Evidence of innocence

[SuperShodan]

I agree Trevor unfortunately some people on this thread seem to be delusional.

Dr Andy Griffiths, former head of Sussex Murder Squad must be delusional too.

“From a Police point of view, the person who finds a body in circumstances like this is always going to be significant to an enquiry. Certainly, in the modern age you couldn’t prosecute anyone with eliminating him [Lechmere] first... because obviously you’ve got somebody who’s been with the body very close to the point of death, and is possibly the person who causes the death, so is definitely a very significant person in terms of the investigation.”

[Trevor Marriott]

The killer running away if disturbed seems the obvious option. Reasons for him not doing so have been discussed at length on this thread. Suffice to say we can’t assume a killer, or for that matter any criminal, will run when caught, challenged or seen by witness.

What would you do if you had just killed a person and you saw and heard somone coming towards you out of the darkness, and out of the darkness is the important factor. You would be on high alert having just killed someone so a nataural reaction would be to run without being seen and identified.

A criminal confronting a witness head on (sizing them up). trying to blag it, trying to appear an innocent passer by, taking a huge risk and just being plain stupid are all completely reasonable.

If he was the killer he had time to run no need to wait and try to blag it

I don’t see that a killer being caught might not try to blag it. Plenty of killers have done just that.

Perhaps you would care to name some and then we can all anaylse their actions and form our own opinion as to whether these persons fit the same circumstances as Lechmere found himself in

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Trevor Marriott]

Dr Andy Griffiths, former head of Sussex Murder Squad must be delusional too.

“From a Police point of view, the person who finds a body in circumstances like this is always going to be significant to an enquiry. Certainly, in the modern age you couldn’t prosecute anyone with eliminating him [Lechmere] first... because obviously you’ve got somebody who’s been with the body very close to the point of death, and is possibly the person who causes the death, so is definitely a very significant person in terms of the investigation.”

The interviews with the experts are not to be relied on in the way they have been projected. We know that Blink films edited out a large portion of the interview with Scobie and manipulated the rest of his interview to fit in with Fish`s theory. I wonder how much of the others were edited and manipulated in the same way?

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[SuperShodan]

Perhaps you would care to name some and then we can all anaylse their actions and form our own opinion as to whether these persons fit the same circumstances as Lechmere found himself in

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

Again you are making an assumption that the killer would run off. I agree this is the best option, but it’s an assumption based on a logical response by a normal person. In terms of killers caught totally red handed who tried to blag it instead of running, lots of them, including Peter Sutcliffe.

Moving on to your question. Perhaps the best example is Jeffery Dahmer. His victim, a teenage boy, ran out in the street naked and injured. He attracted the attention of the police. You would think Dahmer would run, or at least disappear, the situation looked hopeless for him. Caught absolutely red handed (just like Lechmere).

Dahmer instead spoke to the police, he blagged it, and talked them round into giving him the lad back.

[Trevor Marriott]

Again you are making an assumption that the killer would run off. I agree this is the best option, but it’s an assumption based on a logical response by a normal person. In terms of killers caught totally red handed who tried to blag it instead of running, lots of them, including Peter Sutcliffe.

The term blagging it open to different interpretations which are dependent on the circumstances. if you are going to compare you have to come up with an identical set of circumstances to that which derscribes Lechmeres situation

Moving on to your question. Perhaps the best example is Jeffery Dahmer. His victim, a teenage boy, ran out in the street naked and injured. He attracted the attention of the police. You would think Dahmer would run, or at least disappear, the situation looked hopeless for him. Caught absolutely red handed (just like Lechmere).

Dahmers arrest and what you quoted

Although they initially thought the story was dubious, the officers took Edwards back to Dahmer's apartment. Dahmer calmly explained that the whole matter was simply a misunderstanding and the officers almost believed him. However, they spotted a few Polaroid photos of dismembered bodies, and Dahmer was arrested.

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[SuperShodan]

Dahmers arrest and what you quoted

Although they initially thought the story was dubious, the officers took Edwards back to Dahmer's apartment. Dahmer calmly explained that the whole matter was simply a misunderstanding and the officers almost believed him. However, they spotted a few Polaroid photos of dismembered bodies, and Dahmer was arrested.

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

My bad on that one. I was going on memory and thought he had got away with it. I thought when they took the lad back he was murdered. My mistake.

[Mark J D]

Although they initially thought the story was dubious, the officers took Edwards back to Dahmer's apartment. Dahmer calmly explained that the whole matter was simply a misunderstanding and the officers almost believed him. However, they spotted a few Polaroid photos of dismembered bodies, and Dahmer was arrested.

Edwards was a man in his 30s. The teenage boy was someone else entirely: Konerak Sinthasomphone, and his short-lived escape into the street -- involving passers-by, police and firemen, along with Dahmer himself brassing it out -- did not lead to Dahmer's arrest.

M.

[SuperShodan]

Just had a look at the Dahmer case I mentioned. Looks like he did get away with it snd looks like the boy was murdered as I first thought.
The exact details aren’t important though. The point was Dahmer didn’t run, or take evasive action or leave town. He confronted the police, he was caught red handed, yet he did the exact opposite of what one might expect.

[John Wheat]

The interviews with the experts are not to be relied on in the way they have been projected. We know that Blink films edited out a large portion of the interview with Scobie and manipulated the rest of his interview to fit in with Fish`s theory. I wonder how much of the others were edited and manipulated in the same way?

