Lechmere The Psychopath

[Rainbow]

A stupid Lech is essentially a sorry sod caught in the wrong place at the wrong time and likely regretted ever stopping by the body at all.

In the wrong place at the wrong time with the wrong name under the wrong statments in the wrong route to all the crimes .....

He deserve to regrett all this wrong pure coincidences.

At least , we know where our suspect was, do even have a suspect ?! a phantom killer maybe ?!

Rainbow°

[Elamarna]

In the wrong place at the wrong time with the wrong name under the wrong statments in the wrong route to all the crimes .....

He deserve to regrett all this wrong pure coincidences.

At least , we know where our suspect was, do even have a suspect ?! a phantom killer maybe ?!

Rainbow°

Actually you have no idea where Lechmere was for the double event. The suggestion is be was visiting his mother but there is actually no source data to support this idea is there?

Steve

[Mike J. G.]

In the wrong place at the wrong time with the wrong name under the wrong statments in the wrong route to all the crimes .....

He deserve to regrett all this wrong pure coincidences.

At least , we know where our suspect was, do even have a suspect ?! a phantom killer maybe ?!

Rainbow°

The wrong name? Hang on, I think you're forgetting that this man's name was also Cross, lol. If he'd have said his name was Daniel Day Lewis then you might have a point, but he didn't, he used his father's name and his own address. I'm going to hazard a guess that you've had no affiliation with any type of criminal, because I can tell you, a criminal, never mind a serial killer, who gives his real details into the police isn't going to last very long, my friend.

A phantom killer maybe?!

Why so angry? I just told you a few posts ago that I don't have a suspect. So in your world, if you don't believe the very shoddy "evidence" for Lech, then you either have a book to sell or believe in a phantom killer? lol...just...just lol, mate.

I don't have a preferred suspect, because there's no real evidence to suggest that any one of them did it. Who even knows if it was one man, or if the murders are actually connected to all of the others?

I'm leaning more towards the idea that the killer(s) was/were known to the police, and was very likely named within the current list, excluding Lechmere. Personally, I don't think we'll ever know. That's life.

[Harry D]

Funny how the moment Fisherman goes on one of his self-imposed exiles, the other Lechmerians suddenly come out of the woodwork. Makes you wonder.

[Rainbow]

I challenge everyone reading this, to name a suspect that IS tied to the crimes as Lechmere was.

I am not talking about men of interest or men who had the ability to do this, ... I am talking about what you claim as evidences, a suspect that you can build a case against in front of a court.

And you want us to spot Lechmere at every crimes scene now ?! better to believe in a phantom killer with two wings that wears a hat to hide if we couldn't spot him after 130 years at every single crimes scene .. isn't it

Rainbow°

[Mike J. G.]

Actually you have no idea where Lechmere was for the double event. The suggestion is be was visiting his mother but there is actually no source data to support this idea is there?

Steve

Nobody knows where Lech was for any other murder bar Nichols. Nobody can even prove that Lech arrived when Nichols was freshly killed.

Nichols' time of death is debatable, as is Lech's ideas on when he arrived at the scene.

Lech, the cold, calculated killer, studied police beats but gave his real identity and home address to the police, also brazenly lied in front of Paul and assumed Paul wouldn't notice.

Lech is certainly consistent in being inconsistent.

[Harry D]

I challenge everyone reading this, to name a suspect that IS tied to the crimes as Lechmere was.

I am not talking about men of interest or men who had the ability to do this, ... I am talking about what you claim as evidences, a suspect that you can build a case against in front of a court.

And you want us to spot Lechmere at every crimes scene now ?! better to believe in a phantom killer with two wings that wears a hat to hide if we couldn't spot him after 130 years at every single crimes scene .. isn't it

Rainbow°

I can name a convicted killer with a Ripper-esque signature who fled London a couple of months after the last canonical victim, who had graffiti at his house implicating him as the Ripper.

[Mike J. G.]

I challenge everyone reading this, to name a suspect that IS tied to the crimes as Lechmere was.

I am not talking about men of interest or men who had the ability to do this, ... I am talking about what you claim as evidences, a suspect that you can build a case against in front of a court.

And you want us to spot Lechmere at every crimes scene now ?! better to believe in a phantom killer with two wings that wears a hat to hide if we couldn't spot him after 130 years at every single crimes scene .. isn't it

Rainbow°

I challenge to you find any actual evidence that would hold up in court that proves Lechmere was Jack the Ripper. You clearly can't do that, hence why we're here now having this bit of tired banter.

And you want us to spot Lechmere at every crimes scene now ?

Errrm...yeah, obviously, if you can't place Lech at any other crime then he's likely not Jack the bloody Ripper, is he? lol.

[Rainbow]

Fine, just keep looking then for your Jack and catch him at every single crimes scene.

You can do it, trust your instinct, .. may the pure coincidences gather you with your long lost Jack.

