The Lechmere/Cross "name issue"

[Patrick S]

This is a very interesting hypothesis! I'm going to have to give it some thought.

Don't give it much thought, John. I completely invented it and only present as it as a device for arguing against Lechmere. See, we've been told to 'view the theory with an eye on Lechmere's guilt'. We've been told that a series of events and characters conspired - unwittingly - to help Lechmere get away with murder, even though Lechmere himself did not CARE if he got away it (and get away with murder he did, for decades, even though he did NOT care about getting away with it - according to Christer). Paul aided him because he was a publicity seeking crackpot with an axe to grind against the police. Mizen was honest and good and Christian, but was duped by Lechmere who was clearly a psychopath because he killed Nichols and was Jack the Ripper and the Toro Killer, among others. His wife never suspected him. His 10 kids never suspected him. The police never suspected him (I'll remind you here that he did not CARE if he got away with it but he seems to have been REALLY good at getting away with it).

This theory, MY theory, requires no one doing anything other than what we know they did. I don't have to assign motives to Neil or Mizen or Thain, or Llewellyn. I don't have to assume anyone is honest or corrupt or lying or stupid or brilliant or a psychopath. I only need to say that James Green was Jack the Ripper because the information we have tells us he is the only one who had the opportunity to be Jack the Ripper. We know his name. We know he lived on the spot. We know he got involved, right? He cleaned up his own mess, didn't he! Essentially, this seems a good way to combat the "prove Lechmere" wasn't Jack the Ripper. Fair enough. If that's our metric for a good suspect, then prove to me that James Green wasn't Jack the Ripper.

[Patrick S]

I'm afraid I don't understand this.

You say that you are accepting "for the purpose of this conversation" that oozing and running mean the same thing (although that wasn't what I said) then you ask whether the blood was running or oozing and say you don't know!

If they mean the same thing then the blood was both running and oozing wasn't it?

Yes. I'm glad we settled that.

[Fisherman]

Patrick S:

We've been told that a series of events and characters conspired - unwittingly - to help Lechmere get away with murder, even though Lechmere himself did not CARE if he got away it (and get away with murder he did, for decades, even though he did NOT care about getting away with it - according to Christer).

See, Patrick - here´s one of them things you sometimes do again - I was not the one who suggested he did not care - the professor in "the definitive Story" was.
And I only quoted him since you had not given the angle much thought, going by your post.

You need to tell these things apart - the fact that I quote somebody must not mean that what I quote becomes my stance. My stance is that he did not want to get caught, but he had become so arrogant that it could seem like he didn´t care as per the professor.

I thought I explained that quite clearly?

[Sam Flynn]

Amazing! He went looking for a victim, then he brought her back to kill her infront of his own door, so he can hide easily!

Jack the Funnel-Web Spider.

[Sam Flynn]

But Dr Biggs doesn't say that it would be likely that blood would still be oozing from the body after 20 minutes.

Maybe, but it still appeared to be running even when Mizen arrived on the scene:

There was blood running from the throat towards the gutter (Echo, 3rd Sept)

Compare this with Edward Spooner, who arrived at Dutfield's Yard some time after Liz Stride sustained her throat wound:

Was any blood coming from the throat? - Yes; it was still flowing

Did you notice whether the blood was still moving on the ground? - It was running down the gutter (Daily Telegraph, 3rd Oct)

Spooner seems to have erred in respect of time (or his testimony fell foul of a typo), saying he arrived at Dutfield's about "25 minutes to one". I'd suggest that what he really meant, and perhaps what he really said, was that he got there at 25 past one, which would fit in with what happened in Dutfield's Yard/IWMEC before the "Berner Street Runners" were dispatched to get help, and who alerted Spooner in the first place.

If so, the blood from Stride's wound appeared to be "running" perhaps half an hour after her death.

[John G]

Maybe, but it still appeared to be running even when Mizen arrived on the scene:

There was blood running from the throat towards the gutter (Echo, 3rd Sept)

Compare this with Edward Spooner, who arrived at Dutfield's Yard some time after Liz Stride sustained her throat wound:

Was any blood coming from the throat? - Yes; it was still flowing

Did you notice whether the blood was still moving on the ground? - It was running down the gutter (Daily Telegraph, 3rd Oct)

Spooner seems to have erred in respect of time (or his testimony fell foul of a typo), saying he arrived at Dutfield's about "25 minutes to one". I'd suggest that what he really meant, and perhaps what he really said, was that he got there at 25 past one, which would fit in with what happened in Dutfield's Yard/IWMEC before the "Berner Street Runners" were dispatched to get help, and who alerted Spooner in the first place.

