Batty street and the excuse about the cut corn....

Was Kozminski hurt in one of the attacks, I'm thinking of the bloody apron in Goulston Street?

Was kozminski in the infirmary?

Sheffield Evening Telegraph Fri 12th Oct 1888:

The police now have under close observation in connection with the Whitechapel murder a man now inmate of the East End infirmary who was admitted since the murder under suspicious circumstances.

Hampshire Advertiser, Oct. 13, 1888:

A report was current late last night that the police have good reasons to suspect a man who is at present a patient in an East End Infirmary. He was admitted since the commission of the last murder, and owing to his suspicious behaviour and other circumstances the attention of the authorities was directed to him. Detectives are making inquiries relative to his actions before being admitted to the infirmary, and he is kept under constant and close surveillance.

Also if your correct about his family (Cousin) suspecting him of being Jack the Ripper it still doesn't make him Jack the Ripper, infact given that he was followed and the police got nothing on him....and presumable Schwartz and Lawende didn't ID him then the case is weak upto March 1889

Bloody shirts, cutting his corn, infirmary... suspected by his own sister (Matilda?)...? And her own husband (Morris, cousin and brothers-in-law) asked Packer whether he had seen his cousin (after the Kelly murder). It makes sense as Packerīs home was located between Greenfield Street (Matilda & Morris) and Providence Street (Woolf). And it is quite possible that Packer was used to see Aaron in Berner Street.

Remember even Anderson says the police didn't have a clue in August 1889.

So if your Millers court witness did exist he isn't found until after this date?

And i think it probable that Kozminski was off the radar for almost two years, the Seaside Home ID not taking place until shortly before Kozminski enters Colney Hatch...

And we still have the Sims problem....he was at large for some time

Suggesting Sims must have spoken to Anderson

Aaron was at large December 1889, July 1890 and shortly before he was admitted to Colney Hatch 1891 (Swansonīs brotherīs house in Whitechapel/ Sions Square)

[Jeff Leahy]

Hi Paddy, Hi Jeff,

please see my post (1073)

http://www.jtrforums.com/showthread.php?p=290410#post290410

In my theory Aaron Kozminski had already been a strong (prime) suspect in October 1888.

After the killing of Kelly the first man the police visited on 9 November 1888 would have been "Kosminski". I think it is quite possible that they did not find him. The reason for this?

Blurring the traces and talking to the officers? I would not put it past him. Or am I mistaken?

But if he was seen by a witness in Millerīs Court? How he would have reacted? I still lack the faith that Schwartz or Lawende, one of them, had been the Jewish Seaside Home witness.

Or did he plan a hiding place, through fear of the police, after another murder?
.

OK but we also have the bloody shirt in Batty street and the excuse about the cut corn....

Was Kozminski hurt in one of the attacks, I'm thinking of the bloody apron in Goulston Street?

Was kozminski in the infirmary?

Also if your correct about his family (Cousin) suspecting him of being Jack the Ripper it still doesn't make him Jack the Ripper, infact given that he was followed and the police got nothing on him....and presumable Schwartz and Lawende didn't ID him then the case is weak upto March 1889

Remember even Anderson says the police didn't have a clue in August 1889.

So if your Millers court witness did exist he isn't found until after this date?

And i think it probable that Kozminski was off the radar for almost two years, the Seaside Home ID not taking place until shortly before Kozminski enters Colney Hatch...

And we still have the Sims problem....he was at large for some time

Suggesting Sims must have spoken to Anderson

Yours Jeff

[S.Brett]

Hi Paddy, Hi Jeff,

please see my post (1073)

http://www.jtrforums.com/showthread.php?p=290410#post290410

In my theory Aaron Kozminski had already been a strong (prime) suspect in October 1888.

After the killing of Kelly the first man the police visited on 9 November 1888 would have been "Kosminski". I think it is quite possible that they did not find him. The reason for this?

Blurring the traces and talking to the officers? I would not put it past him. Or am I mistaken?

But if he was seen by a witness in Millerīs Court? How he would have reacted? I still lack the faith that Schwartz or Lawende, one of them, had been the Jewish Seaside Home witness.

Or did he plan a hiding place, through fear of the police, after another murder?

Info from RIP128 New Light on Aaron Kosminski (Chris Phillips and myself)

I know it very well. Great work.

Yours Karsten.

[Paddy]

After the double event

It could be that the police did not know where Kosminski was?

