Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Favorite suspect/s?

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

  • I have a little (payed) work to do now, so I´m off for some time. Unless you are willing to pay me for disclosing the truth?

    Comment


    • I'd pay you to knock up some fish and chips.

      From your post #614 :

      I think that there is nothing at all gainsaying that the two men arrived in the street in close physical company with each other, and that Lechmere then said "There´s a copper! I´ll talk to him, and you just go on ahead so you won´t be late!"

      From your post #601 :

      He clearly said that ONE man came up to him and spoke to him, and the coroner asked if there was not another man present as the conversation took place, which Mizen answered with a "yes".

      Do you not see any contradiction here, Fish?

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Fisherman View Post
        It IS pretty even - that far. But then you need to add the list if anomalies I posted
        What anomalies?
        Kind regards, Sam Flynn

        "Suche Nullen" (Nietzsche, Götzendämmerung, 1888)

        Comment


        • If Cross had sent Paul ahead up Hanbury Street as he spoke to Mizen, why would he not take this opportunity to carry on alone along his alternative route to work via Old Montague Street?

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Fisherman View Post
            Herlock, you write:

            It’s perhaps strange that a guilty CL came up with the ‘Mizen Scam’ on the spot to avoid being detained and questioned by the police when, just a few minutes earlier, he’d invited danger and police interference by not escaping from the scene of the crime when he had ample opportunity.

            What you need to pay attention to is how these two matters were not on the table initially. He decided to stay put and con the oncoming person, yes - and that is not something that makes an ex-murder squad surprised - quite the contrary.

            But it was only as a development that he could not foresee at that stage, that he needed to come up with the scam. He may well have hoped to just con the oncomer and then be done.

            What he thought when he realized that he was going to accompany Paul searching for a PC is written in the stars, but it could span from "damn it!" to "This is going to be fun!".
            I dont understand how you can say that the need for a ‘scam’ was due to unforseen circumstances? If he told someone about the body surely its a given that the person that he told would wish to find and inform a police officer?
            Regards

            Sir Herlock Sholmes



            "Tis but a part we see, and not a whole."

            ”Baroni licitum est dicere troglodytam”

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Fisherman View Post
              It IS pretty even - that far. But then you need to add the list if anomalies I posted. After that, Lechmere is smoked, well and truly, in my eyes.
              Not even remotely approaching it Fish.
              Regards

              Sir Herlock Sholmes



              "Tis but a part we see, and not a whole."

              ”Baroni licitum est dicere troglodytam”

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Joshua Rogan View Post
                If Cross had sent Paul ahead up Hanbury Street...
                Paul worked in Corbett's Court, Hanbury Street, and his work-trek would definitely have taken him past #29. Furthermore Corbett's Court was only a short hop away from Dorset Street, and we can definitely place Paul in Bucks Row on the morning of Nichols' murder.

                Hmm...
                Kind regards, Sam Flynn

                "Suche Nullen" (Nietzsche, Götzendämmerung, 1888)

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Sam Flynn View Post
                  Paul worked in Corbett's Court, Hanbury Street, and his work-trek would definitely have taken him past #29. Furthermore Corbett's Court was only a short hop away from Dorset Street, and we can definitely place Paul in Bucks Row on the morning of Nichols' murder.

                  Hmm...
                  Not only that, but as a carman he had access to transport, which is handy for distributing torso parts....And he also claimed to work for Covent Garden market, which is scarily near Whitehall.
                  Last edited by Joshua Rogan; 06-05-2018, 05:46 AM.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Fisherman View Post
                    I didn´t even know that I was agreeing about that.

                    Am I...?

                    I somehow don´t think so.

                    As I wrote yesterday, I can see a possibility of Lechmere talking Paul into agreeing about conning the first PC they met, in oder to be able to get to work in time, and in THAT case, Paul could have stood by as Lechmere spoke. And at the inquest, Paul would reasonably be reluctant to admit that they fooled Mizen. However, it would be risky for Lechmere, and so I favour the idea that Paul didn´t hear what was said.

