Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Favorite suspect/s?

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

  • Originally posted by Elamarna View Post
    Hi Abby,
    Yes the simplist is he was mistaken, and that was my view when i set out researching Bucks Row. However, and it is a big however i have found several seperate sources and several different issues that suggest Mizen did indeed lie at the inquest.
    When i publish then be my guest to take that apart, i may indeed be wrong but the evidence suggests otherwise.

    Steve
    Wow. Cool el.
    I did not know that. I look forward to seeing it.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Abby Normal View Post
      Wow. Cool el.
      I did not know that. I look forward to seeing it.


      Hi Abby
      Running behind schedule, but getting there. it is a fully interactive Ebook.

      I do not rule Lech out by any means, but ask serious questions of the scam and the Blood Evidence.
      The name issue remains.

      Lech is only a section of the work, the sources alone totalling about 60+% should be usefull to anyone studing the murders (Witness statements, lost roads and local history, photo essays relating to Mizen and Thain and loads of period maps).


      Steve

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Abby Normal View Post
        Lech is the only one of the potential suspects whos daily route took him in close proximity to the murder sites and at roughly the right time.
        We only know that to be true of ONE of the murders, Abby - that of Polly Nichols. We don't know that his daily route took him past the murder sites at 29 Hanbury Street, Berner Street, Mitre Square or Miller's Court at any time, let alone at the right times for the murders.
        Kind regards, Sam Flynn

        "Suche Nullen" (Nietzsche, Götzendämmerung, 1888)

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post
          Q: Does the fact that CL’s mother and daughter lived in the area of the Stride murder increase the likelihood of him being guilty?

          A: Absolutely, categorically no.

          Q: Does the fact that he grew up in that area increase the likelihood of CL’s guilt.

          A: Absolutely, categorically no.

          We cant even say for certain that the killer had local knowledge although its perhaps likely. Just saying that someone had a reason to be in a certain location is not evidence that points to guilt. The killer was at various locations to kill not because he was on the way to somewhere else.
          Q1: In comparison with those who had no such ties, he is a likelier killer, all other things disregarded.

          Q2: In comparison with those who did not grow up in the area, he is a likelier killer, all other things disregarded.

          In the docu, you may have noticed how Scobie says that "there is an pattern of offending, an area of offending to which he is linked". And he is linked in NO OTHER WAY than the one we are discussing, but it is not a case of Scobie thinking that having these links is criminal. He does things in the correct way, he FIRST points out that there are too many coincidences surrounding Lechmere for it to be a benevolent thing, and once he has decided that, he moves on to CHECK THE GEOGRAPHY - just like the police does. And the geography becomes the clincher.

          This is what you either choose to disregard (bias) or cannot comprehend (ignorance) and DESPERATELY need to understand before you can judge the case against Lechmere as regards the geograpy in a useful manner. You have a hangup on how you are certain that people must be able to pass areas without becoming murder suspects, but that is not how the case against Lechmere - or any other suspect - is built. You are giving the correct answer to the wrong question, Herlock!
          Once you are a suspect, the geography is used as a litmus paper to check if the suspicions hold water. And whaddayaknow, Lechmere ticks ALL the boxes geographically.

          But in the world according to Herlock Sholmes, such things are irrelevant.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Elamarna View Post
            Yes what we have is what we work with

            The facts suggest that 3.20, given in only a few reports ( i chose 12 random press reports only 2 said 3.20) a mistaken report. If 3.20 he could in noway say he was behind time if he started at 4.00. Plenty of time to get to pickfords
            And thats using the speed you walked at in the Documentary, which was not at all quick.

            And as many reports say about 3.30 as say 3.30 so the timing is certainly in dispute.
            The 3.45 time is based on Paul whom is contradicted by 3 other witnesses.

            There are ample sources and reasons to suggest Mizen was not truthful.

            Steve
            No, but there is a modern day "ripperologist" (quotation marks are someties useful) who has gotten things backwards and even seems proud of it.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post
              CL could have been at the murder sites. No one is disputing that. The fact that one of the sites was near Old Mother Lechmere’s does not make him a more likely killer. Its childish to say that it does.
              By now, you should nhavwe caught my drift: He is a suspect, and as he is a suspect, we check him against the murder sites and times to see if he can be in any way linked.

              He can. Very much so.

              It is not childish to take in these things and their relevance. Then again, you are no child, so with some little effort, we will get you educated.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Abby Normal View Post
                Lech is the only one of the potential suspects whos daily route took him in close proximity to the murder sites and at roughly the right time.

                Of the one that doesn’t quite fit, stride, his mother lived close by.

                Does this make him guilty? Of course not. But it obviously helps the argument that he could have been.

                To argue other wise is just plain wrong.

                I think people’s personal feelings toward fish clouds there judgement.
                It’s painfully obvious.
                Poetry, Abby. The sheer simplicity and beauty if it puts the finest haikus to shame.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Abby Normal View Post
                  Wow. Cool el.
                  I did not know that. I look forward to seeing it.
                  Noone else knows it either. It´s just Steve.

                  I look forward to it too.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Sam Flynn View Post
                    We only know that to be true of ONE of the murders, Abby - that of Polly Nichols. We don't know that his daily route took him past the murder sites at 29 Hanbury Street, Berner Street, Mitre Square or Miller's Court at any time, let alone at the right times for the murders.
                    All we know is that the two routes that were offered up were the Hanbury Street route and the Old Montague Street route. And that Tabram, Nichols, Chapman and Kelly were killed along those routes. It is clear that if he chose the wrong route on all other occasions, he will have passed a hundred yards or two hundred from the sites - whereas he will have passed right by the sites if took the right route.
                    Whichever applies, he nevertheless had a working trek that took him through the Ripper heartland, just as I keep saying - the area bordered by these two routes.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Fisherman View Post
                      No, but there is a modern day "ripperologist" (quotation marks are someties useful) who has gotten things backwards and even seems proud of it.
                      They have it backwards in Your Opinion.


                      Steve

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Fisherman View Post
                        Noone else knows it either. It´s just Steve.

                        I look forward to it too.
                        You might learn a few things, who know?

                        Steve

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Fisherman View Post
                          All we know is that the two routes that were offered up were the Hanbury Street route and the Old Montague Street route. And that Tabram, Nichols, Chapman and Kelly were killed along those routes. It is clear that if he chose the wrong route on all other occasions, he will have passed a hundred yards or two hundred from the sites - whereas he will have passed right by the sites if took the right route.
                          Whichever applies, he nevertheless had a working trek that took him through the Ripper heartland, just as I keep saying - the area bordered by these two routes.

                          Lechmere we know said he walked with Paul to the end of Hanbury street on 31st, but as i pointed out earlier such is not the shortest route, and neither is Old Montague.

                          Who offered up Old Montague?

                          Is there any source at all to suggest that Lechmere ever went that way when it was over 100 yards longer than other routes?


                          Steve

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Elamarna View Post
                            They have it backwards in Your Opinion.


                            Steve
                            It´s not they, it´s you. And yes, that is my opinion.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Elamarna View Post
                              You might learn a few things, who know?

                              Steve
                              Nah, nobody can teach me anything. I am a tower of arrogance and self-appreciation, and I refuse to listen to anything that is not in line with my humongous bias saying that a poor carman was a horrendeous fiend.

                              Didn´t you know?
                              Last edited by Fisherman; 06-03-2018, 01:06 PM.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Fisherman View Post
                                It´s not they, it´s you. And yes, that is my opinion.

                                Such was fairly obvious from the post Christer, so that is not news.

                                Everyone is entitled to their opinions even flawed and incorrect opinions.


                                Steve

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X