Woolf pulled his daughter Rebecca out of Berner street school while living at Providence street on 11/10/88 and she didn't restart Settles school (now living at 34 Yalford Street) untill 6/5/89.

Maybe they didnt tell anyone where they were going or lied and said they were going away? The next family record was the birth of Woolf and Betsys son, Joseph, at 34 Yalford Street on 9 March 1889 who sadly died after 2 days.

Info from RIP128 New Light on Aaron Kosminski (Chris Phillips and myself)

Pat...................

[Jeff Leahy]

If I am not wrong the Sweating System inquiries (see Crawford) started when "Kosminski" was removed to a private asylum (March 1889). Before that Cox and his colleagues were factory inspectors looking for tailors and capmakers. I think it is possible that the Crawford Letter was written in October/November 1888. The reason why Cox and Co. were factory inspectors looking for tailors and capmakers could have been:

They were watching a man in a street with tailors and capmakers. Within of some months they could have seen many things. Things in terms of crime etc. and Crawford sprang into action again...

Karsten.

I'm not going to reply to that tonight.... You have to except surely that the main set of events happened much later January 1891

We have to join the events?

Yours Jeff

[S.Brett]

Hi Jeff!

Agreed but we know that Kozminski was back on the street and NOT being watched in Dec 1889...

PC Borer (City Police) saw Aaron Kozminski with an unmuzzled dog and this would mean: NOT being watched by officers? Please explain this to me a little more precisely.

Even if he'd only just got out thats one hell of a time to keep surveillance

My guess is that no one new he was out....they didn't have a case against him after all

Cox:

Certain investigations made by several of our cleverest detectives made it apparent to us that a man living in the East End of London was not unlikely to have been connected with the crimes.

There were several other officers with me, and I think there can be no harm in stating that the opinion of most of them was that the man they were watching had something to do with the crimes

Sagar:

suspicion fell upon a man, who, without doubt, was the murderer

I feel sure we knew the man

Too important... I guess the police took no risk...

MacNAughten ' and I believe he still is'

Could indicate an "in and out of an asylum suspect"... and Macnaghten got this information...

Until the Kozminski family approached Anderson asking for help...

If Anderson said to Swanson...do you know anyone by the name Kozminski, suddenly bels start to ring....

Cox:

We told them we were factory inspectors looking for tailors and capmakers

... and this happened after the Kelly murder.

If I am not wrong the Sweating System inquiries (see Crawford) started when "Kosminski" was removed to a private asylum (March 1889). Before that Cox and his colleagues were factory inspectors looking for tailors and capmakers. I think it is possible that the Crawford Letter was written in October/November 1888. The reason why Cox and Co. were factory inspectors looking for tailors and capmakers could have been:

They were watching a man in a street with tailors and capmakers. Within of some months they could have seen many things. Things in terms of crime etc. and Crawford sprang into action again...

Karsten.

[Jeff Leahy]

Hi Jeff,

Never say never...

But the same mistake tiwce? If Kosminski was kept under surveillance after the Double Event but not around the time of the Kelly murder, after this murder, the police would have watched this suspect (at large) by day and night... and when he was at liberty (his time in Surrey)...

Agreed but we know that Kozminski was back on the street and NOT being watched in Dec 1889...

Even if he'd only just got out thats one hell of a time to keep surveillance

My guess is that no one new he was out....they didn't have a case against him after all

MacNAughten ' and I believe he still is'

Until the Kozminski family approached Anderson asking for help...

If Anderson said to Swanson...do you know anyone by the name Kozminski, suddenly bels start to ring.... But I think the case was pulled back after March 1889, Abberline being transfer around May presumably while Koz was still in the private asylum?

And whether Koz in out in July or Dec, he's out after three months or six you takes your pick...also typical psychotic episodes last 18-22 weeks so july would fit a release if that was his cycle

Yours Jeff

[S.Brett]

Hi Jeff,

Never say never...

But the same mistake tiwce? If Kosminski was kept under surveillance after the Double Event but not around the time of the Kelly murder, after this murder, the police would have watched this suspect (at large) by day and night... and when he was at liberty (his time in Surrey)...

[Jeff Leahy]

Yes, Jeff...

Yes, I am... and ruling out Alice Mackenzie...

