Favorite suspect/s?

[Elamarna]

One other point that needs to be clarified was just how close or not Mother Lechmere was to Berner Street The impression can be that she is virtually next door (No that was the Kosminski's a few years earlier). However the reality is that depending on tbe route taken its at minimum of just over 200 yards away, or 300 yards at most. Yes it's still relatively close, However when one takes into account the geography of the murders, and the short distances involved, its not as close relatively as the impression people often get.


Steve

[caz]

If I avoided sarcasm, I would say that you are the type of poster who implies unsavoury things about others without having any proof to show for it. A particularly ugly internet troll, as it were.

If I avoided sarcasm, Fish, I would say that you are the type of poster who implies unsavoury things about Lechmere without having any proof to show for it.

But that doesn't make you 'a particularly ugly internet troll', does it? It just makes you someone with a favourite suspect who is struggling to convince his fellow posters.

So how dare you make this particularly ugly accusation against one of them? The 'troll' accusation I mean. I'd put you on the naughty step if I were your mother. And then I'd put myself on the naughty step for being your mother.

Love,

Caz
X

[Elamarna]

But Stride was killed virtually in Ma Lechmere's back yard - and Eddowes a short distance away - in the early hours of CAL's day off. And we know Sunday was his day off because a certain Mr Griffiths told us so...

Sorry, Fish.

Hi Gary,

One could also add that The Kosminski, lived closer to Berner street than mother Lechmere, and at one stage lived at # 38 ( of course we don't know if Aaron was there, or for that matter if he is "Kosminski"; but then of course we don't know Lechmere went to see his mum that night either.

And that "Short distancs away " is over a thousand yards, not really short at all. Two major roads to cross, so won't want to drwa attention, at lrast a ten minute walk, assuming he does not stop and sit to wipe his knife on the way.


His day off? Probably was, we know many probably did not work Sundays, including certain Slaughter men.


Steve

[MrBarnett]

But Stride was killed virtually in Ma Lechmere's back yard - and Eddowes a short distance away - in the early hours of CAL's day off. And we know Sunday was his day off because a certain Mr Griffiths told us so...

Sorry, Fish.

[GUT]

Thats where the expression, 'work hard - play hard' comes from.

Ah, those were the days.....

Yeah seems a lost art to many.

My grandfather would shovel coal all day, held the record with his mate for most coal loaded by hand for about 50 years till the mine closed.

Then go out on the booze get into a fight or three and go home to the missus, and still made a heard of kids.

[Wickerman]

Jus' trying to stay on topic

[DJA]

Figuratively,the motto of "Camborne School of Mines" ...... established 1888.

[Wickerman]

Thats where the expression, 'work hard - play hard' comes from.

Ah, those were the days.....

[GUT]

I just can’t buy the “he’d be too buggered after a hard days graft to go out killing” bit.

I guess I’ve known far to many that’d work darn hard, truck drivers, miners when most of it was by hand, labourers lugging 200lb bags of cement, etc. and still spend the night out on the booze and partying.

[Herlock Sholmes]

I wonder if Mrs Lech ever got a bit suspicious about her husband being out at ridiculous times when he needed to be out of the house at 3.30 to get to work. For eg when he dumped the apron in the doorway of Goulston Street, having been out earlier to kill Stride (or maybe not?) it would have been around 2am. Did he then go home arriving at around 2.20ish only to have to get up an hour later? Or did he just stay out all night with Mrs Lech not complaining and old Charlie still fresh enough to put in a days graft?
Annie Chapman’s t.o.d might be debated....4.30/5.30? Both are still after the time that we would have expected CL to have been at work.
MJK, if we believe Hutch, was alive at 2am. So again we have CL out in the wee small hours about to commit a time-consuming and exhausting murder after which he would, in all likelihood, have had to have toddled straight off too work. Was Mrs Lech locked in a cupboard all night? Did she mind her husband bringing back bags of body parts in the early hours

Ok, I’m being a touch facetious here but the points stand. More doubts. Proper serious ones which Fish will simply brush aside. Surely it’s more likely that the ripper had more freedom than a man who had to be at work at 4am everyday to do a long and tiring shift? Surely it’s more likely that the ripper had somewhere private where he could keep his grisly trophies and not in the larder being the bread (sorry )

These are not conclusive signs of innocence but they are serious doubts to be added to a long list of serious doubts. Far, far too many for anyone to believe with any level of confidence that CL was the ripper.

[Sam Flynn]

so when has fish been not been truthful or honest?

You misunderstood, Abby. The point is that Fish doesn't appear to "treat people as being truthful and honest until it can be proven that they are not" when it comes to Cross.

[Abby Normal]

Mizen was at odds with Paul, too, don't forget.We don't actually know that, Abby: a few census entries and what-not don't a biography make, and he could well have used "Cross" on a day to day basis. Furthermore, if Gary Barnett's discovery of a Pickfords carman named Charles Cross in 1876 is "our" Charles Cross, then he was using that name (which was, after all, his stepfather's) many, many years before 1888.

seems to me like he was using cross at work and lech more commonly.

[Abby Normal]

The "oops" was, I think, in response to Fisherman's statement that "we should treat people as being truthful and honest until it can be proven that they are not"... which doesn't quite tally with Fisherman's approach to Cross's testimony.

so when has fish been not been truthful or honest?

[Sam Flynn]

why is that an oops? hes got a discrepancy with a cop, who may have been right.

Mizen was at odds with Paul, too, don't forget.

and gave another name-not one he commonly used?

We don't actually know that, Abby: a few census entries and what-not don't a biography make, and he could well have used "Cross" on a day to day basis. Furthermore, if Gary Barnett's discovery of a Pickfords carman named Charles Cross in 1876 is "our" Charles Cross, then he was using that name (which was, after all, his stepfather's) many, many years before 1888.

[Sam Flynn]

why is that an oops? hes got a discrepancy with a cop, who may have been right. and gave another name-not one he commonly used?
of course there could be innocent explanations, but dosnt rise to a laughing oops!

The "oops" was, I think, in response to Fisherman's statement that "we should treat people as being truthful and honest until it can be proven that they are not"... which doesn't quite tally with Fisherman's approach to Cross's testimony.