Suspect battle: Cross/Lechmere vs. Hutchinson

[John Wheat]

A Few of the Major Problems with Lechmere

There are some major problems with Lechmere as a suspect these include:

Anyone in the area at the time could have inflicted the wounds before scarpering any where between a couple of minutes up to half an hour depending on which expert is correct before Lechmere found the body.

A complete lack of anything that connects him to the crimes.

A complete lack of any recorded incidents of violence in his life, let alone any violence involving a knife.

Lechmere doesn't match any of the JTR psych profiles. No psyche profile can be 100% accurate and some question there validity but there is likely to be a large amount of correlation between the JTR psyche profiles and JTR.

[Columbo]

Rainbow and all

It is clear that the post #498 is a copy of another posters work :

http://forum.casebook.org/showpost.php?p=370045&postcount=468

No credit as been shown, nor quotes or the quotation facility used, this is wrong. The impression is that this is your own work.


steve

I agree. Give credit where credit is due. That was Fisherman's list. I think Rainbow mentioned that in a later post.

Columbo

[Columbo]

There are some major problems with Lechmere as a suspect these include:

Anyone in the area at the time could have inflicted the wounds before scarpering any where between a couple of minutes up to half an hour depending on which expert is correct before Lechmere found the body.

A complete lack of anything that connects him to the crimes.

A complete lack of any recorded incidents of violence in his life, let alone any violence involving a knife.

Lechmere doesn't match any of the JTR psych profiles. No psyche profile can be 100% accurate and some question there validity but there is likely to be a large amount of correlation between the JTR psyche profiles and JTR.

Well, I gotta play devil's advocate. His finding Nichols ties him to the crime, as any witness would be. There is nothing to tie anyone to the commission of the crimes themselves.

Columbo

[John Wheat]

Well, I gotta play devil's advocate. His finding Nichols ties him to the crime, as any witness would be. There is nothing to tie anyone to the commission of the crimes themselves.

Columbo

Hi Colombo

If any witness is tied to the crime than there are loads of people who are tied to the crime. What makes Lechmere any different to any of them? Nothing.

Other suspects have histories of violence.

Other suspects match the psyche profile's much better than Lechmere.

Cheers John

[Columbo]

Hi Colombo

If any witness is tied to the crime than there are loads of people who are tied to the crime. What makes Lechmere any different to any of them? Nothing.

Other suspects have histories of violence.

Other suspects match the psyche profile's much better than Lechmere.

Cheers John

Sorry I should've been clearer. Lechmere is tied historically only to the crime, not as the perpetrator. Similar to someone who witnessed JFK's assassination.

Columbo

[drstrange169]

>>Number 1: Charles Lechmere happens to stumble over the dead body of Polly Nichols.<<


As did Davis, Diemshitz, Watkins and Bowyer with their respective bodies and all accused at some stage of being Jtr.


>>Number 2: The wounds to the abdomen were covered, whereas this does not apply in the other Ripper cases. Was that a coincidence, or did it serve the practical purpose of hiding from Paul what had really happened? If Paul had discovered that it was a murder, then Lechmere would not have been able to leave the premises without suspicion.<<


A. There is some doubt that all the abdominal wounds were covered.

B. Mrs Nichols was the only victim recorded as wearing stays, this means a different modus was necessary.

C. The neck wound was not covered, which demolishes this particular theory.


>>Number 3: As Lechmere approaches the body, he has Robert Paul walking right behind him, thirty to forty yards away, so they are on the same, absolutely silent street. In spite of this, neither man professes to have seen or heard the other. And we know that John Neil heard his colleague Thain walk past the Buck´s Row/Brady Street crossing – 130 yards away!...<<

P.C.’s Thain and Neil wore wooden soled shoes and walked at a regulated pace. It is an accepted fact that a policeman’s tread was recognisable.


>>Number 4: Lechmere must have passed up at the Bath Street/Foster Street ...<<

There is no evidence that Xmere walked along Bath Street.


