Charles Cross?

[Abby Normal]

It is hard to believe (as in the case of Hutchinson as well) that absolutely no one at Scotland Yard said "hey, do you think that guy that was seen bending over her body could have had anything to do with her murder?"

c.d.

Maybe they did, maybe they didn't-who knows? But what we do know is that there is nothing on record that says that either man was considered a suspect.

And by the way there have been enumerable killers who at some point in the investigation may have seemed suspicious, were actually suspects or persons of interest and were never caught. Happens all the time.

[Abby Normal]

"I don't really believe Cross was responsible for the murders. Why kill on the way to work?"

It's certainly a much better excuse for being late than my alarm didn't go off.

c.d.

HaHA. Now that's funny.

And yes that's one of my main problems with Lech as the killer.

[Fisherman]

Nahhh. Its not that bad. Its at least as good as the by the book, Kosminsky was the killer, Definitive History. And better than pretty much all the rest.

As Fish Noted the Lech leaning over the body when discovered by paul was unfortunate but really-what does it matter. It really does not reraaly change anything or hurt their theory. Lech is cutting her abdomen, hears/sees paul approaching, and quickly pulls down the skirt(to cover the wound he just made) and takes a step or two back-where paul encounters/sees him.

Lechmere certainly has red flags that need to be explained and their are about 100 worse suspects.

Now I think he was probably was just a witness who found the body, but there theory is plausable, and IMHO deserves more attention and research.

Thanks for that, Abby!

More research has been added. It has been revealed that Lechmere is consistent with the blood evidence, for example - the congealing points totally in his direction and pretty much closes nearly all of the window of time for another killer. There is precious little left with a normal congealing.

Plus Edward has found that Lechmereīs mother really did not live in 147 Cable Street at the time of the Stride murder. She lived in 1 Mary Ann Street.

Now, if we had been speaking of Kosinski or Druitt or Tumblety, news like that would be sensational. But now, we are speaking of Lechmere only, the non-starter who would have run...

His mother lived very few yards directly south of Berner Street as Stride was killed.

But by the time of the Pinchin Street torso, she had moved to 147 Cable.

Letīs hope that we can provide you with more evidence in the future. To me, it has long been quite enough.

[Abby Normal]

Fine enough - there can be no absolute ruling out that he DID use another name at work. But the odds are against it, that is wgat I am saying.

Hi Fish/Caz
personally, I think in all probability, he did use the name Cross at Pickfords-mainly because when he started there he was still under the auspices of his stepfather Cross.

However, we simply don't know.

But fish is correct-what we do know is that on record, every time he DID use Lechmere, Not Cross. Except in this case he told the police Cross.

Fish has a point.

Now, personally I think there is probably an innocent explanation-BUT it is something that needs an explanation-so if not red flag at least a yellow flag.
One of several yellow flags with Lech.

[Abby Normal]

Thanks for that, Abby!

More research has been added. It has been revealed that Lechmere is consistent with the blood evidence, for example - the congealing points totally in his direction and pretty much closes nearly all of the window of time for another killer. There is precious little left with a normal congealing.

Plus Edward has found that Lechmereīs mother really did not live in 147 Cable Street at the time of the Stride murder. She lived in 1 Mary Ann Street.

Now, if we had been speaking of Kosinski or Druitt or Tumblety, news like that would be sensational. But now, we are speaking of Lechmere only, the non-starter who would have run...

His mother lived very few yards directly south of Berner Street as Stride was killed.

But by the time of the Pinchin Street torso, she had moved to 147 Cable.

Letīs hope that we can provide you with more evidence in the future. To me, it has long been quite enough.

is Cable closer to Pinchin than Mary Anne st?

[Fisherman]

is Cable closer to Pinchin than Mary Anne st?

Actually no, it is much the same distance.

But Mary Ann Street is very much closer to the Berner Street murder site than 147 Cable, and therein lies the significance.

It is also directly south of the murder spot.

Once again, every little bit fits with the carman.

[Patrick S]

Thanks for that, Abby!

More research has been added. It has been revealed that Lechmere is consistent with the blood evidence, for example - the congealing points totally in his direction and pretty much closes nearly all of the window of time for another killer. There is precious little left with a normal congealing.

