The Mizen scam

[FrankO]

I rather think if you go back through the numerous posts here you will find that those who have argued for Cross/Lechmere as a prime suspect have been at pains to point out that it is based in good measure on conjecture.

I’m afraid, Lechmere, that they also failed in that particular department at times. A recent example is something that you've written yourself: “When a policeman claims you misled them when you met them a short time later.” But it’s good to see it being pointed out again.

Cross/Lechmere is actually one of the tiny number of potential suspects where this exercise can be performed. By the way take a close look at anyone of the other 'cast of thousands' and try and do the same. If you think their cases through I would suggest it won't really work.

I don’t think the arguments back and forth on this thread have anything to do with other suspects, but simply with how the case concerning Cross/Lechmere as killer has been presented. Sometimes, things have been presented as facts while they’re not and with a whim of arrogance and disdain for opposing posters. Or at least, that’s how I’ve perceived it.

To make Cross/Lechmere innocent,for example, he used a different name than he always used when dealing with authority... why?

Perhaps in this case it made a difference that the authorities were the police. Speculation of course, just like all the rest of it.

The alternatives at hand are that a guilty Cross wasn’t known as such and thus risked being noted as suspicious by giving other checkable & true details, and an innocent Cross who was known as Cross at work at least, thus risking nothing, even though he was otherwise officially known only as Lechmere.

We know the Ripper took risks, huge ones even, but the only risks he is known to have taken are those he took to kill and mutilate. He was willing to risk his very life for this, but we don’t know if he was willing to risk or even liked risking anything else. There’s nothing in the evidence that supports this notion.

He seems to have taken far too long to get from his house to Bucks Row. Why?

As timings are generally unreliable in old cases such as these, it’s never a good thing to use them to bolster one’s argument, unless we know the timing has been made by the use of a time piece or clock.

The manner in which he greated Paul was odd - the pirouette in the street, the touch on the shoulder, Paul feeling he was about to be mugged - why?Was Cross socially awkward? Was he unnerved by finding a body? Was he nervous himself? Or was he in a state of high anxiety after just committing a murder and being distubed?

I think you’re reading too much into this, Lechmere. Paul himself stated he was a bit apprehensive walking through Buck’s Row when he did. So, when he saw this figure standing up ahead, his first reaction was to avoid him, to walk around him. Cross, on the other hand, at that point wanted Paul to come and take a look with him at the woman he’d just discovered. There was no pirouette, Cross just tapped Paul on the shoulder to stop him as he was walking by him. Even though Paul claimed to have been apprehensive at first, he never mentioned anything about the encounter having been awkward or Cross having behaved oddly.

A myriad of 'excuses' are needed to make him innocent.

No more than are needed to make him guilty: Cross was in a ‘bubble’ while cutting away at Nichols, he had the calculating mindset of a conman who liked to bluff, he knew where Neil was and when he would arrive at the crime scene, Cross would have run into the arms of Neil or another PC if he would have legged it, Paul must have been out of earshot when Cross talked to Mizen.

By the way I just watched a programn about Harols Shipman
He seemed such a normal guy. No one thought he could be a murderer. People believed him. His work colleagues believed him. That is how these people are.

The fact that Cross was found close to the body makes him interesting as a possible suspect, but the quality you mention here doesn’t make Cross any more special than the next bloke who seems to have been a normal guy.

A young woman was sitting by him, trying to get his attention and was using her mobile phone, clearly to get assistance for him. A woman helping a man, in this socially disjointed city.
It made me think about Cross and how callous he must have been to abandon a woman who he though had been raped and was quite possibly still alive.

You seem to forget the fact Paul was there too, the (near-)fact that he was innocent and the fact that he agreed that the best thing they could do was to alert the first PC they came across, so that 1. the proper authorities were in place, and 2. they could carry on for work.

All the best,
Frank

[Cogidubnus]

I thought it was clear enough. Sharpsburg was a particularly bitterly fought battle in which Robert E Lee fought Hooker's armies to a total standstill...then retreated back whence he came...Even Lee subsequently admitted it was all pretty pointless...remind you somewhat of this thread?

No, some of us have a long standing and genuine interest in the Bucks Row murder and haven't found the thread 'pointless' at all.

Fine...I have a long standing genuine interest in Bucks Row myself, (after all my great great grandfather, Jeremiah McCarthy lived just two minutes away in Queen Anne Street at the time), and if I hadn't been interested I wouldn't have commented...however, it now appears that nothing fresh is going to appear, the Hill moment has come and gone, the same old arguments are going to be hashed over and over...it's a second day at Sharpsburg moment...

