Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The Best Fit For The Jewish Suspect

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

  • #31
    Originally posted by Scott Nelson View Post
    I saw it as left blank for Cohen. In fact his death certificate (filled out in January 1890) simply transfers all of the vital information over from the Colney Hatch registers with no changes to anything (like aging).
    I'm going by what the A-Z says. Perhaps the A-Z is wrong, and a blank space was left, though presumably that still means the information was unknown (unless the person who made the entry was being idle or deliberately awkward). The medical officer noted that the police brought him in, having found him wandering at large. I can't see how to reconcile that with the idea that he had been under police observation in his brother's house.
    Originally posted by Scott Nelson View Post
    "I don't believe Martin Fido would ever have proposed Cohen if he'd found Aaron Kozminski sooner"

    Martin said otherwise, in fact he wrote the Cohen book and several articles supporting Cohen as Anderson's suspect after he found Aaron Kosminski.
    No. According to Fido he already had the book "in print and ready to go", and then he was told there was space for an appendix. He then searched a Colney Hatch record he hadn't seen before, and for the first time found a reference to Aaron Kozminski.
    http://www.ripperologist.co.uk/pdf/ripperologist164.pdf

    Originally posted by Scott Nelson View Post
    I agree with him that there was good reason to suspect that the two men had been confused. Cohen's first name was "Aaron." Cohen was likely changed from something else. It was virtually absent in the Polish records databases I searched some years ago, Coen or Koch being more common.
    You are saying you think there is good reason to think David Cohen was confused with Aaron Kozminski?

    I thought you were saying you thought "Kosminski" referred to someone else of that name, not Aaron at all.

    I'm quite open to the idea other suspects were confused with Aaron Kozminski. It's the idea that "Kosminski" doesn't refer to Aaron at all that makes no sense to me.

    Comment


    • #32
      The Whitechapel Union workhouse register shows the Family Relations space as blank. That shouldn't necessarily mean "none" or "unknown." When Cohen was sent to the asylum, the same information was transcribed in the Colney Hatch register. If there was an informant, they may not have wished their name to be associated with Cohen.

      We don't know where Cohen was picked up. He may have been under surveillance and slipped away. This may have happened shortly after the November murder of Mary Kelly, but before any formal identification proceeding.

      Fido still preferred Cohen over Aaron Kosminski. I said that he wrote his original book around Cohen and still preferred him over the hairdresser, Aaron. I know he included an addendum on Aaron Kosminski in the book. I'm not sure what you're getting at here.

      I'm saying Cohen's European name could have been Kosminski, and if his first name was "Aaron", which it apparently was, there's two guys in Whitechapel with the same first and last names. So the antecedents of both could have been mixed together by mistake. Aaron Abrahams (Kosminski), Aaron Davis(d) Cohen (Kosminski).

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by Scott Nelson View Post
        The Whitechapel Union workhouse register shows the Family Relations space as blank. That shouldn't necessarily mean "none" or "unknown." When Cohen was sent to the asylum, the same information was transcribed in the Colney Hatch register. If there was an informant, they may not have wished their name to be associated with Cohen.

        We don't know where Cohen was picked up. He may have been under surveillance and slipped away. This may have happened shortly after the November murder of Mary Kelly, but before any formal identification proceeding.

        Fido still preferred Cohen over Aaron Kosminski. I said that he wrote his original book around Cohen and still preferred him over the hairdresser, Aaron. I know he included an addendum on Aaron Kosminski in the book. I'm not sure what you're getting at here.

        I'm saying Cohen's European name could have been Kosminski, and if his first name was "Aaron", which it apparently was, there's two guys in Whitechapel with the same first and last names. So the antecedents of both could have been mixed together by mistake. Aaron Abrahams (Kosminski), Aaron Davis(d) Cohen (Kosminski).
        Hi Scott,

        What admission record are you referring to?

        Gary

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by Gary Barnett View Post
          Hi Scott,

          What admission record are you referring to?

          Gary
          You'll find it transcribed under the name David Cahan.

          He entered Stepney Workhouse, 7 December 1888, shipped off to Colney Hatch 21 December.

          It states he speaks Hebrew, so presumably he wasn't an Irishman ;-)

          edit: I should have written that he was of the 'Hebrew' faith; it doesn't actually state that he spoke anything.

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by R. J. Palmer View Post
            You'll find it transcribed under the name David Cahan.

            He entered Stepney Workhouse, 7 December 1888, shipped off to Colney Hatch 21 December.

            It states he speaks Hebrew, so presumably he wasn't an Irishman ;-)
            Ah, thanks, RJ.

