It was Lechmere.

[Mike J. G.]

I honestly don't see a problem with the Ripper killing Nicholls and disappearing before Cross got there on a relatively quiet night, when he seemingly did the same with Stride for example on a rather busier night.
Its not giving the Ripper "supernatural" powers..Its simply giving him an intimate knowledge of the area he decided to ply his grisly trade in

It makes sense to pretty much everyone who is actually willing to see sense.

[Elamarna]

Neil first saw Mizen and call him, then he saw Thail,


No the inquest testimony from Thain and Neil is very clear Thain was seen and sent away to get the Doctor before Mizen arrived.


Thail saw two men shortly before Neil called him, while Neil was there near the woman, and probably even Mizen was there too, This is not the period of time we are talking about here, not the time of the killing, if Lechmere was not the killer, then the Killer must have left before all of this had happened

Again Mizen arrived after Thain. And was sent to get the ambulance.
The argument which has been put was that there was not a soul seen in the area around
the time of the murder. Such appears to be untrue.
Yes he must have left before this time if Lechmere was not the killer

Those two men most likely were Lechmere and Paul after they had finished their talk with Mizen or who ever they were, Thail didn't say where did he see them, and don't forget, the nearest point on his beat to Buck's- row was Brady-street..

How could they be Lechmere and Paul. They were in Bakers Row heading West down Hanbury Street.

Thain had walked down Cambridge Heath Road. Then West along Whitechapel high road and North into Brady street, before seeing Neil and heading West along Bucks Row.

The suggestion that the two men were Paul and Lechmere is utterly mind boggling. They must have been at least 440 yards from him, far out of sight either talking to Mizen or having just spoken to him.
He said the two men were heading towards Whitechapel so logically they were walking South down Brady street towards him. Not certain but probably. These two had nothing to do with the murder at all but they were in the area on a few minutes after Paul and Lechmere.

If that doesn't convince you, its up to you, I am happily convinced!

Rainbow°

Unfortunately Rainbow it's all wrong.
Wrong on the order of the Police arriving.
Wrong on where Lechmere and Paul were.
Wrong on the location of Thain..
That not my opinion, it's what the sources say.


Steve

[Mike J. G.]

Mike, I have tried it with you, it is pointless, you are so clever, it is maybe you don't want to understand, or maybe as you said, I am avoiding this diffecult questions..


Rainbow°

What have you tried? It'd be nice you tried to answer even one honest question, but you divert attention away and repeat yourself. Weird stuff, but if that's how you want to spend your time, whatever, mate.

[andy1867]

I honestly don't see a problem with the Ripper killing Nicholls and disappearing before Cross got there on a relatively quiet night, when he seemingly did the same with Stride for example on a rather busier night.
Its not giving the Ripper "supernatural" powers..Its simply giving him an intimate knowledge of the area he decided to ply his grisly trade in

[Mike J. G.]

Second, if you studied algebra and logic , you will know that

Errrrr....?

[Rainbow]

Mike, I have tried it with you, it is pointless, you are so clever, it is maybe you don't want to understand, or maybe as you said, I am avoiding this diffecult questions..


Rainbow°

[Mike J. G.]

Little silly games, when you can't defeat the result, attack the method...

Rainbow°

You, on the other hand, seem to avoid answering any questions which you feel are too difficult to acknowledge.

You claim that the "three policemen didn't see a third person," but can you tell me whether they saw Nichols? Did they see Nichols with another man? If not, then what makes you think they'd have seen a "third person?"

[Mike J. G.]

Lechmere refused to touch her, ... weird...., he was curious to stop and look at her and stop another man and go to her, but then refused to help her or to touch her..

Paul was a normal man, Lechmere wasn't.


Rainbow°

But you said "normal men would run away", if Paul was "normal" then why didn't he bother to run? It's worth being consistent in your arguments so that you don't contradict yourself all the time.

[Mike J. G.]

These are my evidences, from the inquest itself, if you don't like them, then... don't..

Obviously, our idea about what does and does not constitute as being "evidence" is very different, lol.

And all of your posts are just accusing others of posting nonsense, better to just keep watching than commenting, isn't that what security officers just do ?! watching ?!

Is this some kind of odd insult? lol. Actually, no, I do a lot of different stuff, I work at events all around the UK, mainly concerts, sporting-events, conferences, etc etc. It's a great job! Don't worry about me, Rainbow.

These (nonsense) had convinced me..

