Same motive = same killer

[Elamarna]

I think that in the end, all threads out here will jointly end up at his doorstep. If you want to discuss that with me, you know what to do.

My dear Christer,
So long has you are still posting that is the one certainty of the case we can be 100% sure of.

And of course after 200 pages the thread has not been able to establish that the two series of crimes do reflect the same motive. Yet alone the same hand.
Yes you have certainly argued and suggested the similarities are conclusive with regards to the wounds; however many still do not agree that the similarities are sufficiently strong to be viewed as overwhelming evidence, and are certainly not conclusive.

Many pages ago I said this thread was unlikely to provide any new discussion or seriously change opinions and such I believe is the present outcome, and that despite a very valiant attempt by yourself .

The thread however has tied in rather nicely with work mainly by Jerry, on JTR forums with regards to the Whitehall case and possible links to individuals, companies and waterways, which is all very interesting.

I have no doubt that when you feel ready to use the information you have not yet disclosed, the situation may change, or at the very least we should have something new to use in the debate.

Cheers

Steve

[Fisherman]

and that is the sole reason for christfish's interest in the torsos, they fit his suspect (in a far fetched manner).

If you want to be taken out of that rather exotic delusion very quickly and cleanly, you know what to do, Rocky!

[RockySullivan]

Many pages ago I said this thread was unlikely to provide any new discussion or seriously change opinions and such I believe is the present outcome, and that despite a very valiant attempt by yourself .

Sorry pal but you couldn't be more wrong. josh (I believe) even found 2 reports of a john cleary scenario with Whitehall. that's big news. and there is lots of other important discussion. If you are only reading fish's posts then yea but to say this thread is "unlikely to provide any new discussion" is pure bullshit

[Fisherman]

Elamarna: My dear Christer,
So long has you are still posting that is the one certainty of the case we can be 100% sure of.

Oh, Iīm ready and willing to do my part, never fear!

And of course after 200 pages the thread has not been able to establish that the two series of crimes do reflect the same motive. Yet alone the same hand.

After 129 years, we have not been able to prove much in the Ripper case either. Itīs the nature of things. There will be no conclusive proof, perhaps, but there may nevertheless be a new order of things established. Not by you, though.
You are one of those who have so far chosen to be left behind, methinks. And thatīs just fine, since we all have a choice, and since it is good to see how the other side chooses to argue.

Yes you have certainly argued and suggested the similarities are conclusive with regards to the wounds; however many still do not agree that the similarities are sufficiently strong to be viewed as overwhelming evidence, and are certainly not conclusive.

I would suggest that the group of people who donīt think I have a very strong case is melting away (too) slowly but (indeed) steadily. And yes, I may be wrong about that, but I am not wrong about the general feeling that the ice is finally beginning to break up.

Many pages ago I said this thread was unlikely to provide any new discussion or seriously change opinions and such I believe is the present outcome, and that despite a very valiant attempt by yourself .

The ever disparaging Steve. I knew quite well that this thread would not end in a unanimous decision that the two series belong to the same man. Ripperology is about moving mountains in pebbles. And that is what I am doing. Every now and then, a large boulder is moved, and at other times, itīs just about the tiniest of stone slivers.
It all matters in the end, as long as you know that you have stayed true to your convictions and that you have done so on fair grounds. That, by the way, is where you are failing, the way I see it.

The thread however has tied in rather nicely with work mainly by Jerry, on JTR forums with regards to the Whitehall case and possible links to individuals, companies and waterways, which is all very interesting.

I know that quite well, and I also know that Jerry is quite open to the solution with just the one killer. He too can move mountains, pebble by pebble.

I have no doubt that when you feel ready to use the information you have not yet disclosed, the situation may change, or at the very least we should have something new to use in the debate.

I am a hundred per cent certain that you will remain your own sceptical self as long as I cannot prove my case conlusively. It is my conviction that no matter how strong a non-ripperological jury would consider my case to be, you would flatly deny itīs value to the bitter end.
I donīt hold that against you - I donīt think you are being a naysayer for the hell of it. I think it is something deeply embedded in your nature, and so you do what you must. In a sense, that matters very little, because if you are really off the mark, the contrast will be very obvious once you say no one time too many.

But fear not - no matter how badly you break the laws of logic, you WILL have followers out here. Itīs kind of like how there are congregations of people who claim that there was never a man on the moon, and that Elvis is alive and well.
Not of the same magnitude (yet), mind you - only of the same general character.

[Fisherman]

Sorry pal but you couldn't be more wrong. josh (I believe) even found 2 reports of a john cleary scenario with Whitehall. that's big news. and there is lots of other important discussion. If you are only reading fish's posts then yea but to say this thread is "unlikely to provide any new discussion" is pure bullshit

As you can see, Steve, even the fiercest of my "enemies" are not too impressed by your pessimism. It is all about mountain-moving...

