Originally posted by MrBarnett
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Evidence of innocence
Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
-
"The full picture always needs to be given. When this does not happen, we are left to make decisions on insufficient information." - Christer Holmgren
"Unfortunately, when one becomes obsessed by a theory, truth and logic rarely matter." - Steven Blomer
-
Originally posted by Fisherman View Post"Alright" entails "Got it", though, does it not?
And yes, he did complete a knocking up errand before setting out for Bucks Row. The importance of that factor ies in how it more or less proves that Lechmere never conveyed the gravity of the errand to Mizen. It is a point much in favour of Mizen being the truthful source and Lechmere being the liar."You can rob me, you can starve me and you can beat me and you can kill me. Just don't bore me."
Clint Eastwood as Gunny in "Heartbreak Ridge"
Comment
-
Originally posted by MrBarnett View Post
We might also add that if he was only known to the police as Mr Cross from MEOT, and the sheds were occupied by someone named Lechmere, his connection to it might not be immediately apparent.
M.(Image of Charles Allen Lechmere is by artist Ashton Guilbeaux. Used by permission. Original art-work for sale.)
Comment
-
Hey Fish,
Originally posted by Fisherman View Post
I have been here a good few years too, and I must say that I have never seen anything like the criticism directed towards the Lechmere theory. Donīt get me wrong; in a sense I like it, because it tells me that very many posters feel very threatened by it. However, to say that the treatment the theory is subjected to is par for the course is not true, if you ask me.
Then again, Iīm such a sensitive creature... (lol)
Maybe the overall slightly more stinging tone is partly due to some comments in your book about Ripperology and what you perceive as a sober view of things.
Ah well, how does the old German saying go, viel Feind, viel Ehr'.
Grüße,
Boris~ All perils, specially malignant, are recurrent - Thomas De Quincey ~
Comment
-
Originally posted by barnflatwyngarde View Post
Fish, I think that you should acknowledge that it is possible to reject the Lechmere/Cross theory simply because some people honestly don't think that the evidence stacks up.
It has nothing to do with feeling "threatened" by your theory.
By saying that a large proportion of posters who publish postings criticising or rejecting your theory "feel very threatened" by it, simply gives your theory a certain gravitas that many folks genuinely don't think that it merits.
You reason that people do not feel threatened by the theory.
I reason that many people do.
Very likely, one of us is correct.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Fisherman View Post
I have been here a good few years too, and I must say that I have never seen anything like the criticism directed towards the Lechmere theory. Donīt get me wrong; in a sense I like it, because it tells me that very many posters feel very threatened by it.
Sometimes people pick the low-hanging fruit for the simple reason that it is low-hanging.
- Likes 1
Comment
-
Originally posted by FrankO View PostTo me, “Got it” means “I understood it” while “Alright” means just “Okay”, “Good” or “Fine” and as a reply/reaction to what was said, “good” or “fine” doesn’t mean anything, the way I see it.
Okay. Me, I think that when Mizen said "Alright!", it was a confirmation that he had got the message Lechmere conveyed.
Wasn’t there a regulation that could get police officers in trouble if they neglected to call up the local residents that morning?Last edited by Fisherman; 10-30-2021, 05:42 PM.
- Likes 1
Comment
-
Originally posted by bolo View PostHey Fish,
I think Crossmere and your book get more attention because you developed parts of it in discussions in here so a great many members actively or passively took part in it and consequently have something to say about it.
By contrast, even though a perfectly respectable person might want to argue that Kosminski or Druitt or Cutbush or the City suspect are more compelling suspects, the cases against them are largely abstractions. In the case of Kosminski, for instance, we have no idea what his movements were in 1888, nor what the 'evidence' against him may have been. How do you get worked up over an abstraction, even if it might be the right answer?
- Likes 1
Comment
-
Originally posted by bolo View PostHey Fish,
I think Crossmere and your book get more attention because you developed parts of it in discussions in here so a great many members actively or passively took part in it and consequently have something to say about it.
Maybe the overall slightly more stinging tone is partly due to some comments in your book about Ripperology and what you perceive as a sober view of things.
