Favorite suspect/s?

[Sam Flynn]

If he lied about where he worked isn’t that a huge red flag pointing toward his guilt?

I don't think Robert's saying that he lied. He's saying that we've only got Cross's word for it, as that info doesn't appear in the censuses, which just give his occupation but not his place of work.

I also detect more than a hint of "tongue-in-cheek" in what Robert posted, by the way.

[Elamarna]

Oh, the "you-did-not-answer-the-question" stuff again. Reeks of Harry!

I offered it up. Tabram died there, and the timings Edward Stow have clocked speak for that route being a quicker one. It is also a route Lechmere would have been more aquainted with, logically, since he grew up closer to it than to Hanbury Street.

Whether the old geezers back in 1888 saw the potential relevance of this or not is neither here nor there, methinks.

Yhios remoinds me of how a poster from yesteryear used to claim that the Ripper would never have dared to use Old Montague, crime-ridden as it was...

The quality of the naysayer side arguments never fails to astonish me. What is your take on that? Do you think he would have dared enter that street...?

Christer
You added the last part after I began my reply, And your question deserves an answer.

I see no reason to suggest he would not "dare" use the route, such seems nonsense.

However I see no reason for him to use it when there are shorter routes which include part of a route we know he did use at least once.
So while i of course do not rule the possability of the route out, I see nothing to suggest it was used.


Steve

[Robert]

You said he visited the murder sites, Fish. What you are actually asking is, "who had as much reason to kill these women as Crossmere had?" Do you understand that, Fish?

Do you actually realise what you're typing, Fish? You said visit the sites - not walk past, or walk near, but visit.

[Robert]

Thank you, Gareth!

[Elamarna]

The bias I fear is one of doing your best to deny any implication that Lechmere may be our man. I know that you don´t think you are at all biased, but I fear I very much disagree.

You asked. I answered.

No problem. The possability of a take which differes from a view we sincere beleive in can often prompt fear of bias and unreasonable thinking.

Steve

[Fisherman]

I don't think Robert's saying that he lied. He's saying that we've only got Cross's word for it, as that info doesn't appear in the censuses, which just give his occupation but not his place of work.

I also detect more than a hint of "tongue-in-cheek" in what Robert posted, by the way.

Yeah? To me, it seemed more like a nasty dig meant to annoy me.

[Fisherman]

You said he visited the murder sites, Fish. What you are actually asking is, "who had as much reason to kill these women as Crossmere had?" Do you understand that, Fish?

Do you actually realise what you're typing, Fish? You said visit the sites - not walk past, or walk near, but visit.

No, I did not understand that. Moreover, I think it is a falsity.

I visited my son yesterday, but I cannot remember murdering anbybody. If you must read Freud, then do so with your hat on.

[Sam Flynn]

Yeah? To me, it seemed more like a nasty dig meant to annoy me.

I don't think that applying your idea of the police being deficient in checking out Cross to the subject of his place of work is a "nasty dig", Fish. It seems to be Robert's way of reminding us that we need to be consistent.

[Fisherman]

Christer
You added the last part after I began my reply, And your question deserves an answer.

I see no reason to suggest he would not "dare" use the route, such seems nonsense.

However I see no reason for him to use it when there are shorter routes which include part of a route we know he did use at least once.
So while i of course do not rule the possability of the route out, I see nothing to suggest it was used.


Steve

I think we must offer up some little intellectual learoom here, Steve. I am of the opinion that Charles Lechmere was the Ripper and the Torso killer. If this holds true, then that in itself would be ample reason to use more than one route.

At any rate, the killer used the northern route when disposing of both Kelly and Chapman, and Tabram is no safe bid as the Rippers prey, so you can perhaps have your wish anyway.

Myself, I walked different routes to work when I lived in Malmö, just to get a few new impressions every now and then. To take the same route have always bored me. Even today, I use one route to the supermarket and another one from it.

I don´t think that saying that route X is the shortest one means that we can rule out any other choice on behalf of Lechmere - least of all if he was the killer. It is a deeply disingenuous suggestion.

But I´m glad that you agree about the Old Montague street scare - it was nonsense and twaddle, but the suggestor would have nothing of that.

[Elamarna]

I don´t know how modern the offering is. I am certain that Derek Osborne and Michael What´s-his-name must have pondered it since Tabram died there - it is a very logical thing to do once we realize the power of geographical implications.

Not all of us do.

And yes, it stands to reason that each suspect that is presented will be tested against the geographical evidence. And that is as it should be!

I get the feeling that yu are implying that any suggestion from back then is a more viable suggestion that "modern" suggestions - you see, this is the type of thing that makes me think you are rather heavily biased at times.

Not at all.
The request was purely was there a source I had missed from tge time which supported the use of Old Montague.

Modern views can often be better informed because of new discoveries and information.
Such is undoubted true in Egyptology and Archaeology in general and in all science.
It really depends on what we are using to support the suggestion.

Steve

[Fisherman]

I don't think that applying your idea of the police being deficient in checking out Cross to the subject of his place of work is a "nasty dig", Fish. It seems to be Robert's way of reminding us that we need to be consistent.

It´s really funny how different we look at things at times. And I don´t think Robert is able to apply my idea or even go near it. He has a history of categorically denying the chance that I am right about it.

But Robert is in many a way consistent, I´ll give you that...

[Fisherman]

Not at all.
The request was purely was there a source I had missed from tge time which supported the use of Old Montague.

Modern views can often be better informed because of new discoveries and information.
Such is undoubted true in Egyptology and Archaeology in general and in all science.
It really depends on what we are using to support the suggestion.

Steve

I don´t think the police ever entertained any idea about the benefits of researching which way Lechmere took. I don´t think it crossed their minds that it could be useful information.

[Elamarna]

I don´t think that saying that route X is the shortest one means that we can rule out any other choice on behalf of Lechmere - least of all if he was the killer. It is a deeply disingenuous suggestion.

But I´m glad that you agree about the Old Montague street scare - it was nonsense and twaddle, but the suggestor would have nothing of that.

And of course i made it very clear that i do not rule it out:

"So while i of course do not rule the possability of the route out, I see nothing to suggest it was used."


Just that because he could have used it, we should not necessarily assume that he did. Just that its possible.

Steve

[Robert]

And I'll give you that you are an educator and a teacher, Fish. The fact that you remind me a bit of Will Hay does not in any way detract from your standing.

[Fisherman]

Anyway, I´m tired and a tad discouraged, so I will tuck in for the night (hope I got that right as far as English goes).