If so, the blood from Stride's wound appeared to be "running" perhaps half an hour after her death.

Spooner was certainly wrong about the time. In fact, several other witnesses must have made timing errors that night, including PC Smith. However, I don't see that it's likely that he would be out by as much as an hour. And there's certainly no evidence that he gave the time as 1:25am.

In fact, Dr Blackwell arrived at 1:16 and PC Lamb said he arrived about 10 minutes earlier, say, 1:06. And Spooner said he'd been there about 5 minutes before PC Lamb's arrival, so about 1:01

[Sam Flynn]

However, I don't see that it's likely that he would be out by as much as an hour.

That's not what I'm suggesting, John. It's a very easy, and understandable, slip that would account for "25 past one" being reported, or said, as "25 to one". 25 past fits in very well with events at the IWMEC; from Dymshitz's discovery, his checking that his wife was OK, informing people inside the club, club members inspecting the scene, club members fanning out to find a policeman, their alerting Spooner in the process, and the latter's arrival on site.

[drstrange169]

>>… the mere suggestion that I have no answers was always ridiculous, and I thank for for confirming it by not being able to produce any list. It was smoke and mirrors, nothing else.<<

The list is, and always has been there.

It’s a thread called Lechmere/Cross “name issue”. If there are no questions from me that you haven’t answered on this thread then, indeed I am all “smoke and mirrors, nothing else”.

But since this is a written thread available for all to browse through and check, it is factually correct to say you have not answered my questions and still avoid doing so, with silly semantic games.

I don’t know how it works in Sweden, but here in Oz and the UK when I lived there, in open debates, honest people tend to be upfront and dishonest people tend to be cagey and avoid straight answers, putting up conditions and barriers to avoid facing issues.

Anyway I ‘ll let the posts on this thread speak for themselves. Facts are far more eloquent than a forked tongue.



>>Nobody can synchronize Pauls timings with Lechmeres, for the simple reason that we do not know which clocks were used. We cannot even prove that any clocks were used …<<

Thank you for confirming my point. A simple, “You are correct would have done.

Instead you chose to try and wriggle out of admitting I’m right.

Since David Orsam has already pointed out the errors in your attempt to squirm away from my point (Posts 876 to 880), I need not elaborate, unless of course, you want me too.

[Patrick S]

Patrick S:

We've been told that a series of events and characters conspired - unwittingly - to help Lechmere get away with murder, even though Lechmere himself did not CARE if he got away it (and get away with murder he did, for decades, even though he did NOT care about getting away with it - according to Christer).

See, Patrick - here´s one of them things you sometimes do again - I was not the one who suggested he did not care - the professor in "the definitive Story" was.
And I only quoted him since you had not given the angle much thought, going by your post.

You need to tell these things apart - the fact that I quote somebody must not mean that what I quote becomes my stance. My stance is that he did not want to get caught, but he had become so arrogant that it could seem like he didn´t care as per the professor.

I thought I explained that quite clearly?

I am very sorry to have confused this, Christer. I beg forgiveness. Now, I've quite nearly proven James Green was Jack the Ripper. Shall we get "the pavement cleaner" off the hook?

[drstrange169]

Hello Abby Normal,


>>1. according to lechs testimony it seems mere seconds that he discovers the body and Paul shows up. so to me there is still the question of why they didn't notice each other before bucks row.<<


Given the geography of the street this is not in any way surprising. The two could have been within seconds of each other and still not seen each other. I've shown diagrams before showing just how easily it could occur, I can post them here if you like.



>>2. missing time-good arguments on either side, but the no real missing time side is swaying me. if he left at 3:20 then definitely missing time-red flag. If he left "about 3:30" then probably not-or at least its still unclear. so the missing time thing is still up in the air but has lost a little bit of its luster for me.<<

Fair enough.


>>3.This one bothers me the most now-lech is seen near the body before he raises the alarm. whats the chances of that happening?<<


Very high.

It’s an incident that’s played across the world, perhaps even, on a daily basis.

You might be confusing what we know, with what Xmere and Paul actually saw.

Lechmere said he saw what he initially thought was a tarpaulin, obviously no need to raise any alarm for that.

