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

[Sam Flynn]

I have been told so many times that there were thousands of dwellers in Whitechapel who were as good or better suspects as Lechmere

No, you have NOT been told this - not even once. Stick to the facts.

You've been told that, among the many thousands of men who actually lived in the area, it is statistically inevitable that scores of them would have made better suspects than Cross, or many other named suspects for that matter.

[Batman]

There we go again. Nobody said he needed to, what is said is that he CHOSE to. If that could sink in, it would be awfully nice.
He could run. He did not. He chose to stay.

He stayed because he had found a body and wanted to draw other witness attention to it, as many, if not all the other witnesses in the C5 did also (but Crow didn't for Tabram).

That is the reason for staying. He chose to do what they also did. Wait for someone to also aid in help.

It is simply inexplicable that the murderer needed to stay there with someone coming in the distance.

It IS explicable that witness should wait for someone else to help.

[Darryl Kenyon]

Lech turns up for work not long after he murders Polly.
He then turns up for work not long after murdering Annie a week later.
He then turns up at work three weeks later and say, ten minutes after murdering Kate.
Sorry, I don't buy it.

[Batman]

Lech turns up for work not long after he murders Polly.
He then turns up for work not long after murdering Annie a week later.
He then turns up at work three weeks later and say, ten minutes after murdering Kate.
Sorry, I don't buy it.

He is also re-visiting at least three of the murder scenes at the same time every day on his day to work, by way of their same model. No beat PC, no investigator out at that time to get insights into the murder, apparently ever noticed him nor stopped him to find a big bloody sharp blade on him.

[Fisherman]

I am going to have to disagree with you Fish. It doesn't matter how many entrances Pickfords had at night. There would almost certainly be a night watchman, at least in a company like that. Cross turning up at that time of a morning would almost certainly be asked why, and that's if the night watchman or whoever stopped him knew him. Was it 200 or at least dozens were employed. For Cross to go there uninvited or unknown without some really good reason he would be taking one hell of a risk.

Actually, slaughtering a woman and cutting her up in an open street is not entirely risk-free either, Darryl.

Many have said before that Lechmere would have been met by a welcome committee when arriving at Pickfords, but so far, nobody has proven it.

[Fisherman]

No, you have NOT been told this - not even once. Stick to the facts.

You've been told that, among the many thousands of men who actually lived in the area, it is statistically inevitable that scores of them would have made better suspects than Cross, or many other named suspects for that matter.

Actually, Gareth, you are claiming it as a fact that the Ripper and the Torso killer cut flaps from the abdomens for different reasons, so I would not worry too much about how I approach facts.

As I said before, until you produce a man of flesh and blood that was a better suspect than Lechmere, that made-up army of yours isn´t worth anything.

Gary asked the relevant question earlier: Why would the police engage in geographical profiling if they had a man they KNEW passed through the killing fields, had links to all site and had been found alone beside a freshly killed victim?

It´s doing it the ostridge way.

[Fisherman]

He stayed because he had found a body and wanted to draw other witness attention to it, as many, if not all the other witnesses in the C5 did also (but Crow didn't for Tabram).

That is the reason for staying. He chose to do what they also did. Wait for someone to also aid in help.

It is simply inexplicable that the murderer needed to stay there with someone coming in the distance.

It IS explicable that witness should wait for someone else to help.

Again, much as you claim it inexplicable, others claim the opposite. What if you are wrong, Batman? Is that even a remote possibility...? And can you please establish the exact distance Paul was from Lechmere when the latter noticed him? You see, I think that may have a great deal to do with the matter.
Plus, if you please, can you be so nice as to comment on why the clothing hid the wounds, because that too may be totally crucial.

[caz]

But there are many who pass through Whitechapel on route to the city, quite legitimately. What brings Lechmere into focus is that he found the body. That is what distinguishes him from all the others who would by your argument be, geographically speaking, the best suspect if they had found the body. If Paul had been ten minutes ahead of Lechmere, he might be in your number one slot.

He would have been Fish's number one suspect, etenguy. No doubt about it. Paul was the one who had a rant against the police. Paul lied in the same newspaper by bigging up his own role in the affair. Paul initially failed to attend the inquest. Paul had to be tracked down and got up in the middle of the night to be questioned and made to give his account at the inquest. Paul had as much reason as Cross to be in Hanbury Street the following weekend when Chapman was murdered. Because Paul the liar claimed to arrive at the scene in Buck's Row after Cross, Fish may not have bothered to look in as much detail into any other possible associations in time and place which Paul may have had with other murders.

Not that I believe for a second that Paul should be considered a better suspect, or a suspect at all, but he and Cross should at least have equal 'person of interest' status on the information we do have about them. Yet Fish appears to give Paul a completely free pass for some reason, while insisting that Cross fits all the criteria to be the ripper.

Love,

Caz
X

[Fisherman]

Lech turns up for work not long after he murders Polly.
He then turns up for work not long after murdering Annie a week later.
He then turns up at work three weeks later and say, ten minutes after murdering Kate.
Sorry, I don't buy it.

Lech was supposed to turn up at work on the morning of the 31:st of August.

He was in all probability supposed to do so on the morning of the 8:th of September too.

I´m sure the others immediately would go "you killer, you" when he did. Unless they simply said "good morning". If they met him, that is. The thing is, we can´t know. We do not know the circumstances surrounding his arrival, how many people there were around, etcetera.

Mitre Square, I have told you my view of that.

If you don´t buy it, don´t be sorry. People are wrong ever so often.

