PC Jonas Mizen

[Patrick S]

You can't win.

Lechmere did everything expected of an innocent witness. He approached the first passer-by, he searched for a policeman, he attended the inquest, he volunteered his name, address & place of business.

That's because he was GUILTY and had to do everything an innocent man would.

You're never going to win against this kind of fallacious, ass-backwards logic.

Of course, you're right, Harry. But... Damned if I cannot stop myself from trying...

[Elamarna]

Thanks, Sam. This has been published here before. Perhaps by you (apologies for not recalling). I also did not recall if his name was given as Lechmere or Cross in news reports. This is yet another giant crack in the Lechmere the Ripper facade.

Of course it's not Patrick.
I have been told by Lechmere theorists that if it is him, it merely shows that when Involved in any incident, he used the name "Cross".

You may not believe it, but apparently of he used the name Cross, at Pickfords, it actually strengths the case against Him.

It's truly unbelievable.


Steve

[Patrick S]

Of course it's not Patrick.
I have been told by Lechmere theorists that if it is him, it merely shows that when Involved in any incident, he used the name "Cross".

You may not believe it, but apparently of he used the name Cross, at Pickfords, it actually strengths the case against Him.

It's truly unbelievable.


Steve

I don't even want to try and understand the logic behind that, Steve.

[Elamarna]

I don't even want to try and understand the logic behind that, Steve.

Logic is hardly the word to use.
It's the inevitable result of being convinced that one man is guilty. Everything must point towards guilt, even when I does not.
It's a form of intellectual bankruptcy .

And just so it's clear, I am NOT saying it was Christer who argued this point.


Steve

[Sam Flynn]

And just so it's clear, I am NOT saying it was Christer who argued this point.

I bet Fish was annoyed he didn't think of it first, though

[drstrange169]

>>Actually its not. I had brought this up before and was reminded that lech hadnt seen the killer or even heard him walking away. The killer had nothing to fear from lech and so vice versus.<<

Actually it is, because in that scenario it would be Lechmere's fear of what the killer might do, not what the killer would actually do.

[GUT]

>>Actually its not. I had brought this up before and was reminded that lech hadnt seen the killer or even heard him walking away. The killer had nothing to fear from lech and so vice versus.<<

Actually it is, because in that scenario it would be Lechmere's fear of what the killer might do, not what the killer would actually do.

Precisely

[GUT]

>>Actually its not. I had brought this up before and was reminded that lech hadnt seen the killer or even heard him walking away. The killer had nothing to fear from lech and so vice versus.<<

Actually it is, because in that scenario it would be Lechmere's fear of what the killer might do, not what the killer would actually do.

And how would the killer know if the police were holding back information.

[Abby Normal]

And how would the killer know if the police were holding back information.

hi gut and strange

more than likely if innocent, and lech not wanting any kind of recognition, it had to do with not getting involved or his family involved and the hassles that went with it.

the killer obviously knew he gotten away without being seen and lech only confirms it. whats lech got to fear from the killer-reprisal for not seeing or hearing anything? cmon.

[drstrange169]

>>whats lech got to fear from the killer-reprisal for not seeing or hearing anything? cmon.<<

Well, first of all, I don't believe Lechmere was trying to hide anything, but if we are talking about fear, then unemotional reasoning doesn't come into it, fear drives irrational behaviour. This was an early murder nobody could profile the killer's reasoning or actions at that stage.

>>more than likely if innocent, and lech not wanting any kind of recognition, it had to do with not getting involved or his family involved and the hassles that went with it.<<

I'd tend to agree with that option.

On the other hand creating a false name, if guilty, serves no real purpose other than drawing attention to oneself.

[drstrange169]

Also, it's just occurred to me, Lechmere had a wife and several daughters, under those circumstances, I'd be worried about attracting attention to my family.

[GUT]

hi gut and strange

more than likely if innocent, and lech not wanting any kind of recognition, it had to do with not getting involved or his family involved and the hassles that went with it.

the killer obviously knew he gotten away without being seen and lech only confirms it. whats lech got to fear from the killer-reprisal for not seeing or hearing anything? cmon.

Whilst I agree it was more likely about involvement, if it was fear, it’s not a question of what the killer though, it knew, but what Cross feared, rightly or not.

[Sunny Delight]

I find the linking of an obviously innocent man like Charles Cross to the murders and the attempt to portray him as the Ripper wholly ungratifying. At the end of the day this is not just a name on a page- he was a real person, someone who lived a thoroughly decent life by all accounts. That he so happened to he the unlucky witness who found a murder victims body was his misfortune. There is not one shred of evidence to link him to any other murders and the whole thing has become a hobby horse that is so convoluted and ultimately disrespectful it is hard to take seriously.

[John Wheat]

I find the linking of an obviously innocent man like Charles Cross to the murders and the attempt to portray him as the Ripper wholly ungratifying. At the end of the day this is not just a name on a page- he was a real person, someone who lived a thoroughly decent life by all accounts. That he so happened to he the unlucky witness who found a murder victims body was his misfortune. There is not one shred of evidence to link him to any other murders and the whole thing has become a hobby horse that is so convoluted and ultimately disrespectful it is hard to take seriously.

Totally agree Sunny Delight.

[FISHY1118]

Totally agree Sunny Delight.

Well said Sunny ,now can you do the same for Druitt ? Esp this bit .

''There is not one shred of evidence to link him to any other murders and the whole thing has become a hobby horse that is so convoluted and ultimately disrespectful it is hard to take seriously''