Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Favorite suspect/s?

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

  • "So you are saying that once we know that a person who was found alone close by a murder victim..."

    As I've said before, the use of "found" implies "found out" or "caught", and "close by" implies a greater proximity than the evidence permits.

    All we can safely say is that he was seen in the road, and called Paul's attention to himself and something lying on the pavement. Cross was not "found" by Paul, therefore; if anything, it was the other way round.
    Kind regards, Sam Flynn

    "Suche Nullen" (Nietzsche, Götzendämmerung, 1888)

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Sam Flynn View Post
      "So you are saying that once we know that a person who was found alone close by a murder victim..."

      As I've said before, the use of "found" implies "found out" or "caught", and "close by" implies a greater proximity than the evidence permits.

      All we can safely say is that he was seen in the road, and called Paul's attention to himself and something lying on the pavement. Cross was not "found" by Paul, therefore; if anything, it was the other way round.
      OK-hows this-he was seen near the body of a murder victim before he tried to raise any kind of alarm, the only instance of this happening in the whole series. i do find it odd-just at that moment.

      Comment


      • That doesn't really work either, Abby, because it wasn't even established that the "something" on the pavement was a body, never mind a dead or murdered one, when Cross "found" Paul.
        Last edited by Sam Flynn; 05-31-2018, 05:27 AM.
        Kind regards, Sam Flynn

        "Suche Nullen" (Nietzsche, Götzendämmerung, 1888)

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Sam Flynn View Post
          That doesn't really work either, Abby, because it wasn't even established that the "something" on the pavement was a body, never mind a dead or murdered one, when Cross "found" Paul.
          didn't he realize it was the body of a woman before Paul saw him? but I don't think it matters anyway, the fact remains he was seen a recently murdered victim, before trying to raise the alarm, or look for help.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Abby Normal View Post
            didn't he realize it was the body of a woman before Paul saw him?
            He may well have, but Paul - the one (wrongly) alleged to have "found" him - did not, and that's part of my point.
            but I don't think it matters anyway, the fact remains he was seen a recently murdered victim, before trying to raise the alarm, or look for help.
            But he was not "found close by the body of a murder victim", by Paul or anyone else. To state, in those precise words, that he was tends to make Cross seem more suspicious than the evidence allows.
            Last edited by Sam Flynn; 05-31-2018, 06:53 AM.
            Kind regards, Sam Flynn

            "Suche Nullen" (Nietzsche, Götzendämmerung, 1888)

            Comment


            • Its also surely suggestive that he heard Paul approaching before he saw him, at a distance of around thirty yards (also before Paul saw him) and yet he chose to remain at the scene and to wait until Paul arrived. We might assume that if hed just murdered Nichols he would have had at least some blood on him and a knife. For all he knew Paul might have been a police officer. If he was guilty CL could have easily walked away to freedom (he could even have run away.) He was under no pressure to remain where he was a brazen it out.

              He wasnt ‘discovered’ by Paul. He waited for him to get there and called him over.

              To me, this speaks of an innocent man who had just discovered the body of a woman.

              Comment


              • Very good points, Herlock. Cross would have had every opportunity to get out of there had he chosen to do so, but didn't.
                Kind regards, Sam Flynn

                "Suche Nullen" (Nietzsche, Götzendämmerung, 1888)

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Abby Normal View Post
                  didn't he realize it was the body of a woman before Paul saw him? but I don't think it matters anyway, the fact remains he was seen a recently murdered victim, before trying to raise the alarm, or look for help.
                  Abby,

                  If Lechmere is telling the truth, and for any of this we have only Robert Paul and his accounts, he had literally just seen the object when he heard Paul.
                  Mr Paul provides no information at all to suggest the Lechmere's account of this is untrue.

                  This is the only case of the C5 where two claim to come upon a body in very close proximity to each other ( maybe 30 - 40 seconds apart at most)
                  The point that Lechmere was seen near a body before it was reported is somewhat irrelevant in that case, there is no opotunity to raise the alarm or look for help, other than with Paul, which of course he did, if Lechmere is telling the true.


                  Steve

                  Comment


                  • Ah, but we have to remember that to Fish, Crossmere was James Bond. Instead of running or walking swiftly away, he stays to bluff it out. Later he bluffs Mizen too. And when he eventually visits the police station, he has the officers eating out of his hand with his David Niven charm.

                    Plus, he looks rather defiant in that photograph.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Robert View Post
                      Plus, he looks rather defiant in that photograph.
                      Just on that point, and not apropos the Ripper case as such, I've lost count of the number of times my mother would say "Ooh, he looks shifty" (or words to that effect) whenever a criminal's mugshot appeared on the news or Crimewatch. Well, to me, most people look a bit shifty when they have to stand still and stare into a camera. This applies as much to modern-day mugshots as it did to photos taken in an era when long exposures were essential. I initially thought the photograph of Toppy betrayed a shifty disposition, but then I decided to cut him some slack

                      Diversion over. Back to the discussion...
                      Kind regards, Sam Flynn

                      "Suche Nullen" (Nietzsche, Götzendämmerung, 1888)

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Sam Flynn View Post
                        Just on that point, and not apropos the Ripper case as such, I've lost count of the number of times my mother would say "Ooh, he looks shifty" (or words to that effect) whenever a criminal's mugshot appeared on the news or Crimewatch. Well, to me, most people look a bit shifty when they have to stand still and stare into a camera. This applies as much to modern-day mugshots as it did to photos taken in an era when long exposures were essential. I initially thought the photograph of Toppy betrayed a shifty disposition, but then I decided to cut him some slack

                        Diversion over. Back to the discussion...
                        I remember Patricia Cornwell, in a documentary, talking about the evil looking Sickert in a photograph of him in old age.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post
                          I remember Patricia Cornwell, in a documentary, talking about the evil looking Sickert in a photograph of him in old age.
                          Yes, and I had a little chuckle at that as well.
                          Kind regards, Sam Flynn

                          "Suche Nullen" (Nietzsche, Götzendämmerung, 1888)

                          Comment


                          • This was debated before? Lechmere had oppurtunity to kill Nichols,we do not know what he was doing 20-30 sec or a minute or more before Paul arrived.But where was the knife,the police searched Bucks Row and Paul accompanied Lechmere all the way to Mizen.But as the first murder in the series and also in regards to the knife,Lechmere was not "processed" correctly as a witness like Lawende - Major Smith was trying to test his honesty/sharpness, Millers Court - nobody leaves until they give a full statement,Barnett - 4 hour interrogation and frisked.Then we would have known if Lechmere was another Prater or Lewis or the murderer. Not Lechmere's fault don't you think?

                            -
                            Clearly the first human laws (way older and already established) spawned organized religion's morality - from which it's writers only copied/stole,ex. you cannot kill,rob,steal (forced,it started civil society).
                            M. Pacana

                            Comment


                            • It would be good to get back to the general topic of the thread.

                              Favourite suspect/s, anyone?
                              Kind regards, Sam Flynn

                              "Suche Nullen" (Nietzsche, Götzendämmerung, 1888)

                              Comment


                              • Ok. Blotchy (Cox),Sailor man (Lawende),foreign looking man (Long) maybe BS Man.All the rest are non-suspects - if people realized this then the case progressed.

                                -
                                Clearly the first human laws (way older and already established) spawned organized religion's morality - from which it's writers only copied/stole,ex. you cannot kill,rob,steal (forced,it started civil society).
                                M. Pacana

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X