Ah well, how does the old German saying go, viel Feind, viel Ehr'.
Grüße,
Boris
There is also a tendency to claim the strangest things in the efforts to try and dismantle as much as people possibly can (which is nothing at all, but ...) of the Lechmere bid. Currently, this is shown by how people claim on this very thread that the carmans true name was not concealed by him...? No answer to whether it concealed itself or whether it was something somebody else did for him is given.
I consequently take your point on viel Feind, viel Ehr' as a very promising proverb indeed - I just wish that the quality of the Feinderei was sometimes a tad better...
Comment
-
Originally posted by rjpalmer View Post
If this was true, then Ripperologists are also very threatened by the Maybrick Diary, Hallie Rubenhold, and the theories of Patricia Cornwell (though those once brutal criticisms have dried up since she never posts).
Sometimes people pick the low-hanging fruit for the simple reason that it is low-hanging.
Comment
-
Originally posted by rjpalmer View Post
I think part of the appeal of the Lechmere theory is that the 'evidence,' such as it is, is on the table. Theorists can discuss the alleged blood evidence, the geography, Crossmere's testimony, etc. It's tries to be a circumstantial case, and, in this sense, deals with the knowable and the concrete.
By contrast, even though a perfectly respectable person might want to argue that Kosminski or Druitt or Cutbush or the City suspect are more compelling suspects, the cases against them are largely abstractions. In the case of Kosminski, for instance, we have no idea what his movements were in 1888, nor what the 'evidence' against him may have been. How do you get worked up over an abstraction, even if it might be the right answer?
Lechmere was at a murder site. Alone. With a victim. Who was freshly dead. The forensic pathologists tell me that she would likely have ended bleeding at around 3.48-3.50 if she was cut at 3.45. She bled until around 3.54. And Lechmere passed right through the killing fields on a daily basis. In the early mornings. On the Saturday evenings, he probaly didnīt - he was more likely to visit his old stomping grounds in St Georges then.
But he was not named by Anderson. He was not pointed to by MacNaghten. And he was not championed by the Sun.
He only has a shitload of very weighty circumstantial case-related evidence pointing in his direction, nothing more (see Scobie, James). Whereas the REAL suspects have nothing of the sort.Last edited by Fisherman; 10-30-2021, 05:57 PM.
- Likes 1
Comment
-
Originally posted by rjpalmer View Post
If this was true, then Ripperologists are also very threatened by the Maybrick Diary, Hallie Rubenhold, and the theories of Patricia Cornwell (though those once brutal criticisms have dried up since she never posts).
Sometimes people pick the low-hanging fruit for the simple reason that it is low-hanging.
But the fear certainly seems to be there on many hands. And of course, if youīve been telling all and sundry that it is ridiculous to believe in a solution so long after the events, it will perhaps hurt if that prophecy is ... you know: threatened.
But the topic as such is a difficult one, not least since reliable numbers and statistics are as hard to come by as confessions...Last edited by Fisherman; 10-30-2021, 05:44 PM.
- Likes 1
Comment
-
Originally posted by rjpalmer View Post
If this was true, then Ripperologists are also very threatened by the Maybrick Diary, Hallie Rubenhold, and the theories of Patricia Cornwell (though those once brutal criticisms have dried up since she never posts).
Sometimes people pick the low-hanging fruit for the simple reason that it is low-hanging.
M.(Image of Charles Allen Lechmere is by artist Ashton Guilbeaux. Used by permission. Original art-work for sale.)
Comment
-
Originally posted by Mark J D View Post
Anyone feel like showing me the posts where people have shrieked about "putting a noose around the neck of the innocent [Maybrick]!" or "throwing the [post-impressionist cosmopolitan artist] class under the bus!"...? Anybody...?
M.Last edited by Fisherman; 10-30-2021, 06:06 PM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Mark J D View Post
Anyone feel like showing me the posts where people have shrieked about "putting a noose around the neck of the innocent [Maybrick]!" or "throwing the [post-impressionist cosmopolitan artist] class under the bus!"...? Anybody...?
M.
Comment
Comment