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:
Hutchinson, George: Any updates, or opinions on this witness. - by DJA 34 minutes ago.
Hutchinson, George: Any updates, or opinions on this witness. - by Wickerman 2 hours ago.
Witnesses: Sarah and Maurice Lewis - by Paddy 3 hours ago.
Hutchinson, George: Any updates, or opinions on this witness. - by Wickerman 3 hours ago.
A6 Murders: A6 Rebooted - by cobalt 5 hours ago.
Hutchinson, George: Any updates, or opinions on this witness. - by DJA 5 hours ago.

Most Popular Threads:
A6 Murders: A6 Rebooted - (8 posts)
Torso Killings: torso maps - (7 posts)
Scene of the Crimes: Mitre Sq, The demise is almost complete - (7 posts)
Visual Media: London 1924 in colour - (6 posts)
Lechmere/Cross, Charles: Lechmere was Jack the Ripper - (6 posts)
Hutchinson, George: Any updates, or opinions on this witness. - (5 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 Discussions > Suspects > General Suspect Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #91  
Old 05-12-2015, 12:17 AM
Chris Chris is offline
Inactive
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 3,840
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scott Nelson View Post
Because Swanson and Macnaghten may have wanted to emphasize that Anderson's Polish Jew suspect was an immigrant from the continent-- thus they referred to him by his non-anglicised name, rather than his anglicised name, which the suspect would have been confined under.
If he was always known as Cohen (say) in England, I'm not sure why the police would ever have heard his original surname. But if they had, I don't believe that Macnaghten, writing in an official memorandum, would have used that surname and omitted the one used in the official records. As the recipient of the memo, my question to him would have been, "This man is known as Cohen and appears as Cohen in all the records. Why on earth have you called him Kosminski (and not even Kosminski, alias Cohen) in your memorandum?"

Last edited by Chris : 05-12-2015 at 12:33 AM.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #92  
Old 05-12-2015, 12:21 AM
Batman Batman is offline
Inspector
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 1,497
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Harry D View Post
William Grant Grainger?
Yes candidates like that. Its rare though to find an Irish SK, if one has ever existed. Maybe pairing for business like Burke and Hare but not much else.

Cork is a place close to my heart.
__________________
Bona fide canonical and then some.

Last edited by Batman : 05-12-2015 at 12:25 AM.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #93  
Old 05-12-2015, 12:24 AM
Trevor Marriott Trevor Marriott is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 4,986
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Monty View Post
There would be a prosecution file created by the police, and passed on to their solicitors, who would review the evidence and decide if the case is sound enough to go to court. They make that call.

If a charge is withdrawn, there would be an entry in the withrawn charges book. However, he may not have been charged at all.

Monty
But then we get back to how they managed to take a suspect from London to Brighton without arresting him first.

There has never been any records to show anyone by the name of Kosminski was ever arrested, and you would have thought such a potential breakthrough as this would have been recorded. After all they didn't drag everyone arrested down to Brighton.

In fact if they had such a good witness I have to ask, how come others were not taken down the same route i.e. Tumblety ? if of course Tumblety was ever a suspect.

You would have thought other police officers would have known about the suspect and the ID, but no a deadly silence over all of these years.

And what about the home itself, surely if it had taken place someone from their whether it had been resident of staff might have said something in later years or even at the time.

So if I did take place, what officers could have been involved in this, according to what we know only two possibles. Swanson and Anderson. I doubt Anderson would get off his backside and come out of his palatial office to involve himself in this, that only leaves Swanson who would not have been able to conduct this on his own. By my reckoning it would have taken at least 2 other officers besides him. I would suggest an Inspector and a Sgt. What Inspectors were directly involved in the investigation Abberline and Reid and neither of them mention this in later years.

What make this questionable, is that if it did take place as has been suggested, then are we really expected to believe that the police had the killer in their grasp having been identified and they simply brought him back to London and dropped him off as if nothing had happened.

My money is is on the fact that this never took place in the way it has been described by Anderson and Swanson.

www.trevormarriott.co.uk
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #94  
Old 05-12-2015, 12:43 AM
Chris Chris is offline
Inactive
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 3,840
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Trevor Marriott View Post
What make this questionable, is that if it did take place as has been suggested, then are we really expected to believe that the police had the killer in their grasp having been identified and they simply brought him back to London and dropped him off as if nothing had happened.
I think it's worth considering the exact words Swanson used. The police didn't take him there, they sent him there with difficulty. They didn't bring him back and drop him off. He returned.

I think that wording is consistent with the police having arranged for Kozminski to go to a seaside home as a patient.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #95  
Old 05-12-2015, 12:49 AM
Trevor Marriott Trevor Marriott is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 4,986
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris View Post
I think it's worth considering the exact words Swanson used. The police didn't take him there, they sent him there with difficulty. They didn't bring him back and drop him off. He returned.

I think that wording is consistent with the police having arranged for Kozminski to go to a seaside home as a patient.
That makes it even more unbelievable !
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #96  
Old 05-12-2015, 01:14 AM
Chris Chris is offline
Inactive
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 3,840
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Trevor Marriott View Post
That makes it even more unbelievable !
Why do you find it unbelievable? Given what had happened in Pizer's case, it's quite believable that both the police and (particularly) the family should have wanted to avoid public knowledge of the identification. Why not arrange for this mentally ill man to go to a convalescent home for a few weeks, where he could be shown to the witness informally, rather than arresting him and leaving him and his family vulnerable to the kind of near-riots that had taken place in Mulberry Street?
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #97  
Old 05-12-2015, 02:43 AM
Trevor Marriott Trevor Marriott is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 4,986
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris View Post
Why do you find it unbelievable? Given what had happened in Pizer's case, it's quite believable that both the police and (particularly) the family should have wanted to avoid public knowledge of the identification. Why not arrange for this mentally ill man to go to a convalescent home for a few weeks, where he could be shown to the witness informally, rather than arresting him and leaving him and his family vulnerable to the kind of near-riots that had taken place in Mulberry Street?
So you are suggesting that Kosminski was sent/allowed to go to a location for a period of time where a prime witness was ensconced and allowed to freely mingle with that witness?

I am sorry but your statement is even more unbeiveable than the first !

www.trevormarriott.co.uk
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #98  
Old 05-12-2015, 02:57 AM
harry harry is offline
Chief Inspector
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,811
Default

If the police didn't take Kosminski to the seaside home,who did.Who else had the power to do so,and why should anyone other than the police do so.If an identification was intended as part of the police investigation,then Kosminski must have been subject to suspicion before the seaside home identification.It doesn't make sense that,the identification being positive,Kosminski was not placed under arrest at the seaside home,and no one has yet come forward with a better answer than Trevor.That is ,that an identification never took place as described.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #99  
Old 05-12-2015, 03:05 AM
Batman Batman is offline
Inspector
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 1,497
Default

Why take him there at all? This only seems to make sense if this is where the witness was.
__________________
Bona fide canonical and then some.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #100  
Old 05-12-2015, 03:07 AM
GUT GUT is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: I come from a land Down Under
Posts: 7,334
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Batman View Post
Why take him there at all? This only seems to make sense if this is where the witness was.
G'day Batman

Not necessarily, maybe it was somewhere they knew they could keep security tight and that the "witness" could get to.
__________________
G U T

There are two ways to be fooled, one is to believe what isn't true, the other is to refuse to believe that which is true.
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 09:12 PM.


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