The Missing Evidence II - New Ripper Documentary - Aug 2024

[Elamarna]

From the documentary -



This is what is spoken when the scene of Lechmere leaning over the body is shown. That does not seem as the documentary is making it clear that it was just a possibility. It seems outright they wish to and have done, shown Lechmere poised over the body to make him look more guilty.



They even show Lechmere still over the body as Paul is the '40 yards' away which is inconsistent with the 'evidence.' Tis a sham ya honour.. a fabrication..

Indeed, it does appear to intentionally mislead.

Steve

[Geddy2112]

I was told that this was because when the filming was done, the northern pavement was closed for repairs, but this was an animation, so that is unconvincing.
When I asked about Lechmere crouching over the body, I was told it's to represent what might have happened, that the commentary made It clear that it was only a possibility.

From the documentary -

Lechmere says he was never alone with the body but Lechmere would have arrived at the murder site at 3:37am, long before Paul turned into the street at 3:45am.

This is what is spoken when the scene of Lechmere leaning over the body is shown. That does not seem as the documentary is making it clear that it was just a possibility. It seems outright they wish to and have done, shown Lechmere poised over the body to make him look more guilty.



They even show Lechmere still over the body as Paul is the '40 yards' away which is inconsistent with the 'evidence.' Tis a sham ya honour.. a fabrication..

[Elamarna]

Didn't Cross stand up and go to the middle of the street when he saw Paul coming?

That's what they want people to believe.
Trouble of course is, it's pure invention.

Steve

[Elamarna]

The position is biased and misleading. The kneeling pose is biased and misleading. The direction faced is biased and misleading. The time given is biased and misleading.

No surprise that Christer blanked you. I don't recall him ever directly dealing with evidence that undermined his theory.

It also portrays Paul walking along the southern side of Bucks Row, meaning that he crosses ( no pun intended) to the south side, coming from Bath Street, north of Bucks Rows , before he would then cross over again to the north of Bucks Row when he enters Bakers Row. This would appear to be pure invention on the part of the documentary.

I was told that this was because when the filming was done, the northern pavement was closed for repairs, but this was an animation, so that is unconvincing.

When I asked about Lechmere crouching over the body, I was told it's to represent what might have happened, that the commentary made It clear that it was only a possibility.
The exchange is somewhere on here, but looking for it could be tedious Fiver.

Steve

[Scott Nelson]

Didn't Cross stand up and go to the middle of the street when he saw Paul coming?

[Elamarna]

Chapman was on Lechmere's only known route to Pickfords. We don't know if it was his regular route, or if he went up Hanbury Street that day because he chose to keep talking to Robert Paul. None of the other victims were on a likely route for him to take to the Broad Street Station.

Again Clarification, the route we KNOW he used on one day.

Steve

[Fiver]

Thanks, I'm not really liking the position here of Lechmere as that is not by any stretch the middle of the road, therefore biased and misleading.

The position is biased and misleading. The kneeling pose is biased and misleading. The direction faced is biased and misleading. The time given is biased and misleading.

No surprise that Christer blanked you. I don't recall him ever directly dealing with evidence that undermined his theory.

[Fiver]

Minor clarification Fiver, Chapman was on ONE of the MANY possible routes into Pickfords.

Steve

Chapman was on Lechmere's only known route to Pickfords. We don't know if it was his regular route, or if he went up Hanbury Street that day because he chose to keep talking to Robert Paul. None of the other victims were on a likely route for him to take to the Broad Street Station.

[Elamarna]

* There the only coincidence is that Nichols and Chapman were both killed on Lechmere's route to work. It was also Robert Paul's route to work. And fortunately for both Lechmere and Paul, Chapman was killed after they had started work.

Minor clarification Fiver, Chapman was on ONE of the MANY possible routes into Pickfords.

Steve

[Geddy2112]

Thanks, I'm not really liking the position here of Lechmere as that is not by any stretch the middle of the road, therefore biased and misleading.

'he said at the inquest he left at 3:30'

erm that is simply not true, it's missing the 'about' which in when trying to manufacture a time gap is rather concerning.

The fact the gap is demonstrated at being at least 7 mins (even 9 mins is mentioned) the expert claims it would have taken 2 mins to perform the kill. Now I've just practiced on my teddy bear (no I have not haha) and I think it could be done faster but let's go with 7 mins minus the 2 mins. That leaves 5 mins for Lechmere to either continue cutting or to bugger off. Instead he does neither and waits around for the next passer by to arrive. Seriously this documentary and Cutting Point need putting firmly in the Fiction section.

I asked why Christer did not challenge the above picture from the documentary, since it was misleading and was blanked a couple of times... mmmm.

