Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Upcoming Article

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    He is indeed quoting from the grave. Or rather quoted from the grave. Died in November 1918, quoted in the Police Encyclopedia, 1920. "...there was no doubt whatever as to the identity of the criminal..."



    Source:

    Begg, Fido, and Skinner. The Jack the Ripper A-Z.

    Whether you chose to believe it or not is your own affair; the main point being that Anderson did not promote the Polish Jew as a 'theory' but as a 'definitely ascertained fact.'

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by rjpalmer View Post
      He is indeed quoting from the grave. Or rather quoted from the grave. Died in November 1918, quoted in the Police Encyclopedia, 1920. "...there was no doubt whatever as to the identity of the criminal..."



      Source:

      Begg, Fido, and Skinner. The Jack the Ripper A-Z.

      Whether you chose to believe it or not is your own affair; the main point being that Anderson did not promote the Polish Jew as a 'theory' but as a 'definitely ascertained fact.'
      But what is the ascertained fact he seeks to rely on? He mentions and ID parade but omits important facts surrounding that parade, such as

      where it took place
      when it took place
      who was present?
      who was the suspect referred to?
      who was the witness?
      how was the suspect transported to the ID
      who was present?
      what happened after the positive identification?

      It has been suggested that he may have even been referring to the Sadler ID, but even that is contentious because there was no positive ID made at that time.

      It is unsafe to rely on what he writes, and to rely on that to corroborate the questionable marginalia as some do which also omits many of the same facts is fraught with danger.

      www.trevormarriott.co.uk

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by rjpalmer View Post
        He is indeed quoting from the grave. Or rather quoted from the grave. Died in November 1918, quoted in the Police Encyclopedia, 1920. "...there was no doubt whatever as to the identity of the criminal..."



        Source:

        Begg, Fido, and Skinner. The Jack the Ripper A-Z.

        Whether you chose to believe it or not is your own affair; the main point being that Anderson did not promote the Polish Jew as a 'theory' but as a 'definitely ascertained fact.'
        Hello Rj,

        Do excuse my failing memory.. But from what (and when) direct quote is the Police Encyclopedia saying this? In other words, exactly when and where did he say this? We need this "fact" verified, after all.

        Phil
        Chelsea FC. TRUE BLUE. 💙


        Justice for the 96 = achieved
        Accountability? ....

        Comment


        • #19
          Phil, read this. It explains it and gives Anderson's full quote. (he wrote the introduction before his death; the book didn't appear for a year and a half)

          https://www.casebook.org/ripper_media/rps.adam1.html

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by rjpalmer View Post
            Phil, read this. It explains it and gives Anderson's full quote. (he wrote the introduction before his death; the book didn't appear for a year and a half)

            https://www.casebook.org/ripper_media/rps.adam1.html
            It can be said RJ that all high level Counter Espionage staffers, National Security agents and the like are by nature comfortable with concealing the truth. They lie to the double agents they work with, they lie to the Investigators of crimes and they lie to the Government when the occasion suits them. Since Anderson managed double agents and hid his real agenda when he went to Switzerland, why should we expect any quote to be factual and evidence based?
            Michael Richards

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by Michael W Richards View Post

              It can be said RJ that all high level Counter Espionage staffers, National Security agents and the like are by nature comfortable with concealing the truth. They lie to the double agents they work with, they lie to the Investigators of crimes and they lie to the Government when the occasion suits them. Since Anderson managed double agents and hid his real agenda when he went to Switzerland, why should we expect any quote to be factual and evidence based?
              Hi Michael. I was not endorsing Anderson's claim; I was merely pointing out that he made it. Since his final statement dates to the last weeks of his life, Anderson must have stuck to his guns to the bitter end.

              Although I don't wish to be put in the position of defending the theories of Fido, House, Begg, Nelson, etc., since they are capable of doing so themselves, the counterarguments to your point are that 1) the Whitechapel Murders are generally considered to be a 'standard' criminal case, and not a counter espionage operation, thus the same rules don't apply; (2) that Anderson's quarrelsome opinions are evidently supported by Swanson, and indirectly by Macnaghten, Sagar,etc; and (3) that as a deeply religious man (The Bible and Modern Criticism, Daniel in the Lion's Den, etc.) Anderson would not knowingly lie in print.

              Alas, to this last point, I was raised in an American epoch that gave the world Jimmy Swaggert, Oral Roberts, Jim and Tammy Faye Bakker, etc., so I don't put much stock in the argument that religious people don't crank out porkies with the rest of us, although, in Anderson's defense, I wouldn't put him in the same class as a televangelist.

              My own reservations about Anderson is that he came from an insular background; part of a privileged class. He did not mingle with the 'lower orders.' So he was not necessarily the type of man who would have had great insight into a series of crimes of this sort, no matter what he may or may not have believed.




              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by rjpalmer View Post

                Hi Michael. I was not endorsing Anderson's claim; I was merely pointing out that he made it. Since his final statement dates to the last weeks of his life, Anderson must have stuck to his guns to the bitter end.

                Although I don't wish to be put in the position of defending the theories of Fido, House, Begg, Nelson, etc., since they are capable of doing so themselves, the counterarguments to your point are that 1) the Whitechapel Murders are generally considered to be a 'standard' criminal case, and not a counter espionage operation, thus the same rules don't apply; (2) that Anderson's quarrelsome opinions are evidently supported by Swanson, and indirectly by Macnaghten, Sagar,etc; and (3) that as a deeply religious man (The Bible and Modern Criticism, Daniel in the Lion's Den, etc.) Anderson would not knowingly lie in print.

                Alas, to this last point, I was raised in an American epoch that gave the world Jimmy Swaggert, Oral Roberts, Jim and Tammy Faye Bakker, etc., so I don't put much stock in the argument that religious people don't crank out porkies with the rest of us, although, in Anderson's defense, I wouldn't put him in the same class as a televangelist.

                My own reservations about Anderson is that he came from an insular background; part of a privileged class. He did not mingle with the 'lower orders.' So he was not necessarily the type of man who would have had great insight into a series of crimes of this sort, no matter what he may or may not have believed.



                And he was identified, and his name was Kosminski, pardon you, not Cohen, not Levy, not Kamnsky..

                His name was Kosminski.

                The Baron

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by Simon Wood View Post
                  Sir Robert Anderson was human, certainly. The trouble is, he was also a fabulist.
                  And you came to this conclusion based on.. ?
                  Human feelings ?!

                  The Baron

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    No. By the lies he told in his memoir.
                    Never believe anything until it has been officially denied.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      What lies ?!

                      The Baron

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        You will find a number of them detailed in "Deconstructing Jack: The Secret History of the Whitechapel Murders."
                        Never believe anything until it has been officially denied.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Thank you.

                          May I ask you to name one plain lie ?!

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            I am not being reluctant here, but they're really not the sort of lies you can easily explain in one paragraph. But what I can tell you is that they were the symptoms of a man who never received the levels of respect and admiration he felt he so richly deserved.
                            Last edited by Simon Wood; 03-01-2019, 10:59 PM. Reason: Spolling mistook
                            Never believe anything until it has been officially denied.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              " they were the symptoms of a man who never received the levels of respect and admiration he felt he so richly deserved. "

                              That can exactly be said about Jack the Ripper himself!

                              The Baron

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                No it can't. There was no such person as Jack the Ripper.

                                Anyway, what's that got to do with Sir Robert Anderson?

                                S.
                                Never believe anything until it has been officially denied.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X