I understand your reasoning for this...But it is still a major sticking point, especially as we don't know at what date Kozminski was released from the Private asylum

As I pointed out if the family paid a quarter (1yr) upfront which seems to be a typical requirement its possible he was back on the street in time

I'd prefer to remain open minded

Yorus Jeff

[S.Brett]

Hi Karsten,

Yes, it does sound like a mix-up in the reporting. Makes a lot more sense that the customer's cousin was the one suspected and not Packer's. Thanks!

Dean

Hello Dean,

That would be one way.

Karsten.

[S.Brett]

I've been thinking for some time now that if this were the case it might be argued that MacNAughten and Anderson had the SAME reason of suspecting their suspects...that they spoke to family members who claimed they were Jack they Ripper.....This might give both men firm 'conviction' especially if either men did not know about the others 'private info' (I reference the Crawford letter here)... However one or other has to be wrong.....and the possibility remains both families were mistaken..So both men might have firm conviction and be mistaken..What it explains however, is why the policeman involved said what they did....

I agree!

Balancing the two suspects without Anderson and Manaughtens evidence I am still inclined to prefer Kozminski on the grounds that I believe a Druit killer would attack over a broader area than just Whitechapel, so the geography is more compelling with Kozminski

Right!

Sims.....The only conclusion I can draw is he must have had information from Anderson...do you think like Littlechilde he may also have written to Anderson when making his enquiries?

I do not know...

[S.Brett]

Yes most interesting your cousin theory makes much sense...are you using the date 22nd November because of the incident with Matilda in Brick Lane?

Yes, Jeff...

Are you ruling out a connection to the attack on Annie Farmer?

Yes, I am... and ruling out Alice Mackenzie...

I am claiming that the police and the amily did not know where Aaron was staying after the Kelly murder and that Morris asked Packer:

Have you seen my brother? We do not know where he is! (Maybe Packer was used to see the brother).

See also my posts on JTRForums:

http://www.jtrforums.com/showthread.php?p=290337#post290337

Yours Karsten.

[Jeff Leahy]

Morning Karsten further to me last post:

This 'Cousin' theory if correct gives some credence to the idea that Aaron Kozminski was suspected by his own family of being jack the Ripper....And while interesting is a double edged sword

I've been thinking for some time now that if this were the case it might be argued that MacNAughten and Anderson had the SAME reason of suspecting their suspects...that they spoke to family members who claimed they were Jack they Ripper.....This might give both men firm 'conviction' especially if either men did not know about the others 'private info' (I reference the Crawford letter here)... However one or other has to be wrong.....and the possibility remains both families were mistaken..So both men might have firm conviction and be mistaken..What it explains however, is why the policeman involved said what they did....

Balancing the two suspects without Anderson and Manaughtens evidence I am still inclined to prefer Kozminski on the grounds that I believe a Druit killer would attack over a broader area than just Whitechapel, so the geography is more compelling with Kozminski

Yours Jeff

PS I've been giving thought to your comments on Sims.....The only conclusion I can draw is he must have had information from Anderson...do you think like Littlechilde he may also have written to Anderson when making his enquiries?

[Jeff Leahy]

Hi Dean,

It might have been that way:

The first report (or information) made by Hales (on 13 November 1888) stated, wrongly, that Packer suspected his own cousin.

This information, after clarification (19 November 1888), turned out as a statement made by a man to Packer that this man was of opinion that his cousin had committed the foul deeds.

I am a "Kosminski man" and I have a theory that Packer had seen Aaron Kozminski on the night of the Double Event in Berner Street. Packer stated that he had seen this man later in October 1888. Packer said that the man lived "in the next street". The cousin of Aaron Kozminski was Morris Lubnowski, a bootlaster, and he lived in Greenfield Street, a street "next" to Berner Street. The shop of Packer was between Greenfield Street (the cousin Morris) and Providence Street (Aaronīs brother Woolf Abrahams lived there). Packer said that he saw this suspect again at the end of Greenfield Street (end of October 1888).

Perhaps, Morris Lubnowski talked to Packer (for whatever reasons) around the time of the first statement (Hales). But this is pure speculation.

All of this happened following the Kelly murder. In my theory no one (family and police) did know where Aaron Kozminski was staying between 9 and 22 November 1888. In such a case, via press, the police could have played down the "substantial clue"... maybe it was a strategy of the police to say "little importance"...

Many greetings from Germany,

Karsten.

Yes most interesting your cousin theory makes much sense...are you using the date 22nd November because of the incident with Matilda in Brick Lane?

Are you ruling out a connection to the attack on Annie Farmer?

Yours Jeff