|
 |
 |
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
    
Martin Anderson
Police Constable
Username: Scouse
Post Number: 5
Registered: 12-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 06, 2004 - 8:10 am: |       |
Here is an excerpt from Ap's brilliant Jack The Myth:}
'Take from this ram the fat, the fat tail, the fat around the inner parts, the covering of the liver, both kidneys with the fat on them, and the right thigh...'
(Exodus 29:22-33)
'From the fellowship offering he is to bring a sacrifice made to the Lord by fire: all the fat that covers the inner parts or is connected to them, both kidneys with the fat on them near the loins, and the covering of the liver, which he will remove with the kidneys. Then Aaron's sons are to burn it on the altar on top of the burnt offering that is on the burning wood, as an offering made by fire, an aroma pleasing to the Lord.'
(Leviticus 3:3-5)
'He slaughtered the ox and the ram as the fellowship offering for the people. His sons handed him the blood, and he sprinkled it against the altar on all sides. But the fat portions of the ox and the ram - the fat tail, the layer of fat, the kidneys and the covering of the liver - these they laid on the breasts, and then Aaron burned the fat on the altar. Aaron waved the breasts and the right thigh before the Lord as a wave offering as Moses commanded.'
(Leviticus 9:18-22)
Hasn't it crossed anyone's mind on reading this that Aaron Kosminski, bearing the same christian name, may have thought that this symbolised what he had to do. AP also discusses the possibility that he is affected by religious mania, thus strengthening this opinion.
Religion can play a major part in the motivation of murder, I seem to remember that it played a major part of Mark Chapman's psyche (who killed John Lennon).
Martin Anderson
Analyst |
Glenn L Andersson
Chief Inspector
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 933
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 06, 2004 - 11:36 am: | |
Hi Martin,
I am not sure of Aaron Kosminski being a credible enough suspect (although nothing can be ruled out), but apart from that I think it is quite possible that the Ripper suffered from religious mania -- absolutely -- and it doesen't necessarily have to be connected to his real name, that Aaron metaphor could just as well be a coincidence even if it was Kosminski.
But religious mania -- oh yes. Why not?
All the best
Glenn L Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden |
Martin Anderson
Police Constable
Username: Scouse
Post Number: 6
Registered: 12-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 07, 2004 - 3:29 am: | |
Hi Glenn,
I think you are right about the Aaron metaphor as you put it. It could be just coincidence but Kosminski is still a suspect for me simply because he is named by at least 3 police officials, overwhelming circumstantial evidence and he matches the witness' description of a Jew. Don't forget he is also religious and Macnaghten said he hated women.
Unless he was framed by the police, it was probably him that was identified by a witness.
Critics to this theory say he wasn't violent - how do they know? He doesn't have to have been violent all the time, in fact it was probably because he could fit back into society so easily that he wasn't caught easily.
Just a few thoughts.
Martin Anderson
Analyst |
Glenn L Andersson
Chief Inspector
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 934
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 07, 2004 - 4:21 am: | |
Hi Martin,
The problems with Kosminsiki are several:
1) The statements by the three police officials are by no means unanimous, there are time discrepansies regarding his death and his incarceration.
2) Later statements by both Abberline and Robert Anderson contradicts the notion that the killer was known to the police. Note also that Robert Andersson doesn't mention Kosminski by name.
3) I agree on that the Ripper probably wasn't a violent character all the time (he would indeed have been caught rather quickly if that was the case), but during Kosminski's whole time if incarceration in Colney Hatch we have -- apart from one small outburst, where he threw a chair -- absolutely no records indicating any violent tendensies whatsoever. On the contrary he seems like a complete harmless imbecille.
Regarding the Polish Jew theory, I am more inclined to buy parts of Fido's Favid Cohen stuff (since it tries to explain some of the more crucial problems with the Kosminski suspect), rather than believing in Kosminski himself, but both are indeed problematic. If Kosminski was too harmless (probably an ordinary schizofrenic without any paranoid traits), Davis Cohen is TOO violent and too much of a raving lunatic in order to pull of the crimes. The only solution I can see, is that the -- in time of the capture -- Ripper had degenerated into such a bad mental state, that he no longer could think rationally or take care of himself. Be that as it may, I would think the Cohen mental state would be a more probable progression (that is, that his violent tendensies increased) rather than the harmless signs we see on Kosminski.