>>Number 5: Nichols bled from the wounds in the neck as Mizen saw her, around five, six minutes after Lechmere had left the body...<<

It is not a fact that Mizen saw her bleeding from the neck when he first arrived.


>>Number 6: The blood in the pool under her neck was ”somewhat congealed” ...<<

Negated by the above answer.


>>Number 7: Lechmere called Paul to the body, as if he wanted to see what they could do for the woman. But when Paul proposed that they should prop her up, Lechmere suddenly refused to do so...<<

A. Xmere drew Paul’s attention to the body, allowed him to examine around the neck area making the above point nonsensical.

B. The only reason we know this story is because Xmere volunteered the information. Not the actions of a guilty man surely?


>>Number 8: Lechmere arrived to the inquest in working clothes, thereby deviating from all other witnesses.
Our suggestion is that he used a false name and avoided to give his adress before the inquest in order to avoid having it known amongst his family and aquaintances that he had been a witness in the Nichols case....<<

A. How do we know what the other witnesses wore wasn’t their work clothes?

B. How could the “family” not know the name Cross? How could the family not recognise 22 Doveton Street as their home?


>>Number 9: Lechmere´s fastest routes to work were Old Montague Street...<<

Since we don't know where Xmere entered the Broad Street depot, it is impossible to talk about fastest routes or indeed whether he actual went down any street other than the ones he mentions at the inquest.


>>Number 10: All of these four murders may well have taken place at removes in time when Lechmere was heading for Pickfords ...<<

See next answer.


>>Number 11: The Stride and Eddowes murders did not take place along his working routes, ruling out that he committed these murders en route to Pickfords. Instead, they are the only murders to take place on his night off, Saturday night...<<

If Xmere was not at work, point Number10 cannot be true.


>>Number 12: The Stride murder is perpetrated in St Georges in the East ...<<

Assuming Stride was a victim of the same murderer.


Number 13: ... if he had visited his mother, he would have to head north past the murder spot to get home...<<

Doveton Street is east not north of Maryanne Street.


>>Number 14: These two murders took place much earlier than the others ...<<

A. Depending on whom you believe, Mary Kelly was murdered close the time of Catherine eddowes murder or after Mrs Nichols.

B. Dr Phillips believed Cathrine Eddowes to have been murder by someone else.


>>Number 15: ... his mother was a dominant force in his life – she managed to bring her two children up singlehandedly until Lechmere was around ten year old (her husband, Charles´ father, had left the family), and then she married a ten year younger man. After his premature death, she remarried again,with a ten year older man...<<

How many East End families experienced similar conditions?


>>Number 16: Charles Lechmere gave the name Cross to the police, instead of using his real name. There are around 110 instances where we can follow the carman´s contacts with different authorities...<<

A. Was the use of the name Cross illegal at the inquest?

B. Was the name Lechmere more relevant and/or legally binding on those other occasions?

C. How many of the 110 instances were simply repeat forms filled by another hand?


>>Number 17: Charles Lechmere´s family came to be involved in the horse flesh business...<<

By “came to be” do you mean after the jtr murders? If so, how is this relevant?


>>Number 18: During the time Lechmere had a stand in Broadway Market, two dead women were found floating in Regents canal, passing through the market. Neither death was fully explained and the causes of death were not established.<<

Can you suppy us with exact details so we can cross check this allegation?


>>Number 19: Charles Lechmere did not raise any alarm ...<<

What alarm should he have raised? Even after examining the body, neither man believed a murder had been committed.


>>Number 20: ...<<

This has been dealt with in detail elsewhere. The balance of probabilities are that Xmere’s version was the correct one.


>>Number 21: The things Lechmere say at the inquest mirrors the wordings Paul used in his newspaper report to a considerable extent ...<<

If the two men saw the same thing, wouldn’t it be even stranger if they did not tell the same story?


>>Number 22: Lechmere only came forward after Paul had outed him...<<

Prove that statement to be a correct one.


