Evidence of innocence

[caz]

>>Did CAL have a stable male influence during his first seven years?<<

That would depend on when Cross and Lechmere started courting. It's not impossible that C.A.L. had, at least, 18 years of Thomas Cross in his life starting around the age of 1. He may have never have been able to recall a time when Tom was not in his childhood.

Plus, of course, there is always the possibility that Thomas Cross was his father.

My late father-in-law Charlie [really] had a saying: "It's a wise man that knows his own father."

He was the youngest of thirteen, and always suspected his mum and dad were actually his grandparents, who had brought him up as one of their own when their eldest child - his "sister" - had him out of wedlock.

I'm sure Charlie Cross would have suspected something if he strongly resembled his step-father physically, but not necessarily otherwise. Mannerisms can be part nature, part nurture, so if he had a good relationship with his step-father he was more likely to pick them up anyway. A bad relationship would leave its own mark. A lot would depend on whether or not the young Charles wanted to think of Thomas as his real daddy. It would be strange to use a name as an adult, in any situation, if it brought back to mind a God-awful childhood.

According to Lechmere theorists, he made a career of being Teflon, so I'm surprised he'd have needed to become Cross just for inquests, when he had such a natural gift for putting authority in its place just by being himself, and authority being none the wiser that it was being played like a fiddle.

Love,

Caz
X

[Abby Normal]

I too am confused by the terms 'anti-' and 'pro-' when applied to Lechmere.

If Abby is saying that Lechmere's defenders are just as fervent as his accusers, what actually is wrong with defending an obviously-innocent man?

And have you, Abby, ever heard of a case of our putting forward far-fetched scenarios in his defence?

Hi PI and Caz
Sorry if I was unclear. By anti lechers, I mean the fervent attackers of the Lechmerians. As you know, Im no Lechmerian, more of a Lech apologist lol. I agree they over egg the pudding with some of their stuff, and Ive never understood the attack on his mother. Seems like she was a good person, a strong woman, and great mom.
But I see the anti lechers, well many at least, guilty of the same thing-over egging the pudding in his defense (like saying his suspecthood is akin to a Monty Python sketch among others) and knee jerk arguing and conceding nothing, I mean nothing, no matter how innocuous a point a Lechmerian makes.

Lechmere was seen near a freshly killed victim and in todays world would be a de facto suspect by police until cleared. Hes clearly in the frame for Nichols murder. He also has a few other potential flags and compared to many other suspects his proximity to a victim, geographical points(the Lech Triangle) and route to work near victims locations puts him way ahead of other suspects in that regard-no others even come close.
So if you all think hes a ridiculous suspect worthy of a Monty Python sketch, then so be it, but IMHO you are quite wrong. no big wup.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

Hi PI1,

When there is no direct evidence against this individual, who is being thrown under the Ripper Omnibus just for jolly, what else are they going to do but interpret each new fact that is learned about him - and now his relatives [do Lechmere descendants get a free pass, I wonder?] - as yet another indication of the evil infecting the Lechmere line, and then fill all the gaps in their knowledge - commonly known as their ignorance - with more malicious speculation?

Stow - or whatever his real name is - should have taken a good look at himself in the mirror before accusing anyone else. But on reflection...

If my other half had set off on a crusade to finger one of my ancestors as a serial killer, he wouldn't have been my other half for long. Then again, I'd have told him to go away and shut up at our first meeting if he'd had anything in common with Stow, on any level.

Love,

Caz
X

what else are they going to do but interpret each new fact that is learned about him - and now his relatives [do Lechmere descendants get a free pass, I wonder?] - as yet another indication of the evil infecting the Lechmere line...


I do hope Stow doesn't have any children.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

Oh, I know both of them from the Whitechapel Society meetings I used to attend when I lived in Croydon, which, incidentally, is where Stow went to school.

Stow's infinitely better half is a lovely lady and we always had a good old chinwag. I could never understand how she could stand there and nod and smile as Stow was busy putting a noose round old Lechmere's neck. It was even worse when I learned what colour scarf Stow wears politically. He must tie it so tightly round his neck that the oxygen struggles to reach his brain. I like to think of his missus still nodding and smiling as she watches him turn purple from the anger within.

Love,

Caz
X

I wouldn't dream of asking you to be indiscreet about this, but do you mean that Stow's scarf is of a similar colour to the neckerchief worn by my favoured suspect, the man with the appearance of a sailor, seen by Lawende?