But with that being said, Kosminski is indeed a more interesting and probable suspect than many others that has been suggested, although he don't fit the profile to enough extent. Hatred of women doesen't really say that much, because that feature doesen't narrow the number of suspects down -- on the contrary, it fits most of them and a great deal of other characters hiding in east End as well.
However, I think religious mania is a quite possible compulsion on the Ripper's part, but it doesne't necessarily have to imply that he was Jewish (although there is a great chance for it).
All the best
Glenn L Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden |
Martin Anderson
Police Constable
Username: Scouse
Post Number: 7
Registered: 12-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 07, 2004 - 6:05 am: | |
Hi Glenn,
Thanks for your points. I agree they are very good arguments against the Kosminski theory.
All I can say is that Kosminski the man is shrouded in mystery and this in itself is suspicious. We don't even have a picture of him because he was a very ordinary man. If the police are getting all their facts wrong when they talk about him, are they covering something up because don't forget - he was Jewish!
The time discrepancies can be explained away by the fact that information gets confused by the time it reaches its source. Even hot detectives sometimes get it wrong. (i.e. Abberline called Thomas Lawende Thomas Lewin in his original report, (a phonetic mistake??) and you referred to David as Favid (a typo error).
You are right that being religious doesn't imply he was Jewish but a lot of other evidence strongly supports this view. (Such as witness statements, police cover-ups, arguably Goulston Street writing etc).
Alternatively, the police facts could be wrong because they are protecting someone else. I cannot really go along with this conspiracy theory unless they were protecting someone like Thomas Cutbush. This theory is plausible but contradicts the Jewish element. I think the Ripper was someone like this because the murders stopped around the time these two were incarcerated.
I believe the Ripper had to be someone committed to an asylum around this time. He was caught alright, but he was keeping quiet.
Tumblety was also a good suspect (who left the country around this time) but I read he was too tall? Please tell me if you can confirm as this totally invalidates the argument against him.
Yours
Martin Anderson
Analyst |
Glenn L Andersson
Chief Inspector
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 935
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 07, 2004 - 1:14 pm: | |
Hi Martin,
Thank you very much for your post. I find much of its content very interesting and reasonable.
The fact that he was an ordinary man and that we don't even have a picture of him, is one of the reasons why I -- obviously like you as well -- think he is one of the more interesting suspects. I totally agree on that this gives him an additional flair of mystery.
It is absolutely true that the discrepancies in time regarding Kosminski's incarceration can to some extent be explained by bad memory and confusion on the officials' part, as well as a possible cover-up. I can't with all the will in the world argue against that. The problem regarding the time error is, that we have alot of errors to deal with (yes, "Favid" was an unfortunate typo error on my pert -- sometimes I am too much in a bit of a rush and I am also struggling here with writing in a second hand language); there is -- I believe -- a difference between a typo error and getting so many years wrong, both regarding the time for his incarceration AND regarding his time of death.
However, nothing is impossible in this detective puzzle, and the Polish Jew theory is, although the most appealing one in my view, also the most complicated one. Like Martin Fido, I also believe we can't disregard the circumstances surrounding the anti-semitic riots at the time and the social nuclear bomb a Jewish Ripper would represent. Indeed, we can't disregard the possibility of a cover-up, I agree. We can only look at the vast protests Anderson received from the Jewish community when he first lay forward the Polish Jew suspect to the public. It is obvious that the subject in itself was a delicate one. So it is possible that that the conflicting information could be a result of smoke screens or something similar.
I agree with you, that it is plausible that the Ripper was someone who was caught, who than disappeared into an asylum and died there. I don't know if you've read Martin Fido's book, but it contains interesting discussions on the subject. One doesen't have to buy his David Cohen theory to find it useful -- I think his views and interpretations of the Polish Jew theory is interesting nevertheless, although they -- like everything else in this case -- are nothing more than speculations.