[Fisherman]

He is also re-visiting at least three of the murder scenes at the same time every day on his day to work, by way of their same model. No beat PC, no investigator out at that time to get insights into the murder, apparently ever noticed him nor stopped him to find a big bloody sharp blade on him.

If nothing else, they should have hauled him in when he passed through the X-ray scan.

[Fisherman]

He would have been Fish's number one suspect, etenguy. No doubt about it. Paul was the one who had a rant against the police. Paul lied in the same newspaper by bigging up his own role in the affair. Paul initially failed to attend the inquest. Paul had to be tracked down and got up in the middle of the night to be questioned and made to give his account at the inquest. Paul had as much reason as Cross to be in Hanbury Street the following weekend when Chapman was murdered. Because Paul the liar claimed to arrive at the scene in Buck's Row after Cross, Fish may not have bothered to look in as much detail into any other possible associations in time and place which Paul may have had with other murders.

Not that I believe for a second that Paul should be considered a better suspect, or a suspect at all, but he and Cross should at least have equal 'person of interest' status on the information we do have about them. Yet Fish appears to give Paul a completely free pass for some reason, while insisting that Cross fits all the criteria to be the ripper.

Love,

Caz
X

Let´s see here, Caz, do you get to answer for me about what I would have said and done? Ehmmm, tough one, that...

Nope. Got it. You don´t.

The first thing we must accept to have Paul as the killer is that he must have left home, gone into Bucks Row, heard Lechmere, returned in the direction Lechmere was coming from instead of heading the other way, hidden halfway down Bucks Row, waited for Lechmere to pass and then left his hiding place, where Lechmere accidentally had not spotted him while passing, and joined his fellow carman at the murder scene.

Anybody who suggests something like that needs to have his head checked.

Or chopped off. Not literally, of course, only by way of being thrown to the wolves intellectually speaking.

[caz]

In answer to the question, of course someone residing in Doveton Street could have been the murderer. As I've pointed out before, Lechmere's residence was only around a mile from all of the C5 sites.

However, let's consider Jack Random from Flower and Dean Street. He's just 0.6 miles walking distance from Mitre Square, if he goes via Wentworth Street-the GSG was found on the corner of Wentworth Street and Goulston Street; 0.6 miles from Durward Street; 0.4 miles from Hanbury Street; 0.5 miles from Henriques Street; and a mere 0.2 miles from Whites Row.

He is therefore within about half a mile of all the murder sites. Moreover, if you take into account other factors, such as work address, former work addresses, former residences, girlfriend's addresses, former girlfriends' addresses, etc, you will no doubt be able to discover even closer connections.

On that basis, what makes Jack Random less likely to be the killer than Lechmere, particularly as there is no substantive evidence linking Lechmere to any murder.

Thus, there is no forensic evidence, such as signs of blood on his person, or being discovered with a blood stained knife. No evidence that he was a violent character. No confession. No witnesses observing him commit a murder, or flee a murder scene.

All there is, from a substantive perspective, is the fact that he found a body close to the time when a murder took place. Well, someone had to find the body. And both Louis D and PC Thompson discovered the body of murder victims shortly after the murder took place. Does that make them prime suspects?

Jack Random is more likely to have been the killer, John, on the very simple grounds that there are no documented cases of one who chose to stay with his nearly decapitated, freshly killed victim, to wait for the next man - whoever that might be - to reach the spot, then steer him over to where the body was, requiring him to inspect the damage. Or if there are such cases, Fish evidently does not think it necessary or desirable to draw our attention to them, which frankly I would find quite astonishing, considering his efforts to convince us all that Lechmere makes a much better suspect than one who would have left the scene unseen, because he wanted to remain anonymous and may well not have had a good excuse for being there, if the victim led her killer to the scene and not the other way round.

Love,

Caz
X

[Abby Normal]

He would have been Fish's number one suspect, etenguy. No doubt about it. Paul was the one who had a rant against the police. Paul lied in the same newspaper by bigging up his own role in the affair. Paul initially failed to attend the inquest. Paul had to be tracked down and got up in the middle of the night to be questioned and made to give his account at the inquest. Paul had as much reason as Cross to be in Hanbury Street the following weekend when Chapman was murdered. Because Paul the liar claimed to arrive at the scene in Buck's Row after Cross, Fish may not have bothered to look in as much detail into any other possible associations in time and place which Paul may have had with other murders.

Not that I believe for a second that Paul should be considered a better suspect, or a suspect at all, but he and Cross should at least have equal 'person of interest' status on the information we do have about them. Yet Fish appears to give Paul a completely free pass for some reason, while insisting that Cross fits all the criteria to be the ripper.

Love,

Caz
X

Hi Caz
are you being sarcastic with this post? Paul came upon lech who was already by the dead victim. Your not seriously suggesting paul murdered Nichols, left and then circled around to re enter bucks row are you?

[Abby Normal]

Lech turns up for work not long after he murders Polly.
He then turns up for work not long after murdering Annie a week later.
He then turns up at work three weeks later and say, ten minutes after murdering Kate.
Sorry, I don't buy it.

HI DK
I see where your coming from-its one of my main beefs with lech also-murdering on his way to work. You would think it would be better for him to murder on his way home from work.

but perhaps he didnt get off at the right time-perhaps too early for their to be prostitutes out? or something else in his personal circs that didnt allow it.
who knows?

[John Wheat]

Hi Caz
are you being sarcastic with this post? Paul came upon lech who was already by the dead victim. Your not seriously suggesting paul murdered Nichols, left and then circled around to re enter bucks row are you?

It's no more fanciful than Lechmere killing Nicholas.