Evidence of innocence

[Herlock Sholmes]

Of course it is. When somebody says ”I did it at around 4.15”, then that time is likelier to be the correct one than 4.10 or 4.20.

Any of them. Or else he’d have said “I did it at 4.15” and he’d have been able to show why he was so confident. By saying “around 4.15” he’s admitting a lack of confidence.

[Herlock Sholmes]

I already did - with the reservation that it is much likelier to mean 3.30.

But it’s not likelier. He wasn’t sure or else he wouldn’t have said ‘about.’ And if we can’t say for certain that he didn’t leave the house at 3.35 or 3.36 how can we claim an unexplained/suspicious gap? It can’t be done.

[Doctored Whatsit]

He effectively denied it at the inquest, as has been pointed out before. And as I said before, Neil arrived many minutes after Lechmere left. Are you really suggesting that the carmen pumped her arm vigorously enough to set a six minute bleeding in motion …?
Also, would you now please state which experts you are referring to when saying that they refute Payne-James and Thiblin?

Neil never denied lifting her arm to check pulse, temperature of hand and arm under the clothing etc which he did check. He said he never moved the body, which is quite different.

Llewellyn may not be one of the experts who you like to quote, but he had one big advantage over your experts - he was there. He saw the body, and the blood evidence, and he was happy to accept a time of death about 30 minutes previously. I never refuted your experts, I merely said experts disagree. As I have made clear several times, I don't consider the blood evidence necessarily relevant.

[drstrange169]

>> Dusty, the material you somehow believed was not there:<<

Finally answers!

???

Of course not, back to status quo, lots of avoidance and no actual serious answers.

Christer spends the bulk of his long awaited "answers" reply on my posts #3504, #3505, #3506 and #3507. The problem is I didn't ask any questions in any of these posts. Feel free to check.

My post 3487 did ask some questions,

"Where on this map is the this fictitious window that somebody woke and was looked out of?
There are no houses!
And even if there were, how would these fictitious sombolists see on the very dark night?
Wasn't Lechmere supposed to have spent months casing the joint? Gee talk about self defeating stories."

In reply Christer ignored explaining how there were any houses where people were asleep overlooking an escape route. He ignored explaining, even if there were, how they would see in the dark. Instead he offered up the idea that a bugler might have seen something and would have appeared at court to testify against Cross!!!

To this SuperShodan replied,

"Brilliant post. If this was a boxing match the ref would stop it."

He would indeed Bob, he would indeed!

[GUT]

Why are we wasting so much time arguing about the time of events, as if we can possibly ever know the truth?

Lechmere left home, he thought about 3.30 am, believing he was late, probably estimating the time from his last glance at his grandfather clock as best he can remember. Paul did something similar perhaps ten minutes later. Neil and Mizen, if they didn't have watches, were probably estimating their times from their last passing of different nearby clocks, and Llewellyn was relating his times to his clock and or watch. The chances of these various timepieces all agreeing with each other is absolutely zero. We, and Baxter, only estimate or guess.

In London in 1888, time was an approximation, not a fact.

I just checked some time pieces in my house, three watches (all modern) two clocks, one analogue, one digital, and an iPad, total time span, 4 minutes. That’s in 2022 with modern relatively accurate time keeping devices, but I don’t sit down and synchronise them. No idea how anyone can rely on ant times given in 1888 as being dead accurate.

[FISHY1118]

We have a PC claiming that the murder took place between 3. 15 am and 3. 45 am, and a doctor giving, shall we say, a best guess that the time of death was about 3. 30 am. Then we have Harriet Lilley of 7 Buck's Row saying that she heard whispers under her window, "a painfull moan - two or three faint gasps..." and then silence, as a goods train passed by. That was confirmed to be within a minute or two of 3. 30 am. It makes perfect sense that JtR used the noise of the passing train to conceal his attack, and this also explains why no-one else heard anything. As I have written previously, this seems to be a very likely scenario. It doesn't totally exonerate Lechmere, but if Harriet Lilley is correct, it would be odd that he was still standing near the body some ten minutes or more after the murder.

Can you please point out where harriet lilley claims this ? , i dont see it in the inquest of Nichols . Thanks

[drstrange169]

So what were my questions and why is Christer trying to avoid them and did he really have answers waiting or has he quickly cobbled together some distractions to avoid them yet again?

Christer wrote in post #3463,

“The idea that Cross and Paul did not give a time for when they were in Bucks Row is also bonkers”
(My emphasis)

Which promoted me to write, (#3486)

“Can anyone point to where Cross says what time he was in Buck's Row?”