>>Number 23: Paul saw no blood under Nichols´ neck in spite of kneeling by her side and checking for breath. He saw her clothes and her hat, though. Could it be that the cuts were so fresh that the stream of blood towards the gutter had not yet formed?<<

And if Xmere disturbed the killer wouldn’t it be exactly the same?


>>Number 24: In spite of Old Montague street being the shorter route ...<<

Again you make an unverifiable statement about an alleged fastest route. There is no evidence Xmere ever went down Old Montague Street. The only streets we can verify are the ones mentioned at the inquest.


>>Number 25: Serialists regularly lack a father figure growing up. That fits Lechmere´s life... <<

Charles Lechmere didn’t lack a father figure growing up, he had one and his name was Cross.


>>Number 26: Lechmere seems not to have given his address in open court during the inquest...<<

“Seems” is a very vague word to build a case on.


>>Number 27: The quickest road from Berner Street to Mitre Square is Lechmere´s logical old working route from James Street ...<<

Even if we assume he worked at Broad Street when he lived in James Street, which we can't, no, it wasn’t the shortest route.


>>Number 28: The Pinchin Street torso was discovered in a street where Lechmere has lived earlier with his family, and a very short route from 147 Cable Street where his mother, who became a cat´s meat woman ...<<

A when did this Cat’s meat business start and what exactly did it entail? Are you now claiming Mrs Cross was the killer?


>>Number 29: The implications are that the Pinchin Street torso was carried manually to the dumping site.<<

And according to the newspapers, people carried sacks around the area.


>>Number 30: Charles Lechmere stated that he had left home at 3.20 or 3.30 on the murder morning...<<

Xmere’s timings are in sync with three policemen and Baxter’s inquest summation. The only discord comes from the Lloyds Weekly’s article about Paul, an article known to be inaccurate and Paul did not repeat the 3:45 timing under oath.


>>Number 31: Lechmere said that he and Paul both spoke to Mizen, but Mizen is clear in saying that ”a carman”, not ”two carmen”, contacted him on the murder morning.<<

If you believe the Lloyds article to be accurate, as you suggest in the last point, then you have to accept that Paul did talk to Mizen and Mizen’s story was incorrect.

[John Wheat]

Hi Dusty

Interesting response to the usual level of utter bullshit on Lechmere. I like your quote on your posts. However my question is when has an expert ever actually bolstered the Lechmere theory? From what I have read it is those proponents of the Lechmere theory that tend to misrepresent what experts have said in support of the laughable theory that Lechmere was JTR.

Cheers John

[Rainbow]

Hi Colombo

If any witness is tied to the crime than there are loads of people who are tied to the crime. What makes Lechmere any different to any of them? Nothing.

Lechmere was not a witness, thats what you want to think, but this is simply not true...

Lechmere was a man who has been seen by the true witness Paul , standing by a fresh bleeding murdered woman

don't change the facts..

[Elamarna]

Lechmere was not a witness, thats what you want to think, but this is simply not true...

Lechmere was a man who has been seen by the true witness Paul , standing by a fresh bleeding murdered woman

don't change the facts..

It is you who are changing the facts, he was not standing by, but close to in the same street.

It seems you accept every word that Fisherman has ever said as being Gospel.

I admire the work and effort he has put into the Lechmere theory, but it is still only a theory, you however seem to believe it is established fact.

By the way where did those 3x3minute timings come from?

Is there any data on those specific events you claimed each last 3 minutes?


Why can you not give an answer?

cheers


Steve

[Elamarna]

>>Number 1: Charles Lechmere happens to stumble over the dead body of Polly Nichols.<<


As did Davis, Diemshitz, Watkins and Bowyer with their respective bodies and all accused at some stage of being Jtr.


