Lechmere The Psychopath

[Elamarna]

In fact there are many students of the crimes that continue to question the validity of The Canonical Group as has been generally accepted over the years, personally I don't see any more than 2 or 3 victims being potentially connected by a single lone killer. I don't see Tabram as a legitimate candidate, although I do see great similarity with some of the prior murders in the murder of Alice Mackenzie.

I think its prudent to remember that any connection by killer of Polly Nichols through Mary Kelly is theoretical, there is no evidence at all that connects even 2 of the victims by killer.

Michel while I disagree with you view on the number of victims your points are all true .

However it really is beholden on us who challenge the accepted view to put forward the argument, which I know you have. It is only at that point I believe that others who believe in the C5 have to offer counter arguments. The stance taken by Rainbow to me does not advance the case at all.


Steve

[Rainbow]

.. Cross again as that was obviously the name he used in everyday life and therefore the name that he himself preferred!

I even don't need to answer this...


Rainbow°

[Patrick S]

But Steve, you have to excuse me of not being a part of this group who only believe in the C5.. you have to excuse everyone that think Tabram is a ripper victim, and I may dare to say, those who believe Tabram is a ripper victim are more than those who believe Stride was


Rainbow°

I believe Tabram is a Ripper victim.

Yet, after extensive research - specifically into the Nichols' murder, the inquest into her death, the recorded actions of the police the night of her murder, and into Cross/Lechmere himself - I've seen nothing, remotely, that compels me to suspect the man had anything to do with her murder.

Now, we can go 'round and 'round about how I cannot PROVE that Charles Cross didn't kill Nichols and all the rest, and how I cannot PROVE that he duped poor Robert Paul, pulled that elaborate scam on honest, good Jonas Mizen, waltzed off into the night only to show up and tell more lies at the inquest a few days later. And all that is correct. I cannot PROVE any of that. Luckily, for most reasonable people that's simply not how it works...and it's laughable to think that it is.

I cannot PROVE that Walter Sickert wasn't Jack the Ripper. I cannot PROVE that Tumblety wasn't. I cannot prove that Chapman wasn't. I cannot PROVE that Lewis Carroll wasn't. I cannot PROVE it wasn't Hutchinson, Barnett, Richardson, Green, Mann, Ostrog, Kosminsky, Druitt. As far as Cross goes, there are a great many things I cannot PROVE. I cannot prove, for instance, that he wasn't - in fact - a woman and that his marriage was a sham and that all his children were fathered by the local tailor. I cannot prove that he didn't have a club foot. I cannot prove that didn't beat his children. I cannot prove he wasn't a pyromaniac, a stutterer, an alcoholic, an opium fiend. I can't prove he didn't cry after sex, prefer chubby blondes over thinn brunettes. All I can do is understand the data and make assumptions with to respect to what was LIKELY true. And having him as Jack the Ripper.....isn't anywhere on my list of what was likely true about the guy.

[Rainbow]

I cannot PROVE that Walter Sickert wasn't Jack the Ripper. I cannot PROVE that Tumblety wasn't. I cannot prove that Chapman wasn't. I cannot PROVE that Lewis Carroll wasn't. I cannot PROVE it wasn't Hutchinson, Barnett, Richardson, Green, Mann, Ostrog, Kosminsky, Druitt. As far as Cross goes, there are a great many things I cannot PROVE. I cannot prove, for instance, that he wasn't - in fact - a woman and that his marriage was a sham and that all his children were fathered by the local tailor. I cannot prove that he didn't have a club foot. I cannot prove that didn't beat his children. I cannot prove he wasn't a pyromaniac, a stutterer, an alcoholic, an opium fiend. I can't prove he didn't cry after sex, prefer chubby blondes over thinn brunettes. All I can do is understand the data and make assumptions with to respect to what was LIKELY true. And having him as Jack the Ripper.....isn't anywhere on my list of what was likely true about the guy.

You don't have to, any of them was NOT standing where a freschly murdered still bleeding woman was at 3:40 on the morning.. any of thim didn't hide his true name or gave a false statment to a police officer

Rainbow°

[Elamarna]

Steve, can you show me at which point in time history has established the C5 theory?!

They were talking about the whichapel killer in the press all the time at that period without limiting this series to only 5.

I realy want to know when exactly history and science gathered a group of only 5

That was not the opinion of police offecers at the time too

Rainbow°

I believe it was first suggested by Sir MM, the term C5 however is from the 1970's I believe. but I could be wrong.

The majority of the books and articles published over the last 30byears at least have stuck to this. You may not like it yourself and disagree however there is no doubting it is the current generally accepted view. However there is a large number who have different views.
However it is the generally accepted theory and it is up to those who disagree to make the argument. Just saying she is prove she is not will not do I am afraid.


Steve

[Rainbow]

Serial killers are 2 steps ahead of you

First, they know how you think, and they will do what you don't think about

Second, they have nothing conecting them to those women

The Zodiac couldn't be identifed, Jack couldn't be identifed, the only way is to catch them while they are in act, if you missed Lechmere, the whole case will be lost forever.

