Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Evidence of innocence

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by The Baron View Post
    You may have missed the point altogether.


    It is not that Lechmere couldn't have killed Chapman after he started his work, it is about their saga "route to work argument" that Lechmerians created to insert cross at other murders spots, but Stride, Eddowes and Kelly's murders don't support their claim, so they need Chapman's badly.

    If Chapman was killed after Lechmere started to work, that will ruin their "Lechmere's route takes him over other murders spots" at a time corresponding with their time of death.



    The Baron
    This is very true.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Columbo View Post

      Well not that he needed one because he apparently was never accused, but guessing by his work history of several years of service I would say he was working. Most likely if he left his cart to get "pinched" he would've suffered a fine from his employer or getting axed.

      done
      Sorry, didn't mean done at the end of that.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Harry D View Post
        If Chapman was murdered while Lechmere was on his rounds, that raises several questions:
        • Would Lechmere's round have taken him past Hanbury Street?
        • Would Lechmere had been using a horse and cart? If so, none were reported nearby.
        • Wouldn't it have been foolhardy for Lechmere to park the cart elsewhere and leave it unguarded in the middle of Whitechapel?
        * Would Lechmere's route have taken him past Hanbury Street between 4:00am and 5:30am?
        * Was anything Lechmere delivered before 5:30am poorly wrapped meat to explain any bloodstains?
        * If Lechmere had bloodstains he claimed came from poorly wrapped meat, then before signing for delivery every customer would have spent time examining their deliveries to make sure they had not been damaged by the blood.
        * Was Lechmere assigned a van boy that day?
        * Lechmere would have been wearing his work uniform. No carmen were reported nearby.
        * Deliveries were signed off on along with the time of delivery . A delivery between 4am and 5:30 that took 20 minutes longer than it should have would drawn attention from record keepers and supervisors.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Fiver View Post
          * Would Lechmere's route have taken him past Hanbury Street between 4:00am and 5:30am?
          * Was anything Lechmere delivered before 5:30am poorly wrapped meat to explain any bloodstains?
          * If Lechmere had bloodstains he claimed came from poorly wrapped meat, then before signing for delivery every customer would have spent time examining their deliveries to make sure they had not been damaged by the blood.
          * Was Lechmere assigned a van boy that day?
          * Lechmere would have been wearing his work uniform. No carmen were reported nearby.
          * Deliveries were signed off on along with the time of delivery . A delivery between 4am and 5:30 that took 20 minutes longer than it should have would drawn attention from record keepers and supervisors.
          This is all pretty desperate.

          ‘No carmen were reported nearby’ is a classic. So there wasn’t a single horse and cart anywhere near Hanbury Street or Spitalfields Market around 5 a.m. that morning???

          Try working out a route between Liverpool Street and HB’s wholesale depot in Coventry Street and see if it passes anywhere near Hanbury Street. Or perhaps, for once, you’ve actually bothered to put in the research and come to the conclusion that the shortest route was via the Old Kent Road. Enlighten us.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Columbo View Post

            This is very true.
            It was, but now it’s about a Lechmere having an alibi for the Chapman murder. He didn’t.

            Comment


            • The brigade that suspects Lechmere shouldn't be calling his defendants and doubters "desperate", they should be looking for actual evidence that he really did something. All I have seen is suggestions that he could have done something. That applies to most of the adult male population of East London. I for one, accept the possibility that he could have done something here, but I haven't seen any evidence that he did. Don't ask for proof that he didn't do anything, offer evidence that he did. An alleged coincidence, a claim that it is possible that he was somewhere, or he retained his step-father's name etc is not evidence of guilt.

              I for one would welcome some genuine tangible evidence in this case.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Doctored Whatsit View Post
                The brigade that suspects Lechmere shouldn't be calling his defendants and doubters "desperate", they should be looking for actual evidence that he really did something. All I have seen is suggestions that he could have done something. That applies to most of the adult male population of East London. I for one, accept the possibility that he could have done something here, but I haven't seen any evidence that he did. Don't ask for proof that he didn't do anything, offer evidence that he did. An alleged coincidence, a claim that it is possible that he was somewhere, or he retained his step-father's name etc is not evidence of guilt.

                I for one would welcome some genuine tangible evidence in this case.
                hi doctor
                the only tangible evidence in this case against any suspect, and its still very weak at that, is the possible id of koz.
                "Is all that we see or seem
                but a dream within a dream?"

                -Edgar Allan Poe


                "...the man and the peaked cap he is said to have worn
                quite tallies with the descriptions I got of him."

                -Frederick G. Abberline

                Comment


                • Originally posted by MrBarnett View Post

                  It was, but now it’s about a Lechmere having an alibi for the Chapman murder. He didn’t.
                  That's not necessarily true, as the other threads address this. We have no idea because he was not asked as he was not suspected in Chapman's case, but it's more than likely he was working, unless you can prove he was somewhere else other than on his cart, or if he was even on a cart and not in a warehouse somewhere.

