Evidence of innocence

[Abby Normal]

Hello

If it doesn't mean he was JTR why are we discussing it on a Suspect Thread? If there is some hidden agenda in his using a different name, that has nothing whatsoever to do with the murders, then yes please by all means explain it to us in a cogent fashion.

If what you are getting at goes straight over my head, allow me to apologize in advance for my profound ignorance. You seem to have made an in depth study of geneology of Lechmere/Cross and, and you know something we don't.

What is it please?

Because for my purposes, Charles Cross and Robert Paul were regular swell fellows who did the right thing. What people do in a community.

Paddy

yeah regular swell fellows who left a woman in obvious need of aid lying in the middle of the street in the dead of night. great guys!!!

[Dickere]

Strangely eloquent, Mr B!

Excellent use of emojis!

Hello Ms D

[Greenway]

hi greenway
people who discover a dead body are always a suspect until they are cleared. in todays cop world anyway, apparently maybe not then.

Agreed about now - I don't know about then. But don't you need more than that, plus an ID confusion that didn't seem to confuse anybody at the time?

I do. I'd love a motive - even a hint of violence or mental instability would help the case. He just looks like a normal bloke who led a long and respectable life to me (from what little we know of him), despite all the innuendo.

All the best

[Abby Normal]

Agreed about now - I don't know about then. But don't you need more than that, plus an ID confusion that didn't seem to confuse anybody at the time?

I do. I'd love a motive - even a hint of violence or mental instability would help the case. He just looks like a normal bloke who led a long and respectable life to me (from what little we know of him), despite all the innuendo.

All the best

cheers greenway and i hear ya. but many serial killers apparently lead normal lives. until thyre caught. and what motive do any of them have except there own sick fantasy?

lech has a few yellow flags and i find him being seen alone with a freshly killed victim as the biggest. i cant recall ever hearing of an innocent witness in this weird sich. imho lech is a valid suspect no big wup.

[Paddy Goose]

The anti-Lechmerians seem to completely miss the point about the name thing.
It’s an anomaly that just won’t go away I’m afraid.

Does it mean he was JTR? Of course it doesn’t. Does it suggest he may have been trying to hide something from someone? Of course it does.

A sidebar.

Yes MrBarnett you have given me an idea. And I hope you don't mind me suggesting it to you. You have obviously done a great deal of research into the family histories of the Cross/Lechmere clans as well as a study of the socio-legal aspects of names in the Later Victorian Period.

This could make for an interesting sidebar. A thread. In the Witnesses section. You could lay out your research and conclusions concerning Cross/Lechmere. Because you don't seem to particularly lean towards him as Jack the Ripper. Yet we are on a Suspect Thread. Anything posted here is construed as taking sides.

Only a suggestion.

Because just think about it. If, as you say, the name anomaly won't go away, then we are here to infinity and beyond. On a Suspect Thread. Discussing what you seem to think is a side issue.

A side issue calls for a sidebar.

Paddy

[Mark J D]

people who discover a dead body are always a suspect until they are cleared. in todays cop world anyway, apparently maybe not then.

Actually, the weirdness of all this makes my head spin... We know for certain that W. H. Bury's London connections were checked and that he was grilled by two coppers sent up to Scotland. On the basis of these actual, real investigations, the police decided that he wasn't JtR; but even so, people on here have no difficulty ignoring the fact that he was cleared, and quite happily propose him as a totally respectable suspect. Contrast this with the way Lechmere is treated. We don't have any concrete evidence at all that his connections were checked or that he was subjected to a police interview; yet in spite of this, people don't just assume that meaningful investigations 'must have' taken place and 'must have' put him in the clear, but they also assume that, in his case, the (wholly imaginary) decision can't possibly have been wrong...

M.

[Great Aunt]

By 1876, Thomas Cross had been dead for 7 years. By 1888, Cross had been dead for nearly 20 years. How many of the police were even on the force when Thomas Cross died? How many police who had known Thomas Cross had already retired, moved or died? Plus Thomas Cross is not an uncmomon name. I doubt that using the Cross surname would grant any credibility with the police.

