Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Swanson : The Life & Times Of A Victorian Detective ( Wood )

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

  • #16
    Originally posted by Chris Phillips View Post
    The more time goes on, the less I understand the workings of the modern Internet, but when I looked on Amazon the only option it offered me was Kindle, and it offered it to me free if I had a trial of "Kindle Unlimited". So there it is for free. I have been expecting to buy a copy, of course, but apparently the free Kindle is the way to read it now.

    Having had a quick look, I'm surprised Adam doesn't think that Macnaghten's and Swanson's "Kosminski" was Aaron. But I suppose life would be very boring if we all thought the same thing.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by Chris Phillips View Post
      Having had a quick look, I'm surprised Adam doesn't think that Macnaghten's and Swanson's "Kosminski" was Aaron. But I suppose life would be very boring if we all thought the same thing.

      Well there is no evidence to suggest he was is there, its all wild speculation ?



      www.trevormarriott.co.uk

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by Chris Phillips View Post
        Having had a quick look, I'm surprised Adam doesn't think that Macnaghten's and Swanson's "Kosminski" was Aaron. But I suppose life would be very boring if we all thought the same thing.

        Not that boredom is the worst thing in the world.

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by Trevor Marriott View Post
          Well there is no evidence to suggest he was is there, its all wild speculation ?
          No one ever argues that Ostrog wasn't Ostrog, or Druitt wasn't Druitt, or Tumblety wasn't Tumblety, or Klosowski wasn't Klosowski, because they didn't fit the accepted profile of the Ripper.

          Only in the case of Kosminski do people toy with the idea of placing the horse in front of the cart instead of behind it.

          It interests me from a philosophical standpoint, but I can't quite wrap my mind around the impulse.

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by Chris Phillips View Post
            Having had a quick look, I'm surprised Adam doesn't think that Macnaghten's and Swanson's "Kosminski" was Aaron. But I suppose life would be very boring if we all thought the same thing.
            It's the "died shortly afterwards" bit that throws the question open as to who it was that Swanson referred to in the Marginalia. I'd have no problem believing the enfeebled former hairdresser, Aaron Kosminski, was Swanson's and Macnaghten's "Kosminski" if Swanson hadn't said the Ripper was dead at least fifteen years earlier, in 1895 (PMG May 7th).

            Least anyone counter this by arguing that Swanson, in 1895, could have meant Druitt, or a deceased man other than "Kosminski", the story was published at least a year after the Macnaghten Memorandum was written, mentioning "Kosminski". Since Swanson was familiar with the Ripper investigations, it seems inconceivable that he would have been unaware of Kosminski at that point in time.

            Or so the reasoning goes....

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by Scott Nelson View Post
              It's the "died shortly afterwards" bit that throws the question open as to who it was that Swanson referred to in the Marginalia. I'd have no problem believing the enfeebled former hairdresser, Aaron Kosminski, was Swanson's and Macnaghten's "Kosminski" if Swanson hadn't said the Ripper was dead at least fifteen years earlier, in 1895 (PMG May 7th).

              Least anyone counter this by arguing that Swanson, in 1895, could have meant Druitt, or a deceased man other than "Kosminski", the story was published at least a year after the Macnaghten Memorandum was written, mentioning "Kosminski". Since Swanson was familiar with the Ripper investigations, it seems inconceivable that he would have been unaware of Kosminski at that point in time.

              Or so the reasoning goes....

              I just find it so much easier to believe that Swanson was mistaken about when Kosminski died, than that there was another man known to the police as Kosminski - but called something different in all the official records - who lived in his brother's house in Whitechapel, practised self-abuse and was committed to Colney Hatch.



              But everyone has their own opinion.

              Comment


              • #22
                Since Swanson was familiar with the Ripper investigations, it seems inconceivable that he would have been unaware of Kosminski at that point in time.
                -Scott-

                One possible yet unlikely alternative is that when he was approached by the press in the midst of the Grainger incident, he simply said the Ripper was dead to put an end to any resurrection of Ripper talk.

                Which begs the obvious question of why didn't the media press for the name of the murderer......
                .
                To Join JTR Forums :
                Contact Howard@jtrforums.com

                Comment


                • #23
                  Yes, I agree How. Or why, at least 15 years later, Swanson seems to stick to the conclusion that he was dead, even though Kosminski was still alive.

                  That's a long time for someone who was in charge of a major investigation not to keep tabs on a prime suspect.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by Howard Brown View Post
                    Which begs the obvious question of why didn't the media press for the name of the murderer......
                    Without the advantages of the French system, they had no hope of prying an answer "from Swanson's unwilling lips..."

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Scott:

                      One other thing about this matter is the question of how many other times during Swanson's career/post-career life was he queried as to the name of the man.

                      Being in charge of the investigation, he may have said the Ripper was dead numerous times to colleagues.
                      To Join JTR Forums :
                      Contact Howard@jtrforums.com

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by Chris Phillips View Post
                        I just find it so much easier to believe that Swanson was mistaken about when Kosminski died, than that there was another man known to the police as Kosminski - but called something different in all the official records - who lived in his brother's house in Whitechapel, practised self-abuse and was committed to Colney Hatch.
                        If you're suggesting someone like Cohen, we don't know that he didn't have a family (record space in Admissions register left blank) or didn't practice self abuse (many men who were confined did, like Joseph Isaacs).

                        Interestingly, Cohen's death certificate repeats exactly the same information (or lack of) more than a year after his death -- same age, same address, no relatives. It's almost as if the info was just copied to the certificate and nothing new was added or found in the ten months he was alive in Colney Hatch.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by Howard Brown View Post
                          Scott:

                          One other thing about this matter is the question of how many other times during Swanson's career/post-career life was he queried as to the name of the man.

                          Being in charge of the investigation, he may have said the Ripper was dead numerous times to colleagues.
                          Yes, certainly. But I wonder why Swanson would lie to himself in private writings.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            All this bombardment of modern speculation much to Simon Wood's chagrin...

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by Scott Nelson View Post
                              If you're suggesting someone like Cohen, we don't know that he didn't have a family (record space in Admissions register left blank) or didn't practice self abuse (many men who were confined did, like Joseph Isaacs).

                              I'm not suggesting we do know any of that. I'm saying I find it easier to believe Swanson was wrong, than that by chance there was someone else called (or rather not called, by anyone except the police) Kosminski, who also fitted those other circumstances too.


                              And it is right to make so much of Swanson thinking Kosminski died soon after he was committed, but to ignore the fact that Macnaghten thought he was still living in 1894?

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by Scott Nelson View Post
                                All this bombardment of modern speculation much to Simon Wood's chagrin...
                                ...or delight.

                                Speaking of Simon, he writes of a request made by Sir Robert Anderson in March 1891 that the Yard be informed if a certain lunatic named George Hall was ever released from Colney Hatch. We know Macnaghten made a similar request in reference to Ostrog--a Ripper suspect. Should we be concerned that no similar attention was paid in the case of Aaron Kosminski, even though he was also sent to Colney Hatch at around the same time as Hall (and Ostrog in Banstead)? And, who the Hell was Hall anyway?

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X