Lechmere The Psychopath

[andy1867]

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.

I think you do a disservice to the posters who may not be acquainted with the whole dogs breakfast of the story as a whole Harry.
I actually don't find the Lechmere suspect theory outlandish even after reading most of the threads on here, but that's far from being accepting of it.
At least on here it's done openly, and you see what you are getting,unlike many of the books that are peddled that leave more out than they actually put in so they can shoehorn their theory in and pocket your cash.
I find this thread particularly interesting because it actually follows a person we KNOW was there, on his own for a time
Although as Herlock pointed out succinctly earlier there were several others at murder scenes in the same situation .
I find it fascinating without being suckered into it
Already been suckered in by books in the past
Been there, Done it ,bought the Gladstone bag

[andy1867]

Really Rainbow
If you were 10 minutes late for work, you would walk past a bleeding woman in the road ?

[Patrick S]

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

Because he found a woman lying on the pavement. What would you do? I think maybe Robert Paul would have walked on by. He tried to even though Cross asked him to stop. Me? I'd probably stop. But, let's try this on: What if Cross HAD walked on by? What if Paul saw the woman and saw Cross walking up ahead. You'd find that suspicious as well. So, why dont you tell us what Cross - if he were just a guy on his way to work - SHOULD have done for you to view him as, say, NOT Jack the Ripper?




Rainbow°

bold.

[Elamarna]

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°

You are making assumptions about people's thinking process which are just speculation rainbow. Poor arguments.

Steve

[Rainbow]

You are making assumptions about people's thinking process which are just speculation rainbow. Poor arguments.

Steve

I am talking about a murderer who killed at least 5 poor women, isn't that what history says ?

didn't he killed twice at a night ?! if he was a just ordinary and stupid criminal, we will not be here now ? or ...


Rainbow°

[Harry D]

I think you do a disservice to the posters who may not be acquainted with the whole dogs breakfast of the story as a whole Harry.
I actually don't find the Lechmere suspect theory outlandish even after reading most of the threads on here, but that's far from being accepting of it.

I wasn't necessarily referring to posters on here, Andy. There's a lot of dilettantes on other websites who have been misled by the Lechmere theory.

And it does sound like an attractive proposition. Lechmere isn't an outlandish suspect akin to Sickert, Van Gogh, Prince Albert, etc. He was just a random guy who found one of the victims and faded into obscurity afterwards. What an enthralling plot twist if the real killer was right in front of the police all along and they never suspected him! Unfortunately, despite the imaginative efforts of Fisherman et al. to paint this ordinary working man as a murderous psychopath, there is little reason to suspect Lechmere was anything but an innocent witness.

[Rainbow]

bold.

If I was there, I will run .. run .. run.. without even thinking what others will think about me..

Its a life matter, besides, you claim that Lechmere wasn't sure if she was dead or not, he didn't yet examine her to know that , or .. ?!

Running away is the normal behaviour


Rainbow°

[andy1867]

I wasn't necessarily referring to posters on here, Andy. There's a lot of dilettantes on other websites who have been misled by the Lechmere theory.

And it does sound like an attractive proposition. Lechmere isn't an outlandish suspect akin to Sickert, Van Gogh, Prince Albert, etc. He was just a random guy who found one of the victims and faded into obscurity afterwards. What an enthralling plot twist if the real killer was right in front of the police all along and they never suspected him! Unfortunately, despite the imaginative efforts of Fisherman et al. to paint this ordinary working man as a murderous psychopath, there is little reason to suspect Lechmere was anything but an innocent witness.

Fair enough points Harry,but that's what brings some into the field, and you never know who's got what hiding in the attic.
I got interested after watching the Michael Caine drama, what a load of tosh that turned out to be lol

[Patrick S]

If I was there, I will run .. run .. run.. without even thinking what others will think about me..

Its a life matter, besides, you claim that Lechmere wasn't sure if she was dead or not, he didn't yet examine her to know that , or .. ?!

Running away is the normal behaviour


Rainbow°

Why would you run...run...run...simply because a woman is lying on the ground? If you're implying that he didn't run..run...run because he killed her then you're right. Running WOULD have been the normal behavior. And he didn't run. So, what? Is this the he killed her and didn't run because he's a psychopath and we know he's a psychopath because he killed her argument? On the other hand, finding a woman on the ground and not knowing if she's dead, ill, drunk, or sleeping and alerting the first person along to that fact is perfectly normal.

[Patrick S]

I am talking about a murderer who killed at least 5 poor women, isn't that what history says ?

didn't he killed twice at a night ?! if he was a just ordinary and stupid criminal, we will not be here now ? or ...


Rainbow°

Oh. I've never thought of it like that.

[Herlock Sholmes]

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°

Same old conspiracy theorist waffling. Mizen said that he'd been told by Cross that there was a policeman in Bucks Row with a woman lying in the street. Cross said that he didn't mention a policeman. Either way it makes no difference whatsoever. Cross could have said ' you're wanted in Bucks Row.' Which in everyday speech can be taken to mean 'your presence is required,' but Mizen assumed that he must have meant by a policeman (as there was a woman lying in the street.)

If Cross didn't mention that she could have been dead it's overwhelmingly likely that he did so because both he and Paul were (as was stated) desperate to get to work on time.
There's no mention of any suspicious actions like Cross pulling Mizen to one side to mutter some lie out of Paul's hearing. Nothing

You say 'we made a PC a liar to defend him.' Yet you make Cross a liar to accuse him.

No 'coincidences', 'suspicious, mythical actions,' or 'non-founded accusations of psychopathy' are required yet they keep being used to tortuously rearrange the facts to suit a theory.

[Herlock Sholmes]

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

I was being sarcastic Patrick

Herlock

[Rainbow]

Who the one that is making theories here ?!

Do you want me to believe that Nichols had been killed by a phantom killer, then within seconds Lechmere came in, then within seconds Paul came in, then within seconds Neil came in ?! while she was still bleeding ?!

where the hell she took her client? to a football stadium to have sex ?!


Rainbow°

[Herlock Sholmes]

Who the one that is making theories here ?!



You and all who propose Cross

Do you want me to believe that Nichols had been killed by a phantom killer, then within seconds Lechmere came in, then within seconds Paul came in, then within seconds Neil came in ?! while she was still bleeding ?!

No just an as yet unknown one. Check out Steve's (Elamarna's) research on timings. Cross found a body (not the first person in history to do so) Another man arrived a couple of minutes later, on his way to work (never in a million years, how unbelievable!). And then to top it off who do you think turns up next, The Prime Minister? Sir Arthur Conan Doyle? None other than.....a policeman on his beat. AMAZING!

where the hell she took her client? to a football stadium to have sex ?!

Nope. Bucks Row


Rainbow°

Herlock

[Patrick S]

I was being sarcastic Patrick

Herlock

sorry. I thought rainbow wrote that and that it was serious.