I have never believed in Tumblety as a credible suspect, although I don't think he is equally bad as Klosowski. Tumblety was obviously quite intelligent and an exhibitionist. I am by no means an expert on Tumblety, but from what I know there are some circumstances round this character that would make it quite hard for him to blend in and get away with the murders. He was too tall, too flamboyant and too old. We have no witness statements in connection with the murders that describes someone similar to Tumblety in height and age. One of the reasons for him being on the suspect list, is his alleged medical experience and his hatred of women. Since I don't believe it was necessary for the Ripper to be in possession of anything other then superficial anatomical knowledge and curiosity, and experience in handling a knife from numerous different kinds of occupations, I don't see this as large argument for his inclusion. Furthermore, hatred of women could fit an endless row of characters in this context, so Tumblety isn't in any way unique in that respect.
What I find most interesting with Tumblety is the fact that the police showed a great deal of interest in him, but then again, they were largely interested in other individuals as well.
Nice talking to you, Martin.
All the best
Glenn L Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden |
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 1788
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 07, 2004 - 1:46 pm: | |
Hi folks
Um, I'm not sure we can say that a Jew was more likely to have religious mania than a Gentile. But even if we can, I feel that a religious maniac Jew would have been more likely to kill Jewish women whom he believed, for one reason or another, to be guilty of some sort of serious misdemeanour.
I'm not saying that Jack definitely wasn't a religious maniac, or that he definitely wasn't Jewish, or that he couldn't have been both - just that there doesn't seem to me to be any particular reason to pick out Jews as being more susceptible to religious mania, and then (particularly if he was a newcomer) to be so interested in the native population's morals that he started slaughtering Gentiles.
Could someone point me to the reference to Aaron having religious mania? I didn't think there was any reference to his religious beliefs in the evidence.
Didn't MacNaghten say that he discounted religious mania as a motive?
Robert |
Bullwinkle
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 06, 2004 - 12:27 pm: | |
Martin,
If you want to drop this little number on us, then you have to go right ahead and solve the whole case for us integrating it forthwith. You can't just lob a disjointed tangent over our wall to us and make us responsible for the solution. Now, please solve all the problems Aaron Kosminski has as a suspect, and tell us WHY he had to have been the murderer. It isn't easy, is it?
Additionally, I strongly believe that Martin Anderson is somehow connected to Glenn L. Andersson. They are either father and son, brothers, cousins, or so on. They may be even ONE AND THE SAME!!!! This is another little answer I'd like to have, if you please.
Bullwinkle
|
Donald Souden
Detective Sergeant
Username: Supe
Post Number: 101
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 07, 2004 - 9:20 pm: | |
David,
Maybe Martin does think he has the solution and just won't tell. Probably something like A?R. Why, Martin Anderson might even be Bullwinkle's nom de ruse. No, Martin makes too much sense for that to be true.
Don. |
R.J. Palmer
Inspector
Username: Rjpalmer
Post Number: 252
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 07, 2004 - 10:03 pm: | |
Martin----Kosminski did state that he was 'guided' and was 'told' to do things, but he made no claim that it was God speaking or that it was religious doctrine that one might find in a book---only 'an instinct' that spoke to him. Yes---ahem--- personally, I do see a trace of religious monomania in Anderson's theory; you just happen to be looking through the wrong end of the telescope, i.m.h.o.
In other words, "How can we know the dancer from the dance?" RP
|
Andrew Spallek
Inspector
Username: Aspallek
Post Number: 331
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 07, 2004 - 10:15 pm: | |
Martin:
This is an interesting thought. Surely such distortion of Scripture is possible in the mind of a deranged killer.
However, one should take care to note that the Hebrew Scriptures (i.e., the Christian Old Testament) expressly condemn human sacrifice. Furthermore, the animal sacrifices were to take place only at the site of the Temple in Jerusalem, which was destroyed by the Roman Army in AD 70. This is why Jews do not practice such sacrifices today. [Though it is true that isolated sects of Jews do practice animal sacrifice].