Plus Edward has found that Lechmereīs mother really did not live in 147 Cable Street at the time of the Stride murder. She lived in 1 Mary Ann Street.

Now, if we had been speaking of Kosinski or Druitt or Tumblety, news like that would be sensational. But now, we are speaking of Lechmere only, the non-starter who would have run...

His mother lived very few yards directly south of Berner Street as Stride was killed.

But by the time of the Pinchin Street torso, she had moved to 147 Cable.

Letīs hope that we can provide you with more evidence in the future. To me, it has long been quite enough.

Fish,

I haven't posted in quite some time. When last I did, I'm sure it was to go 'round and 'round re: Crossmere with Fisherman, et al. I'll say now what I've said before: Charles Cross - witness in the Nichols murder in Bucks Row -as Jack the Ripper is sensational. It's an appealing story. Fascinating. It would make a wonderful movie directed by David Fincher. I'd see it upon it's opening. See it again. Buy the BluRay. Watch it every few months......

Alas, I still can't buy in. I've sat down, taken the info presented on this board, sketched it out. I can't jump through the required hoops to plausibly see Crossmere as JtR. Then, it is ALSO true that I cannot jump through the required hoops to see ANY current "suspect" as the killer, either.

It is a great theory. I wish I'd have come up with it. I remain completely unconvinced. I understand there have been TV programs, interviews, and various events. When will we get a book? It would be nice to have something that puts everything together, all the facts, theories, suppositions, coincidences, etc. Something to study, reference, digest, and intelligently discuss upon these pages.....

PDS

[Fisherman]

Fish,

I haven't posted in quite some time. When last I did, I'm sure it was to go 'round and 'round re: Crossmere with Fisherman, et al. I'll say now what I've said before: Charles Cross - witness in the Nichols murder in Bucks Row -as Jack the Ripper is sensational. It's an appealing story. Fascinating. It would make a wonderful movie directed by David Fincher. I'd see it upon it's opening. See it again. Buy the BluRay. Watch it every few months......

Alas, I still can't buy in. I've sat down, taken the info presented on this board, sketched it out. I can't jump through the required hoops to plausibly see Crossmere as JtR. Then, it is ALSO true that I cannot jump through the required hoops to see ANY current "suspect" as the killer, either.

It is a great theory. I wish I'd have come up with it. I remain completely unconvinced. I understand there have been TV programs, interviews, and various events. When will we get a book? It would be nice to have something that puts everything together, all the facts, theories, suppositions, coincidences, etc. Something to study, reference, digest, and intelligently discuss upon these pages.....

PDS

Iīm sorry to say that I cannot give you any date for a book as of now.

[Fisherman]

If they had always known him as Cross at Pickfords, it would have made absolute sense to give the police that name, as a carman witness on his way to work...

Caz
X

Just saw this. Lechmere was not on his way to work when he gave his name to the police.
It is clear from the Echo reports that Mizen did not take the menīs names down, but only learnt the (false) name of the carman on the inquest day.

That means that Lechmere had a number of days to decide what he was to call himself when approaching the police.

It also means that this crucial point of yours is gone.

[caz]

Once again, it must be speculated that the killer was a psychopath. His deeds bear testimony to it.

Once again, it must be pointed out that Lechmere, if the killer, behaved in a manner that is consistent with psychopathy.

That is not to say that Charles Lechmere must have been the killer and that he must have been a psychopath. It is merely offering a backdrop against which everyting fits.

But that is such a lame and pointless argument, Fisherman. Anyone can offer a backdrop against which everything fits, simply by arguing that 'if x, y or z was the killer, everything fits'. But everything can be made to fit if you start with that little minx of a word 'if'.

Moreover, if I cannot say that Lechmdere would have been a psychopath if he was the killer, then I find it odd on the extreme that you are free to speculate that he was Cross at work.

If he was Cross at work, then he would have had a reason to use that name.

If he had a reason to use that name, then he was probably innocent.

The fact is that you conjured it all up, didnīt you?

Funny, is it not, that you should accuse me of circular reasoning?

Now this is where you keep going wrong. You are trying to make a case against Lechmere, using arguments that begin: 'If he was the killer...'. Well dur.