>>Number 2: The wounds to the abdomen were covered, whereas this does not apply in the other Ripper cases. Was that a coincidence, or did it serve the practical purpose of hiding from Paul what had really happened? If Paul had discovered that it was a murder, then Lechmere would not have been able to leave the premises without suspicion.<<


A. There is some doubt that all the abdominal wounds were covered.

B. Mrs Nichols was the only victim recorded as wearing stays, this means a different modus was necessary.

C. The neck wound was not covered, which demolishes this particular theory.


>>Number 3: As Lechmere approaches the body, he has Robert Paul walking right behind him, thirty to forty yards away, so they are on the same, absolutely silent street. In spite of this, neither man professes to have seen or heard the other. And we know that John Neil heard his colleague Thain walk past the Buck´s Row/Brady Street crossing – 130 yards away!...<<

P.C.’s Thain and Neil wore wooden soled shoes and walked at a regulated pace. It is an accepted fact that a policeman’s tread was recognisable.


>>Number 4: Lechmere must have passed up at the Bath Street/Foster Street ...<<

There is no evidence that Xmere walked along Bath Street.


>>Number 5: Nichols bled from the wounds in the neck as Mizen saw her, around five, six minutes after Lechmere had left the body...<<

It is not a fact that Mizen saw her bleeding from the neck when he first arrived.


>>Number 6: The blood in the pool under her neck was ”somewhat congealed” ...<<

Negated by the above answer.


>>Number 7: Lechmere called Paul to the body, as if he wanted to see what they could do for the woman. But when Paul proposed that they should prop her up, Lechmere suddenly refused to do so...<<

A. Xmere drew Paul’s attention to the body, allowed him to examine around the neck area making the above point nonsensical.

B. The only reason we know this story is because Xmere volunteered the information. Not the actions of a guilty man surely?


>>Number 8: Lechmere arrived to the inquest in working clothes, thereby deviating from all other witnesses.
Our suggestion is that he used a false name and avoided to give his adress before the inquest in order to avoid having it known amongst his family and aquaintances that he had been a witness in the Nichols case....<<

A. How do we know what the other witnesses wore wasn’t their work clothes?

B. How could the “family” not know the name Cross? How could the family not recognise 22 Doveton Street as their home?


>>Number 9: Lechmere´s fastest routes to work were Old Montague Street...<<

Since we don't know where Xmere entered the Broad Street depot, it is impossible to talk about fastest routes or indeed whether he actual went down any street other than the ones he mentions at the inquest.


>>Number 10: All of these four murders may well have taken place at removes in time when Lechmere was heading for Pickfords ...<<

See next answer.


>>Number 11: The Stride and Eddowes murders did not take place along his working routes, ruling out that he committed these murders en route to Pickfords. Instead, they are the only murders to take place on his night off, Saturday night...<<

If Xmere was not at work, point Number10 cannot be true.


>>Number 12: The Stride murder is perpetrated in St Georges in the East ...<<

Assuming Stride was a victim of the same murderer.


Number 13: ... if he had visited his mother, he would have to head north past the murder spot to get home...<<

Doveton Street is east not north of Maryanne Street.


>>Number 14: These two murders took place much earlier than the others ...<<

A. Depending on whom you believe, Mary Kelly was murdered close the time of Catherine eddowes murder or after Mrs Nichols.

B. Dr Phillips believed Cathrine Eddowes to have been murder by someone else.


>>Number 15: ... his mother was a dominant force in his life – she managed to bring her two children up singlehandedly until Lechmere was around ten year old (her husband, Charles´ father, had left the family), and then she married a ten year younger man. After his premature death, she remarried again,with a ten year older man...<<

How many East End families experienced similar conditions?


>>Number 16: Charles Lechmere gave the name Cross to the police, instead of using his real name. There are around 110 instances where we can follow the carman´s contacts with different authorities...<<

A. Was the use of the name Cross illegal at the inquest?

B. Was the name Lechmere more relevant and/or legally binding on those other occasions?

C. How many of the 110 instances were simply repeat forms filled by another hand?


>>Number 17: Charles Lechmere´s family came to be involved in the horse flesh business...<<

By “came to be” do you mean after the jtr murders? If so, how is this relevant?