Andy S.
|
R.J. Palmer
Inspector
Username: Rjpalmer
Post Number: 253
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 07, 2004 - 10:19 pm: | |
"My words are meant to specify race, not religion." |
Glenn L Andersson
Chief Inspector
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 936
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 07, 2004 - 10:39 pm: | |
As I said, I am not at all convinced that a religious mania has to involve a perpetrator of Jewish origin or belief -- it could just as well be Christian -- but when I said that there was a chance for it, I referred to the large population of immigrated Jews in Whitechapel, which we can't disregard.
And no, Robert, I really don't see why a Ripper with a Jewish religious mania had to stick to Jewish female victims.
If the Ripper had some kind schizofrenic disorder, which I believe, then religious mania can't be excluded -- there has been several killers witrh religious mania, the Ripper wouldn't be the first or the last.
One thing many here forgets, though, is that, just because he may have been of Jewish origin doesen't mean that he had to a practicing Jew. Therefore I feel litterary interpretations of the Jewish scripts to be worthless, since we don't have any religious symbols or signature signs pointing at it. But can't be ruled out nevertheless, especially if we're talking about a killer "hearing voices".
But whether Kosminski was the killer or not, is another question. I think not.
All the best
Glenn L Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden |
Glenn L Andersson
Chief Inspector
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 937
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 07, 2004 - 10:47 pm: | |
No, David,
Me and Martin isn't related to each other in any way. You may also note that the spelling isn't the same.
May I inform you, that Andersson is probably one of the most common surnames in the Western world -- in Sweden it is the third most common one. There are five Glenn Andersson in the town where I live. Sorry to disappoint you, mate.
All the best
Glenn L Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden |
Glenn L Andersson
Chief Inspector
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 938
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 07, 2004 - 10:55 pm: | |
David,
Where do you read that Martin thinks he has solved the case? He was just laying forward an opinion and asked some questions -- I believe that is allowed. If everyone who lays forward an opinion has to "present a solution" or "solve the case" (just because he's suggesting a suspect), I believe it would make rather harsh conditions for any discussion. If that was the case, then you yourself should have presented such a solution long ago.
There you go again... No wonder people are getting pissed off at you.
And, for the record, David: NO, we are not one and the same either -- I actually didn't think Stephen would allow it or that it would be technically possible since we are both registred. Was it something you ate, brother?
(Message edited by Glenna on January 07, 2004)
Glenn L Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden |
John Fogarty
Detective Sergeant
Username: Goryboy
Post Number: 65
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, January 08, 2004 - 1:24 am: | |
All:
The soundest argument against Aaron Kosminski as the Ripper was his long, uneventful period of freedom (Nov 8, 1888 - March, 1891) following the MJK killing in Miller's Court, before he is sent to Stepney Workhouse by his family. The Ripper would not have been able -- following such a string of savage, bloody murders -- to simply content himself with eating bread from gutters, drinking water from public taps and mumbling to nonexistent friends for over two years. The Ripper, if still on the streets, surely would have attempted another killing or two during that time. Kosminski did nothing violent that we know of during that entire period.
Also, Kosminski is a bit too young (23 in 1888) to fit most eyewitness descriptions. Our Boy was very likely between 30 and 40 (note the age of his victims, save MJK).
Finally, Kosminski is (by all extant accounts) far too disassociated, distracted, and tame to be the feral maniac who disemboweled Chapman, Eddowes and Kelly (Nicholls and Stride not being eviscerated as were the others). Kosminski's only act of recorded violence the whole time he was at Colney Hatch (following his release from Stepney) was hurling a chair at attendants when they came to bathe him.
No, a mumbling, shambling, unemployed, 23-year-old masturbator is quite unlikely to have been Jack the Ripper.
Aaron Davis Cohen (a.k.a. David Cohen) on the other hand looks a much more likely candidate. Read Fido's chapter in "The Mammoth Book of Jack the Ripper" or his posts here for more on the Cohen/Kosminski theory.