Sorry

Dave

[Abby Normal]

I thought it was clear enough. Sharpsburg was a particularly bitterly fought battle in which Robert E Lee fought Hooker's armies to a total standstill...then retreated back whence he came...Even Lee subsequently admitted it was all pretty pointless...remind you somewhat of this thread?

All the best

Dave

(PS And yes I know Lincoln used Antietam as a hook upon which to hang his emancipation legislation...but Shapsburg or no Sharpsburg, he'd have found that hook somewhere!)

What a stupid and thoughtless analogy. First of all thousands of people lost their lives fighting for what they believe in and also if Hookers charge had been successful and the union was defeated it would have changed the course of the war not to mention history. Your grasp of history is as weak as your debating skills. I am no big fan of the lech theory but the detractors need to come up with something better than this nonsense.

[Monty]

Hi Monty
if I met you at a cocktail party and told you my name was Joe Crow and then later you found out that my drivers license said Joe Kinnamon would you think that it was "completely irrelevant"? Or would you say wtf and try to figure it out?

Firstly I don't do Cocktail Parties, secondly I'd question why you're wearing a dress if your name is John and thirdly, yep, wouldn't phase me the slightest. I wouldn't care what you called yourself.

Again, it seems many on here have no idea regarding Police procedure and so on. Obviously, for those too slow to pick up on my point, I am referring to the legalities of Cross being called Lechmere and the impact upon his guilt.

Again it is about recognising the man known as Cross.

Monty

[Observer]

I for one don't think that this thread is pointless. it's given me a better all round understanding of the Bucks Row murder.

Regards

Observer

[Cogidubnus]

First of all thousands of people lost their lives fighting for what they believe in and also if Hookers charge had been successful and the union was defeated it would have changed the course of the war not to mention history.

I'm as aware of that as you are...over 23,000 men...it was probably the bloodiest day of the entire sad conflict...my comparison may have lacked good taste, (actually now I think about it certainly lacked good taste, and I apologise if I've upset anyone's sensibilities) but I think it's still reasonably apt...all those "ifs" aside, (they didn't happen), all these posts, all this battling...and?

All the best

Dave

[Monty]

Monty
I only just caught up on the posts where you laid bare your hostility to 'suspectology' - I sympathise in many ways. It is something of a parlour game - but it is one many 'Old Guardistas' engage in.
If it is any solace to you, the Cross/Lechmere theory has brought to light the exact sequence of events surrounding the discovery of Polly's body - this aspect of the case is usually glossed over. Also the police **** ups involved at this early stage if the investigation. That is whether you think Cross did it or not.

On another note - getting an insight into those 'Old Guard' tut-tugging pms would be fascinating. Do they say 'don't rise to the bait Monty, ignore the newbie fools', or 'Monty, I don't know how you can control yourself while debating with those idiots'.
Am I warm?

Absolutely spot on Lechemere,

They balance out the PMs you receive which encourage you to carry on in the face of such hostility, how Monty is such a negative b*stard and is too entrenched in the old ways.

My hostility towards suspect based Ripperology is born out of the fact you suspectists will defend your man at any cost, drawing on supposition and spewing it out as fact. It warps the case and drags it backwards....yet I'm the old guard dinosaur.

Its bought nothing to light regarding Nichols, has Cross I agree.

Your ignorance regarding the Police is summed up well in your statement of fcuk ups. I'd be interested to know who you would have managed the situation, so wise one, how would you have dealt with it?

I'm all tingling with anticipation to hear.

Monty

[Cogidubnus]

I for one don't think that this thread is pointless. it's given me a better all round understanding of the Bucks Row murder.

Hi Observer

Me too...I'm not saying the thread itself is pointless...but unless something new emerges I think it's continuation may well be...

All the best

Dave

[Sally]

It is pointless.

The premise of this thread is exactly that of the interminable 'Clothes Puller' thread - all the same arguments for Cross The Ripper can be found there.

The only reason for this thread appears to have been to solicit opinion on Fishermans article - because nobody was commenting. Hmm, could that have been because most people had heard it all before and remained unconvinced?

I wish something new would be presented, perhaps then it'd become more worthwhile.

Not that it matters. I suspect the idea is to be the last man standing, rather than to bring anything new to the table.

I find it helps to read selectively, makes the whole thing shorter and easier to manage.

[Lechmere]

If you think its pointless the simple solution for you is to ignore it - there are plenty of other, presumably less pointless, threads on here.
But 'the game' is actually about rubbishing a rival suspect.
Monty may genuinely not be a suspectologist, but he is a rare bird.
Familiar faces from The extra long Hutchinson threads moaning that this one is producing no new info is a little farsical.

