Casebook: Jack the Ripper - Main
   

Introduction
Victims
Suspects
Witnesses
Ripper Letters
Police Officials
Official Documents
Press Reports
Victorian London
Message Boards
Ripper Media
Authors
Dissertations
Timelines
Games & Diversions
Photo Archive
Ripper Wiki
Casebook Examiner
Ripper Podcast
About the Casebook

Most Recent Posts:
Torso Killings: torso maps - by Abby Normal 8 minutes ago.
Hutchinson, George: Any updates, or opinions on this witness. - by Wickerman 10 minutes ago.
Maybrick, James: One Incontrovertible, Unequivocal, Undeniable Fact Which Refutes the Diary - by Sam Flynn 1 hour and 10 minutes ago.
Maybrick, James: One Incontrovertible, Unequivocal, Undeniable Fact Which Refutes the Diary - by Simon Wood 1 hour and 13 minutes ago.
Witnesses: Sarah and Maurice Lewis - by Scott Nelson 3 hours ago.
Maybrick, James: One Incontrovertible, Unequivocal, Undeniable Fact Which Refutes the Diary - by Scott Nelson 3 hours ago.

Most Popular Threads:
Hutchinson, George: Any updates, or opinions on this witness. - (11 posts)
Maybrick, James: One Incontrovertible, Unequivocal, Undeniable Fact Which Refutes the Diary - (11 posts)
Torso Killings: torso maps - (6 posts)
Maybrick, James: And This Is Factual! - (4 posts)
Witnesses: Sarah and Maurice Lewis - (3 posts)
Maybrick, James: New Thoughts On The “diary” - (2 posts)

Wiki Updates:
Robert Sagar
Edit: Chris
May 9, 2015, 12:32 am
Online newspaper archives
Edit: Chris
Nov 26, 2014, 10:25 am
Joseph Lawende
Edit: Chris
Mar 9, 2014, 10:12 am
Miscellaneous research resources
Edit: Chris
Feb 13, 2014, 9:28 am
Charles Cross
Edit: John Bennett
Sep 4, 2013, 8:20 pm

Most Recent Blogs:
Mike Covell: A DECADE IN THE MAKING.
February 19, 2016, 11:12 am.
Chris George: RipperCon in Baltimore, April 8-10, 2016
February 10, 2016, 2:55 pm.
Mike Covell: Hull Prison Visit
October 10, 2015, 8:04 am.
Mike Covell: NEW ADVENTURES IN RESEARCH
August 9, 2015, 3:10 am.
Mike Covell: UPDDATES FOR THE PAST 11 MONTHS
November 14, 2014, 10:02 am.
Mike Covell: Mike’s Book Releases
March 17, 2014, 3:18 am.

Go Back   Casebook Forums > Ripper Media > Audio -- Visual > Rippercast

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old 06-11-2018, 04:27 PM
jmenges jmenges is offline
Casebook Supporter
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,299
Default Oh, Dear Boss: The Lighter Side of John Malcolm

This episode of 'Oh, Dear Boss' welcomes researcher and author John Malcolm to the show to discuss Aaron Kosminski's current place as the leading candidate for being Anderson's suspect and also as Jack the Ripper. Associated topics are also covered with panelists Jon Rees, Karl Coppack, Robert McLaughlin, Ally Ryder and Jonathan Menges.



Available now to stream or download from the following link:

http://www.casebook.org/podcast/listen.html?id=199

Also in iTunes, Podcast Addict, PodBean, MixCloud and any other podcast app where in-depth discussions about Aaron Kosminski, the Crawford letter, and Robert Anderson's 'Polish Jew Theory' can be found.

Thank you to John Malcolm for being on the show, in what I hope is the first of many appearances.

And thank you all for listening!



JM
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 06-12-2018, 06:26 AM
Elamarna Elamarna is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: South london
Posts: 4,217
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jmenges View Post
This episode of 'Oh, Dear Boss' welcomes researcher and author John Malcolm to the show to discuss Aaron Kosminski's current place as the leading candidate for being Anderson's suspect and also as Jack the Ripper. Associated topics are also covered with panelists Jon Rees, Karl Coppack, Robert McLaughlin, Ally Ryder and Jonathan Menges.