I am not trying to make a case either way, but simply pointing out that yours depends on Lechmere being known as Lechmere at Pickfords, but using the name Cross to help him get away with murder. Neither of us knows if this is even a possibility, because neither of us knows which name he was known by at work.

Simple as.

Love,

Caz
X

[caz]

Just saw this. Lechmere was not on his way to work when he gave his name to the police.
It is clear from the Echo reports that Mizen did not take the menīs names down, but only learnt the (false) name of the carman on the inquest day.

That means that Lechmere had a number of days to decide what he was to call himself when approaching the police.

It also means that this crucial point of yours is gone.

Not at all, Fisherman. I was not suggesting he was on his way to work when he gave his name to the police. My point is that he was volunteering his story to the police about what had happened on the murder night as he was making his way to work. Common sense tells us that he anticipated the police would treat his account as important evidence and were likely to seek confirmation not only of his identity and employment status, but also his stated movements, including what time he had arrived and whether this was his usual routine. After all, as you say, he had a number of days to think about it. More fool him, then, if he came up with the wizard wheeze of giving a name that wouldn't check out at his given place of work. And more fools the police, if they didn't bother to check a single detail, and believed the word of a total stranger found near the body, over one of their own officers, one PC Mizen.

Love,

Caz
X

[Harry D]

I think it's disingenuous to state that someone like Crossmere wouldn't have registered on the police radar. All kinds of men were arrested during the investigation.

[Trevor Marriott]

Nahhh. Its not that bad. Its at least as good as the by the book, Kosminsky was the killer, Definitive History. And better than pretty much all the rest.

As Fish Noted the Lech leaning over the body when discovered by paul was unfortunate but really-what does it matter. It really does not reraaly change anything or hurt their theory. Lech is cutting her abdomen, hears/sees paul approaching, and quickly pulls down the skirt(to cover the wound he just made) and takes a step or two back-where paul encounters/sees him.

Lechmere certainly has red flags that need to be explained and their are about 100 worse suspects.

Now I think he was probably was just a witness who found the body, but there theory is plausable, and IMHO deserves more attention and research.

So are you going to look at every one who finds a murder victim as being the killer ?

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Fisherman]

But that is such a lame and pointless argument, Fisherman. Anyone can offer a backdrop against which everything fits, simply by arguing that 'if x, y or z was the killer, everything fits'. But everything can be made to fit if you start with that little minx of a word 'if'.



Now this is where you keep going wrong. You are trying to make a case against Lechmere, using arguments that begin: 'If he was the killer...'. Well dur.

I am not trying to make a case either way, but simply pointing out that yours depends on Lechmere being known as Lechmere at Pickfords, but using the name Cross to help him get away with murder. Neither of us knows if this is even a possibility, because neither of us knows which name he was known by at work.

Simple as.

Love,

Caz
X

Nope. Does not work. You are every bit as circular in your argument, and you need to realize that.

And I know what name he was known by with the authorities.

Simple as, Toots.

[Fisherman]

Not at all, Fisherman. I was not suggesting he was on his way to work when he gave his name to the police. My point is that he was volunteering his story to the police about what had happened on the murder night as he was making his way to work. Common sense tells us that he anticipated the police would treat his account as important evidence and were likely to seek confirmation not only of his identity and employment status, but also his stated movements, including what time he had arrived and whether this was his usual routine. After all, as you say, he had a number of days to think about it. More fool him, then, if he came up with the wizard wheeze of giving a name that wouldn't check out at his given place of work. And more fools the police, if they didn't bother to check a single detail, and believed the word of a total stranger found near the body, over one of their own officers, one PC Mizen.

Love,

Caz
X

If he gave the name Lechmere, it would check out with the records and with all other authorities.

If he gave the name Cross, it would not check out with the records, nor qould it check out with any other authority.

If he gave the name Lechmere and the police found out that he called himself Cross at work and asked why, he could easily explain it.

If he gave the name Cross and the police found out that the records and authorities had him down by another name, he would be in trouble.

I really cannot spell it out much more clearly to you.

He had time to think. Days of time. Why would he not say "My name is Charles Lechmere, but some know me as Charles Cross"?

You have just about the worst argument I have heard.

Keep it, Toots.