Evidence of innocence

[MrBarnett]

>>Says ‘Dr Strange’. <<

aka Dr Strange.

drstrange169 is what it says. That’s the false name you are posting under.

[drstrange169]

>>Dusty (if that’s his real name) seems to be saying that if Lechmere hadn’t worn his apron in the witness box that would somehow have prevented him from returning to work. <<

Goodness me! you are getting desperate, Gary.

[MrBarnett]

>>Dr Strange (the man with the phobia of false names) <<

I realise you can't grasp the concept of names but, I've never had any kind of phobia about names false or otherwise.

That must be it, ‘Dusty’/‘drstrange169’, I don’t understand the concept of real/false names.

Mr Gary Barnett

[MrBarnett]

>>Dusty (if that’s his real name) seems to be saying that if Lechmere hadn’t worn his apron in the witness box that would somehow have prevented him from returning to work. <<

Goodness me! you are getting desperate, Gary.

Why? That’s effectively what you are saying, isn’t it?

[drstrange169]

>> drstrange169 is what it says. <<


See my previous reply.

[drstrange169]

>>It reflects the significant steps taken by the police, which Swanson was keen to put on record. Mulshaw, the old boy dozing beside his brazier in the next street, gets a mention. ‘Cross’ doesn’t.<<

Or the search and questioning of Paul. Why do you keep avoiding that?

[MrBarnett]

>>It reflects the significant steps taken by the police, which Swanson was keen to put on record. Mulshaw, the old boy dozing beside his brazier in the next street, gets a mention. ‘Cross’ doesn’t.<<

Or the search and questioning of Paul. Why do you keep avoiding that?

So it’s a search now and not a hunt?

It’s not a bad point, Dusty.

Swanson could have said, ‘we tracked down the irritating bugger who went to Lloyds and made us look rather foolish.’

[MrBarnett]

>> drstrange169 is what it says. <<


See my previous reply.

There’s no aka on your user name. Just as their isn’t on Ed Stow’s. What’s your point?

This is a bit silly, but I’m guessing that if you and Ed were called to give evidence under oath the names Dusty, drstrange and Stow might not be heard.

It’s that ‘real’ name thing again.

[MrBarnett]

During his recent hilarious attempt to deny that Charles Lechmere had a long-standing connection to the Pinchin Street area, Lord O of Stepney introduced us to a character named Benjamin Jordan who was known by the nickname of Dick Turpin.

Of course, his real name came out in court, as you would expect, but he was called to the witness stand in the name of Dick Turpin, and it doesn’t seem that he was formally summoned to appear. His mate just asked him to come along to back him up. At least that’s the way the press reports read.

Some years later, Jordan’s wife appeared as a witness when he was up at the Old Bailey - no less - charged with stealing a safe, and she claimed she had been asked to attend court that morning by a detective who had called to interview her about her husband. Again, it seems to have been a fairly informal process.

Although witnesses may generally have been summoned to appear in court by means of a formal summons, I wonder how often they just turned up at the last minute.

https://www.oldbaileyonline.org/brow...-360#highlight

[drstrange169]

>>There’s no aka on your user name.<<



"#5670
Today, 11:54 AM
>>Dr Strange (the man with the phobia of false names) <<

I realise you can't grasp the concept of names but, I've never had any kind of phobia about names false or otherwise.
dustymiller
aka drstrange"



There it is.

Sometimes it doesn't appear, but that's not by my design, that's something to do with the way casebook works.

Still waiting for explanation of how I have a phobia withy names. Although it is coming across that you are obsessed with names.

[GBinOz]

As those of you who read my post 5612 will gather, I am retracting from debating on Casebook until further notice. Whatever contributions I make will be new finds and suchlike, and I will in such cases not go on to debate the material until I find that the debating climate out here has changed for the better.

To those who struggle on with good and sound intentions, the best of luck. The truth tends to prevail, even though much work is produced out here to hinder it.

All the best!

All the best Christer. While I am still on the fence about Lechmere I very much admire your research and perseverance in constantly answering the same questions and objections from the same people. Your contributions will be missed.

Cheers. George

[MrBarnett]

>>There’s no aka on your user name.<<



"#5670
Today, 11:54 AM
>>Dr Strange (the man with the phobia of false names) <<

I realise you can't grasp the concept of names but, I've never had any kind of phobia about names false or otherwise.
dustymiller
aka drstrange"



There it is.

Sometimes it doesn't appear, but that's not by my design, that's something to do with the way casebook works.

Still waiting for explanation of how I have a phobia withy names.

Perhaps phobia was too strong a word. It seems you are keen to let the world know that drstrange isn’t your real name and your comment about Ed Stow being a ‘false’ name did give the impression that you thought using a false name was somewhat dubious. (I’m sure that was the impression you were trying to convey. ;-))

Of course, you don’t find it remotely odd that Charles Allen Lechmere called himself Cross and failed to mention his real name when appearing at inquests.

[Abby Normal]

Perhaps phobia was too strong a word. It seems you are keen to let the world know that drstrange isn’t your real name and your comment about Ed Stow being a ‘false’ name did give the impression that you thought using a false name was somewhat dubious. (I’m sure that was the impression you were trying to convey. ;-))

Of course, you don’t find it remotely odd that Charles Allen Lechmere called himself Cross and failed to mention his real name when appearing at inquests.

aparently some have such a phobia against lech that they cant grasp the concept that criminals use aliases to avoid detection lol.

and yes it is a phobia, hes as a valid suspect as any

[drstrange169]

>>Perhaps phobia was too strong a word. <<

The entirely wrong word.

>>It seems you are keen to let the world know that drstrange isn’t your real name<<

Not really, I just assume most would know surname isn't "169"


>> ... your comment about Ed Stow being a ‘false’ name did give the impression that you thought using a false name was somewhat dubious. <<

Or, more accurately, I just think that it's ironic that someone who thinks Cross was a fake name and therefore a sign of some kind of guilt should himself use a "fake" name.

I'm not the first to make that comment and there are those who definitely think the use of "Ed Stow" was to deceive. I couldn't possibly say one way or the other.



>>Of course, you don’t find it remotely odd that Charles Allen Lechmere called himself Cross and failed to mention his real name when appearing at inquests.<<

Not odd, it would be illegal to use the name Cross, if it was a name he never otherwise used.

[drstrange169]

>>aparently some have such a phobia against lech that they cant grasp the concept that criminals use aliases to avoid detection lol<<

Except there is no evidence he was a criminal or that he was trying to deceive anyone, but I suppose they a just minor details aren't they?