All the best,
John
Cheers,
John e-Rotten
(a.k.a., Goryboy) |
Glenn L Andersson
Chief Inspector
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 939
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, January 08, 2004 - 1:42 am: | |
Hi John,
A great post, and I agree on that David Cohen indeed is a more possible suspect than Kosminski, if we had to choose one or the other -- and mainly for the reasons you point out.
The age on his victims, though, are, in my experience, not of enough importance in order to draw any conclusions regarding his own. I would say that a reasonable age would be around 25--35, probably not younger, since we must take in consideration that he probably had a history involving other crimes prior to those connected with the Ripper. But here, once again, we're stuck with speculations.
All the best
Glenn L Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden |
John Fogarty
Detective Sergeant
Username: Goryboy
Post Number: 66
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, January 08, 2004 - 8:43 am: | |
Hi, Glenn:
You wrote "he probably had a history involving other crimes prior to those connected with the Ripper." I agree 100%.
The creature or creatures who would later become known as Jack the Ripper undoubtedly perpetrated other, lesser crimes before the Tabrum or Nicholls murders. I strongly suspect the man who attacked Ada Wilson in Mile End, Feb., 1888, to be a likely suspect.
Unfortunately, few records from the local courts or assizes remain for us today. Yet, of those that do, we can glean faint hints, such as the one uncovered by Martin Fido during his Nathan Kaminsky research. He discovered the court case of one Aaron Davis Cohen (later referred to simply as "David Cohen") whose hearing was minuted with that of a brothel madame and one of her girls in early December, 1888. Seems this Cohen was picked up by Met police for being a "lunatic wandering at large and unable to care for himself." There is the slightest hint that he might have been the same oddball living at a local brothel who'd been reported to police by the madame of the house, back in September, following the Chapman murder on Hanbury.
The madame claimed that this man was seen with blood on him the morning of the murder. But when Met officers arrived to interview him, he bolted and was not seen again. There is no proof that this suspect and the David Cohen picked up in early December were one and the same, but the fact that Cohen's case was minuted with the brothel madame and her girl is more than a little intriguing.
Cohen is by the far the most violent Jewish pauper picked up by the police and funneled through a local workhouse to Colney Hatch. Fido refers to him as "hair-raisingly" violent. And his incarceration date at Colney matches perfectly with Macnaghten's erroneous report of Kosminsky's, in March of 1889 (Kosminsky wasn't put into Colney until early 1891).
Also, Cohen died in the Hatch October of 1889, which Swanson mistakenly claimed for Kosminski. The latter, however, lived until the 1920s. So I think Fido quite right when he concludes that these two Jewish tailor/cobblers -- Nathan Kaminsky (dubbed David Cohen by officials) and Aaron Kosminsky -- became confused with each other. Nathan K disappears from the records altogether, while David Cohen suddenly appears in court, Dec., 1888 and eventually at Colney Hatch the following March. He dies, a Metropolitan suspect under watch by the City of London Police, while the City of London suspect (under watch by the Met CID), Kosminsky, winds up in the Hatch...
This kind of bureaucratic mix-up is only too believable, to my admittedly world-weary mind, and I still hold that Fido has probably come closer to naming Jack the Ripper than anyone else to date. If Kaminsky/Cohen's descendants could be located, and any remaining personal effects examined, wouldn't it be interesting to find a pair of old, brass rings (Chapman) or an ancient amputation knife, or other mementos? Highly unlikely, of course, but still...it does give one pause for thought.
Cheerio for now,
John
Cheers,
John e-Rotten
(a.k.a., Goryboy) |
Glenn L Andersson
Chief Inspector
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 942
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, January 08, 2004 - 10:08 am: | |
I agree, John. Absolutely.
Of course, as I wrote in my article on Cohen's suspect page, the link between Kaminsky and Cohen and on the other hand Cohen and Kosminski is indeed circumstancial, and it has its shortcomings. I believe even Fido himself have admitted that. But so far I think that he at least is the one who has delivered the most plausible explanation to the Polish Jew mystery.
That discussion about the brothel -- and Cohen as a probable lodger -- I think was discussed on another thread, if I don't remember completely wrong. It is indeed interesting but I can't really comment on it, since I don't have access to the original documents. (Hmmm.., maybe that would be an extra treat for my London visit in February...? Don't think I have the time to spare, though...)