Then he saw it was person, dossers sleeping rough, again are not something to raise an alarm about. Anyone reading this who lives in a big city probably has seen plenty. I know I have.

Even when they actually inspected the body they saw no signs of blood. At worst, Xmere and Paul were a bit callous and more concerned about work than getting involved.

If his story is true, Xmere did nothing odd or unusual. Nothing we wouldn’t reasonably expect anybody else would have done in the same circumstances. Certainly nothing that Robert Paul didn’t also do.



>>Paul just happens to come upon him in the few seconds he notices the body and stops-but before he tries to find someone or call for help? <<

Did Paul call for help or did he do exactly the same thing?




>> He still isn't in my first tier of favored suspects but hes a valid one IMHO-and at least one that deserves the attention and further research.<<


Fisherman will tell you otherwise, but most of us agree Xmere is a person of interest along with anyone else involved in this case and well worth researching.

It's the way stories are sometimes altered to make him look guilty that worries people.

[drstrange169]

Hello Gary,


>>His father did a runner, leaving his mother, a Herefordshire woman who had probably thought she had made a good match by marrying into a prominent local family, to singlehandedly bring up two small children in London, where she perhaps had little or no support network.<<

Which, of course, was hardly a unique situation in the area at the time. Thousands were in the same boat.



>>She married (bigamously, I think?) a younger man, a policeman, also from Herefordshire and wound up in the East End - in Tiger Bay no less, when that term meant something.<<

The potential bigamy gives a good reason for Xmere to use the name Lechmere on official forms. I don't think Thomas Cross came from Hereford. I know it was initially suggested, but Chris Scott cast some considerable doubt on it in the end.



>>And after remarrying, she had her children belatedly Christened with their birth name of Lechmere, a rather odd thing to do, I'd say. <<

You can't be christened with a surname. By definition a christening is about "Christian" names hence the title "christening". Since Lechmere was the birth fathers name, why would any certificate not reflect the birth father's name? Nothing odd about it.

[drstrange169]

>We are speaking of a man who was found alone in a dark street, standing quite close to the body of a freshly killed murder victim, who by the press accounts from the inquest beld for many minutes afterwards - something that made the forensic expert Jason Payne-James suggest that he fits the murderers frame very well.We are speaking of a man who then used another name than the one he otherwise used in authority contacts, and we have only this example - from the murder inquest - of him using this alternative name.We are speaking of a case where the victims wounds were covered, in sharp contrast to the other Ripper victims - and where there would have been a need to do so for Lechmere if he was the killer.Last, but not least, we are speaking of a man who according to a serving PC presented a lie, perfectly shaped to take him past the police.
That is a very compelling set of circumstances, no matter how we look at it. He ticks every box there is to tick, if he was the killer.<<

All of this has already been dealt with, but of course unless it's on a list ... "I see now ships" Admiral Nelson said as he held a telescope to his blind eye.

[drstrange169]

Hello David,

>The same Andy Griffiths who participated in the below exchange:
Andy Griffiths: We know that he [Paul] was late for work, as he said at the inquest, and I think it’s reasonable to assume then he was keeping an eye on the time.
Christer Holmgren: Then we’ve got a discrepancy of about 9 minutes or something like that.
Andy Griffiths: Which was a big difference in that time.
So Andy Griffiths believes that 9 minutes was a big difference "in that time".
What could he have possibly meant by this?<<

The same Andy Griffith who said Xmere was "duty bound to give his real name."
The same Andy Griffiths who said Paul could see to the end of the street.

[drstrange169]

Hello David,

>>Originally Posted by Fisherman View Post
Fisherman does not answer my questions!!


It's most certainly true in my case.<<

Did he ever tell you what route he took with Andy Griffiths? He is willing to answer all questions now.

[drstrange169]

>>No, Patrick, Lechmere must NOT have known that Mizen would not take him back He could not have known that they WOULD run into a policeman - he left it in the hands of destiny. Once they did, he would have done his utmost to TRY and not to be taken back. He would not be certain that it would work, because you never CAN be - some PC:s are more, some less harsh and demanding.The lie he seems to have fed Mizen, though, was perfectly shaped to optimize his chances of being allowed to walk on.<<

And yet scant seconds before Xmere was content to wait for an unknown person to find him in Buck's Row. If he wasn't frightened that the approaching person was a policeman then, why on earth would he suddenly, supposedly be frightened of being taken back there?


>>That is where the interest must lie for any serious researcher ...<<

See above if you are actually interested in "serious research".