Jack the Ripper and the Case for Scotland Yard's Prime Suspect - Rob House

[mariab]

it is the fact that you keep trying to dodge the fact that practically just copied someone else's review/idea and passed them off as your own.

So you think that the amazon reviewer and me are the only ones who noticed that ridiculous mistake in the book?

[tji]

So you think that the amazon reviewer and me are the only ones who noticed that ridiculous mistake in the book?

I have typed this slowly so you can try and understand............It was not a ridiculous mistake, so the fact it was made suggests one person misunderstood - that would be the reviewer. Then you have come onto the boards and practically quoted her word for word on the 'error', but made out it was you who noticed the 'ridiculous mistake' when in fact all you did was copy from her review. Try answering that point instead of trying to change the subject.

[The Grave Maurice]

This thread has gone so far off track it would need a boy scout and a compass to find its way back.

[Cogidubnus]

You're right Ken, and for my part I'm sorry

Dave

[tji]

This thread has gone so far off track it would need a boy scout and a compass to find its way back.

Lol - nicely put - however this is par for the course when Maria answers a post, it suddenly all becomes about her and not the thread in question.....unless she is pinned down on a comment and then she suddenly goes quiet, busy with work or not well.

For my part though I do think that it is the individuals like Kosminski (or Jacob Levy ) who make the better suspects.

Tracy

[c.d.]

A couple of things here. I have to admit that I find the whole Lodger thing very confusing. But doesn't it seem reasonable that if the police had a description of the lodger or any suspicion that Kosminski could have been the lodger, that they would have brought the landlady and/or fellow lodgers in to indentify him?

I also find it hard to believe that the police would have said "well, we think this guy that's locked up in an asylum could be the Ripper or we're pretty sure he's the Ripper. What the heck, let's call it a day and go get a pint."

Doesn't it seem more likely that they would have questioned him repeatedly until they were completely satisfied? Even if he was incoherent, don't you think they could have gotten some sort of response from him that would have confirmed their suspicions?

c.d.

[Beowulf]

A couple of things here. I have to admit that I find the whole Lodger thing very confusing. But doesn't it seem reasonable that if the police had a description of the lodger or any suspicion that Kosminski could have been the lodger, that they would have brought the landlady and/or fellow lodgers in to indentify him?

I also find it hard to believe that the police would have said "well, we think this guy that's locked up in an asylum could be the Ripper or we're pretty sure he's the Ripper. What the heck, let's call it a day and go get a pint."

Doesn't it seem more likely that they would have questioned him repeatedly until they were completely satisfied? Even if he was incoherent, don't you think they could have gotten some sort of response from him that would have confirmed their suspicions?

c.d.

Kosminsky lodged at his family's dwellings, who all lived on two blocks or so from each other, in Whitechapel. The family did suspect him.

They did inquire of his family, who admitted him to an asylum immediately after the police were done with him.

As for the questioning, yes, it's a good point, but I believe he refused to answer their questions.

I found Rob House's book pretty well written and there is a lot of good information in there on Kosminski, you should read it.

[John Malcolm]

Just to clarify a few things here: There is, as of yet, no evidence that Aaron was suspected by his family, or that the family was even questioned. It seems very likely, given the various addresses of the family, that there would have been inquiries involving those addresses, but it's still speculation. As far as I'm concerned, Aaron Kosminski is the best "named" suspect to date, but it's still far from a given.

[Jonathan H]

To John Malcolm

I agree.

Weighing up the scraps I also agree with the Evans/Rumbelow theory that Aaron Kosminski's name appeared on some 1888 police list of local possibles, one name miong many others (I also accept their Sailor's Home theory in terms of the positive identification: eg. it never happened).

Macnaghten accessed that list and checked it at some point, and disocovered that 'Kosminski' had been sectioned in Feb 1891 for, among other examples of a deteriorating personality, threatening his sister with a knife.

Also that one of his symptoms of mania was masturbation.

To know that detial Mac may have checked on the suspect at the asylum?

Either by accident or by design, Macnaghten redacted this minor suspect much more firmly into the 1888 investigation by having him -- maybe -- seen by a cop with a victim, and then being safely caged within a few months after Kelly -- to make him fit the 'awful glut' thesis as a mind cracked; nothing much left but 'solitary vices'.

Via Sims (1907), and his own memoirs (1914), Mac attempted to debunk this suspect on the basis -- in the former source -- that the mad Polish Jew had really been out and about for too long to be the Ripper, and for his last victim be Kelly.

[robhouse]

Interesting... you can buy a flat at Leavesden asylum. http://property.independent.co.uk/sales/3142428

[Tom_Wescott]

Hi Rob,

Ignore Maria's comments on the book I'm reading. Do you have a Kindle?

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[mariab]

To Rob House:
By all means read the book and ignore my comments if you wish, but there's a strong possibility than you might end up agreeing with me. The way I recall it, the author went a bit creative with the crime timeline too (to fit OJ covering up for his son), so it'd be worth it to cross-reference this with official sources – both what the prosecution and the defense said, plus Mark Fuhrman's book.

It's the first time I register disagreeing on a book with Tom, BTW. (Unless it's the Bible, lol.)

PS.: I can totally picture a Ripperologist buying a flat at Leavesden.

[robhouse]

Tom,

Yes I do have a Kindle. Can I "borrow" the book from you somehow?

Hi Maria,

I am currently reading the new, highly rated Van Gogh biography, and I can tell you it is utter crap... total garbage. So do not worry, I am able to read books and come up with my own conclusions about them. But thank you for the tip.

RH

[Tom_Wescott]

Hi Rob. Once I'm done reading it, I'll PM you and see if this 'borrow' feature works. I haven't tried it yet.

Maria,

His 'creative timeline' was the timeline provided by prosecution lawyer, Marcia Clark, at the original trial.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[mariab]

So do not worry, I am able to read books and come up with my own conclusions about them. But thank you for the tip.

Really hope I didn't sound "patronizing" or anything, esp. since I've gone through your book (perused it rather than studied it yet) and was truly impressed.

Tom, I know about Marcia Clark. Not the best prosecutor ever. And her book on the case is so whiny. Her and that guy helping her who looked like on sedatives. The defense (which arguably was one of the strongest defense teams in American history) had a field day with them. If I ever buy one book on the OJ Simspon case, it would be Mark Fuhrman's. He's also written a book on the Martha Moxley case, which, unlike Simpson jr., features a teenager as the suspect convincingly. Plus I've always been saying that Kato Kaelin was the Matthew Packer of OJ Simpsonology, lol.