Cross/Lechmere had worked at Pickfords for 20 years - why not the same for colleagues of Thomas Cross? After all "time flies" and all that ....

[John Wheat]

Actually, the weirdness of all this makes my head spin... We know for certain that W. H. Bury's London connections were checked and that he was grilled by two coppers sent up to Scotland. On the basis of these actual, real investigations, the police decided that he wasn't JtR; but even so, people on here have no difficulty ignoring the fact that he was cleared, and quite happily propose him as a totally respectable suspect. Contrast this with the way Lechmere is treated. We don't have any concrete evidence at all that his connections were checked or that he was subjected to a police interview; yet in spite of this, people don't just assume that meaningful investigations 'must have' taken place and 'must have' put him in the clear, but they also assume that, in his case, the (wholly imaginary) decision can't possibly have been wrong...

M.

We simply don't know what transpired between Bury and the two police officers. There is actual evidence Bury was Jack the Ripper. But **** all evidence Lechmere was Jack. Anyone who thinks Lechmere is a better suspect than Bury is deluded at best

[Abby Normal]

We simply don't know what transpired between Bury and the two police officers. There is actual evidence Bury was Jack the Ripper. But **** all evidence Lechmere was Jack. Anyone who thinks Lechmere is a better suspect than Bury is deluded at best

hi john
evehough im a lech apologist i dont think he makes a better suspect than bury. bury is a known murderer with a similar sig as the ripper so theres that. you should tone down on the rhetoric though as they are all weak suspects imho.

[Doctored Whatsit]

Actually, the shocking thing is that Lechmere was seemingly NOT investigated. Have you read Dew on the matter, where he describes Lechmere as a rough but thouroughly honest man, whereas he paints a picture of Paul as a man trying to avoid the law?

I think that is a helpful thing to digest.

This is Christer's complete item at #2000 which he and I have been bogged down with for some time - and my sincere apologies to everyone for that!

I have said many times that the point is trivial, but I keep getting come-backs from Christer, so I will ask everyone to look at what was actually written by him, and then, as far as I am concerned this thread is a waste of my time, and I will not return to it. I have always said that the subject is an interesting one, that it is reasonable to consider CAL as a suspect if you wish, but that the evidence is not sufficiently strong to even nearly convince me. I looked forward to constructive debate on the issues, but except for a few persons, this has not happened, and allegations of misrepresentations, and similar insults have been the norm. I can't be bothered any more.

With regard to the above quotation, I suggested that Dew's recollections have not always been utterly reliable, but that if he was to be believed, could not his statement that CAL was a "thoroughly honest man" suggest not necessarily that he was "seemingly not investigated" but that the police had investigated and cleared him? If one can propose the former, then equally one can suggest the latter.

Christer's response at #2152 was "You can of course not read my mind. If you could you would know that I never considered Dew's words evidence. I thought that you would easily see this when I worded myself the way I did. I was wrong, but there you are."

Could I easily see that from #2000? Does it look as if "Have you read Dew on the matter?....that is a helpful thing to digest." was not offered as evidence that Cal was "seemingly not investigated"? If it wasn't intended to be taken into consideration, why was it mentioned at all?

Then Christer added at#2154, "it boils down to the two matters of how clear I was and how perceptive you were. And apparently I was hoping for too much"

Well, for me he was crystal clear. The two sentences that make up the first paragraph of #2000 must be connected or they shouldn't be placed together.

I sought meaningful discussion, but found unfounded allegations of misrepresentation, and boundless sarcasm instead, so as far as this thread is concerned, Goodbye everyone, and my thanks to those who contributed openly, honestly maturely and politely.

[The Baron]

could not his statement that CAL was a "thoroughly honest man" suggest not necessarily that he was "seemingly not investigated" but that the police had investigated and cleared him?

Of course, and this is the one and only logical explanation, that the police had investigated and cleared him, Cross denied telling Mizen he was wanted by another policeman in Buck's row, he contradicted a police officer in front of the coroner and the jury, and there is no way in hell Dew would say (thoroughly honest man) after this, if Cross was not thoroughly investigated and cleared and proved to be the honest man!