If Cohen was the Polish Jew suspect (and possibly Jack the Ripper), and not Kosminski, than he actually must have deteriorated mentally when they finally picked him up, because I don't think such a person in that state would be able to get away with serial killing of any kind (that character is just too disorganized), but there is a possibility that his illness and violent tendencies escalated and finally completely turned him into a vegetable state after the Kelly murder (or prior to it).
Yes, I think it's fair to assume that the Ripper had some early violent spells long before Tabram (for example). I think he would have started off with violent threats and harassments and as far as knife work is concerned I am inclined to think Annie Millwood was such an early attempt. Regarding Ada Wilson, I have always been sceptical about her, but now I am not so sure.
Cheerio, John, and all the best
Glenn L Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden |
R.J. Palmer
Inspector
Username: Rjpalmer
Post Number: 255
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, January 08, 2004 - 10:42 am: | |
John--Hello there. You probably knew that you wouldn't escape without hearing my standard long-winded rebuttal. Now, in admitting the many subtleties of Mr. Fido's study, and your own rigorous defense of it above, what about the weakenesses of the 'case against' Cohen? Let me suggest few. 1) Cohen has no known relationship to the Ripper case. He is not known to be a 'suspect.' 2) He appears to be so whacked-out that it is difficult to understand his ability to elude capture, and, indeed, he is put down as a lunatic and thrown in the asylum 3) He clearly does not match the man described by Swanson as Anderson's suspect; he does not have relatives in Whitechapel, for instance. He is dead before the Seaside Home was built. (Anderson had connections to the Hove Home--so it more than just a little likely that it's the one in question) 4) Without the connection to Anderson's suspect, you have no circumstantial evidence against Cohen (the evidence that Macnaghten alludes to) nor do you have the witness identification. 5) The witness identification is a kettle of fish in its own right. 6) There is nothing that suggests that Nathan Kaminsky and Aaron Davis Cohen are the same man, and, to my mind, a great deal that suggests that they aren't. There is a Nathan Kaminsky of the right age living in the U.S. at the turn of the Century. 7) Anderson's statements post-January 1889 suggest that he still believed the Ripper was at large, and Scotland Yard was still acting on that assumption. 8) The belief in a bureaucratic 'mix-up' doesn't explain the presence of Aaron Kosminski in the historical record. For there to be a 'mix-up' there has to be two suspects. But it's a paradox; for if Aaron is a suspect, you don't need Cohen. 9)The bureaucratic mix-up theory also relies on what seems to me to be the unlikely scenerio that Swanson would be mistaken or misremembering extremely dramatic events, including releasing Jack the Ripper to his family. An event, which again, cannot refer to Cohen. 10) At any rate, most police officials did not agree with Anderson's theory. Monro, who some historians state was in a position to know more than anyone else, flatly stated that Jack the Ripper was not caught. It would have been utterly impossible for him not to know of the events described by Anderson & Co. if they happened before 1890.
No, a mumbling, shambling, unemployed, 23-year-old masturbator is quite unlikely to have been Jack the Ripper.
Ah, but isn't this placing the cart before the horse? What do we have? Both Anderson and Macnaghten explicitly stating that the Jewish Pole was mad due to 'umentionable vices' or 'solitary vices' which entirely agree with Aaron Kosminski's asylum records. You might personally find it unlikely, but evidently Anderson and Macnaghten didn't.
Further, there is your reasonable objection that Aaron Kosminski was free between 1889-90. But this is casting into the unknown. There's any number of reasons why he might have been incapacitated, including a serious illness, or a break-down. We don't know either way. My main disagreement with the appeal to the Cohen theory is that it is somewhat based on the gooey waters of psychological profiling rather than accepting the historical record and proceeding from there. I agree with Paul Begg that the record tells us that Aaron Kosminski was Anderson's suspect. Again, to say that he doesn't 'fit', and then fall back on Cohen (because of some assumed accuracy of a psychological profile) is, it seems to me, putting the cart before the horse.
