The Missing Evidence II - New Ripper Documentary - Aug 2024

[rjpalmer]

This seems to suggest it was Christer's evidence given to Scobie. The problem is the video is misleading and biased and he has put his name to it. If I were in his shoes I would have made sure it was a true representation of the 'story' I wanted to tell before it was aired. It certainly does not help his theory or his credibility.

Hi Geddy -

I'm more inclined to use the word misguided than deceptive when it comes to the Lechmere theory, but I suppose it's often a thin line.

[Geddy2112]

I feel inclined to defend Christer, which is a bit surprising because I don't accept his theories of the case.
The video didn't attribute the discovery of Cross's birth name to Christer Holmgren but to a "group of amateur enthusiasts" working in 2005. It never implied that it was Christer's discovery, so the thought of correcting them wouldn't have presented itself.
How they came up with the date 2005 is unclear. You can find the comment and the discussion of the name at the 16:30 mark on YouTube.
I don't agree with Holmgren's views of the case, but I've never doubted that he believes what he says, and I don't think he is the sort who is deliberately dishonest or misleading.
Rather, I think he has convinced himself that his methodology and opinions are legitimate.

OK, that is fair enough. Although I've done a more in depth dissection of the video on another thread today. Christer does contradict himself on occasions. The video/narrator does it a lot.

…but James Scobie suggests the evidence drawn together by Christer.

This seems to suggest it was Christer's evidence given to Scobie. The problem is the video is misleading and biased and he has put his name to it. If I were in his shoes I would have made sure it was a true representation of the 'story' I wanted to tell before it was aired. It certainly does not help his theory or his credibility.

[rjpalmer]

I completely agree but then he should have challenged what the documentary said after all it was using 'his' work. Surely after seeing the video and finding 'inaccuracies' he should have done something about it or his credibility not just as a Ripperoligist, an author on the subject and in his professional capacity as a journalist would be dented.
Alas he did not.

I feel inclined to defend Christer, which is a bit surprising because I don't accept his theories of the case.

The video didn't attribute the discovery of Cross's birth name to Christer Holmgren but to a "group of amateur enthusiasts" working in 2005. It never implied that it was Christer's discovery, so the thought of correcting them wouldn't have presented itself.

How they came up with the date 2005 is unclear. You can find the comment and the discussion of the name at the 16:30 mark on YouTube.

I don't agree with Holmgren's views of the case, but I've never doubted that he believes what he says, and I don't think he is the sort who is deliberately dishonest or misleading.

Rather, I think he has convinced himself that his methodology and opinions are legitimate.

[The Baron]

I actually like your post.

I actually don't care.


It's a good thing that we don't agree and you clearly give as good as you get.


Again I don't care.


The passive aggressive thing amuses me more than anything and doesn't affect/effect me in the slightest


God knows I don't care.


so that approach certainly won't get you anywhere, but I admire your effort nonetheless.


Pretty certain I don't care.


If you believe that a series of dismembered women found dumped in various places were not murdered, then you're entitled to your opinion of course

The modern construct of Wokeness means that anyone is allowed to believe what they want and pedal to others their beliefs.

Good on you sir for your stoic stance.

I might also choose to state that it can't be proven conclusively that 2 plus 2 is...4




I would be wrong, but if I believed I was right, then nobody could tell me otherwise because it's my opinion and etc...etc...


The only thing I can prove is that regardless of your valid and warranted opinions on the Torso women having not been murdered,

You're still wrong


I challenge you to show where I stated that it is MY opinion that the torsos haven't been murdered.

If you can't, and you can't, then, surprise .. I don't care.


But that's okay, respect to you for being wrong


I know someone who has been shown to be wrong


I am also wrong, moreso than you...believe me.


I don't care either way


But anyway, back to earth...

The so called missing evidence is interesting because that idea can be applied to almost every person of interest and suspect.


And who would have believed MJK committed suicide?!


You can't prove she didn't after all


It is not my opinion, so I don't care


RD

My comments in bold above.