It is a game over for Lechmerians!




The Baron

[MrBarnett]

Dew on Fanny Mortimer:



“Berners Street had been reformed. Formerly it had been known as Tigers' Bay and had been the refuge of many of the most desperate criminals of the East End. But the police had combed and cleaned it, with the result that it had become a comparatively decent street in which to live.

Some distance along the street was a dark, narrow court, leading to Commercial Road. The court was closed at night by two large wooden gates, in one of which there was a small wicket gate for the use of residents when the larger ones were closed. It was through this wicket gate that the Ripper and the first of his two victims that night passed.

The court had no lamps and was in darkness. On one side were cottages occupied mostly by cigarette-makers and tailors. The whole length of the other side was taken up by the rear of a social club known as The Working Men's Educational Club. A back entrance linked the building with the court and was in fairly frequent use.

The club had a good name. Its members were nearly all foreigners-Russians, Germans, Poles and Continental Jews. That night there happened to be a special function at the club, and a good many men were in the building from 8.30 p.m. till past eleven o'clock. It was a wet night. The rain beat mercilessly on the windows of the room.

Not a single suspicious sound was heard by any of the men inside the building, but it is more than probable that a woman living in one of the cottages on the other side of the court was the only person ever to see the Ripper in the vicinity of one of his crimes.

This woman was a Mrs. Mortimer. After the main meeting at the clubhouse had broken up some thirty or forty members who formed the choir, remained behind to sing. Mrs. Mortimer, as she had done on many previous occasions, came out to her gate the better to hear them. For ten minutes she remained there, seeing and hearing nothing which made her at all suspicious.

Just as she was about to re-enter her cottage the woman heard the approach of a pony and cart. She knew this would be Lewis Dienschitz, the steward of the club. He went every Saturday to the market, returning about this hour of the early morning.

At the same moment Mrs. Mortimer observed something else, silent and sinister. A man, whom she judged to be about thirty, dressed in black, and carrying a small, shiny black bag, hurried furtively along the opposite side of the court.

The woman was a little startled. The man's movements had been so quiet that she had not seen him until he was abreast of her. His head was turned away, as though he did not wish to be seen. A second later he had vanished round the corner leading to Commercial Road.”


She lived in Dutfield’s Yard, apparently, and she saw Jack the Ripper carrying a black bag while standing at her gate…

In fairness to Dew, he may not have been there personally. He was probably too busy checking out how ‘honest’ Charles Lechmere was.

[MrBarnett]

Dew on George Yard Buildings:

“These buildings were just off High Street, Whitechapel, and thus quite close to the police station to which I was attached. Originally the buildings had been a weaving factory. This had been converted into mean flats housing innumerable poor class families.”

I was under the impression that GYB were purpose-built Artisan’s Dwellings. It’s nice to learn new things.

[MrBarnett]

Dew on the meeting of Lechmere and Paul:

“A curious thing then happened. The carman had gone but a short distance when he saw another man on the opposite side of the street whose behaviour was certainly suspicious. The other man seemed to seek to avoid the carman, who went over to him, and said:

"Come and look here. Here's a woman been knocked about."

Together the two men went to the gateway where the poor woman was lying. The newcomer felt her heart. His verdict was not reassuring.

"I think she's breathing," he told his companion, "but it's very little if she is."

The couple parted, ________ promising, as he walked away, to call a policeman.

All this was afterwards told in evidence by the carman. It never had the corroboration of the other man. The police made repeated appeals for him to come forward, but he never did so.

Why did he remain silent? Was it guilty knowledge that caused him to ignore the appeals of the police?”



There are plenty more examples like this. Anyone who relies on a comment made by Dew 50 years after events he probably had no personal involvement in is a few sandwiches short of a picnic.

[John Wheat]

hi john
evehough im a lech apologist i dont think he makes a better suspect than bury. bury is a known murderer with a similar sig as the ripper so theres that. you should tone down on the rhetoric though as they are all weak suspects imho.

No I won't turn down the rhetoric as Bury is not a weak suspect and it wasn't me who bought Bury into this joke thread.