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

I'm with you, Abby.

The anti lechers are emotionally invested in sticking the knife fervantly into this man, for the original 'sin' of discovering a murder victim. I'll say it's original. It's an original way of playing detective.

Ah, you meant the pro lechers, who are fervantly in favour of fair play for the Pickfords One.

As for Maybrick, sicket [sic], the royal consiracy [sic] and Van Gogh, I couldn't agree more. And whichever wag put the first one in the frame [Maybrick, not Lechmere, don't panic] could have written a Monty Python sketch in their sleep. Cheese shop, anyone? Dead Parrot?

Free the Pickfords One!

Love,

Caz
X

I too am confused by the terms 'anti-' and 'pro-' when applied to Lechmere.

If Abby is saying that Lechmere's defenders are just as fervent as his accusers, what actually is wrong with defending an obviously-innocent man?

And have you, Abby, ever heard of a case of our putting forward far-fetched scenarios in his defence?

[caz]

I would say the anti lechers are just as fervant. And "suspects" more akin to a Monty python sketch include the likes of Maybrick, sicket, the royal consiracy and Van Gogh. lech isnt one of them, not by a long shot. IMHO.

I'm with you, Abby.

The anti lechers are emotionally invested in sticking the knife fervantly into this man, for the original 'sin' of discovering a murder victim. I'll say it's original. It's an original way of playing detective.

Ah, you meant the pro lechers, who are fervantly in favour of fair play for the Pickfords One.

As for Maybrick, sicket [sic], the royal consiracy [sic] and Van Gogh, I couldn't agree more. And whichever wag put the first one in the frame [Maybrick, not Lechmere, don't panic] could have written a Monty Python sketch in their sleep. Cheese shop, anyone? Dead Parrot?

Free the Pickfords One!

Love,

Caz
X

[caz]

I take it you're referring to the report, which I have heard, that Stow's wife is a descendant of Lechmere.

I agree with you that it is strange that she should have swallowed his bizarre allegations.

I have just had an exchange on another forum with a 'believer' in Stow and the case against Lechmere.

I use the word 'believer' because when arguing with such a person, it is rather like talking to a religious fundamentalist.

I quote from my own comments there:


The idea that the murderer was Lechmere, walking three times in the wrong direction on his way home from his mother's house, is laughable. You have Lechmere murdering a woman on his way to work and then murdering a woman on his way home from his mother's house. Most people would laugh at the suggestion because it's more like something out of a Monty Python sketch than from real research.

Oh, I know both of them from the Whitechapel Society meetings I used to attend when I lived in Croydon, which, incidentally, is where Stow went to school.

Stow's infinitely better half is a lovely lady and we always had a good old chinwag. I could never understand how she could stand there and nod and smile as Stow was busy putting a noose round old Lechmere's neck. It was even worse when I learned what colour scarf Stow wears politically. He must tie it so tightly round his neck that the oxygen struggles to reach his brain. I like to think of his missus still nodding and smiling as she watches him turn purple from the anger within.

Love,

Caz
X

[caz]

How about “dirty old man”, wasn’t my fault she looked about 13, when she was 25, and I looked about 40 when I was 28. I was taken as her father a few times, she was taken as our sons sister many times. It didn’t really worry me, but she sure got upset by both.

Ha! That reminds me when my ex and I were on holiday in Florida in 1981, when we were both 27. He was three months older. I was wearing a Disney World sweater and dozing off in a chair, when a middle aged woman came up and spoke to my husband, referring to me as his daughter. He was NOT happy.

I am now married to my toy boy, who is either four or five years my junior, depending on the time of year. I hope nobody makes anything of it. I'm just a crazy cat lady in jeans, not a cat's meat lady with crazy genes.

Love,

Caz
X

[Abby Normal]

I would say the anti lechers are just as fervant. And "suspects" more akin to a Monty python sketch include the likes of Maybrick, sicket, the royal consiracy and Van Gogh. lech isnt one of them, not by a long shot. IMHO.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

Hi PI1,

When there is no direct evidence against this individual, who is being thrown under the Ripper Omnibus just for jolly, what else are they going to do but interpret each new fact that is learned about him - and now his relatives [do Lechmere descendants get a free pass, I wonder?] - as yet another indication of the evil infecting the Lechmere line, and then fill all the gaps in their knowledge - commonly known as their ignorance - with more malicious speculation?