Rainbow°

[Patrick S]

He gave his adress at the inquest , after he had time to think and calculate everything, there are two points here

So what was his objective? To be EXECUTED under a false name? Are we to imagine him reading Paul's statement and thinking......: "Hmm.....this fellow I dragged to see the body of the woman I killed, and went with me as I reported to a PC that my victim was lying in Buck's Row is really ON about that PC and the police in general! Pretty nasty stuff he's saying here about the body being cold and what a great shame that PC's reaction to all was. Even though I did all the talking because I made him stand in a corner with his fingers in his ears while I had a private chat with the PC, tricking him into essentially paying no attention to fact that we'd just told him about a woman lying in Buck's Row. Still....hardly anything about...ME. Hmmmmm. Eh. I guess I'll show up at the inquest and tell lies and hope I don't get caught. But...what if I do get caught? I GOT IT! I'll give them a fake name! Real address and employer but a fake name! I'll use my stepdads name! That way.....when they arrest me and throw my in jail to await my trial and eventually hanging...NO ONE WILL KNOW THAT MY NAME IS REALLY LECHMERE....BWAHAHAHAHAHA (that's an evil laugh, just so you know)."

first Paul and a policeman saw him
second, he has a family and a regular work in Whitechapel

He will be found if the police wanted him, so, He will not rescue everything by giving a false adress, a little changing in his name will make all what he needed

Please note: The police DID find him. Well.....HE found the police. He sought out the police. He found the police. He told the police what he told them. Now, THAT policeman appears to have told NO ONE what Cross and Paul told him. But, that's hardly something Cross could have known. We're to believe he lied to Mizen. Then showed at the inquest to lie again, making Mizen out to be a liar? Clearly....that was the most reasonable of all available options (that's sarcasm, by the way).

and that worked!

we couldn't know who was Cross till the 21 century! amazing, isn't it.

Not in the least. Spend some time researching people from 19th century and before. Tell us what you find.

Rainbow°

Above bold.

[Patrick S]

Serial killers are 2 steps ahead of you

First, they know how you think, and they will do what you don't think about

Second, they have nothing conecting them to those women

The Zodiac couldn't be identifed, Jack couldn't be identifed, the only way is to catch them while they are in act, if you missed Lechmere, the whole case will be lost forever.

Rainbow°

Ah. Yes. The Ripper and The Zodiac were real geniuses. Capable to almost superhuman powers of stealth, mind-reading, two steps ahead, as you say. But, what about the serial killers that HAVE been caught? They're kind of a let down, aren't they? I mean, Dennis Rader and Gary Ridgeway? Imagine if BTK and the Green River Killer hadn't been caught. We'd view them as we view Jack and Zodiac: supernatural killers of unimaginable skill and cunning. Top hat. Black bag. All that.

Jack wasn't what you think he was. Zodiac wasn't what you think he was. For instance, what if Arthur Leigh Allen WAS the Zodiac? Have you seen interviews with him? Hardly what we imagined Zodiac to be, correct? Best he remain a product of our imaginations, like Jack.

[Harry D]

Too many of the uninitiated out there are suckered in by the half-truths and misinformation spread by the Lechmere school. A man caught crouched over the victim!? Nope. He was stood in the street. A man who gave a fake name to fool the cops? Nope. He gave his stepfather's surname, volunteered his place of business and voluntarily attended the police inquest.

[Rainbow]

The same with Mizen, did he think Paul had his fingers in his ears when he will lie and say something that Cross didn't say ?!

Weird... all this coincidences happening with Lechmere, we made a PC a liar to defend him..


Rainbow°

[Patrick S]

You don't have to, any of them was NOT standing where a freschly murdered still bleeding woman was at 3:40 on the morning.. any of thim didn't hide his true name or gave a false statment to a police officer

Rainbow°

AH! Freshly murdered. One of my favorites. Well. You've got us. Although.....still..... Can you run down your evidence that he gave a false statement to police for us? I think I need a refresher.

[Michael W Richards]

Too many of the uninitiated out there are suckered in by the half-truths and misinformation spread by the Lechmere school. A man caught crouched over the victim!? Nope. He was stood in the street. A man who gave a fake name to fool the cops? Nope. He gave his stepfather's surname, volunteered his place of business and voluntarily attended the police inquest.

Youre right Harry....Lechmere is about as probable as Richardson is for the Chapman murder, Diemshizt for the Stride murder, Watkins for the Mitre Square murder and Indian Harry for the Millers Court event. The first person who comes across the deceased is just that.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Serial killers are 2 steps ahead of you

First, they know how you think, and they will do what you don't think about

Second, they have nothing conecting them to those women

The Zodiac couldn't be identifed, Jack couldn't be identifed, the only way is to catch them while they are in act, if you missed Lechmere, the whole case will be lost forever.

Rainbow°

That's why serial killers are never caught unless they are found standing over a mutilated corpse!

Come on

[Patrick S]

That's why serial killers are never caught unless they are found standing over a mutilated corpse!

Come on

Um. Would you like a list serial killers where caught while NOT standing over "freshly killed" (God I love that expression!) corpses?

[Rainbow]

Why was he near a still bleeding woman while he was 10 minutes late from his normal route to work

Why didn't he run away from that dark and dangerous alley after noticing a woman lying and a man is hurrying towards him as Esrael(Stride) did ?!

Why didn't he use his true name as he did by all his documents

Why didn't he let Paul touch the woman ?!

why did Mizen lie and say something he didn't say..


Why .. Why


Rainbow°