So if you live in Bethnal Green, you won´t kill in Whitechapel?

[Batman]

As for Crow, surely the inquest records place him as living in George Yard buildings in 1888:

"Alfred George Crow, cabdriver, 35, George-yard-buildings, deposed that he got home at half-past 3 on Tuesday morning. As he was passing the first-floor landing he saw a body lying on the ground. He took no notice, as he was accustomed to seeing people lying about there. He did not then know whether the person was alive or dead. He got up at half-past 9, and when he went down the staircase the body was not there. Witness heard no noise while he was in bed." (my highlighting)

So if he was the killer, then he started his killing career, it would seem, in his own stairwell. And it is easy to geographically profile him, should anyone want to do so.

The result of this is not much more left of flower & dean with flower & dean still on it. It doesn't shift the hot zone much.

Crow has all the trimmings of your Lechmere claims and is much closer to the murder sites in terms of total length and drove a cab around Whitechapel. If you want to cut distances from Lechmere then Rossmo can do the exact same thing, even for an UNSUB.

[MrBarnett]

The result of this is not much more left of flower & dean with flower & dean still on it. It doesn't shift the hot zone much.

Crow has all the trimmings of your Lechmere claims and is much closer to the murder sites in terms of total length and drove a cab around Whitechapel. If you want to cut distances from Lechmere then Rossmo can do the exact same thing, even for an UNSUB.

Sorry, Bats, we don't know where he drove his cab. On the 1891 census he gave his occupation as cab driver, but that was amended with the word 'groom'.

His father was listed on the 1889 electoral register at 35 GYB. That would have been compiled in late 1888, so Alf was probably living there with his mum and dad when Tabram was killed.

[Batman]

Sorry, Bats, we don't know where he drove his cab. On the 1891 census he gave his occupation as cab driver, but that was amended with the word 'groom'.

He was Cab driver (No.6.600). So he was licenced it seems.

[Abby Normal]

Pretty high, seeing as another carman on his way to work was minutes behind him.

Pretty high that he would just come upon him at the exact couple seconds when hes just discovered the body and wondering what to do? I dont think so.

Not seeing him walking ahead and finding it.
Not seeing him looking for help.
Not seeing him walking away back on his trek to work.

But that exact moment before hes trying to raise an alarm or doing anything else? Chances are low IMHO.

I could see if it was more busy and more people around like diemshitz and stride scene, but we dont see anything like this in any of the other ripper murders, or any other murder that ive heard of.

[Fisherman]

Batman: I am going to demonstrate here that all you have done is special plead that you are allowed to make up when you want to start counting meters on Lechmere's journey from his home, and ... no one else is allowed to do that with their model, i.e, Rossmo.

Wrong. What I can do, anyone can do, and there is not a thing in the world I could - or would - do to stop that. You are perfectly welcome to produce anyone, living anywhere, who you by way of residence or established treks can put closer to the victims than I can. Bring it on, Batman.

That positive claim that JtR is not from F&D street can only be made if you had evidence for who JtR is. Since you don't have that, this claim can be dismissed as nothing but conjecture. Instead of saying the burden of proof is on us to provide JtR living on F&D, you erred here.

I am not saying that the Ripper cannot have lived in Flower & Dean, I am saying that you are welcome to produce any name from there or any other street, relating to somebody you can put closer to the murder sites than I can do with Lechmere and his Spitalfields trek.

We can still arbitrarily conjecture exactly what you did omitting distances by subjectively claiming the exact same thing. We don't need a suspect to do what you did.

You don´t need a suspect? You mean you CAN´T PRODUCE a suspect of flesh and blood. In order to get somebody closer to the sites than Lechmere, you need to engage in free phantasies and conjecture. You need to say "Maybe there was a man with murderous intentions living in the area I and Rossmo have taken a shine to?"
Guess how much that is worth in competition with a suspect where we know that the only logical working trek leads straight through the Spitalfields murder area? Hm?

Shall I help you? Zilch. Nada. Zero. Rien. Keines. Not a thing.

That´s what it´s worth. It´s like claiming that the likelihood of Lechmere is diminished by the fact that there were residential addresses available closer to the centre of the murders than his home address - and as if that had any sort of importance considering that he would not have killed out of his home but alongside his working trek.

It counts for nothing.

Being Lechmere is not a licence to make up when we want to start measuring his journey to work from his home.

The only reasonable thing to do is to see how his working trek relates to the sites, and allow for all variables within the Spitalfields area. I have a special license for that, called simple logic.

Cab drivers in Whitechapel traversed all of Whitechapel.