>>Number 18: During the time Lechmere had a stand in Broadway Market, two dead women were found floating in Regents canal, passing through the market. Neither death was fully explained and the causes of death were not established.<<

Can you suppy us with exact details so we can cross check this allegation?


>>Number 19: Charles Lechmere did not raise any alarm ...<<

What alarm should he have raised? Even after examining the body, neither man believed a murder had been committed.


>>Number 20: ...<<

This has been dealt with in detail elsewhere. The balance of probabilities are that Xmere’s version was the correct one.


>>Number 21: The things Lechmere say at the inquest mirrors the wordings Paul used in his newspaper report to a considerable extent ...<<

If the two men saw the same thing, wouldn’t it be even stranger if they did not tell the same story?


>>Number 22: Lechmere only came forward after Paul had outed him...<<

Prove that statement to be a correct one.


>>Number 23: Paul saw no blood under Nichols´ neck in spite of kneeling by her side and checking for breath. He saw her clothes and her hat, though. Could it be that the cuts were so fresh that the stream of blood towards the gutter had not yet formed?<<

And if Xmere disturbed the killer wouldn’t it be exactly the same?


>>Number 24: In spite of Old Montague street being the shorter route ...<<

Again you make an unverifiable statement about an alleged fastest route. There is no evidence Xmere ever went down Old Montague Street. The only streets we can verify are the ones mentioned at the inquest.


>>Number 25: Serialists regularly lack a father figure growing up. That fits Lechmere´s life... <<

Charles Lechmere didn’t lack a father figure growing up, he had one and his name was Cross.


>>Number 26: Lechmere seems not to have given his address in open court during the inquest...<<

“Seems” is a very vague word to build a case on.


>>Number 27: The quickest road from Berner Street to Mitre Square is Lechmere´s logical old working route from James Street ...<<

Even if we assume he worked at Broad Street when he lived in James Street, which we can't, no, it wasn’t the shortest route.


>>Number 28: The Pinchin Street torso was discovered in a street where Lechmere has lived earlier with his family, and a very short route from 147 Cable Street where his mother, who became a cat´s meat woman ...<<

A when did this Cat’s meat business start and what exactly did it entail? Are you now claiming Mrs Cross was the killer?


>>Number 29: The implications are that the Pinchin Street torso was carried manually to the dumping site.<<

And according to the newspapers, people carried sacks around the area.


>>Number 30: Charles Lechmere stated that he had left home at 3.20 or 3.30 on the murder morning...<<

Xmere’s timings are in sync with three policemen and Baxter’s inquest summation. The only discord comes from the Lloyds Weekly’s article about Paul, an article known to be inaccurate and Paul did not repeat the 3:45 timing under oath.


>>Number 31: Lechmere said that he and Paul both spoke to Mizen, but Mizen is clear in saying that ”a carman”, not ”two carmen”, contacted him on the murder morning.<<

If you believe the Lloyds article to be accurate, as you suggest in the last point, then you have to accept that Paul did talk to Mizen and Mizen’s story was incorrect.

Love the response, lots of nice detail, that mine was lacking.

regards


Steve

[Columbo]

Lechmere was not a witness, thats what you want to think, but this is simply not true...

Lechmere was a man who has been seen by the true witness Paul , standing by a fresh bleeding murdered woman

don't change the facts..

Don't invent facts. There is no proof she was "freshly bleeding".

Columbo

[Columbo]

>>Number 1: Charles Lechmere happens to stumble over the dead body of Polly Nichols.<<


As did Davis, Diemshitz, Watkins and Bowyer with their respective bodies and all accused at some stage of being Jtr.