[Lechmere]

I have also regularly been at pains to pint out which bits are conjecture and to back that conjecture up with supporting evidence rather than rely on pure conjecture - where possible obviously.
It can be a temptation to try to create new 'facts' but I think this is less the case here than it is with most other suspects.

[Lechmere]

Monty
I am lacking in the pm department compared to you - conjecture on my part but I base it on (a) you letting the cat out of the bag about persons unknown sending you pms to comfort you in your hour of need, and (b) by my inside knowledge of the sparce contents of my own pm box.

But more importantly I wish to stop you tingling.
The police failings in the Nichols enquiry were (off the top of my head):
Failure to get interviews from the majority of residents in Bucks Row.
Failure to guard Polly's body allowing the mortuary attendants to tamper with it.
Fixation on a type of culprit. This led to Cross being ignored. They clearly failed to check him out - even after Mizen claimed he misled him. A proper check would have at least revealed his true name - and may have put an end to this thread 124 years before it was started.

That's enough isn't it?
I think all written and dramatic recreations of the Cross - Paul - Polly's body - Mizen interaction are inaccurate. Regardless of whether Cross did it. You may think this is unimportant to have an overall understanding if the case but I would disagree. The details are important.
That documentary last year - otherwise very good - mishandled the Nichols murder scene.
Paul was about 2 yards behind Cross and it was very light and extra lamp incorrectly illuminated the street I believe opposite the murder scene ( or the excess lighting may have been attributed to it I forget).
Besides discussing Cross's possible guilt we have also gone over the detail of what happened and I don't think that has been done on that detail before.

[Jon Guy]

I for one don't think that this thread is pointless. it's given me a better all round understanding of the Bucks Row murder.

Agreed, Observer.

It was an interesting little exercise, worth doing every couple of years. This time round I learnt what side of Brady St PC Thain was on, and in which direction he was walking.

[moonbegger]

I prefer:
'They are coming on in the same old style and we will drive them back in the same old style'.
Wellington at Waterloo before defeating the Old Guard.

It reminds me more of the D Day landings .. Where the allies fought bloody battles on the beaches of Normandy .. but successfully went on to free Europe ...

only in this instance Team Lechmere have landed but are a long way from even getting off the beach ( victim number 1) .. you still got a long way to go to reach Paris let alone Berlin !

moonbegger

[Monty]

Monty
I am lacking in the pm department compared to you - conjecture on my part but I base it on (a) you letting the cat out of the bag about persons unknown sending you pms to comfort you in your hour of need, and (b) by my inside knowledge of the sparce contents of my own pm box.

But more importantly I wish to stop you tingling.
The police failings in the Nichols enquiry were (off the top of my head):
Failure to get interviews from the majority of residents in Bucks Row.
Failure to guard Polly's body allowing the mortuary attendants to tamper with it.
Fixation on a type of culprit. This led to Cross being ignored. They clearly failed to check him out - even after Mizen claimed he misled him. A proper check would have at least revealed his true name - and may have put an end to this thread 124 years before it was started.

That's enough isn't it?
I think all written and dramatic recreations of the Cross - Paul - Polly's body - Mizen interaction are inaccurate. Regardless of whether Cross did it. You may think this is unimportant to have an overall understanding if the case but I would disagree. The details are important.
That documentary last year - otherwise very good - mishandled the Nichols murder scene.
Paul was about 2 yards behind Cross and it was very light and extra lamp incorrectly illuminated the street I believe opposite the murder scene ( or the excess lighting may have been attributed to it I forget).
Besides discussing Cross's possible guilt we have also gone over the detail of what happened and I don't think that has been done on that detail before.

Awwww, someone PM Lechmere, he is feeling lonely.

This obession with my inbox disturbs Lechmere, I do hope your home isn't decorated with my image.

Spratlings report states enquiries were made. Out of those enquiries Mrs Emma Green, Mr Walter Purkis, William Court and the Railway PC gave information. Again, you make assumption.

There was no public mortuary in Whitechapel, the Workhouse one had to be used, therefore the Police had no responsibility to said mortuary.

You really do not comprehend this name issue do you? or rather non issue. For me, explaining it is tiresome.

You are perfectly correct about the documentary, I had no input in that so I'm rather confused why you have decided to raise it with me.

I shall now leave you to play soldiers, plan your imaginary battlefronts and pretend you are winning the war.

In the meantime, the real world ticks over whilst is waits for this daming Cross evidence. You know, the real stuff instead of your supposition and almost certainlys that seem so prominant in your posts and that mask the reality that you have nothing but the admitted conjecture.

It has now become tiresome.

Monty