Did they? How remarkable! Why only Whitechapel? Were they disallowed to go to any other parish?
There were many kinds of occupations that could take you through the streets of Whitechapel. The problem is that you do not have any such person to present. And therefore you have no suspect to compare to Lechmere. Crow is the closest you have come, and we can - of course - not show that he was likely passing through the killing fields on the relevant hours. In fact, we have no idea where his cab business took him, but we DO know that he tucked in at around 3.30 on the morning of Tabrams murder, so from what we know, he went to bed on a time preceding for example Nichols´ murder.
So nothing at all is in sync with him being the murderer. The one link he has to the murders is that he passed by a person who may or may not have been Tabram at around 3.30 on the Tabram murder morning. Like he said, people sleep there often, and since he could not identify Tabram, she may have arrived later to the building, and the person he saw could have been anyone.
The case for Crow is therefore indefinitely much weaker than the one for Lechmere, as I am sure you will agree, unless you are intent on having your behind spanked even more.

Since you have arbitrarily decided to omit any trek from Lechmere's home to a murder site, we can do the same, for any UNSUB.

Why would I NOT omit treks from his home - when we know he was not there when Nichols was murdered? Why would I work from a model that puts him somewhere we effectively know he was not? Why would I say that Chapman was ten or twelve minutes away from his home - when I know that he walked Hanbury Street on the Nichols murder morning? Hanbury Street, where Chapman was killed.
I am not that fond of models, Batman. I prefer reality, unlike you. You opt for any unnamed and unproven character as the best bid for the killer´s role. You opt for the phantom killer, who MAY have lived nearby, who MAY have roamed these exact streets, who MAY have felt a resentment of the unfortunates, who MAY have carried a knife, who MAY have wanted to take organs out, who MAY have felt like cutting throats, who MAY....

That´s the great thing about of making stuff up. You can mould and shape it any way you like.
Once you have a suspect, things are indefinitely more tricky - every little thing must be something that can be shown to work together with this named and existing suspect.

It is the hard way, as opposed to the lazy way, the useless way, the making up way, the wrong way.

[Fisherman]

The result of this is not much more left of flower & dean with flower & dean still on it. It doesn't shift the hot zone much.

Crow has all the trimmings of your Lechmere claims and is much closer to the murder sites in terms of total length and drove a cab around Whitechapel. If you want to cut distances from Lechmere then Rossmo can do the exact same thing, even for an UNSUB.

Since you haven´t the faintest about where Crow worked on the murder morning and where his occupation took him, no, he has not got anything at all comparable to Lechmere.
I am not cutting distances from Lechmere - I am giving them alongside his trek, both as the longest and the shortest possible distance, working from the completely logical assumption that he trekked to work through Spitalfields on the murder mornings. So no cutting is done, if anything adding to the true length may be at work. I am saying that he may have been as far as 0,2 miles from George Yard when de facto he may just as well have passed via Old Montague Street, taking him on spot.

[MrBarnett]

He was Cab driver (No.6.600). So he was licenced it seems.

Yes, he was, but we don't know where he was based.

[Fisherman]

Yes, he was, but we don't know where he was based.

If it can be proven that he occupied a fixed cab line Bucks Row - Broad Street - Bucks Row, going in a loop all around the hours, he is of course as good a bid as Lechmere. Well, provided that he did work the early morning hours, that is. And of course presupposing that he drove both along the Hanbury Street route and the Old Montague ditto. Plus he must have done so carrying no passengers on the murder mornings, unless he used them as associates in his murderous business.
Maybe that was what cab 6. 600 did...?

[Batman]

Lechmere is NOT a suspect.

In your third paragraph, you immediately claim that Lechmere as a suspect makes him better than a non-existent candidate.

Lechmere is no more or less a suspect than Crow.

If you want people to believe that a cabby working in a small 9^2km area, won't be able to go through all the major routes in Whitechapel (which happens to be your claim with Lechmere) throughout their career, then fine. However, it is clearly a bias to say Lechmere can do it and Crow can't.

Crow gave the excuse he didn't know she was dead. He didn't even report being beside the body for a period of time. He obviously had to explain himself because there is no way he could have gotten into his accommodation without having to be within feet or her.

If you want to put a sinister twist to a witness, then there you have Crow not even reporting it.

Plus the hours he came home at on a Bank Holiday aren't at odds with any of the crimes. We know he stays out until the wee hours of the morning, like JtR.

[Fisherman]

Batman:
Lechmere is NOT a suspect.

That is not entirely your decision, I´m afraid. Nobody is discussed out here more in the role as a suspect, he is listed as a suspect on the boards, if you look at other listings of suspects on the net, you will find him there and hoards of people confess to believing him to be not only a suspect but actually the killer in the comment sections of Youtube, relating to the documentary. A barrister said that he warrants a prima faciae case that suggests he was the killer, and a retired murder squad leader and academic scholar in criminology says that he is of tremendeous interest to the case, plus he admitted in person to me that he thought there was a good chance we really had found the Ripper.
If that is not good enough for you, then that says a whole lot more of your personal bias than of anything else.
Plus, of course, his geographical links to the case are in no way dependant on whether you refuse to admit his suspect status or not.

