Lay it on me mates, I can take it. Tell me where I'm wrong and how I'm wrong. Prove that you can teach an old dog new tricks. But please be specific. I don't have the patience to deal with dumb generalizations.
Even churchill thought Anderson was a blow hard. Ill go with churchill. Lol.
Seriously, ive got him in my top tier of suspects. Two senior police officers name him and hes the only ripper suspect that has any real evidence against so hes got to be up there.
That being said.... regarding the positive ID-lawende probably said something along the lines of i think thats him but i cant swear to it. Over the years, with wishful thinking, misremembering and or the need to cast himself in a better light, it became the ascertained fact in andersons mind.
Plus, even before the id, anderson seemed to think that the ripper might be jewish, so there may be a bit of preconceived bias there.
And i agree with CD—-if it was actually such a positive ID at the time, such a definite ascertained fact, there is no way they would have let it slide. Throw up the arms oh well. They could have supoened him to testify and either if they couldnt if they thought they had there man they would have charged him and let the chips fall as they may. The pressure was tremendous on them to solve this case.
Now all this being said, i cant throw the baby out with the bathwater, so koz remains a suspect. A weak suspect, but theyre all weak. Some just less weak than others.
__________________ "Is all that we see or seem
but a dream within a dream?"
-Edgar Allan Poe
"...the man and the peaked cap he is said to have worn
quite tallies with the descriptions I got of him."
-Frederick G. Abberline
Last edited by Abby Normal : 06-13-2018 at 04:29 PM.
I simply can't see Anderson and the police getting a positive identification and then finding out the witness won't testify and responding by saying "understood old boy. Thanks for your time. Have a nice day."
You missed off “hope you enjoyed the day out at the seaside” 😀
Get a grip, lads. These top police officials weren't in the dark. Anderson was an accomplished liar and Macnaghten played the game.
Swanson appearing to agree with Anderson in his marginalia is one of the worst pranks of all time.
What evidence do we have that Anderson or Macnaghten were liars on this issue Simon? Surely we cant just take the ‘they were all in on it,’ approach. Everyone lies at times including those in power but they would have to have a pretty serious reason to lie on this issue. And if these top men weren’t isolated figures (they of course had colleagues, family and friends) then surely the risk of the lie being passed on would increase massively. Once one person tells another.....
So what I’m saying is that we need tangible reasons for believing them to be liars.
"There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact!"