Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The Lechmere/Cross "name issue"

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

  • Originally posted by Fisherman View Post
    I think that each unprofessional witness was told to state name, address and working place. I am sure somebody on the boards can confirm or deny this, but I believe a phrase like " State your name, address and place of work" was uttered when a witness took the stand. And that would have been the case for Lechmere too.
    However, I believe he may have skipped over the adddress, and that it may have passed unremarked upon. [/B]
    There's the problem right there. The idea that Lechmere was the only witness who was not required to state or confirm his address! i.e. that he was allowed not to do it.

    His written deposition was being taken at the same time as he was giving his oral evidence so of course that detail would not have been omitted.

    From the fact that only one newspaper reported his address you've built up a whole fantasy about what happened in court despite the fact that variations of personal witness details across all the newspapers are clear for everyone to see.

    It's a non-runner. There could not possibly have been a 'gamble' by Lechmere. He simply must have confirmed his name and address for the inquest but whether the reporters all heard it properly is another matter.

    So I'm suggesting that all we probably have here is an issue with acoustics, the Star reporter having correctly heard his address, although possibly not his full name hence the reference in the Star to "Carman Cross" (thus strongly suggesting that the reporter did not get his details from a clerk).

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Fisherman
      We know for certain that Charles Lechmere was found standing in the street, close to the body of Polly Nichols
      No, we can't say that for certain. To say that Cross was "found" and "close to the body" are examples of what I might call "directed language", which clearly impart a more sinister slant to Cross's actions than an objective reading of the evidence permits. (See my post yesterday.) That's not to say he wasn't up to anything sinister, but it's clearly inadmissible to assert that we "know such things for certain" when, in reality, they are subjective interpretations of the evidence.
      Last edited by Sam Flynn; 02-04-2017, 05:53 AM.
      Kind regards, Sam Flynn

      "Suche Nullen" (Nietzsche, Götzendämmerung, 1888)

      Comment


      • Fisherman always oversells the fact that Lechmere was at the crime scene, as opposed to any other named suspect who could feasibly have been there. How many serial killers are actually found with the murder victim that aren't caught?

        Comment


        • Originally posted by David Orsam View Post
          There's the problem right there. The idea that Lechmere was the only witness who was not required to state or confirm his address! i.e. that he was allowed not to do it.

          His written deposition was being taken at the same time as he was giving his oral evidence so of course that detail would not have been omitted.

          From the fact that only one newspaper reported his address you've built up a whole fantasy about what happened in court despite the fact that variations of personal witness details across all the newspapers are clear for everyone to see.

          It's a non-runner. There could not possibly have been a 'gamble' by Lechmere. He simply must have confirmed his name and address for the inquest but whether the reporters all heard it properly is another matter.

          So I'm suggesting that all we probably have here is an issue with acoustics, the Star reporter having correctly heard his address, although possibly not his full name hence the reference in the Star to "Carman Cross" (thus strongly suggesting that the reporter did not get his details from a clerk).
          Hi David and fish
          Would have it been possible for lech to ask the coroner, or some other quest official, before he gave his statement, if he could leave out his address over concern for his family? Perhaps he gave it privately to the court?
          "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

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Sam Flynn View Post
            No, we can't say that for certain. To say that Cross was "found" and "close to the body" are examples of what I might call "directed language", which clearly impart a more sinister slant to Cross's actions than an objective reading of the evidence permits. (See my post yesterday.) That's not to say he wasn't up to anything sinister, but it's clearly inadmissible to assert that we "know such things for certain" when, in reality, they are subjective interpretations of the evidence.
            Hi Sam
            I somewhat disagree. I think the language is pretty neutral and accurate.
            He WAS close to the body. He was found by another witness, before alerting anyone. I think it, if not sinister, again is just another of a long list of things that make you go hmmmmmmm with lech.
            "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

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Abby Normal View Post
              Hi David and fish
              Would have it been possible for lech to ask the coroner, or some other quest official, before he gave his statement, if he could leave out his address over concern for his family? Perhaps he gave it privately to the court?
              And how did the Star reporter then obtain it?