In your third paragraph, you immediately claim that Lechmere as a suspect makes him better than a non-existent candidate.

Yes, you see, that is because no non-existing candidate can be shown to have existed. Such a phantom person must always stand back to whichever person we can show was actually alive and there at the time. A bummer, I know, but I think you will find that the fewest are interested in people who are not real but instead figments of our imagination.

Lechmere is no more or less a suspect than Crow.

Lechmere is a suspect, Crow is not. And that is exactly as it should be. If anybody can dig out anything at all that points to a need to award Crow a suspect status, I am all for changing it. But as it stands, Lechmere is a suspect, Crow is a non suspect, and you are being daft.

[Jon Guy]

If it can be proven that he occupied a fixed cab line Bucks Row - Broad Street - Bucks Row, going in a loop all around the hours, he is of course as good a bid as Lechmere.

He`s a better bid than Cross because he has finished work by 3.30, and lives right at the centre of the murder sites.

[Abby Normal]

Lechmere is NOT a suspect.

In your third paragraph, you immediately claim that Lechmere as a suspect makes him better than a non-existent candidate.

Lechmere is no more or less a suspect than Crow.

If you want people to believe that a cabby working in a small 9^2km area, won't be able to go through all the major routes in Whitechapel (which happens to be your claim with Lechmere) throughout their career, then fine. However, it is clearly a bias to say Lechmere can do it and Crow can't.

Crow gave the excuse he didn't know she was dead. He didn't even report being beside the body for a period of time. He obviously had to explain himself because there is no way he could have gotten into his accommodation without having to be within feet or her.

If you want to put a sinister twist to a witness, then there you have Crow not even reporting it.

Plus the hours he came home at on a Bank Holiday aren't at odds with any of the crimes. We know he stays out until the wee hours of the morning, like JtR.

Hi batman
Thats a good point about crow not reporting, but he did admit it. If he was the killer and no one saw him, wouldnt it be more likely he would just say he didnt see her?
Amd how likely would a killer kill on literally his doorstep? What does rossmo model say about that?

But i guess one could argue it was his trigger kill so that would make more sense.

So on the balance these factors are a wash for me regarding crow, especially since there are no other red flags with him, unlike lech and hutch, where there are.

But hes exactly the type of person in my view that would need to be looked at. But back then i dont think the police regarded folks like him, and lech and hutch as de facto persons of interest until they are cleared, like they do now.

And re your statement that lech is not a suspect. He certainly wasnt back then. But i think enough people have made enough valid arguments now that he could considered a valid suspect... the boards are riddled with lots of modern suspects that are much more weak than lech IMHO.

Plus hes listed on the suspects page here, so theres that. ; )

[Fisherman]

He`s a better bid than Cross because he has finished work by 3.30, and lives right at the centre of the murder sites.

Was he found by the side of a freshly killed victim?

Did he have a proven trek that would take him close to or past the murder sites?

Did he have links to St Georges and the Mitre Street area?

Was he in disagreement with the police over what was said?

Did he call himself P Hantom instead of Crow at the inquest?

Is it impossible to kill during a trek through Spitalfields? Must you be off work to be a killer? Was Paul Ogorzow told about this?

Crow is not a bid at all, Jon. Let alone a good one.

[Abby Normal]

He`s a better bid than Cross because he has finished work by 3.30, and lives right at the centre of the murder sites.

Hi jon
Respectfully no he is not. Theres a reason hes never been really put forth as a suspect or discussed as much. There simply is nothing suspicious about him or his behaviour that would warrant it. The only potential red flag that i can see and its a minor one, is that he thought it might just be another sleeper and didnt report immediately. Not enough to put any real suspician on IMHO.

[Batman]

Why is "being found" standing beside a victim a better candidate than someone who was beside the victim and left her there without telling anyone! We know JtR does this for sure! We don't know JtR hangs around his victims at all. We know civilians and PCs discover his victims though, but they report it. Cross, he doesn't and then blames the dark when confronted with it! See how sinister this is!

Crow was a licenced cab driver who likely drove around Whitechapel. Your claim is that the major routes are going passed murder sites. Well, then you need Crow as a licenced cab driver not going down any major routes ever to rule him out of the same claims you have for Cross.

He is a cabby. He goes more places than Cross can be accounted for. Crow is a better candidate there for your Thames Torso killer. Dumping torsos from his cab and all.