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:
Witnesses: Caroline Maxwell Alibi ? - by Debra A 57 minutes ago.
Witnesses: Caroline Maxwell Alibi ? - by jerryd 4 hours ago.
Witnesses: Caroline Maxwell Alibi ? - by DJA 7 hours ago.
Mary Jane Kelly: Mary Kellys Inquest - by DJA 7 hours ago.
Rippercast: Colin Wilson: Jack the Ripper Conference in Ipswich, 1996 - by Herlock Sholmes 8 hours ago.
General Suspect Discussion: Favorite suspect/s? - by Abby Normal 8 hours ago.

Most Popular Threads:
Witnesses: Caroline Maxwell Alibi ? - (29 posts)
General Suspect Discussion: Favorite suspect/s? - (13 posts)
Mary Jane Kelly: Mary Kellys Inquest - (5 posts)
Rippercast: Colin Wilson: Jack the Ripper Conference in Ipswich, 1996 - (3 posts)
A6 Murders: A6 Rebooted - (2 posts)
Witnesses: Mizen's inquest statement reconstructed - (1 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
  #1281  
Old 06-13-2018, 07:13 AM
Abby Normal Abby Normal is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 6,091
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fisherman View Post
I have pointed out how Lechmere may have suggested to Paul that they should tell whichever PC they found that there was a policeman present in Bucks Row. The idea would be to guarantee that they were not detained and could walk on to their working places with no further delay.

I do favour the scenario where Paul is out of earshot, though, since I think Mizens leaving Paul out together with the passage "the other man, who went dwon Hanbury Street" points us in that direction. It also applies that Lechmere may have been unwilling to engage Paul in a lie that could be disclosed at a later date, giving Lechmere trouble.

Any which way, the scam is something that cannot be in any way excluded - and the phrasing suggested by Mizen is one that is in exact line with something that would more or less guarantee the carmen free passage.

That is either another coincidence - or not. And it is reasonably one of the matters that made Scobie say "A jury would not like that".
Thanks Fish for responding to this. I note no one else has.
I wonder why-its a definite possibility.
__________________
"Is all that we see or seem
but a dream within a dream?"

-Edgar Allan Poe


"...the man and the peaked cap he is said to have worn
quite tallies with the descriptions I got of him."

-Frederick G. Abberline
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #1282  
Old 06-13-2018, 07:15 AM
Fisherman Fisherman is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 17,129
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jon Guy View Post
You mean he would have just legged it from the scene of the crime, and not had to:

1. Scam Paul
2. Scam Mizen
3. Give statement to Police
4. Attend Coroners Inquest



(drum roll) Agreed, Christer
My money`s on the phantom killer.
Yes, that is the only way we can perpetuate the Ripper myth, so I see the allure.

The really funny thing is when we look at other suspectologists. Some say that Lechmere disturbed Kosminski, some say he disturbed Druitt, Levy, Bury etc. Itīs quite Pythonesque.

By the way, for you to agree with me, you really need to know what I think first. And if you do, then you also realize that agreeing with me is naming Lechmere the Ripper.

So agree away, Jon!
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #1283  
Old 06-13-2018, 07:15 AM
Elamarna Elamarna is online now
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: South london
Posts: 4,162
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fisherman View Post
We donīt know that other people did notn have red flags pertaining to them. Thatīs just brilliant! How could I have forgotten this?

As for heavily interpreted, I take helium light on such nonsense.

The man walked right through the epicenter of the murder spree at the relevant hours. The man is on record as having disagreed with Mizen over what was said, and the wording Mizen offers is totally consistent with a wish to pass the police unsearched.

Those are two gigantic, humongous, collosal red flags in any sane world. Then again, this isnīt a world noted for itīs sanity, is it? It is cuckoo country.

I sometimes forget that.

"Through the Epicenter of the murder spree at the relevant hours"

Really?

Nichols - yes

Chapman - probably on his route, but the timing is disputed.

Stride - Not on his route, the suggestion he was going or coming from his mothers is unprovable and hence is not evidence; just unsupported theory.

Eddowes - as Stride

Kelly, close to a possible route, however TOD is problematic, either too early or too late to support on his walk to work..

So no red flag.


Steve
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #1284  
Old 06-13-2018, 07:18 AM
Abby Normal Abby Normal is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 6,091
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Elamarna View Post
"Through the Epicenter of the murder spree at the relevant hours"

Really?

Nichols - yes

Chapman - probably on his route, but the timing is disputed.

Stride - Not on his route, the suggestion he was going or coming from his mothers is unprovable and hence is not evidence; just unsupported theory.

Eddowes - as Stride

Kelly, close to a possible route, however TOD is problematic, either too early or too late to support on his walk to work..

So no red flag.


Steve
he el

Quote:
So no red flag.
well aman did give her a red hanky-so perhaps a little one? ; )
__________________
"Is all that we see or seem
but a dream within a dream?"

-Edgar Allan Poe


"...the man and the peaked cap he is said to have worn
quite tallies with the descriptions I got of him."

-Frederick G. Abberline
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #1285  
Old 06-13-2018, 07:19 AM
Fisherman Fisherman is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 17,129
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Abby Normal View Post
Thanks Fish for responding to this. I note no one else has.
I wonder why-its a definite possibility.
Surely you donīt wonder why? You are being ironic, yes?