[Sam Flynn]

The thread however has tied in rather nicely with work mainly by Jerry, on JTR forums with regards to the Whitehall case and possible links to individuals

Coming soon, a thread entitled "Was 'Wildbore' another Lechmere alias?"

[Elamarna]

Sorry pal but you couldn't be more wrong. josh (I believe) even found 2 reports of a john cleary scenario with Whitehall. that's big news. and there is lots of other important discussion. If you are only reading fish's posts then yea but to say this thread is "unlikely to provide any new discussion" is pure bullshit

Rocky

You misunderstand my view and maybe I could have been clearer. Yes there has been some very good debate, by many contributors. Much of the interesting stuff has been regards the Torso killings and the item you mentioned from Joshua was very interesting, however none of it really suggests the same killer for both series of murders.

Further i see nothing which advances the question of was the same MOTIVE involved, which was surely the purpose of the thread given it's title.


Steve

[Elamarna]

Elamarna: My dear Christer,
So long has you are still posting that is the one certainty of the case we can be 100% sure of.

Oh, Iīm ready and willing to do my part, never fear!

And of course after 200 pages the thread has not been able to establish that the two series of crimes do reflect the same motive. Yet alone the same hand.

After 129 years, we have not been able to prove much in the Ripper case either. Itīs the nature of things. There will be no conclusive proof, perhaps, but there may nevertheless be a new order of things established. Not by you, though.
You are one of those who have so far chosen to be left behind, methinks. And thatīs just fine, since we all have a choice, and since it is good to see how the other side chooses to argue.

Yes you have certainly argued and suggested the similarities are conclusive with regards to the wounds; however many still do not agree that the similarities are sufficiently strong to be viewed as overwhelming evidence, and are certainly not conclusive.

I would suggest that the group of people who donīt think I have a very strong case is melting away (too) slowly but (indeed) steadily. And yes, I may be wrong about that, but I am not wrong about the general feeling that the ice is finally beginning to break up.

Many pages ago I said this thread was unlikely to provide any new discussion or seriously change opinions and such I believe is the present outcome, and that despite a very valiant attempt by yourself .

The ever disparaging Steve. I knew quite well that this thread would not end in a unanimous decision that the two series belong to the same man. Ripperology is about moving mountains in pebbles. And that is what I am doing. Every now and then, a large boulder is moved, and at other times, itīs just about the tiniest of stone slivers.
It all matters in the end, as long as you know that you have stayed true to your convictions and that you have done so on fair grounds. That, by the way, is where you are failing, the way I see it.

The thread however has tied in rather nicely with work mainly by Jerry, on JTR forums with regards to the Whitehall case and possible links to individuals, companies and waterways, which is all very interesting.

I know that quite well, and I also know that Jerry is quite open to the solution with just the one killer. He too can move mountains, pebble by pebble.

I have no doubt that when you feel ready to use the information you have not yet disclosed, the situation may change, or at the very least we should have something new to use in the debate.

I am a hundred per cent certain that you will remain your own sceptical self as long as I cannot prove my case conlusively. It is my conviction that no matter how strong a non-ripperological jury would consider my case to be, you would flatly deny itīs value to the bitter end.
I donīt hold that against you - I donīt think you are being a naysayer for the hell of it. I think it is something deeply embedded in your nature, and so you do what you must. In a sense, that matters very little, because if you are really off the mark, the contrast will be very obvious once you say no one time too many.

But fear not - no matter how badly you break the laws of logic, you WILL have followers out here. Itīs kind of like how there are congregations of people who claim that there was never a man on the moon, and that Elvis is alive and well.
Not of the same magnitude (yet), mind you - only of the same general character.

So nice to see things never change my friend.

You think I am far off the mark, yet you constantly seem to misunderstand my position on this. I do not rule the same killer out, like some I just say I have seen nothing presented to convince me the argument is strong. That is a very different thing.

And to attempt to link my views to those who claim no men on the moon or Elvis is a somewhat poor response. I do not argue against overwhelming real evidence, such is a futile and ultimate foolish standpoint.

One wonders why you make such remarks?


And you have claimed, or rather suggested that you have information which could be the key to all, apparently related to the 73 case. If that is so then you may well change minds.



All the best


Steve

[Fisherman]

So nice to see things never change my friend.

You think I am far off the mark, yet you constantly seem to misunderstand my position on this. I do not rule the same killer out, like some I just say I have seen nothing presented to convince me the argument is strong. That is a very different thing.