As I told you, go and find your way. don't expect others to help you while you are just setting and enjoying your cafe and doing NOTHING .


Rainbow°

I can't address this because it makes no sense. I own a cafe now?

[Rainbow]

Police-constable John Thail [Thain] stated that the nearest point on his beat to Buck's- row was Brady-street. He passed the end every thirty minutes on the Thursday night, and nothing attracted his attention until 3.45 a.m

By the Coroner: There were one or two working men going down Brady-street shortly before I was called by Neale

Neil first saw Mizen and call him, then he saw Thail,

Thail saw two men shortly before Neil called him, while Neil was there near the woman, and probably even Mizen was there too, This is not the period of time we are talking about here, not the time of the killing, if Lechmere was not the killer, then the Killer must have left before all of this had happened

Those two men most likely were Lechmere and Paul after they had finished their talk with Mizen or who ever they were, Thail didn't say where did he see them, and don't forget, the nearest point on his beat to Buck's- row was Brady-street..

If that doesn't convince you, its up to you, I am happily convinced!


Rainbow°

[Elamarna]

I think if you combine the fact that she was still bleeding with the idea that from her wound that the ripper hadn't completed his true aim of organ removal, than I think she was killed within minutes of Paul coming on the scene.

Probably because the killer took off when he heard lech or less likely IMHO lech did it.

Hi Abby

That's my view too.
I suggest the probably time of attack was between 3. 30 and 3.40 with the earlier being more likely.

Steve

[Abby Normal]

I think if you combine the fact that she was still bleeding with the idea that from her wound that the ripper hadn't completed his true aim of organ removal, than I think she was killed within minutes of Paul coming on the scene.

Probably because the killer took off when he heard lech or less likely IMHO lech did it.

[Elamarna]

Steve,

May I ask you to stop telling me to read or look or ...

If you have anything against what I wrote just give it..

The blood was running from her throat, prove it was not


Rainbow°

The answer to the blood flow can be obtained by reading the sources avaible on this site. It all there. The book was just added as a helpful suggestion if natural science is not your area. I obviously have no idea.

I did actually give the issues I have with the posts you made. I see you have not addressed such.

I raised specific points on the issue of PC Thain saying he saw two men just before he saw PC Neil which obviously does not fit with the not a soul about view. You have not addressed that.

Next I raised specific issues on the blood the response says nothing.
There are many issues with that idea, however probably the biggest is that for the hypothesis to work it needs to have parameters that can be measured. It does not.
The idea floated by Fisherman is very woolly it gives no definitive time points and so it cannot be used to set a TIME OF attack.

You in a earlier post mentioned algebra.
So I assume that's something you a well versed in.

The blood flow hypothesis is the equivalent of the following formula.

X = Y - A



Without knowing what any of X, Y and A are it is unsolvable and the maths fails.

The same is true of the blood flow hypothesis.



We have no Y or A . We therefore cannot calculate x.


Steve

[Rainbow]

Steve,

May I ask you to stop telling me to read or look or ...

If you have anything against what I wrote just give it..

The blood was running from her throat, prove it was not


Rainbow°

[Elamarna]

Pierre,

This will not work here, you can't draw a clear limits between what press said at the time and what is history,

It is about giving the informations, you like to give more value to the goverment's documents only, and you are right, in this case, the inquest had reach us through newspaper, how much of truth there are, we can discuss that forever, but let me remind you, even police's documents that survived, contains a lot of errors... discussing that is endless..

The man has been found by the women, she was still bleeding, no one had seen a soul around till he was found by Paul, he gave a different name, and refuse to touch the woman .. thats what I found, you don't need to accept it, and I don't want to convince you...

All of those right minded people that talked about a teacher who comitted suicide, or a sailor or a painter or a mad jew or a poet, just didn't convince me..

And your history Pierre, was silent about those crimes, he left us to a world of fantasy, I don't like your history Pierre, it is disgusting...


Rainbow°

Actually and I rarely say this, in this case Pierre's response is correct..

My dear Rainbow all you are doing is repeating the same phrases over and over again, such as there was not a soul about, this is contrary to the sworn testimony of PC Thain.

You again keep saying "still bleeding" as if the very words convict on their own.

Look at the science. All you need is on this forum or in publically available text books.
Look at the witness reports in particular the times that witness arrive after each other, see if those reports match what is claimed by the blood flow hypothesis, and finally and most importantly explain how that hypothesis works to pinpoint a TIME OF ATTACK.


You may find it rewarding.


Steve