Rather than simply accepting he made a mistake and apologise, Christer chose to lie,

“Dusty claims that I would have said that Paul and Lechmere gave a time for being in Bucks Row. ... I never quoted Lechmere giving such a time…“
(my emphasis)

Same post I asked,

“If he (Paul) wasn't lying about entering Buck's Row at "exactly 3:45" why didn't he repeat his claim under oath? What time is "just before 3:45"? 3:42? 3:40? 3:35? When?
How, in any unbaised terms, is this not dubious?”


#3489

“If anyone can name a book with more detail about Buck's Row than Steve's book feel free to name it. Until then let's stick with, "the most comprehensive book on Buck's Row", as being correct.”

#3509

“Where in his summing up does Baxter quote a time from Paul? Why does he say the murder happened before 3:45? Why does he say Llewelyn was in Buck's Row around 4:00 a.m.? Where does Baxter's "fixed by so many independent data" come from? "So many" is more than one, it's more than two, so what other independent data was he referencing?”

#3510

“If they (the 3 policemen) colluded, why did Neil know nothing about Mizen meeting the two men?

Finally in #3515 Christer wrote,

“I should perhaps warn you, Dusty, not to try the "Fisherman avoids my very difficult questions" angle again; I have already prepared an answer for your various "points", listing and torching your claims as I went along. It´s on my computer desk. So you can have that, if you want to…”

Well, we are still waiting for some actual answers let alone any torching.

[drstrange169]

>>He is also saying that the body could not have been found far off the 3.45 mark. If he thinks it could have been 3.40, then why does he not say so?<<

Because nobody knows, the only corroborated time Baxter had was the three policemen's 3:45.

[drstrange169]

>>It would be odd if he (Llewelyn) was called to the site at 4.00 <<

Why do you keep using a time of 4:00 when you know him his own words within a few hours of being called his EXACT words were "I was called to Buck's row about five minutes to four this morning"?

[drstrange169]

>>Can you please point out where harriet lilley claims this ? , i dont see it in the inquest of Nichols . Thanks<<

It was in a newspaper article not the inquest, Echo - 6 September 1888.

[drstrange169]

Sorry I forgot to mention another question Christer claims to have answered, but keeps avioding,

"I'm also still waiting for the "scientific" explanation of how serious researchers can deduce a time gasp between two unrelated times."

[Herlock Sholmes]

>>He is also saying that the body could not have been found far off the 3.45 mark. If he thinks it could have been 3.40, then why does he not say so?<<

Because nobody knows, the only corroborated time Baxter had was the three policemen's 3:45.

Exactly

[Herlock Sholmes]

>>It would be odd if he (Llewelyn) was called to the site at 4.00 <<

Why do you keep using a time of 4:00 when you know him his own words within a few hours of being called his EXACT words were "I was called to Buck's row about five minutes to four this morning"?

An important point Dusty. As he uses the word ‘about’ we know that he’s accepting that a margin for error however slight is required. There seems to be a determination in some quarters not to accept what is meant by an estimate. It purely and simply means that the person stating it is not suggesting an exact time. That’s all. It doesn’t mean one minute or two minutes before or after. There are no implied times. So if he said “about 3.55” it’s entirely reasonable to suggest some time between 3.50 and 4.00.

[drstrange169]

Apologies for the delay, but because of the sheer stupidity of Christers posts it's sometimes hard for a sane person to grasp what he's claiming when he writes,

"And that need not have been somebody looking out a window - that was just a suggestion to clarify what I meant - but it could also have been passers by. Or somebody doing what you like to do - take a piss."

So to clarify, if there WAS someone around the corner, rather than disproving a killer Lechmere's claims, Christer completely fails to unstand that it would PROVE his claim and that "passerby or "piss taker" would become everybody's prime suspect!!!

The is the quality of arguement SuperShodan apparently thinks is "brilliant"!?!

And that's what we are dealing with here. I had hoped the New Year would bring a better approach to debate, but it seems we are destined for a year were it will sink to new unthought of lows.

[drstrange169]

>> it’s entirely reasonable to suggest some time between 3.50 and 4.00.<<

Of course you are right. and here's some more unanswered questions:

How long did Thain knock the doctors door?
Who answered the door?
When (or if) did Llewelyn look at a clock?
Why did he not know the exact time when he gave his statement?
How fast/slow/accurate was his clock?
How in sync was it with everyone elses?