Evidence of innocence

[Fisherman]

Please show me again were Mitre Square is on Lech's route to work or the fact that Lech visited his mother on the night of the double murder and were there is proof that the neck wounds [ were blood was oozing from ] were covered.
Just conjecture dressed up as fact

If you are going claim things on my behalf that I did not say, we are not going to be friends, you know.

[Fisherman]

You asked me to contact Dr Biggs which I did, and I posted his reply in good faith to your question but because his reply does not support your medical evidence you now call me stupid.

Now let me tell you something else which you are not going to like to hear

Because you dispute my conversation with Scobie where he clearly states he was not provided with the full facts and his opinion was bady edited by Blink films. I recently wrote to him with a view to finally clearing up these issues, but he failed to respond, I guess having been professionally embarrased by his part in this he now wants to distance himself from this.

I also wrote to Jason Payne who you seek to rely on and asking him if he concurred with Dr Biggs and was he standing by what he is alleged to have told you, and would you belive he too has not bothered to reply I wonder if he also is professionally embarrased by his partcipation in trying to prove your theory.

Now who is looking stupid !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

You, Trevor. You just used no response from Scobie and no response from Payne James to try and make the point that these men are embarrased by the Lechmere theory. It does not get much worse than that, does it?

[Fisherman]

Too much time is being spent on the old questions like "would he have run or would he have stayed". I keep telling you all that it is a complete waste of time, but that does not seem to filter through...?

Anyways, I´m off for now. That´s becasue I do not want to intimidate Dusty too badly.

[JeffHamm]

Where did I say that the LLoyds article is to be preferred, Jeff. I am getting on agewise, and I keep forgetting.

Pauls information about the timings is consistent throughout and suggests very clearly that he was in Bucks Row at 3.45. I remember that much!

Other than the Lloyd's article, where is it recorded that Paul says he was in Bucks Row at 3:45, or at any other time even? At the inquest, all he says is that he left home "about 3:45."

- Jeff

[John Wheat]

If you are going claim things on my behalf that I did not say, we are not going to be friends, you know.

Big blow for Darryl there.

[Trevor Marriott]

I think Trevor suggesting that PC Neil didn’t do his 03.15 patrol is at best dubious. We know Neil found the body on his 03.45 patrol which suggests he was out doing his patrols properly that morning. The earlier time of death, say 02.30, would also equire Neil to miss out 2 patrols - 02.45 and 03.15 and I just don’t think that’s remotely credible or based on any kind of evidence whatsoever.

Basically, the 03.15 patrol sinks Trevor’s theory of an early death, so he just pretends it didn’t happen.

However, we do have Trevor’s bizarre missing cape theory, which is Thains cape not Neil’s. This is a magic cape that somehow prevents Neil from doing an hours worth of patrols. And an unnamed “brother officer” handing it in is taken to refer to Neil when it could refer to any Constable in the Division.

Furthermore, Thains testimony is highly questionable anyway. It appears he simply left his cape in Winthrop Street and had to go back for it himself. No doubt he had some explaining to do about why he’s not in full uniform when he arrives in Bucks Row (he’s been skiving off).

And just for arguments sake, if Neil did hand in a cape, the horse slaughterers is right on the Brady Street edge of Winthrop street, and would require a minor detour to hand it in. It would hardly prevent an hours worth of patrols.

The idea that Neil didn’t do his nightly patrols only exists in Trevor’s imagination. There’s not an iota of evidence to support it.

Moving on, this is typical of many in this thread. Just change facts. Anything inconvenient just change it.

Lechmere has no good reason to be in Bucks Row at 03.45 so just change the time. The time gap incriminates Lechmere, just change it. Lechmere is found “standing where the woman was” just move him down the street 30m to the wool factory gate. Paul would have to walk 80 or 90m up Bucks Row and not see a man 40m in front of him. Just ignore it. Pauls witness statement to Lloyds incriminates Lechmere, just change it. Time the body was found, set by the Coroner, is a problem so just change it. And so and so forth.

We don’t really have a debate, just the most incredible mental gymnastics. Extricating Lechmere from the murder scene is truly something to behold.