Available now to stream or download from the following link:

http://www.casebook.org/podcast/listen.html?id=199

Also in iTunes, Podcast Addict, PodBean, MixCloud and any other podcast app where in-depth discussions about Aaron Kosminski, the Crawford letter, and Robert Anderson's 'Polish Jew Theory' can be found.

Thank you to John Malcolm for being on the show, in what I hope is the first of many appearances.

And thank you all for listening!



JM

Good work Guys, a very interesting an far reaching debate.



Steve
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 06-12-2018, 09:07 AM
jmenges jmenges is offline
Casebook Supporter
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,299
Default

Thanks, Steve.

We aim to please.

JM
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 06-12-2018, 11:16 AM
Varqm Varqm is offline
Detective
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 469
Default

This has been debated before .Kosminski was not a suspect .The evidence against him were low standard .If that list/pronouncement happens today, with the supposed suspect possibly being mobbed and he then have to changed his name because of the stigma ,the police will be liable for damages/retraction.I have not but it's obvious enough, ask any lawyer.
Anderson's suspect does not matter because in the first place he did not say the witness verbally/explicitly told him he recognized the suspect but won't testify because he was a fellow Jew which I think he would have explicitly mentioned because it would have made his statement "the suspect was positively identified" (if I remember right) or something similar definite/unassailable. Then case would have made a different turn. More likely it was a hunch/read based on the reaction of the witness.


-
__________________
Clearly the first human laws (way older and already established) spawned organized religion's morality - from which it's writers only copied/stole,ex. you cannot kill,rob,steal (forced, otherwise people run back to the hills,no towns).
M. Pacana
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 06-12-2018, 01:26 PM
Scott Nelson Scott Nelson is offline
Inspector
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,182
Default

Nobody knows more about it than me.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 06-12-2018, 01:45 PM
John Malcolm John Malcolm is offline
Constable
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Cardiff, Wales
Posts: 90
Default

Fair do's Scott. You've written some great stuff over the years.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 06-13-2018, 04:07 AM
Harry D Harry D is offline
Superintendent
 
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 2,193
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Varqm View Post
Then case would have made a different turn. More likely it was a hunch/read based on the reaction of the witness.

-
That's long been my interpretation. There was no actual identification, Anderson was just reading between the lines.
__________________
Hail to the king, baby!
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 06-13-2018, 04:29 AM
jmenges jmenges is offline
Casebook Supporter
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,299
Default

So when Anderson says "the only person who had ever had a good view of the murderer at once identified him" (Blackwoods) and "unhesitatingly identified the suspect the instant he was confronted with him"(LSOMOF) and Swanson "And after this identification which suspect knew", "after the suspect had been identified", and "sent by us with difficulty in order to subject him to identification, and he knew he was identified".
-they were both just making an assumption based on nothing but maybe the witnesses body language and then made these pretty definitive statements based on a hunch? I don't see it. To me that opinion is more of a 'hunch' than their statements.

JM
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 06-13-2018, 05:16 AM
John Malcolm John Malcolm is offline
Constable
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Cardiff, Wales
Posts: 90
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Harry D View Post
That's long been my interpretation. There was no actual identification, Anderson was just reading between the lines.
This line of reasoning has long been the interpretation of many. Unfortunately it leads to unnecessarily marginalizing Anderson, which in turn encourages the dismissal of the "Polish Jew Theory". It's a convenient way to avoid the confusing details, and it clears the table for imaginary suspects to be served up. That's why the myths surrounding the ex-assistant commissioner should be dispelled. The weight of "evidence" against Anderson looks formidable from a distance, but up close it amounts to an army of laughing gas filled balloons. The man was a divisive character who was equally respected and despised. There are many people in this field who I respect and admire who look at everything Anderson said with suspicion, and rightly so. But it's not good enough reason to opt for what may appear to be the simplest explanation, that the man was just blowing smoke.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:59 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.