Originally posted by Fisherman
View Post
1. They probably arrived together but not proven.?
All 3 of the individuals say that the two men arrived together. We have nothing in any source to counter that. To then suggest as you have this may not be the case is simply unsupportable.
2. You think that Lechmere and Paul parted ways.
The sources from all 3 witnesses say different. I have asked you to provide data/evidence to support this hypothesis and to refute the sources of Lechmere, Paul and Mizen. I do not see any provided.
3 . We all know it cannot be proven that the two men were close together.
Do we?
Lechmere in his sworn statement says they walked together and while he gave the majority of information to Mizen, Paul did speak too.
Paul in his sworn testimony says they went together to find a policeman which they did in Bakers Row.
In his newspaper article where he appears to be taking the credit he says it is him who speaks to Mizen, no mention of Lechmere at all. His attitude has changed by the time of the inquest and now lets look at Mizen.
In his testimony he is recorded as saying:
Cross was accompanied by another man. Or In company with another man. Depending on the report.
If you are in the company of another it normally means close together not yards apart as you attempt to suggest.
Mizen says one man spoke to him and said there was a woman in Bucks Row. True,however in all accounts he says there were two men together.
You give a partial quote in that a man passed and spoke to him however ALL sources which say this, also say the man was in the company of another, which you leave off.
That is certainly not sufficient evidence to put being "together" in doubt.
It is wishful think. Superposition not sourported by the data.
I repeat. The data sources of the witnesses say they arrived at Mizen together and Indeed left left together.
Lechmere says they parted at Corbetts Court, Shown to be Paul's place of work
Mizen as I previously quoted and which was ignored in the reply, said they both went down Hanbury street. He does not say they went seperatly and obviously he viewed them as being together.
I asked for supporting evidence for your hypothesis. All you offer is your view of what you think was meant. That is not evidence or data.
Do you have ANY Data, other than your opinion, that they were not together?
If so you hypothesis can be tested, if not it fails and it remains just another vague possibility along with so many others equally unsupported.
Steve
Comment