Stow - or whatever his real name is - should have taken a good look at himself in the mirror before accusing anyone else. But on reflection...

If my other half had set off on a crusade to finger one of my ancestors as a serial killer, he wouldn't have been my other half for long. Then again, I'd have told him to go away and shut up at our first meeting if he'd had anything in common with Stow, on any level.

Love,

Caz
X

I take it you're referring to the report, which I have heard, that Stow's wife is a descendant of Lechmere.

I agree with you that it is strange that she should have swallowed his bizarre allegations.

I have just had an exchange on another forum with a 'believer' in Stow and the case against Lechmere.

I use the word 'believer' because when arguing with such a person, it is rather like talking to a religious fundamentalist.

I quote from my own comments there:


The idea that the murderer was Lechmere, walking three times in the wrong direction on his way home from his mother's house, is laughable. You have Lechmere murdering a woman on his way to work and then murdering a woman on his way home from his mother's house. Most people would laugh at the suggestion because it's more like something out of a Monty Python sketch than from real research.

[caz]

I would say EVERYTHING about the 'case' against Lechmere is evidence of questionable technique!

Everything he said or did is interpreted in such a way that he will look guilty.

For example, when he approached a policeman and told him that he was 'wanted' - according to that policeman by another policeman - at the murder site, this is explained as a ruse in order to 'get Lechmere past the policeman'.

If Lechmere had wanted to get past that policeman, he wouldn't have gone looking for him in the first place in Bakers Row and he wouldn't have approached him or engaged him in conversation.

As for the bigamy charge, it seems to be part of a character assassination of the whole family.

Anyone who challenges Stow to his face, as it were, gets the same treatment.

He has accused me of both ignorance and malice.

Hi PI1,

When there is no direct evidence against this individual, who is being thrown under the Ripper Omnibus just for jolly, what else are they going to do but interpret each new fact that is learned about him - and now his relatives [do Lechmere descendants get a free pass, I wonder?] - as yet another indication of the evil infecting the Lechmere line, and then fill all the gaps in their knowledge - commonly known as their ignorance - with more malicious speculation?

Stow - or whatever his real name is - should have taken a good look at himself in the mirror before accusing anyone else. But on reflection...

If my other half had set off on a crusade to finger one of my ancestors as a serial killer, he wouldn't have been my other half for long. Then again, I'd have told him to go away and shut up at our first meeting if he'd had anything in common with Stow, on any level.

Love,

Caz
X

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

This is a relatively recent suggestion, it's been made several times over on FB groups.

Christer is still sticking with the way to work.argument PI1

Yes, indeed!

But Stow is hedging his bets.

[Elamarna]

I had an exchange with Christer Holmgren some time ago about the Hanbury St murder, and he was suggesting that Lechmere committed it on his way to work, nearly three hours before the body was discovered, on the basis of the medical testimony that rigor mortis had set in and death could not have occured later than 4:30.

Of course, in case that would leave him insufficient time to get to work on time, he has him leaving home early!

As far as I'm aware, neither he nor Stow has suggested that the murder took place while Lechmere was out on deliveries, but I have come across this argument before.

This is a relatively recent suggestion, it's been made several times over on FB groups.

Christer is still sticking with the way to work.argument PI1

[Herlock Sholmes]

On the other hand, the cold delays the onset of rigor mortis!

There are way too many factors like the condition of the body, clothing, air currents, stress before death, blood loss etc which can affect an estimation. Even today they don’t rely on it. Phillips would have had to have surpassed the knowledge of todays experts for us to have had confidence in his estimate. We really only have the witnesses to assess.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

Phillips did say that he thought at most 2 hours but he added this:

“..at least two hours, and probably more, when he first saw her; but it was right to mention that it was a fairly cool morning, and that the body would be more apt to cool rapidly from its having lost a great quantity of blood.”

Even the proper accepted that Phillips could have been wrong.

It’s not realistic to suggest that he would have killed whilst he was out on his rounds imo so they prefer the doctors unreliable estimate because it gives them a TOD which allows for Lechmere to have done it before he went to work. All the modern experts though tell us that the methods that he used were extremely unreliable. He still could have got it right of course but we can’t verify one way or another. He could have been right or wrong. So Phillips gets us no further forward. We’re left with 3 witnesses who all point strongly to a later TOD.

Then again, this thread isn’t the place to go over that old ground again.

On the other hand, the cold delays the onset of rigor mortis!