                  Comment


                  • Hi Abby,

                    In general terms, I agree that there isn't good useful evidence against any suspect - that is why I don't have one. Unfortunately, it will always be that when someone has a suspect, and no real evidence, the quoting of possibilities, vague doubts, alleged anomolies etc, tends to appear very weak, and occasionally rather desperate - and frankly very desperate when we resort to - he could have done it, because there isn't any good evidence that he didn't. That applies, I think, to almost the entire population of the area at the time! Something like a witness statement describing a possible carman in the vicinity at the time of Chapman or Tabram's murders, for example, would be very useful. Although I agree that absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, there is always nothing there to help us.

                    Personally I can't argue for one suspect based on virtually no evidence whatever, because I will always be outvoted by those who point out the lack of evidence. That's our problem, isn't it? Ripperology is a subject full of contradicting information, some facts, and endless possibilities. That's probably why it can be so addictive.

                    Comment


                    • Did Lechmere like wearing multiple headwear whilst at work? Did he smoke a clay pipe or drink on duty? Did sometimes like to look like a sailor when working? Did he have a carrot moustache with a blotchy face? Did he like walking around looking like a Jewish spiv?

                      He matches no witness descriptions at all.

                      Only Nichols has even the remotest link to Lechmere and that is weak at best.
                      "When the legend becomes fact... print the legend"
                      - The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance (1962)

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Doctored Whatsit View Post
                        Hi Abby,

                        In general terms, I agree that there isn't good useful evidence against any suspect - that is why I don't have one. Unfortunately, it will always be that when someone has a suspect, and no real evidence, the quoting of possibilities, vague doubts, alleged anomolies etc, tends to appear very weak, and occasionally rather desperate - and frankly very desperate when we resort to - he could have done it, because there isn't any good evidence that he didn't. That applies, I think, to almost the entire population of the area at the time! Something like a witness statement describing a possible carman in the vicinity at the time of Chapman or Tabram's murders, for example, would be very useful. Although I agree that absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, there is always nothing there to help us.

                        Personally I can't argue for one suspect based on virtually no evidence whatever, because I will always be outvoted by those who point out the lack of evidence. That's our problem, isn't it? Ripperology is a subject full of contradicting information, some facts, and endless possibilities. That's probably why it can be so addictive.
                        exactly dr
                        which is why i keep an open mind and view the suspects as a range of validity, instead of having one suspect, or no suspect. ive noticed people that have a favored suspect, will more often than not will knee jerk attack all other suspects. its also why i dont understand the almost hysterical reaction against lech as a suspect. hes as valid a suspect (or as i like to say -least weak ) as any other and checks a few boxes.
                        "Is all that we see or seem
                        but a dream within a dream?"

                        -Edgar Allan Poe


                        "...the man and the peaked cap he is said to have worn
                        quite tallies with the descriptions I got of him."

                        -Frederick G. Abberline

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by erobitha View Post
                          Did Lechmere like wearing multiple headwear whilst at work? Did he smoke a clay pipe or drink on duty? Did sometimes like to look like a sailor when working? Did he have a carrot moustache with a blotchy face? Did he like walking around looking like a Jewish spiv?

                          He matches no witness descriptions at all.

                          Only Nichols has even the remotest link to Lechmere and that is weak at best.
                          Being found alone at the scene of the crime immediately after it occurred is rather more than "weak at best".

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Dickere View Post

                            Being found alone at the scene of the crime immediately after it occurred is rather more than "weak at best".
                            No, your phrasing makes it sounds more sinister than it was. First to discover the body is the correct phrasing.

                            On your wonderful use of logic we should also consider PC Watkins as a suspect? Or perhaps John Davis? Or even Louis D?

                            Its the epitome of weak.
                            "When the legend becomes fact... print the legend"
                            - The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance (1962)

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by erobitha View Post

                              No, your phrasing makes it sounds more sinister than it was. First to discover the body is the correct phrasing.

                              On your wonderful use of logic we should also consider PC Watkins as a suspect? Or perhaps John Davis? Or even Louis D?

                              Its the epitome of weak.
                              I'm afraid your post is the epitome of 'whataboutism'.

                              You mentioned Lechmere, rightly, in a Lechmere thread but when someone argues against your view you jump to comparisons with others. That is actually weak.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Dickere View Post

                                I'm afraid your post is the epitome of 'whataboutism'.

                                You mentioned Lechmere, rightly, in a Lechmere thread but when someone argues against your view you jump to comparisons with others. That is actually weak.
                                Nonsense.

                                Lechmere was the first to discover the body. That is it. There is nothing else to see here. If that is good enough for you to make him JtR then so should all the others who were first discover the body of the victims as they all have exactly the same level of evidence aginst them as he does.
                                "When the legend becomes fact... print the legend"
                                - The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance (1962)

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X