                    But now you seem to have decided for me that I do think Paul was present....?
                    We can assume that Paul was with CL when he spoke because we have no concrete reason to think otherwise. You accept that even if CL lied that he had a perfectly innocent reason for doing so. Both CL and Paul spoke of their concern at getting to work on time. Mizen, in stating that another man (Paul) was present, is surely making a pretty obvious statement. He was conversing with CL and Paul was present ie. he was in their company and not a few yards away. It cant be much clearer.
                    Last edited by Herlock Sholmes; 06-05-2018, 05:47 AM.
                    Regards

                    Sir Herlock Sholmes



                    "Tis but a part we see, and not a whole."

                    ”Baroni licitum est dicere troglodytam”

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Joshua Rogan View Post
                      Not only that, but as a carman he had access to transport, which is handy for distributing torso parts....And he also claimed to work for Covent Garden market, which is scarily near Whitehall.
                      Yikes ...

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post
                        We can assume that Paul was with CL when he spoke because we have no concrete reason to think otherwise. You accept that even if CL lied that he had a perfectly innocent reason for doing so. Both CL and Paul spoke of their concern at getting to work on time. Mizen, in stating that another man (Paul) was present, is surely making a pretty obvious statement. He was conversing with CL and Paul was present ie. he was in their company and not a few yards away. It cant be much clearer.
                        Paul was not just present, but chipping in to the conversation with Mizen, according to Cross' inquest testimony report (from Daily News);
                        "He and the other man left the deceased, and in Baker's row they saw the last witness whom they told that a woman was lying in Buck's row. The witness added, "She looks to me either dead or drunk," and the other man remarked, "I think she's dead." The policeman answered, "All right." The other man left witness soon afterwards."

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Fisherman View Post
                          What makes you think that I cannot see that the defence could always argue that there was a window of opportunity for someone else, Caz? Is that another ne of your inventionws, that I would not be able to see that?

                          Of course I can. But I am not arguing that there cannot have been another killer -
                          That's fishy, Fishy, because you claimed - falsely - that Lechmere's opportunity to kill Nichols was proven. And what's this about another killer? If she was already dead or dying when Lechmere first saw her [and you cannot possibly prove she wasn't], then there was no opportunity for 'another killer', or just another man, be it Lechmere or anyone else, to do the deed, was there?

                          In short, in order to have had the opportunity - the proven opportunity - Lechmere would have had to be seen with Nichols while she was still alive.

                          How is that so hard for you to grasp?

                          As for your plastic sheet story, it was you - not me - who suggested that inventing such a story pointed to guilt.
                          Eh? Where did you get that idea from? I said the opposite - that the killer would have been unlikely to be able to invent such a plausible lie without knowing what innocent people think they see when first noticing an object from a distance and in darkness, which then turns out, when seen up close, to be a murder victim. The tarpaulin, for me, supports Lechmere as an innocent witness, just telling the truth as he saw it.

                          Love,

                          Caz
                          X
                          Last edited by caz; 06-05-2018, 06:14 AM.
                          "Comedy is simply a funny way of being serious." Peter Ustinov


                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Fisherman View Post
                            He had some days to construct his story, Caz, so it is not exactly an example of thinking on yur feet, is it?
                            What? He knew when he picked up Polly Nichols that he might well be 'found' near her dead body and would need to come up with a plausible "thought she was a tarpaulin" story, to mimic precisely what many an innocent witness would say in the future?

                            The much more impressive thing in this context is how he concocted the Mizen scam - that shows us just how fast he was. And believe me, if he was the killer, then he was MUCH faster on the uptake than some ripperologists...
                            With insight like that, I'm surprised Lechmere didn't end up owning Pickford's and becoming psychologist to the Royal family to boot.

                            Love,

                            Caz
                            X
                            "Comedy is simply a funny way of being serious." Peter Ustinov


                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Fisherman View Post
                              And why not? If we cannot make out the outlines as that of a person, then a bundle of rags is the much more likely option. The fewest will think "must be a murder victim".
                              Precisely my point, Fish! And that tells me Lechmere genuinely thought he was seeing a tarpaulin, because that's what Nichols looked like when he first saw her, lifeless in the dark from a distance. And like Paul, he didn't even assume she "must be a murder victim" when they got up close.

                              Love,

                              Caz
                              X
                              "Comedy is simply a funny way of being serious." Peter Ustinov


                              Comment


                              • The Ripper must have got out of Bucks Row pretty smart, as neither Lechmere, nor Paul saw anyone as they approached the Row. And with these guys approached from either end,so which way did or could the Ripper have gone?

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X