Anyway, how often in a murder investigation do the police only find their suspect two or three years later? Often, it seems. The investigation into the Whitechapel murders didn't suddenly stop on November 11th, 1888. Far from it. Much or even most of the investigation went on over the next few years, an area that has received scant research when compared to the span of Aug-Nov, 1888. All the best. RP |
Diana
Inspector
Username: Diana
Post Number: 246
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, January 08, 2004 - 11:02 am: | |
It would explain why the police never publicly acknowledged that the Ripper had been caught. It was certainly in their interest to do so as there was much public criticism of them in the public and press.
But if you think about it the same people who wiped off the Goulston St. graffito to prevent a riot would certainly have hushed up Jack's identity if he were Jewish. They might have had a pogrom on their hands.
Incidentally, I think it necessary to point out that every race and religion has produced a few sour notes and a few heroes. |
Andrew Spallek
Inspector
Username: Aspallek
Post Number: 333
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, January 08, 2004 - 12:01 pm: | |
RJ --
Good post! While I tend to believe Martin's Kaminsky theory is the most likely, I do also have problems with it. To respond to some of your points:
1) Cohen is not a known suspect by that name. However a confusion of the name Kosminski with Kaminsky is quite plausible. This is not a major difficulty.
2) But he was extremely violent. We don't know his state of mind at the time of the murders.
3) We're going in circles on this one. Swanson was describing Kosminski. Unknown to him, the suspect may have actually been Kaminski.
4) Quite true. But we do have Anderson's suspect.
5) In my mind, the actual identification is next to worthless as evidence. It is important primarily because it presents the chronological problem of the Seaside Home. This is the most damaging difficulty with Fido's theory, IMO.
6) True, but again it is plausible. Actually, Fido's basic premiss of Kosminski/Kaminski confusion still works even without "Cohen" but it is much weaker.
7) Again, if the identities of the two men were confused in his mind his miscomprehension is neatly explained.
8) I wouldn't say it is a paradox. Even with Kosminski as a suspect, you do in a sense "need" Kaminski because Kosminski appears to be such a poor suspect and his history does not match the suspect described by Swanson.
9) A little bit of a red herring here! Clearly somebody's memory is confused.
10) You're right about this. The opinion that Kosminski/Kaminski was JTR was not universally held in SY. MacNaughten, for example, affirms Kosminski as a strong suspect at the time but clearly favors Druitt.
I agree that there are a lot of mere plausibilities in the Kamisnki theory, but that doesn't make it, well, implausible!
Andy S.
|
Martin Anderson
Sergeant
Username: Scouse
Post Number: 12
Registered: 12-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, January 08, 2004 - 12:04 pm: | |
Hi everyone,
I have enjoyed your reactions to my points and the way others have responded. I have discovered a lot of new information but unfortunately I wouldn't take it as fact unless it has references so I can look at its source myself.
I shall try to address each point apologies if I miss anyone out as I'm a little short on time.
Glenn I like the deliberate error on your pert, haha. Is it really a 2nd language - what did you eat brother? I agree with you about Aberline. He could be the key but why he holds Chapman as his favoured suspect defeats even me. There must be more than meets the eye...almost like he is deliberatley covering up who he thinks JTR is.
Likewise JTR probably had superficial medical knowledge. Similar crimes have since proved that little or no professional skill is needed.
Robert: No-one said a Jew was more likely to have religious mania. I think what happened was that I said Kosminski was a credible suspect because of the evidence that he was a jew. I quote myself again:-
"Kosminski is still a suspect for me simply because he is named by at least 3 police officials, overwhelming circumstantial evidence and he matches the witness' description of a Jew."
Also about his religious mania I only really gleaned from AP's Jack The Myth - can I have any royalties for every time I quote this book, AP? But indeed not that much is known about him except that he walked the streets drinking dirty water...
Bullwinkle I was only trying to find out more information by putting my opinion across. It has worked and you made me laugh with your Anderson connection. It reminds me of my Aaron connection, haha.
Andrew anything is possible in the mind of a deranged killer - I don't think anyone can disagree with that.