As I told you in my last post, you should be now working on yourself so to keep open minded and live up to the ethics you were preaching.


The Baron

[The Rookie Detective]

True, you cannot prove they were murdered.

Funny how that is coming from the one who is lecturing us about keeping an open mind, better to take care of yourself now.



What you think might have happened to them is of no importance.



The Baron

I actually like your post.

It's a good thing that we don't agree and you clearly give as good as you get.

The passive aggressive thing amuses me more than anything and doesn't affect/effect me in the slightest, so that approach certainly won't get you anywhere, but I admire your effort nonetheless.

If you believe that a series of dismembered women found dumped in various places were not murdered, then you're entitled to your opinion of course

The modern construct of Wokeness means that anyone is allowed to believe what they want and pedal to others their beliefs.

Good on you sir for your stoic stance.

I might also choose to state that it can't be proven conclusively that 2 plus 2 is...4



I would be wrong, but if I believed I was right, then nobody could tell me otherwise because it's my opinion and etc...etc...


The only thing I can prove is that regardless of your valid and warranted opinions on the Torso women having not been murdered,

You're still wrong


But that's okay, respect to you for being wrong


I am also wrong, moreso than you...believe me.



But anyway, back to earth...

The so called missing evidence is interesting because that idea can be applied to almost every person of interest and suspect.


And who would have believed MJK committed suicide?!


You can't prove she didn't after all



RD

[Geddy2112]

Just something I'm getting confused about....

It was exactly a quarter to four when I passed up Buck's-row to my work as a carman for Covent-garden market. It was dark, and I was hurrying along....

He (PC Neil) deposed that on Friday morning, at a quarter to four o'clock, he was going down Buck's Row, Whitechapel, from Thomas Street to Brady-street. Not a soul was about. He was round there about half an hour previously, and met nobody then. The first thing he saw was a figure lying on the footpath. It was dark, but there was a street lamp on the opposite side some distance away.

Can we assume Robert Paul meant it was exactly 3:45 when he 'entered' Bucks Row or was a good way up it? It does not really matter but if PC Neil was certain he found the body at 3:45am as per his testimony I'm not sure how he could have missed Lechmere, or Lechmere and Paul together. Surely we have to give Paul at least a minute to get to Lechmere (according to the video we do) and the faffing about with the 'touch her' 'no you touch her' routine along with the discussion to leave to find a copper would have say taken at least another minute, if not more then according to PC Neil he would have been on the scene and found Lechmere or Lechmere and Paul by the body but he did not.

Something does not add up here unless erm that 'gap' proposed did not actually happen.

[Paddy Goose]

Good morning Lewis and welcome to Casebook

... the Missing Evidence video...

The video came about by all the posting on Casebook about Lechmere. It was a constant topic of discussion. As it still is.

Neil Bell, who posted as 'Monty' and authored the book Capturing Jack the Ripper: In the Boots of a Bobby in Victorian London related here that he received a telephone call one day from someone at Blink films, who asked was there a suspect being discussed online, and he casually answered, "yes, Lechmere.'

Neil didn't agree with the theory, none of us here did, nor do we now, obviously.

But that's not the point. Christer won. We all gather here on the top line to talk about Lechmere. And it's been this way for years. It would be more precise to say -

"Welcome to Lechbook"

[The Baron]

True, you cannot prove they were murdered.

Funny how that is coming from the one who is lecturing us about keeping an open mind, better to take care of yourself now.



What you think might have happened to them is of no importance.



The Baron

[The Rookie Detective]

You cannot even prove those torsos were connected to one perpetrator, or even that they were murdered.

If you see a connection between them or to the ripper victims then good for you, the Police at the time didn't deal with all those cases as one serie.

But as I said, it is all about trying to pin another crime on Lechmere, other than that it is only a theory.



The Baron

No evidence that the torso victims were murdered?

Hmmm...