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

As Trevor said Griffiths was fed a load of crap by the documentary makers.

[Trevor Marriott]

Just had a look at the Dahmer case I mentioned. Looks like he did get away with it snd looks like the boy was murdered as I first thought.
The exact details aren’t important though. The point was Dahmer didn’t run, or take evasive action or leave town. He confronted the police, he was caught red handed, yet he did the exact opposite of what one might expect.

You cannot compare Dahmers case with that against Lechmere

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Abby Normal]

My bad on that one. I was going on memory and thought he had got away with it. I thought when they took the lad back he was murdered. My mistake.

no. not your bad. trevor as usual is mistaken. you are entirely correct. it was a later instant that got dahmer busted when the intended victim edwards got away.

Even the ripper case itself ! also has someone that walked straight into the teeth of police in an attempt to ruse himself out of murder-Bury.
ironic that bury supporters criticize the idea that lech wouldnt have done the same, isnt it?

[SuperShodan]

You cannot compare Dahmers case with that against Lechmere

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

I totally agree. I’m not trying to. I was just trying to demonstrate that when killers are caught they don’t always try to get away. Sometimes they will try and talk their way out of it. Dahmer took an insane risk, but it actually worked.
In Lechmere’s case I think he was caught unawares, he had very little time to think, and just reacted on gut instinct. I think Lechmere is similar to Dahmer in that he took a huge gamble, bordering on recklessness, which paid off.

[Herlock Sholmes]

The killer running away if disturbed seems the obvious option. Reasons for him not doing so have been discussed at length on this thread. Suffice to say we can’t assume a killer, or for that matter any criminal, will run when caught, challenged or seen by witness.

A criminal confronting a witness head on (sizing them up). trying to blag it, trying to appear an innocent passer by, taking a huge risk and just being plain stupid are all completely reasonable.

I don’t see that a killer being caught might not try to blag it. Plenty of killers have done just that.

But would any of that apply to a killer who heard the approach before he actually saw who it was? If the crime scene was really dark, and it appears to have been, then the killer would assume that if he couldn’t see the person approaching that it was highly probable that the person approaching couldn’t see him either. So Lechmere would have been pre-warned of Paul’s approach.

If Lechmere had been caught in the act then in supposedly pulling down her dress to hide the fact that she’d been attacked we have to ask why he didn’t cover her legs. A shortage of time can’t explain this as it would have taken no extra time. So he hears Paul approach, drops her skirt and moves to the middle of the road to see Paul come into view and approach from around 40 yards away.

Even if Paul had heard Lechmere run or walk away he couldn’t have connected this to anything sinister until he’d arrived at the scene, spotted the body (or what might have been a body) gone over to check and decided that she was dead rather than just lying drunk. We can’t know how long this would have taken of course but I’d suggest that a minute would be a reasonable estimation. So this would have given Lechmere a minutes head start (and if he’d heard him before he saw him possibly 10 or 15 seconds more. This would have been ample time for him to have gotten away. Then we have to consider how long it might have taken Paul to find a Constable (if he hadn’t simply turned a blind eye and proceeded to work which was far from unlikely) Lechmere would have been streets away.

The two options aren’t approaching equal in merit. Staying to blag it out would have been close to suicidal. We can’t even claim the thrill because Lechmere would have had zero control over the situation and even more certainly zero control over Paul. The Mizen Scam is suggested but how could Lechmere have believed that if they had arrived at a Constable that he’d have been able to have manipulated the situation to have allowed him to speak to the Constable without Paul hearing the conversation and adding his own thoughts? So how can we suggest that Lechmere would have had the thrill of trying to blag his way out of it when he’d have had no control to do this?

Im sorry but this simply doesn’t make sense. Although there are other reasons, this one ranks high in the list of reasons why I don’t think that Lechmere killed Nichols.

[Herlock Sholmes]

As long as you realize that Jeff works from the somewhat exotic notion that "we" would somehow "know" that Mizen was approached by Lechmere at 3.45, for example, that is entirely your own choice, Herlock.

Me, I´m a cynical old fart, and so I tend to doubt people working from assumptions as proven facts.

And yet you assume that ‘about 3.30’ couldn’t have meant 3.35. And you assume that just before 3.45 couldn’t have meant 3.40 or 3.41.

Ive been on here for 5 years Fish (nowhere near as long as you of course) and I have to say that I’ve always found Jeff to be the most scrupulously honest, fair-minded and unbiased of posters. I’ve also always found that he’s willing to admit to any error and he always accepts the merits of alternate interpretations.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Just had a look at the Dahmer case I mentioned. Looks like he did get away with it snd looks like the boy was murdered as I first thought.
The exact details aren’t important though. The point was Dahmer didn’t run, or take evasive action or leave town. He confronted the police, he was caught red handed, yet he did the exact opposite of what one might expect.

But the huge difference is that Dahmer really had no other option. The boy had been drugged by him and so he knew that when the drugs wore off he’d have been able to have led the police straight to Dahmer’s apartment where the body parts in the fridge might have triggered a suspicion.

Dahmer was compelled to act. Lechmere wasn’t.

Dahmer had no other option. He could have run but it would have been just a matter of time (and probably a very short one) Lechmere had a very simple, glaringly obvious and infinitely safer one. Scarper!