            It was the Whitechapel Union Infirmary, wasnít it? He had been brought there by PC 91H from the Thames Police Court. As you say, his religion was recorded as Hebrew. His period of settlement was left blank which may suggest they were not sure that he was actually chargeable to Whitechapel. I wonder why they chose Whitechapel rather than STGITE?

            Apologies if this has already been figured out.

            Comment


            • #36
              Yes, Whitechapel Union Infirmary, excuse me.

              By the way, I once found a Nathan Kaminsky, roughly the right age, born Russia, who emigrated to the U.S.A. (sailed from Liverpool) in the early 20th Century.

              He's listed as a crossing guard (and evidently a rabbi!), but if this is the same bloke Fido found in the infirmary records suffering from syphilis in 1888, he must have returned to Mother Russia, because one of his children was born there in 1891. (Unless he married a woman with a child, I suppose).

              It would take a lot of work to trace him back to Russia/Poland, and I guess I'm not that dedicated.

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by R. J. Palmer View Post
                Yes, Whitechapel Union Infirmary, excuse me.

                By the way, I once found a Nathan Kaminsky, roughly the right age, born Russia, who emigrated to the U.S.A. (sailed from Liverpool) in the early 20th Century.

                He's listed as a crossing guard (and evidently a rabbi!), but if this is the same bloke Fido found in the infirmary records suffering from syphilis in 1888, he must have returned to Mother Russia, because one of his children was born there in 1891. (Unless he married a woman with a child, I suppose).

                It would take a lot of work to trace him back to Russia/Poland, and I guess I'm not that dedicated.
                Interesting. Itís not an aspect of the case Iíve ever really focussed on.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by Scott Nelson View Post
                  The Whitechapel Union workhouse register shows the Family Relations space as blank.
                  It's actually the Colney Hatch admissions and Discharge Register, sorry. As I said, the workhouse simply transferred all of the relevant info. over to the asylum, which had the extra column information the workhouse didn't, so they left it blank (which still does not preclude a brother or a family for Cohen).

                  Martin Fido abandoned the idea that the bootmaker, Nathan Kaminski, was a misreading for Cohen, who may have been "Kosminski", according to Fido. Similarly, when Keith Skinner (I think it was him) found the Thames Magistrates Court record of the brothel raid on December 7th, 1888 where Cohen's name is recorded as "Aaron Davis Cohen", he (Fido) abandoned the idea that "David Cohen" was just a type of police-assigned "John Doe" name.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    [Deleted owing to format problems]

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      These institutions generated many different records about patients. The one transcribed in the A-Z (2010 edition, p. 97) appears from its format to be one of the Colney Hatch "Case book for male patients" (presumably the one with reference H12/CH/B/13/037). The A-Z transcript includes the words "Nearest relative Unknown". Unless someone has a photo of that particular record in front of them, I don't think the authors should be accused of inaccuracy.

                      Regarding Martin Fido's book, what I said was that I don't think he would have proposed David Cohen as a suspect if he had found a record of Aaron Kozminski earlier. In response, Scott said he had written the book proposing David Cohen after he had found Aaron Kozminski. My point is that that wasn't the case - according to Fido, the book was essentially complete ("in print and ready to go") by the time he found Aaron Kozminski.

                      And regarding the "alternative Kozminski" theory, I'm afraid I'm still not clear about what is being suggested. I had assumed previously that the idea was that the suspect was a different Kozminski, and that Aaron Kozminski wasn't ever suspected by the police, only by modern Ripperologists. Now Scott seems to be saying he thinks the police confused two different Kozminskis (perhaps even two different Aaron Kozminskis).

                      That's a very different suggestion. As I said, I can believe Aaron Kozminski was confused with another suspect. But what I can't understand is why if Aaron Kozminski was suspected in the first place, there's any reason for that other suspect also to be called Kozminski.

                      Why couldn't the name have come from one suspect - Aaron Kozminski - and other aspects, such as the early death and perhaps Stepney Workhouse, from the other? That would be much more plausible, because it would dispose of the objection that no alternative death or workhouse/asylum inmate with the name Kozminski has been found.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by Chris Phillips View Post
                        These institutions generated many different records about patients. The one transcribed in the A-Z (2010 edition, p. 97) appears from its format to be one of the Colney Hatch "Case book for male patients" (presumably the one with reference H12/CH/B/13/037). The A-Z transcript includes the words "Nearest relative Unknown". Unless someone has a photo of that particular record in front of them, I don't think the authors should be accused of inaccuracy.

                        Regarding Martin Fido's book, what I said was that I don't think he would have proposed David Cohen as a suspect if he had found a record of Aaron Kozminski earlier. In response, Scott said he had written the book proposing David Cohen after he had found Aaron Kozminski. My point is that that wasn't the case - according to Fido, the book was essentially complete ("in print and ready to go&quot by the time he found Aaron Kozminski.