RJ: I quote you from Anderson himself:-
"My words are meant to specify race, not religion."
You make a very technical and very valid point. I'm sorry I havent time to expand but dont forget this was Anderson's idea so does this mean the suspect was plain crazy and he was Jewish but he felt he had to protect Jewish people?
John Fogarty:
Thankyou. You have presented real evidence against Aaron Kosminski, especially if his age can be verified. I will be looking at Martin Fido's book next.
Regards
Martin Anderson
Analyst |
R.J. Palmer
Inspector
Username: Rjpalmer
Post Number: 256
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, January 08, 2004 - 12:56 pm: | |
Alan--Hi. Let's go slowly here; I want to understand your reasoning. Under what possible circumstance can Swanson confuse Cohen with Kosminsky? If Cohen was Anderson's suspect, and the Ripper, he was identified, caged, and dead by 20 October, 1889. The case is over. Even allowing that Swanson is writing after 1910, how does he confuse this remarkable fact with the events of Kosminski & the strange events of Kosminski's alleged indentification in 1891? It doesn't work. Or it least it certainly doesn't work for me. Because it would mean that the Ripper investigation was still ongoing in 1891---and why would it be if the Ripper was identified and buried in Oct 1889?? It is an internal contradiction, and a nearly unsurmountable objection to the Cohen theory in less one goes to a bizarre length, such as suggesting Anderson was lying or confused about his own suspect, or that Cohen somehow actually lived past Oct. 1889., etc.
Unfortunately I can't even agree with you that a confusion between Cohen and Nathan Kaminsky is plausible, or even probable. One must remember that when Martin first began his research, Macnaghten's "Kosminski" was entirely unidentified. So Martin began looking through various work-house and asylum records trying to find him. At some point, he found the name of a boot maker named 'Nathan Kaminsky' having been treated for syph in the Whitechapel Infirmary in March 1888 and released 'cured'. This is ALL we know about Kaminsky. The totality. He is merely a name in a ledger. I don't mean to be crass here, but he might have had a peg-leg for all we know. Despite this, Martin, quite rightly, made a note of him because the name was close enough to the still unidentified suspect 'Kosminski.' Meanwhile, Martin discovers the raving maniac David Aaron Cohen. This man's incarceration and death neatly explain the ceasation of the murders. His incarceration date also fit well with Macnaghten's statement. His name, however, is nothing like "Kaminski, Kosminski, or K-something-ski." And there is no indication that this isn't his name. And, further, there is no reason whatsoever to link him to someone treated for syph back in March. Why would there be?
In general, it's my belief that the historic record--Anderson's own statements (he certainly didn't confuse his own suspect in regards to 'unmentionable vices') the information we know about Aaron Kosminski, the dates of the Hove Home, etc., 'the non-detection' of the murderer, etc., all point to Aaron K. being the right man.
Meanwhile, there could not have been a police conspiracy to prevent a pogrom. The Lipski affair was entirely public, and the prosecution went on despite social unrest. Monro's statement regarding the Ripper (as well as the statement of Littlechild) were private reflections--not official lines. Besides, Anderson's accusations were hardly in the spirit of a man who cared about protecting the Jewish population. All i.m.h.o. Cheers, RP |
R.J. Palmer
Inspector
Username: Rjpalmer
Post Number: 257
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, January 08, 2004 - 1:44 pm: | |
unsurmountable=insurmountable
Alan=Andrew
my apologies, my mind is slowly (or not so slowly) slipping
(Message edited by rjpalmer on January 08, 2004) |
|
Use of these
message boards implies agreement and consent to our Terms of Use.
The views expressed here in no way reflect the views of the owners and
operators of Casebook: Jack the Ripper.
Our old message board content (45,000+ messages) is no longer available online, but a complete archive
is available on the Casebook At Home Edition, for 19.99 (US) plus shipping.
The "At Home" Edition works just like the real web site, but with absolutely no advertisements.
You can browse it anywhere - in the car, on the plane, on your front porch - without ever needing to hook up to
an internet connection. Click here to buy the Casebook At Home Edition.
|
|
|
|