>>Number 2: The wounds to the abdomen were covered, whereas this does not apply in the other Ripper cases. Was that a coincidence, or did it serve the practical purpose of hiding from Paul what had really happened? If Paul had discovered that it was a murder, then Lechmere would not have been able to leave the premises without suspicion.<<


A. There is some doubt that all the abdominal wounds were covered.

B. Mrs Nichols was the only victim recorded as wearing stays, this means a different modus was necessary.

C. The neck wound was not covered, which demolishes this particular theory.


>>Number 3: As Lechmere approaches the body, he has Robert Paul walking right behind him, thirty to forty yards away, so they are on the same, absolutely silent street. In spite of this, neither man professes to have seen or heard the other. And we know that John Neil heard his colleague Thain walk past the Buck´s Row/Brady Street crossing – 130 yards away!...<<

P.C.’s Thain and Neil wore wooden soled shoes and walked at a regulated pace. It is an accepted fact that a policeman’s tread was recognisable.


>>Number 4: Lechmere must have passed up at the Bath Street/Foster Street ...<<

There is no evidence that Xmere walked along Bath Street.


>>Number 5: Nichols bled from the wounds in the neck as Mizen saw her, around five, six minutes after Lechmere had left the body...<<

It is not a fact that Mizen saw her bleeding from the neck when he first arrived.


>>Number 6: The blood in the pool under her neck was ”somewhat congealed” ...<<

Negated by the above answer.


>>Number 7: Lechmere called Paul to the body, as if he wanted to see what they could do for the woman. But when Paul proposed that they should prop her up, Lechmere suddenly refused to do so...<<

A. Xmere drew Paul’s attention to the body, allowed him to examine around the neck area making the above point nonsensical.

B. The only reason we know this story is because Xmere volunteered the information. Not the actions of a guilty man surely?


>>Number 8: Lechmere arrived to the inquest in working clothes, thereby deviating from all other witnesses.
Our suggestion is that he used a false name and avoided to give his adress before the inquest in order to avoid having it known amongst his family and aquaintances that he had been a witness in the Nichols case....<<

A. How do we know what the other witnesses wore wasn’t their work clothes?

B. How could the “family” not know the name Cross? How could the family not recognise 22 Doveton Street as their home?


>>Number 9: Lechmere´s fastest routes to work were Old Montague Street...<<

Since we don't know where Xmere entered the Broad Street depot, it is impossible to talk about fastest routes or indeed whether he actual went down any street other than the ones he mentions at the inquest.


>>Number 10: All of these four murders may well have taken place at removes in time when Lechmere was heading for Pickfords ...<<

See next answer.


>>Number 11: The Stride and Eddowes murders did not take place along his working routes, ruling out that he committed these murders en route to Pickfords. Instead, they are the only murders to take place on his night off, Saturday night...<<

If Xmere was not at work, point Number10 cannot be true.


>>Number 12: The Stride murder is perpetrated in St Georges in the East ...<<

Assuming Stride was a victim of the same murderer.


Number 13: ... if he had visited his mother, he would have to head north past the murder spot to get home...<<

Doveton Street is east not north of Maryanne Street.


>>Number 14: These two murders took place much earlier than the others ...<<

A. Depending on whom you believe, Mary Kelly was murdered close the time of Catherine eddowes murder or after Mrs Nichols.

B. Dr Phillips believed Cathrine Eddowes to have been murder by someone else.


>>Number 15: ... his mother was a dominant force in his life – she managed to bring her two children up singlehandedly until Lechmere was around ten year old (her husband, Charles´ father, had left the family), and then she married a ten year younger man. After his premature death, she remarried again,with a ten year older man...<<

How many East End families experienced similar conditions?


>>Number 16: Charles Lechmere gave the name Cross to the police, instead of using his real name. There are around 110 instances where we can follow the carman´s contacts with different authorities...<<

A. Was the use of the name Cross illegal at the inquest?

B. Was the name Lechmere more relevant and/or legally binding on those other occasions?

C. How many of the 110 instances were simply repeat forms filled by another hand?


>>Number 17: Charles Lechmere´s family came to be involved in the horse flesh business...<<

By “came to be” do you mean after the jtr murders? If so, how is this relevant?