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Abby Normal View Post
                I think the language is pretty neutral and accurate.
                He WAS close to the body. He was found by another witness, before alerting anyone.
                In LechWorld only Robert Paul can "find" someone. Lechmere cannot "find" anyone, only kill.

                This is the exact opposite of neutral, Abby.

                Roy
                Sink the Bismark

                Comment


                • Originally posted by David Orsam View Post
                  And how did the Star reporter then obtain it?
                  Good question. Maybe he asked.
                  "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

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Roy Corduroy View Post
                    In LechWorld only Robert Paul can "find" someone. Lechmere cannot "find" anyone, only kill.

                    This is the exact opposite of neutral, Abby.

                    Roy
                    Was any other witness seen by another witness near a victim before they raised any alarm? I mean what are the chances that one witness just happens to come upon another witness at exactly the moment that witness found the body but before he goes to seek help or raises the alarm?

                    Especially since bucks row was one of, if not the most, deserted sites at that time. Dutfields yard, hanbury street back yard, mitre square, millers court are literally crawling with potential witnesses. You would think that this oddity would have happened at one of these locations, but it just happened to happen in the loneliest location. One in which neither man had seen or heard each other on there walk when one would expect they might? But meet just at that moment.
                    Just seems a little odd to me.
                    "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

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Roy Corduroy View Post
                      In LechWorld only Robert Paul can "find" someone. Lechmere cannot "find" anyone, only kill.
                      Indeed, and don't forget that, in LechWorld, it's perfectly permissible for Lechmere to be "found". Subconsciously, or even consciously, there's only a small step between being "found" to being "caught", and even being "found" can easily be taken to imply being "found out". We have to choose our words very carefully, or we might end up misleading ourselves.
                      Kind regards, Sam Flynn

                      "Suche Nullen" (Nietzsche, Götzendämmerung, 1888)

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Abby Normal View Post
                        Good question. Maybe he asked.
                        But if it was a secret, due to concern for Lechmere's family, he wouldn't have been told.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Abby Normal View Post
                          Especially since bucks row was one of, if not the most, deserted sites at that time.
                          It certainly was quiet, albeit not entirely deserted. We know of two - even three - policemen who either passed down Bucks Row or the adjoining streets, and at least two "commuters" (Cross and Paul) who passed through; there may have been others about whom we'll never know.

                          Still, as you suggest, it was probably one of the quietest sites, although arguably not as much as Mitre Square.
                          Kind regards, Sam Flynn

                          "Suche Nullen" (Nietzsche, Götzendämmerung, 1888)

                          Comment


                          • What are the chances of an innocent carman finding the body? I don't know, about the same as the one who was right behind him. Obviously Buck's Row was a common route for these early workers and therefore Lechmere's placement at the murder site was nothing out of the ordinary.

                            Comment


                            • I keep reading "Cross didn't raise the alarm" (or similar).

                              Who was he supposed to raise the alarm to.

                              Oh the first person he saw. You might say.

                              You mean like when Paul came along and rather than letting him walk on by, says "Vome and have a look, I'm not sure if she's dead or drunk out of her tine mind".

                              So no suspicion here either I'm afraid, just like the name issue a real non starter.
                              G U T

                              There are two ways to be fooled, one is to believe what isn't true, the other is to refuse to believe that which is true.

                              Comment


                              • Originally Posted by Fisherman View Post
                                I think that each unprofessional witness was told to state name, address and working place. I am sure somebody on the boards can confirm or deny this, but I believe a phrase like " State your name, address and place of work" was uttered when a witness took the stand. And that would have been the case for Lechmere too.
                                However, I believe he may have skipped over the adddress, and that it may have passed unremarked upon.
                                Nothing surer to get the one asking the questions, and the judge (or coroner) asking and asking and asking again, than failing to answer a question. Guarantee you if he skipped one of the parts there'd have been a supplementary question.

                                And some as that as one question, many make it three seperate questions.

                                Please tell the Court you name

                                Your address

                                Your occupation.
                                G U T

                                There are two ways to be fooled, one is to believe what isn't true, the other is to refuse to believe that which is true.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X