There's also no evidence that the Ripper was an adult

There's also no evidence that a pregnant Jackson didn't commit suicide and murder her own baby by slowly dismembering herself


If we strip everything down to that we know...


Someone used a knife to cut up some women...

Oh no, we can't even say that...

There's no evidence that lots of different men copied each other and took a victim each...


What a load of rubbish.



Don't tarnish those who support Lechmere at the killer with the same brush as those of us who believe that the torso VICTIMS were MURDERED.

Otherwise, you do those women who were butchered by the Torso killer a great disservice

It doesn't downgrade the Canonical Ripper victims in any way.


Or we choose to believe that all the dismembered bodies found just died of natural causes...

Or suicide

It's so ridiculous it's laughable



RD

[Geddy2112]

I believe it was the presenter who said that, Christer would not claim credit for the discoveries of others.

I completely agree but then he should have challenged what the documentary said after all it was using 'his' work. Surely after seeing the video and finding 'inaccuracies' he should have done something about it or his credibility not just as a Ripperoligist, an author on the subject and in his professional capacity as a journalist would be dented.
Alas he did not.

[The Baron]

You cannot even prove those torsos were connected to one perpetrator, or even that they were murdered.

If you see a connection between them or to the ripper victims then good for you, the Police at the time didn't deal with all those cases as one serie.

But as I said, it is all about trying to pin another crime on Lechmere, other than that it is only a theory.



The Baron

[Elamarna]

Hi Fiver,

I believe that in the Missing Evidence video, Christer said that he discovered that Charles Cross and Charles Lechmere were the same person, the origin of the "fake name" argument.

I believe it was the presenter who said that, Christer would not claim credit for the discoveries of others.

Steve

[FISHY1118]

I understand that Fishy used the TorsoRipper Theory to try to pin more crimes on Lechmere. But doesn't the idea that the Ripper and the Torsoman were the same person significantly predate Christer's latching onto the TorsoRipper Theory?

Gee for a second i thought you ment me Fiver . Haha

I've never posted anything in regards to the pinchen torso/ murder , as I have no interest in that at all and in my opinion there is no connection to the Whitechapel murders .

[The Rookie Detective]

Did the Police or doctors at the time consider them connected ?!

They are not advocating the TorsoRipper theory, it is only important to them if it will help them advertising Lechmere as the Ripper, and let me walk you inside the maze of their minds..

Lechmere was found near the Body of Nichols, Chapman has abdomen injuries like Jackson, the killer of Jackson is the same killer of the Pinchin Street Torso, now connect this last one with a bloody rag to Lechmere, and Bingo, same serie of murders and same killer, Lechmere.



The Baron

A connection between the Ripper murders and Torso killings was considered at the time.

That seems to stem from the Pinchin Street torso, because it combined elements of both series of murders in terms of location, the writing of the word Lipski on the wall and some of the injuries.

The concept of the combining the Ripper with the Torso killer is not a modern day construct.

It is frustrating because there are clear links between both series of murders, but the theory is ruined because it has been highjacked by those who believe that Lechmere was the Ripper.

Lechmere was not the Ripper.

But the idea of the Ripper being connected to the Torso murders is an idea which does warrant further investigation.

Unfortunately, those who are correct in dismissing Lechmere can also sometimes be blinkered with any other idea that Lechmere supporters have.

Dismissing ideas and concepts for the sake of disagreeing with another individual is not a good basis from which to work.

I admire someone like Jerry, who has done so much good research into the Torso killer and identified and highlighted some excellent data, and remains open minded with his approach.

In other words, agreeing with SOME of Fisherman's views, shouldn't automatically mean you should be labelled as being a Lechmere supporter.

Ultimately it's not about agreeing or disagreeing, it's about being open to the possibility that you may be wrong.

I am wrong most of the time and so I quite enjoy watching the banter between some of the more rigid mindsets regarding the case.


RD

[Geddy2112]

So if that was said in the video, it was a lie.

A lie in the video? Shirley Knott...