Coincidence happen all the time , don't they?! There are even who believe human being was a result of too many coincidences ... like those that happened all the time with Lechmere..


Keep searching, you will catch him!

Rainbow°

[Harry D]

Fine, just keep looking then for your Jack and catch him at every single crimes scene.

You can do it, trust your instinct, .. may the pure coincidences gather you with your long lost Jack.

Coincidence happen all the time , don't they?! There are even who believe human being was a result of too many coincidences ... like those that happened all the time with Lechmere..


Keep searching, you will catch him!

Rainbow°

Someone had to find the body, didn't they?

If it wasn't that carman, it would've been the other one minutes behind him.

[Rainbow]

I can name a convicted killer with a Ripper-esque signature who fled London a couple of months after the last canonical victim, who had graffiti at his house implicating him as the Ripper.

Did he killed Mckenzie ?!

Huh ?!

Rainbow°

[Mike J. G.]

Fine, just keep looking then for your Jack and catch him at every single crimes scene.

You mean like actual policemen do? Yeah, that'd make more sense than to convict a man based on how spooky he looks in a photograph and the fact that he was seen over the road from a woman who may or may not have been killed in the preceding minutes.

You can do it, trust your instinct, .. may the pure coincidences gather you with your long lost Jack.

Coincidence happen all the time , don't they?! There are even who believe human being was a result of too many coincidences ... like those that happened all the time with Lechmere..


Keep searching, you will catch him!

Rainbow°

There's less in the way of coincidence with Lech as there is with James bloody Maybrick, lol.

Once again, I ask you: why would a serial killer give his known address to the police? If your answer is to avoid suspicion then you're essentially rubbishing the significance of him bothering to use his father's surname.

Those are not the actions of this supremely gifted hunter of which you seem to favour Lech being.

[Rainbow]

You mean like actual policemen do? Yeah, that'd make more sense than to convict a man based on how spooky he looks in a photograph and the fact that he was seen over the road from a woman who may or may not have been killed in the preceding minutes.



There's less in the way of coincidence with Lech as there is with James bloody Maybrick, lol.

Once again, I ask you: why would a serial killer give his known address to the police? If your answer is to avoid suspicion then you're essentially rubbishing the significance of him bothering to use his father's surname.

Those are not the actions of this supremely gifted hunter of which you seem to favour Lech being.

I will ask you this, when did he gave his true adress?! was that at the night of the murder, or was that a while after, when he finaly stood in the inquest ?

Rainbow°

[Harry D]

Did he killed Mckenzie ?!

Huh ?!

Rainbow°

McKenzie is not a definite Ripper victim. Her throat was stabbed, not sliced, and her mutilations were mostly superficial.

[Herlock Sholmes]

That is not a simple plan, that is a stupid plan.

He didn't run away at first place because he wanted everything to be under his control..

I will explain further, if they split up and Paul went on another way and found a policeman, what will Paul say ? he will say, I was hurrying to my work when I spoted a man standing where the woman was.. this man had told me that he will try to find a policeman too and vanished away

the policeman : do you know this man?

Paul: no, but I can recognise him again.

Do you see now how it will be a stupid plan, he will have completely no control on the situation . but more, he will turn in one second to the first police's suspect.


Rainbow°

'He wanted everything to be under his control.'

Unfortunately the pro-Lechmere case is full of assumptions like this. How can anyone possibly know that. If he wanted everything under his control why would he leave Buck's Row with Cross knowing that he'd somehow have to contrive a situation where he could give a police officer a version of events without his companion butting in with an alternative one.

It's a stupid plan because Paul, by speaking to a police officer alone, would immediately become the number one suspect.

So the police wouldn't think it strange that a killer, who could have kept quiet and passed him by, chose instead to stop him and tell him about the body in Buck's Row.

Paul would have been able to recognise him.

True. But they would still have had to have found him. The police never found 'Blotchy Man,' or 'Astrakhan Man,' or the men seen by Israel Schwartz or the suspect seen with Annie Chapman, despite having witnesses who would have been able to identify them. The main risk for Lechmere would have been due to the fact of his being stupid enough to kill at a spot that he (and very few others) passed each day at around the same time on his way to work.

'He will have completely no control on the situation.'

Like a man who waits, after hearing footsteps, for another person to arrive (a person who might even have been a policeman if Lechmere couldn't make him out in the dark) and then calls him over to see his handiwork. The 'crazy' alternative would have been to take advantage of the 30 or 40 seconds head start and simply walk away to almost guaranteed freedom.



Lechmere the witness. Ordinary working bloke whose absolute priority ( like Paul's) was not to risk his job by being late for work. He's a victim of circumstance in that he found a body just as someone came along ( I still say that the overwhelming likelihood would be that a guilty man would have run.) That fact apart he's no better a suspect than Diemschutz, Richardson or Bowyer.