[Fiver]

I think, as I've scanned and scanned but forgive me there are a lot of tit for tats 'Fisherman vs The Rest of The Forum' that basically go back and forth, Fisherman not accepting anything but his version of events no matter how many times things are pointed out to the contrary. But I did read (I think) that Scobie has been to some degree discredited, or rather hoodwinked. Is this correct and has anyone a link to it on here? Has Scobie been contacted as a follow up? Apologies I'm just jumping between threads like 'Springheeled Jack' (I got that name from a YouTube video because I'd read Whizzer and Chips as a kid) and would prefer to save some time. Muchas grassy arse...

According to people who watched the video, there's a brief shot of the "evidence" given to Scobie. It's a set of bullet points, not actual witness statements and it includes only accusatory claims, not anything exculpatory.

Scobie appears to have said: "The timings really hurt him because she could have been very very recently fatally killed. You can inflict injuries, as I'm sure a pathologist will tell you, with a knife in seconds and the question is, "where were you?" "what were you doing during that time?" Because actually he has never given a proper answer. He is somebody who seems to be acting in a way, behaving in a way that is suspicious, which a jury would not like. A jury would not like that. When the coincidences add up, mount up against a defendant, and they mount up in this case, it becomes one coincidence too many. The fact that there is a pattern of offending, almost an area of offending, of which he is linked geographically and physically, you add all those points together, piece it all together and the prosecution have the most probative powerful material the courts use against individual suspects. What we would say is that he has got a prima facie case to answer which means there is a case good enough to put before a jury which suggests that he was the killer."

Which is a mix of speculation and provably false statements.

* The time gap only exists if you ignore the testimonies of PC Mizen, PC, Neil, PC Thain, and the report given by Inspector Abberline.
* The timings help Lechmere in the other cases. Most were killed before Lechmere would have started his walk to work or after he had already started his work.
* If victims bled out as fast as the documentary claims, then that makes PC Neil the most likely murderer of Nichols.
* Lechmere accounted for his movements from the time he left home until the time he found the body - he describes the approximate time he left home and gives the route he walked from his house to the murder site.
* Lechmere's actions were not suspicious. They were the actions of an innocent man or an incredibly stupid murderer.
* There the only coincidence is that Nichols and Chapman were both killed on Lechmere's route to work. It was also Robert Paul's route to work. And fortunately for both Lechmere and Paul, Chapman was killed after they had started work.
* There was no "pattern of offending". There are no records of Lechmere ever committing any criminal act.
* Lechmere is not linked geographically to any of the sites. He lived in the area, like 90% of the hundreds of named Ripper suspects.
* Lechmere is only physically linked to the Nichols murder site in that he was present at the site near the time of death. Putting him at any other site is pure speculation.

[Herlock Sholmes]

I think, as I've scanned and scanned but forgive me there are a lot of tit for tats 'Fisherman vs The Rest of The Forum' that basically go back and forth, Fisherman not accepting anything but his version of events no matter how many times things are pointed out to the contrary. But I did read (I think) that Scobie has been to some degree discredited, or rather hoodwinked. Is this correct and has anyone a link to it on here? Has Scobie been contacted as a follow up? Apologies I'm just jumping between threads like 'Springheeled Jack' (I got that name from a YouTube video because I'd read Whizzer and Chips as a kid) and would prefer to save some time. Muchas grassy arse...

Hi Geddy,

Post #1359 Evidence Of Innocence thread by Trevor Marriott, talking about Scobie:

“I had a telephone call with him discussing the full facts with him and went through with him the full facts many of which he openly stated he had not been made aware of, had he done so he would not have made the statement Fisherman seeks to prop up his theory with.”

[Geddy2112]

2) KC Scobie's part in the production that Christer so vehemently relies on. We hear Scobie was mislead, if true what can be added to allow him the bigger picture?

I think, as I've scanned and scanned but forgive me there are a lot of tit for tats 'Fisherman vs The Rest of The Forum' that basically go back and forth, Fisherman not accepting anything but his version of events no matter how many times things are pointed out to the contrary. But I did read (I think) that Scobie has been to some degree discredited, or rather hoodwinked. Is this correct and has anyone a link to it on here? Has Scobie been contacted as a follow up? Apologies I'm just jumping between threads like 'Springheeled Jack' (I got that name from a YouTube video because I'd read Whizzer and Chips as a kid) and would prefer to save some time. Muchas grassy arse...

[Geddy2112]

Definitely not from there.
Here's my response to Part 4.
And my response to Part 5.

I fear mine might not have been so 'polite.' Part 5 was an absolute joke. In fact I use the word 'tenuous' I need a stronger one... you know like 'bullshite' or the likes but 'posher' The one about the bagel 'gave me fits'... I mean really. Seriously you just cant make it up. The Journo, The Fascist and the Serial Killer...

The problem 'we' have is all the folk replying to his videos saying how great they are. I go back to the quote I found.. 'While Internet has transformed the world into a global village, it has also given a voice to people who would have been considered the village idiots.' I think it was by George Washington

[mpriestnall]

I wouldn't want a haircut from an alcoholic barber. He might not be the only one ending up half-cut.

OK, I'll get my coat.