                        And regarding the "alternative Kozminski" theory, I'm afraid I'm still not clear about what is being suggested. I had assumed previously that the idea was that the suspect was a different Kozminski, and that Aaron Kozminski wasn't ever suspected by the police, only by modern Ripperologists. Now Scott seems to be saying he thinks the police confused two different Kozminskis (perhaps even two different Aaron Kozminskis).

                        That's a very different suggestion. As I said, I can believe Aaron Kozminski was confused with another suspect. But what I can't understand is why if Aaron Kozminski was suspected in the first place, there's any reason for that other suspect also to be called Kozminski.

                        Why couldn't the name have come from one suspect - Aaron Kozminski - and other aspects, such as the early death and perhaps Stepney Workhouse, from the other? That would be much more plausible, because it would dispose of the objection that no alternative death or workhouse/asylum inmate with the name Kozminski has been found.
                        It all goes to show that the suspect status of Aaron Kosminski is totally flawed. www.trevormarriott.co.uk

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Originally posted by Chris Phillips View Post
                          Regarding Martin Fido's book, what I said was that I don't think he would have proposed David Cohen as a suspect if he had found a record of Aaron Kozminski earlier. In response, Scott said he had written the book proposing David Cohen after he had found Aaron Kozminski. My point is that that wasn't the case - according to Fido, the book was essentially complete ("in print and ready to go") by the time he found Aaron Kozminski.
                          Yes, sorry. My point being that even after Aaron Kozminski was found, Fido still preferred Cohen.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Originally posted by Chris Phillips View Post
                            Now Scott seems to be saying he thinks the police confused two different Kozminskis (perhaps even two different Aaron Kozminskis).

                            That's a very different suggestion. As I said, I can believe Aaron Kozminski was confused with another suspect. But what I can't understand is why if Aaron Kozminski was suspected in the first place, there's any reason for that other suspect also to be called Kozminski.

                            Why couldn't the name have come from one suspect - Aaron Kozminski - and other aspects, such as the early death and perhaps Stepney Workhouse, from the other? That would be much more plausible, because it would dispose of the objection that no alternative death or workhouse/asylum inmate with the name Kozminski has been found.
                            Yes, it's a suggestion that they were confused partly because of the similarity of names, if Cohen's European name was Kosminski. If his last name was just Cohen, then the confusion hypothesis is weakened, but not totally invalidated in my opinion. And as you say, two different men could have been described as one.

                            If the Swanson Marginalia hadn't said that the suspect died soon after confinement, I'd have no problem believing Aaron Kosminski was Anderson's Polish Jew suspect.




                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Originally posted by Chris Phillips View Post
                              These institutions generated many different records about patients. The one transcribed in the A-Z (2010 edition, p. 97) appears from its format to be one of the Colney Hatch "Case book for male patients" (presumably the one with reference H12/CH/B/13/037). The A-Z transcript includes the words "Nearest relative Unknown". Unless someone has a photo of that particular record in front of them, I don't think the authors should be accused of inaccuracy.
                              I wouldn't intentionally accuse the A-Z authors of inaccuracy. When I looked at the Colney Hatch Admissions and Discharge Register, I remember seeing a blank space under the column for relatives or family. I don't have the transcript any longer and can't find the link, but there was no word "Unknown" there that I can recall. That may have been an interpretation on the author's part. Sorry, I don't have the 2010 edition of the A-Z to refer to.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Originally posted by Scott Nelson View Post

                                I wouldn't intentionally accuse the A-Z authors of inaccuracy. When I looked at the Colney Hatch Admissions and Discharge Register, I remember seeing a blank space under the column for relatives or family. I don't have the transcript any longer and can't find the link, but there was no word "Unknown" there that I can recall. That may have been an interpretation on the author's part. Sorry, I don't have the 2010 edition of the A-Z to refer to.
                                Just to be clear, what I'm saying is that I don't think the transcript in the A-Z is from the same record you are talking about - the Admission and Discharge register. From the column headings, it looks more like a different record - the "Case book for male patients". So it may be that it was left blank in the record you saw, but said "Unknown" in the record transcribed in the A-Z.

                                In Aaron Kozminski's case, among the Mile End Old Town records was a reception order with a statement of particulars. The latter included "Names, Christian names, and full postal addresses of one or more relatives of the patient" and "Name of the person to whom notice of death to be sent, and full postal address if not already given". If there were one for David Cohen, it might contain more information than was copied into the Colney Hatch records. But maybe the reception orders haven't survived for Whitechapel. I can't see them on the LMA online catalogue, but it's pretty difficult to find things there even when you already have the details.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X