And to attempt to link my views to those who claim no men on the moon or Elvis is a somewhat poor response. I do not argue against overwhelming real evidence, such is a futile and ultimate foolish standpoint.

One wonders why you make such remarks?


And you have claimed, or rather suggested that you have information which could be the key to all, apparently related to the 73 case. If that is so then you may well change minds.



All the best


Steve

No, Steve, I donīt misunderstand your stance at all. I know that you never rule anything out - it is part and parcel of your thinking. The outcome of that stance, however, is that whenever somebody - not only me - suggests something, you are far more likely to say "Much as you feel you have got somethin there, I must take you out of that misconception" than "Wow! That really is interesting!"

If I was in a bad mood. I could say that you bring nothing to the discussion. However, that would be a tad unfair - you DO bring the naysaying (or should I call it "the that cannot be proven-saying"?), and that has a value per se.
Of course, it often amounts to nothing more than a kind of defense speech by a lawyer, and we already KNOW that nobody can be convicted conclusively on the evidence presented. And indeed, that is not what I am looking for, I am looking for a sensible evaluation and some enthusiasm where enthusiasm is due. And please donīt say that if enthusiasm was due, I would get it from you, because that is not true, Steve. You either donīt have it in you, or you always give in to Mr Scepticism.
I sometimes think that if all the people who only contribute this quality would go away, the boards would be a better place, but on reflection it is of course always important to have scepticism represented. After all, we do not want to allow for too much enthusiasm, do we?

As for the Elvis and Man on the Moon comparison, you may wish to look at it again - I DID say that this was the character of it all - but that the magnitude differed.

[Fisherman]

Coming soon, a thread entitled "Was 'Wildbore' another Lechmere alias?"

Who would have thought that you would team up with Pierre on the Lechmere issue, Gareth? Well, now you are there, surfacing all over the threads, letting off some steam from that boiling kettle of Lechmere fear.

Keep it up. It is revealing.

[Elamarna]

I sometimes think that if all the people who only contribute this quality would go away, the boards would be a better place, but on reflection it is of course always important to have scepticism represented. After all, we do not want to allow for too much enthusiasm, do we?

As for the Elvis and Man on the Moon comparison, you may widh to look at it again - I DID say that this was the character of it all - but that the magnitude differed.

Dear Christer,

Yes would it not bee great if those who disagree went away. I could say the same myself, however a board made of those who agree with each other ceases to be a forum at all, just as you say.

It's not a question of just being sceptical, on some points I feel you are just plain wrong, much the same as you with me.

Steve

[Fisherman]

Elamarna: Dear Christer,

Yes would it not bee great if those who disagree went away.

No, Steve, it would not - as I just said.

I could say the same myself, however a board made of those who agree with each other ceases to be a forum at all, just as you say.

Exactly so.

It's not a question of just being sceptical, on some points I feel you are just plain wrong, much the same as you with me.

Iīm afraid that IS being sceptical if you "feel" I am plain wrong. Maybe you donīt understand just how that works, though. One of the trickiest persons to understand is always oneself.

But now we are wasting bandwidth out here, methinks.

[jerryd]

Christer,

I have a genuine question regarding Lechmere's possible involvement in the Whitehall case. First, let me be clear, I am in no way belittling you or downplaying your work on Lechmere. I know you put a lot of effort into that work and I think it's commendable, personally.

The question is: Out of the 21,000 possible square feet in that basement, why would Lechmere pick one, small corner of a 720 square foot room to place the torso and leg? And it so happens the exact spot where the body was placed, is where Frederick Wildbore decided to keep his tools every week for work. Not only that, this was a very difficult spot to reach and was always dark. And, what do you think brought him to Whitehall in the first place? Wasn't he delivering meat when he had his cart?

[Fisherman]

jerryd: Christer,

I have a genuine question regarding Lechmere's possible involvement in the Whitehall case. First, let me be clear, I am in no way belittling you or downplaying your work on Lechmere. I know you put a lot of effort into that work and I think it's commendable, personally.

No worries, Jerry - and I say that before I have read your question...

The question is: Out of the 21,000 possible square feet in that basement, why would Lechmere pick one, small corner of a 720 square foot room to place the torso and leg?

Couldnīt that be asked wherever the torso and leg wound up, Jerry? To begin with, if Lechmere was the person who placed the torso and leg in that vault, then I would make the assumption that he was making some sort of point by doing so. And in that context, two scenarios offer themselves up:
1. There are numerous examples of serialists who taunt the police, and so, Lechmere could well have wanted to do just that.
2. Lechmere had a police stepfather in his formative years as a child. This stepfather ignored the name Lechmere was baptized by in the 1861 census, naming the whole family "Cross". It could be that Charles was disciplined by Thomas Cross and resented his imposing upon the Lechmere grounds, if you see what I mean.
It must be said that we know next to nothing about Charles Lechmere and what he was about, since so much time has passed. We are left with guesswork, and the frame that is offered to guess by is a meagre one. There may have been some other reason for his choice of place to deposit the torso, we just canīt tell.

