Jack The Ripper solved?

[Monty]

Latter, I reckon........

Exactly Steve,

The boys in blue who were there at the time vrs an ill informed hack from Sweden who is 125 years too late?

Its all old ground, now churned to mush, which is why it goes nowhere. Its quite sad to see others unable to accept that their theories are flawed, quite blatantly too.

The theory is rejected by the majority in the field, certainly by those who have studied the case and the period in great depth, too much conjecture regarding what is supposed to be key damning evidence.

However, I bet you'll buy the book....won't you?

Monty

[Scott Nelson]

What about the scenario where Lechmere tries to set Paul up by murdering Chapman on Hanbury street, one street away from where Paul worked and where both men walked past?

[Fisherman]

That post just about sums you up.

Rob

Iīm glad I made it easier for you.

Then again, you have already "summed me up" lots of times, havenīt you?

Not to worry, though - Iīve got you sorted too.

Fisherman

[Lechmere]

Sally
You can wonder and conjecturise to your heart’s content about what Charles Lechmere was known as at Pickfords or the significance of his long deceased step father being a policeman.
I am going on what we do know.
I would point to 1859 baptism and that fact that his sister died as a Lechmere before Thomas Cross died as the only evidence we have as to what names the children where known actually known as.

Jon
He didn’t give Mizen his name and according to Mizen said he was wanted by another policeman in Bucks Row and just said there was a woman lying in the street. Not much of a notification.

I think the meeting was strange as Paul thought Lechmere was about to mug him. Lechmere didn’t just call out to Paul.

According to PC Mizen only Lechmere spoke to him, and according to PC Mizen Lechmere said he was wanted by another policeman and also according to PC Mizen all Lechmere said was that there was a woman lying there.
Lechmere claimed he told PC Mizen that she was dead or drunk.

Rob
I might lend you a copy.
I’ve heard about your book reviews.

[Rob Clack]

Rob Clack:

So anyone who doesn't agree with your tripe should get another hobby? That would be about 99% of us.

Then so be it.

Question to difficult?

Thatīs for you to say.

Fisherman

That post just about sums you up.

Rob

[Fisherman]

Rob Clack:

So anyone who doesn't agree with your tripe should get another hobby? That would be about 99% of us.

Then so be it.

Question to difficult?

Thatīs for you to say.

Fisherman

[Fisherman]

We do have Paul`s statement, too.

Yep. And does he say they arrived at the body together?

Fisherman

[Fisherman]

Yes, but Fish - if a man lived and worked in the area then of course there'd be a good chance that his routine routes (it's Alliteration Day today, evidently...) could take him past the murder sites - and could is all that we're talking about here after all, with the obvious exception of Nichols.

There'd be a reasonable chance that he'd have relatives living in the area.

We are talking about a small, densely populated area - so while it's interesting that you can see a correspondence between Crossmere's walk to work (there we go again..) I don't see it as particularly significant.

Try and think of it differently, Sally. Imagine how many choices Lechmere had of different routes after Buckīs Row. They were innumerable.

Then imagine how many choices of murder venues a killer in the East End had. Innumerable, them too.

Listen to how many people were out and about on them streets at that time, according to Hutchinson, Lechmere, Halse. Only the fewest.

Now, ask yourself, if you pick at random one man and his path to work, and if you randomly place seven murder spots in the East end - how big is the chance that they all correspond in terms of location, in terms of times, in terms of weekdays?

One in a thousand? Not likely. More like one in a million, Iīd say.

How do police squads looking for serial killers work? What do they take an interest in when they start to suspect a person, perhaps because of this person having given them a false name or perhaps because they suspect that he has lied to a fellow officer?

They map their suspect as closely as they can. They look for receits, observations etcetera, they check the suspects mobile phone marks on the map.
If they all correspond, and they can prove that their man has been in the vicinity of each of the murders that have taken place at the approximate hours they occurred, Sally, what do you think the police will do? Say that he could just as well have been out buying new trousers or just walking about in the wrong places at the wrong removes of time - just been unlucky?

Or do they arrest their man and get a search warrant?

