Suspect battle: Cross/Lechmere vs. Hutchinson

[drstrange169]

Charles Lechmere is a person of interest but, yet again, we see people distorting the known evidence to elevate him to suspect status.

What two sets of three minutes?

Where and when did Paul specifically say he didn't hear footsteps?

If Mrs Nichols was bleeding when the two carmen examined her, why didn't they say so?

If Xmere was standing "where the body was" why did Paul say he "went with him" to look at the body?

The quote cited in post 469 is an excerpt from The Lloyds Weekly, an article known to be an incorrect version of what happened that night.

If we are to believe that particular article, then we have to accept Xmere did not lie to PC Mizen, as Paul claimed he was the one that spoke to Mizen.

Lechmere is interesting as a potential suspect, but the theory falls over every time someone tries to cherrypick a case against him.

[Abby Normal]

She/He's not going to tell you. by the tone of his/her posts I would bet this is a JTR troll trying to get people riled up. Same old stuff we've seen in other threads ad nauseum.

There are two parallels for Lechmere and Hutchinson in my opinion. They both allegedly lied about something in their statements. Lechmere (to some) may have lied about his name. Hutchinson (I believe) lied about Astrakhan man. He knew the victim and places himself there late at night not too long before the estimated time of death.

The reason I think he lied about Astrakhan man is the standard. too many details in too short a time in minimal lighting. Couple that with the fact no one else reported seeing him. The cops with Hutchinson in tow, couldn't locate him and he was dropped immediately from the investigation.

Columbo

Well
Also Hutch was engaging in stalking behavior, had no real excuse for being there, and conveniently shows up right after the inquest is over.

He makes a much better suspect than lech imho.

[John Wheat]

I see now where your and others problem comes from..

It is not Lechmere found a body on his way to work..

Its Paul who found a body and a man standing by this body on his way to work....

that makes all the difference......

No Lechmere did find a body on the way to work. Paul later joined Lechmere in looking at the body. You can't convict a man merely for finding a body and looking at it. Nothing whatsoever suggests Lechmere was JTR.

[Pcdunn]

"Grasshopper" Rainbow has the conviction of youth, and thinks the television film has explained it all, I venture to say. I think the chances he/she has read any of the original sources regarding Cross/ Lechmere are very slim.

The three-minute blocks of time may have come from the Lechmere documentary or perhaps from some of Fisherman's writings on this forum.

[Rainbow]

shame on you..

forget about me, go and try to build a case against a mad jew ...

or maybe against an american quack...

or a sailor who traveled to argentina...

or a cricket player whom after a month of kelly's murder thought he was going to be like his mum and threw himself in the water...

thats better for you

[GUT]

shame on you..

forget about me, go and try to build a case against a mad jew ...

or maybe against an american quack...

or a sailor who traveled to argentina...

or a cricket player whom after a month of kelly's murder thought he was going to be like his mum and threw himself in the water...

thats better for you

Well where do the three minutes come from.

[Elamarna]

shame on you..

forget about me, go and try to build a case against a mad jew ...

or maybe against an american quack...

or a sailor who traveled to argentina...

or a cricket player whom after a month of kelly's murder thought he was going to be like his mum and threw himself in the water...

thats better for you

Rainbow,

instead of hurling insults and making accusations, why not just answer the question I asked you?

Or is it the comment posted by Columbo true,

no reply will assume so and so will everyone else I am sure


bye


Steve

[Columbo]

Well
Also Hutch was engaging in stalking behavior, had no real excuse for being there, and conveniently shows up right after the inquest is over.

He makes a much better suspect than lech imho.

The stalking behavior never occurred to me. Excellent point.

Columbo

[Columbo]

shame on you..

forget about me, go and try to build a case against a mad jew ...

or maybe against an american quack...

or a sailor who traveled to argentina...

or a cricket player whom after a month of kelly's murder thought he was going to be like his mum and threw himself in the water...

thats better for you

Actually I think people have already done that. It doesn't make them right.

Most of the one's you mentioned were considered suspects at the time. Charles Lechmere wasn't.

Keep trollin'. I'm sure most posters here have forgotten you as you asked.

Columbo

[drstrange169]

>>forget about me, go and try to build a case against a mad jew ... etc.<<

Better still forget trying to pin the murders on anybody and just learn about the people and the times, which the really interesting stuff.

[Columbo]

>>forget about me, go and try to build a case against a mad jew ... etc.<<

Better still forget trying to pin the murders on anybody and just learn about the people and the times, which the really interesting stuff.

I couldn't agree more. The "Pin the Murder on the latest Suspect" has grown tiresome.

Columbo

[Damaso Marte]

Tsk tsk at Lynn and co for not letting us have any fun in this kind of thread and fighting the poll question.

Lechmere can be absolutely and without a doubt placed at a murder scene, which is not true of any other suspect we generally discuss. This statement is not meant to propose that Lechmere was the Ripper, but rather to demonstrate the parlous state of the case against the known suspects. Lechmere's candidacy suffers from defects other than not being known to have been at a murder scene.

Hutchinson might be wide-awake man, or might be a complete fabulist.

[Rainbow]

Tsk tsk at Lynn and co for not letting us have any fun in this kind of thread and fighting the poll question.

Lechmere can be absolutely and without a doubt placed at a murder scene, which is not true of any other suspect we generally discuss.

at a murder scene.. while the victim was still bleeding, at the time of death too

I don't care if he has one child or eleven, I don't care if he gave his real name or a false one, I don't care if he has a motive or not, if he lived happily ever after or not.....he is the prime suspect till he clear himself infront of a court

thank you Damaso and Abby for being rational

[GUT]

I love the "H's a better suspect than ....." (not just by crossites), so what. Best of a bad bunch doesn't prove Jack.

[John Wheat]

I love the "H's a better suspect than ....." (not just by crossites), so what. Best of a bad bunch doesn't prove Jack.

Lechmere is not the best of a bad bunch. In no way is a random witness the best suspect. Just because he found body allegedly shortly after the victim died does in no way make him the strongest suspect.