And it so happens the exact spot where the body was placed, is where Frederick Wildbore decided to keep his tools every week for work. Not only that, this was a very difficult spot to reach and was always dark.

But no matter where he placed the torso, there will have been somebody who frequented that space and who could have been the Wildbore of those premises, if you will. The fact that it was dark and hard to reach does not mean that it was too dark to visit or impossible to find. As I have said before, it may be that the person who placed the torso where it was found may have been looking for the very roots of the house - and the police corps.

And, what do you think brought him to Whitehall in the first place? Wasn't he delivering meat when he had his cart?

He was probably delivering all sorts of stuff, meat being one of them. When the torso was placed in the vault is something we canīt tell, maybe it was during Lechmereīs working hours, maybe it wasnīt. I can see how many questions can be raised about this, but to me, there is a very clear coupling between the Ripper murders and the Torso ditto, and I am content to say that Lechmere highy likely was the killer of Nichols, and by way of extension reasoning also the Ripper - and therefore, I am not phazed by this. There will be a reason and there will have been the means. I see no real obstacle in these factors.

I welcome your thoughts and questions, by the way. You were always thoughtful, well informed and sincere, which makes for a very good discussion!

[jerryd]

jerryd: Christer,

I have a genuine question regarding Lechmere's possible involvement in the Whitehall case. First, let me be clear, I am in no way belittling you or downplaying your work on Lechmere. I know you put a lot of effort into that work and I think it's commendable, personally.

No worries, Jerry - and I say that before I have read your question...

The question is: Out of the 21,000 possible square feet in that basement, why would Lechmere pick one, small corner of a 720 square foot room to place the torso and leg?

Couldnīt that be asked wherever the torso and leg wound up, Jerry? To begin with, if Lechmere was the person who placed the torso and leg in that vault, then I would make the assumption that he was making some sort of point by doing so. And in that context, two scenarios offer themselves up:
1. There are numerous examples of serialists who taunt the police, and so, Lechmere could well have wanted to do just that.
2. Lechmere had a police stepfather in his formative years as a child. This stepfather ignored the name Lechmere was baptized by in the 1861 census, naming the whole family "Cross". It could be that Charles was disciplined by Thomas Cross and resented his imposing upon the Lechmere grounds, if you see what I mean.
It must be said that we know next to nothing about Charles Lechmere and what he was about, since so much time has passed. We are left with guesswork, and the frame that is offered to guess by is a meagre one. There may have been some other reason for his choice of place to deposit the torso, we just canīt tell.

And it so happens the exact spot where the body was placed, is where Frederick Wildbore decided to keep his tools every week for work. Not only that, this was a very difficult spot to reach and was always dark.

But no matter where he placed the torso, there will have been somebody who frequented that space and who could have been the Wildbore of those premises, if you will. The fact that it was dark and hard to reach does not mean that it was too dark to visit or impossible to find. As I have said before, it may be that the person who placed the torso where it was found may have been looking for the very roots of the house - and the police corps.

And, what do you think brought him to Whitehall in the first place? Wasn't he delivering meat when he had his cart?

He was probably delivering all sorts of stuff, meat being one of them. When the torso was placed in the vault is something we canīt tell, maybe it was during Lechmereīs working hours, maybe it wasnīt. I can see how many questions can be raised about this, but to me, there is a very clear coupling between the Ripper murders and the Torso ditto, and I am content to say that Lechmere highy likely was the killer of Nichols, and by way of extension reasoning also the Ripper - and therefore, I am not phazed by this. There will be a reason and there will have been the means. I see no real obstacle in these factors.

I welcome your thoughts and questions, by the way. You were always thoughtful, well informed and sincere, which makes for a very good discussion!

Thanks for the reply,

I have to disagree that Lechmere would pick that spot. The fact that spot in that vault was chosen was no coincidence in my opinion. Someone familiar with that basement was involved, which, by the way, could be someone other than Wildbore. Several news reports indicate there was suspicion on the workmen because of where the body was found. I would go as far to say (without proof) that some of these men were watched by the police. And maybe watched for a long period of time, due to the fact Elizabeth Jackson wasn't dismembered until June of 1889.

What would have been Lechmere's working hours? Would they coincide with the working hours of the men at the worksite? 6 a.m to 5 p.m roughly. And if Lechmere wasn't hauling around bodies with his cart during working hours, did he have another cart at home to haul bodies around when he didn't have his work cart? Again, genuine questions.