Exactly. And no prosecutor would disallow the police to get that warrant on that sort of evidence.

Thatīs not your way of doing the homework - itīs only narrowminded me and the police. You seem to allow for a lot more before you become suspicious.

Fisherman

[Rob Clack]

Anybody who thinks that is not a remarkable thing needs to get another hobby.

Fisherman

So anyone who doesn't agree with your tripe should get another hobby? That would be about 99% of us.

I feel pretty certain that Lechmere didnīt consider what I thought at the time since I was not yet born.

If you are asking whether the reason I gave was the confirmed truth or a suggestion, well ...

Fisherman

Question to difficult?

Rob

[Jon Guy]

.... which was the exact picture he tried to sell in if he was the killer. And he sold it to Swanson, and now to you. Congratulations, Lechmere - things still work to plan.

Fisherman

We do have Paul`s statement, too.

[caz]

Hi caz,could Mr Hutchinson have been Kelly's pimp?his behaviour standing round for all that time by millers court was certainly odd or could he have hung round till Kelly had finished with her clients to ask her for money.His description of the Jewish gentleman he gave to the police which was very accurate to accurate for a fleeting glimpse but if he spent some time in his company escorting him to Kelly he certainly would have had a good look at him also he couldn't very well tell the police he was Kelly's pimp could he.

Hi Pinky,

It's possible, although I doubt Kelly needed a pimp or would have allowed herself to be 'managed' by Hutch. I think it's more likely that he was hanging around hoping for a free bed for the night now Barnett had moved out. He would have been in a difficult position, with Kelly entertaining someone else and no sign of the man leaving, then finding out she was murdered - very probably by that man, whoever he was. Too near the crime scene for comfort, and possibly seen there by witnesses, but innocent nonetheless, I can see why Hutch wanted to clear himself but took his time about doing so. He'd have had a job without involving the man who had been at the crime scene, keeping Hutch outside.

Love,

Caz
X

[Sally]

Yes, but Fish - if a man lived and worked in the area then of course there'd be a good chance that his routine routes (it's Alliteration Day today, evidently...) could take him past the murder sites - and could is all that we're talking about here after all, with the obvious exception of Nichols.

There'd be a reasonable chance that he'd have relatives living in the area.

We are talking about a small, densely populated area - so while it's interesting that you can see a correspondence between Crossmere's walk to work (there we go again..) I don't see it as particularly significant.

[Fisherman]

Basically, in this instance we could say Paul and Cross found the body together. Cross saw the body, turned his head and Paul was upon him.

.... which was the exact picture he tried to sell in if he was the killer. And he sold it to Swanson, and now to you. Congratulations, Lechmere - things still work to plan.

Fisherman

[Fisherman]

So the alternative name was to protect friends and family then? And nothing to do with you thinking he was Nichols murderer?
Less and less to suspect him now then.

Rob

I feel pretty certain that Lechmere didnīt consider what I thought at the time since I was not yet born.

If you are asking whether the reason I gave was the confirmed truth or a suggestion, well ...

Fisherman

[Jon Guy]

Ed

The police are a severe form of officialdom, particularly when you are a witness turning up several days late in a brutal and well publicised murder case..

He had notified the police before Neil had discovered the body.

When Charles Lechmere noticed that Paul was close behind him he walked up to him. Paul thought he was about to be mugged and tried to avoid Lechmere by walking around him off the pavement. As he passed Lechmere tapped him on the shoulder and then drew Paul's attention to the body. This is a strange way of raising the alarm. It is very different to what happened in all the other cases..

Why was it strange ?
Basically, in this instance we could say Paul and Cross found the body together. Cross saw the body, turned his head and Paul was upon him.

You have no idea whether his hand was unbloodied...

I have a good idea.
Bolstered by the fact he put his hand on Paul.

They then left Nichols to go to work, saying afterwards they intended to tell any policeman they saw. The policeman they bumped into gave a very different account of the subsequent conversation than that offered by Charles Lechmere.

Didn`t they approach and tell the first policemen they saw that a woman was dead or drunk back in Bucks Row?