The simple truth of the matter is that the naysayers want to perpetuate a picture where the Mizen scam goes away if it can be proven that Paul was within earshot. They donīt want any discussion of another alternative.

Alternatives are only meant to dissolve any suggestion of red flags that attach to Lechmere. Not to open up pathways to enable the scam.

"In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king". That is a quotation I like a lot, and in all probability something that will have the naysayer squad speaking of pots and kettles.

Let them.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #1286  
Old 06-13-2018, 07:22 AM
Abby Normal Abby Normal is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 6,091
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jon Guy View Post
Exactly Abby.
Cross was seen doing nothing suspicious by Paul, but the others could have been doing anything with the body, dead or alive.
Hi Jon
I'm a little confused by this-can you please explain?
__________________
"Is all that we see or seem
but a dream within a dream?"

-Edgar Allan Poe


"...the man and the peaked cap he is said to have worn
quite tallies with the descriptions I got of him."

-Frederick G. Abberline
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #1287  
Old 06-13-2018, 07:22 AM
Fisherman Fisherman is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 17,129
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by caz View Post
Could Mizen have thought, after Paul's account was published, that he might be asked why he had left his beat on the sole word of two workmen whose details he had failed to take? Would it not have helped him to add that he understood he was wanted by a fellow officer [which was technically true as he was immediately sent for the ambulance], even if this later appeared to have been a minor misunderstanding? He'd have covered himself, wouldn't he?

After all, Mizen quickly appreciated, if he hadn't done initially, that both men had been at the scene of a brutal murder [not long after the brutal murder of Tabram] and he had let them go on their way without asking a single question. The only response we have from him is "All right", isn't it? If neither carman had gone to the papers or come forward voluntarily, I'm not sure if or when Mizen would have dared mention the encounter, because if he did they would both instantly be treated as persons of interest, but with bugger all to go on regarding their identities, movements or current whereabouts!

Love,

Caz
X
"Could Mizen have thought....?"

Yes, he could have thought anything - just look at all the fancy suggestions that are offered on his account out here!

And I donīt think that the carmen would have been regarded as persons of interest at all, Caz - somebody had to find the body, donīt yaīknow.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #1288  
Old 06-13-2018, 07:23 AM
Fisherman Fisherman is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 17,129
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Abby Normal View Post
Hi Jon
I'm a little confused by this-can you please explain?
Yes, Iīm especially intrigued by how Jon suggests that people can do things dead or alive...
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #1289  
Old 06-13-2018, 07:26 AM
Fisherman Fisherman is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 17,129
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Elamarna View Post
"Through the Epicenter of the murder spree at the relevant hours"

Really?

Nichols - yes

Chapman - probably on his route, but the timing is disputed.

Stride - Not on his route, the suggestion he was going or coming from his mothers is unprovable and hence is not evidence; just unsupported theory.

Eddowes - as Stride

Kelly, close to a possible route, however TOD is problematic, either too early or too late to support on his walk to work..

So no red flag.


Steve
The epicentre is the area between Old Montague Street and Hanbury Street where Tabram, Nichols, Chapman and Kelly perished. Lechmere passed through there ate times that are seemingly consistent with all the murders, including Chapmans that was performed at the latest 4.30 according to Phillips.

If you donīt see the potential relevance of this, then I wonīt point out to you what that says about you. There has been too many degrading things said out here already.

The fact that you want to use the TOD for Kelly as given by Bond and Phillips as if either man must be correct says a whole deal about your bias. The bias of never admitting any possible guilt on Lechmeresī behalf, no matter how ridiculous an excuse you must use. (And this is not the time to go on about how you have never said that Lechmere cannot be guilty; it would be very unbecoming).

Thank you for the revelation, Steve. One of many!

Last edited by Fisherman : 06-13-2018 at 07:31 AM.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #1290  
Old 06-13-2018, 07:28 AM
Premium Member
caz caz is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 6,213
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert View Post
Maybe Mizen wanted to pay Paul back for his newspaper interview by relegating him to a bit part player.
Something of the sort, Robert, wouldn't surprise me in the least. Mizen would have been smarting and in damage limitation mode after Paul's very public condemnation of his attitude, especially if he had also failed to report his brief encounter with both men. Downplaying Paul's role could have been a snub, but he missed a trick if Paul really hadn't said a word or was far enough away not to have known or cared what Cross was saying.

Mizen could have made much more of this when asked by Baxter if Cross was with anyone else at the time. We can all imagine why Baxter asked the question, if Mizen was saying that 'a' man [Cross] spoke to him and made no mention initially of another man being there too. The newspaper account had Paul telling Mizen about the woman down, so Baxter understandably needed to clear this up and establish there were indeed two men involved in the reporting. It was Paul according to Paul, with the other man reduced to a cameo performance, while it was just Cross according to Mizen - until he admitted this other man - the cop hater - was there too. In light of Paul's scathing account, this was the golden opportunity for Mizen to put the boot in and say the other man kept his distance while Cross did the talking, if that was the truth of the matter, but no - he let Paul off the hook. Why? Because he knew very well that both men had reported the matter together and that Cross would confirm it?

Love,

Caz
X
__________________
"Comedy is simply a funny way of being serious." Peter Ustinov


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 12:10 AM.


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