The Lechmere/Cross "name issue"

[Fisherman]

You're right. Lechmere is no more a credible suspect than when we started.

Exactly - he retains the exact position he always have had as the best suspect overall and the only truly factually based suspect. Nothing less, nothing more.

[Harry D]

Exactly - he retains the exact position he always have had as the best suspect overall and the only truly factually based suspect. Nothing less, nothing more.

Is it a fact that Lechmere was a proven murderer who mutilated his victim?

[Fisherman]

Is it a fact that Lechmere was a proven murderer who mutilated his victim?

Now, why would you take up space out here by asking that, Harry? Surely you realize that if it WAS, the Lechmere theory would no longer be a theory? Or can´t you see how things like that work?
Theory - more or less factbased suggestion (in the Ripper case, there are no other suggestions as based on case facts as the Lechmere bid)
Proven matter - proven matter.

Capisce?

[Harry D]

Now, why would you take up space out here by asking that, Harry? Surely you realize that if it WAS, the Lechmere theory would no longer be a theory? Or can´t you see how things like that work?
Theory - more or less factbased suggestion (in the Ripper case, there are no other suggestions as based on case facts as the Lechmere bid)
Proven matter - proven matter.

Capisce?

Well then, factually Lechmere is no more likely to be the killer than any other witness who was first on the scene.

[Fisherman]

Well then, factually Lechmere is no more likely to be the killer than any other witness who was first on the scene.

There are caserelated facts pointing to him in a much larger degree than for any other suspect. Try your favourite Bury:
Lechmere - found alone with the body of Nichols.
Bury - ?

Caserelated facts. See? No? Hard?

[Harry D]

There are caserelated facts pointing to him in a much larger degree than for any other suspect. Try your favourite Bury:
Lechmere - found alone with the body of Nichols.
Bury - ?

Caserelated facts. See? No? Hard?

Caserelated: One of these men exhibited a similar MO and post-mortem signature to the Whitechapel killer. One of these men left London after the Autumn of terror. One of these men had Ripper graffiti found at his residence. One of these men was suspected as the Ripper.

If murder cases were only solved on the basis of who found the body first, a lot of innocent people would've been sent to the gallows.

[Fisherman]

Caserelated: One of these men exhibited a similar MO and post-mortem signature to the Whitechapel killer. One of these men left London after the Autumn of terror. One of these men had Ripper graffiti found at his residence. One of these men was suspected as the Ripper.

If murder cases were only solved on the basis of who found the body first, a lot of innocent people would've been sent to the gallows.

So, Harry!

The MO and signature - and there are many deviances in Bury´s case - are NOT caserelated matters. If they were, anybody cutting a neck would be caserelated people.
There is some likeness inbetween the Ellen Bury murder and the Ripper murders, but there are many differences too. That is all. You are trying to couple this to the Ripper case, but whether that is a correct aim or an incorrect one is unanswerable. And until the coupling can be confirmed as factual, there is no case relation.

The same goes for leaving London. Are all the thousands of people who did that period caserelated? Of course not. One person MAY be, but until that is proven: No.

The graffiti? Same thing. Some chalk on a Scotch wall is not a caserelated matter. It MAY be, but until that is proven: No.

Nor is the suspicion. Many were suspected, only one of them - or none of them - was caserelated.

Caserelated means tied to the case, not tied to the discussion about it.

Lechmere is, Bury is not. End of.

[Harry D]

There are inconsistencies between all of the Whitechapel murders. No two murders were completely alike. The fact that similarities exist in the first place between Ellen Bury and the Whitechapel victims is the important factor here. There are not many killers whose first impulse after committing murder would be to mutilate the abdomen of their victim. So, accepting that this was a rare kind of paraphilia, the fact that one such murderer lived within two miles of the Ripper's stomping ground is a striking coincidence.

[Fisherman]

There are inconsistencies between all of the Whitechapel murders. No two murders were completely alike. The fact that similarities exist in the first place between Ellen Bury and the Whitechapel victims is the important factor here. There are not many killers whose first impulse after committing murder would be to mutilate the abdomen of their victim. So, accepting that this was a rare kind of paraphilia, the fact that one such murderer lived within two miles of the Ripper's stomping ground is a striking coincidence.

...but not necessarily a caserelated one.

Which - bye the bye - was what we were discussing.

[Harry D]

...but not necessarily a caserelated one.

By your arbitrary definition of the word, no.

[Fisherman]

By your arbitrary definition of the word, no.

Caserelated means directly and factually related to the case. I have no problems understanding why that definition does not appeal to you: It makes the Bury´s of this world arbitrary.

[Harry D]

Caserelated means directly and factually related to the case. I have no problems understanding why that definition does not appeal to you: It makes the Bury´s of this world arbitrary.

And the manner in which these women were killed is not related to the case?

[Fisherman]

And the manner in which these women were killed is not related to the case?

If the manner is what governs what is caserelated or not, then Richard Cottingham is caserelated, although he killed a hundred years after the Ripper. "Caserelated" in the sense that he to a degree did what the Ripper did. The exact same goes for Bury.

But does anybody think that Cottingham is related to the Ripper case on account of it? No. And neither is Bury.

So much for that distinction, Harry.

[Harry D]

If the manner is what governs what is caserelated or not, then Richard Cottingham is caserelated, although he killed a hundred years after the Ripper. "Caserelated" in the sense that he to a degree did what the Ripper did. The exact same goes for Bury.

But does anybody think that Cottingham is related to the Ripper case on account of it? No. And neither is Bury.

So much for that distinction, Harry.

What a complete strawman. You should feel embarrassed for posting that.

[Fisherman]

What a complete strawman. You should feel embarrassed for posting that.

The embarrasment lies wholly on you, Harry. Bury has no more of a proven case connection to the Ripper case than Cottingham OR ANY OTHER EVISCERATION KILLER RECORDED.

That is the long and the short of it. Being an evisceration killer makes you interesting as a comparison, nothing else. It does not per se establish a factual connection to the case.

Sorry that you dislike the facts, Harry. Perhaps you should never have tried to push an unsustainable case?