>>Number 18: During the time Lechmere had a stand in Broadway Market, two dead women were found floating in Regents canal, passing through the market. Neither death was fully explained and the causes of death were not established.<<

Can you suppy us with exact details so we can cross check this allegation?


>>Number 19: Charles Lechmere did not raise any alarm ...<<

What alarm should he have raised? Even after examining the body, neither man believed a murder had been committed.


>>Number 20: ...<<

This has been dealt with in detail elsewhere. The balance of probabilities are that Xmere’s version was the correct one.


>>Number 21: The things Lechmere say at the inquest mirrors the wordings Paul used in his newspaper report to a considerable extent ...<<

If the two men saw the same thing, wouldn’t it be even stranger if they did not tell the same story?


>>Number 22: Lechmere only came forward after Paul had outed him...<<

Prove that statement to be a correct one.


>>Number 23: Paul saw no blood under Nichols´ neck in spite of kneeling by her side and checking for breath. He saw her clothes and her hat, though. Could it be that the cuts were so fresh that the stream of blood towards the gutter had not yet formed?<<

And if Xmere disturbed the killer wouldn’t it be exactly the same?


>>Number 24: In spite of Old Montague street being the shorter route ...<<

Again you make an unverifiable statement about an alleged fastest route. There is no evidence Xmere ever went down Old Montague Street. The only streets we can verify are the ones mentioned at the inquest.


>>Number 25: Serialists regularly lack a father figure growing up. That fits Lechmere´s life... <<

Charles Lechmere didn’t lack a father figure growing up, he had one and his name was Cross.


>>Number 26: Lechmere seems not to have given his address in open court during the inquest...<<

“Seems” is a very vague word to build a case on.


>>Number 27: The quickest road from Berner Street to Mitre Square is Lechmere´s logical old working route from James Street ...<<

Even if we assume he worked at Broad Street when he lived in James Street, which we can't, no, it wasn’t the shortest route.


>>Number 28: The Pinchin Street torso was discovered in a street where Lechmere has lived earlier with his family, and a very short route from 147 Cable Street where his mother, who became a cat´s meat woman ...<<

A when did this Cat’s meat business start and what exactly did it entail? Are you now claiming Mrs Cross was the killer?


>>Number 29: The implications are that the Pinchin Street torso was carried manually to the dumping site.<<

And according to the newspapers, people carried sacks around the area.


>>Number 30: Charles Lechmere stated that he had left home at 3.20 or 3.30 on the murder morning...<<

Xmere’s timings are in sync with three policemen and Baxter’s inquest summation. The only discord comes from the Lloyds Weekly’s article about Paul, an article known to be inaccurate and Paul did not repeat the 3:45 timing under oath.


>>Number 31: Lechmere said that he and Paul both spoke to Mizen, but Mizen is clear in saying that ”a carman”, not ”two carmen”, contacted him on the murder morning.<<

If you believe the Lloyds article to be accurate, as you suggest in the last point, then you have to accept that Paul did talk to Mizen and Mizen’s story was incorrect.

Well done.

Columbo

[John Wheat]

Lechmere was not a witness, thats what you want to think, but this is simply not true...

Lechmere was a man who has been seen by the true witness Paul , standing by a fresh bleeding murdered woman

don't change the facts..

I'm not changing the facts. History regards Lechmere as a witness. Unless you or any of the other Lechmere boys can give a good reason why the killer hadn't left the scene anywhere up to half an hour before Lechmere arrived. Then don't accuse me of changing the facts.

[Abby Normal]

Don't invent facts. There is no proof she was "freshly bleeding".

Columbo

I think you could accurately describe her as freshly bleeding. I mean she was still bleeding from the neck wound when the cops looked at her.

[Columbo]

I think you could accurately describe her as freshly bleeding. I mean she was still bleeding from the neck wound when the cops looked at her.

Yes blood was still coming out but I think the huge debate over oozing or flowing has put that into question. Was it old blood building up and oozing out or was it still bleeding from the pressure of the faded heartbeats?

Columbo