You forget Police officers dont always tell the truth when they are likely to be found out as having not been where they should have been and if Lechmere is innocent then Pc Neil lying has to be considered

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Trevor Marriott]

You, Trevor. You just used no response from Scobie and no response from Payne James to try and make the point that these men are embarrased by the Lechmere theory. It does not get much worse than that, does it?

Embarrassed perhaps by the way their opinions have been manipulated!!!!!!!!!!!!!

It could be fact though if they would come up to proof as you suggest what have they got to fear. Why dont you go ahead and post in full the questions and answers you rely on with Payne and Thiblin after all I have done that all the way through with Dr Biggs then you can be completely transparent !!!!!!!!

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Fisherman]

Other than the Lloyd's article, where is it recorded that Paul says he was in Bucks Row at 3:45, or at any other time even? At the inquest, all he says is that he left home "about 3:45."

- Jeff

The question I asked you is where I have claimed that the Lloyds article is to be preferred, Jeff. You have given no answer to that specific question yet, and as you will be aware, the claim you made portrays me as cherry-picking. So let´s hear it now, please?

As for Paul claiming that he left home "about 3.45", that is not the whole story, is it? We know that he was quoted in the Daily News as having said "just before 3.45", and we can therefore see that this time fits perfdectly with having passed down Bucks Row at 3.45 precisely. And Paul was quoted in the Lloyds as having said this very thing.

Of course, if we sweep that statement under the carpet and only opt for "about 3.45", then we may feel more at ease to claim that Paul could well have been five minutes wrong or more. So it´s not that I cannot see where you are coming from, it´s more a question of me not wanting to be misrepresented and not accepting you cherrypicking a quotation that suits your desires.

I always found that looking at the whole picture and representing ALL the evidence was the best guarantee for a fair weighing. I hope you agree.

[Mark J D]

... the map you and mark are using appears to be from an angle. and therefor skews locations. i think it would be better to use a total birds eye view map, ie one that looks straight down. and has north at the top center

Simple alterations to imitate perspective from a helpful height and angle should not 'skew locations'. But even so, I'd have happily used a flat map, except that I can't find one that covers the entire area under consideration. Doing bits of triangle without proper vertices is a bit too heavy on the guesswork...

M.

[Fisherman]

Embarrassed perhaps by the way their opinions have been manipulated!!!!!!!!!!!!!

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

You are going to have to explain this to me in extenso, Trevor. You contacted Scobie. He did not want to talk to you. You contacted Payne James. He did not want to talk to you either.

If you can tell me how that translates into how the two gentlemen were so embarrased about how their information had been manipulated, that THIS was why they did not want to talk to you, it would be interesting. Then again, we may cut to the chase since I have personal mails from Payne James where he gives me the go ahead after having read my text and reasoning concerning his contribution to "Cutting Point", and I don´t mind presenting you with it here.

I posted the chapter about his and Arne Thiblins timings to him and asked him this:

Hello, Jason!


I am sending you the chapter from my upcoming book on Charles Lechmere/Jack the Ripper/The Thames Torso killer, so that you can have a look at it and tell me if you are alright with the wording. The parts where you are concerned are in bold.

All the best!

Christer Holmgren

He promptly answered, on the 7th of October 2020, like this:

Hi Christer,


That's fine. All very best, Jason

Professor Jason Payne-James

LLM MSc FFFLM FRCS FRCP FCSFS FFCFM(RCPA) RCPathME DFM LBIPP Mediator

Specialist in Forensic & Legal Medicine & Consultant Forensic Physician

Lead Medical Examiner, Norfolk & Norwich University Hospital

Honorary Clinical Professor, William Harvey Research Institute, Queen Mary University of London

Executive Board Member - European Council of Legal Medicine

Firearms Licensing Medical Advisor, Sussex and Surrey Police

+++

I don´t know about you, but I certainly don´t think that sounds like a man who has been so very disgusted by my misrepresenting him that he would not speak to YOU as a - very strange - result of it. To me, it sounds like a man who is instead quite happy about how I represent his opinions.

You see, Trevor, much as you can not show a scintilla of evidence for your claim that Scobie and Jason Payne would have been misrepresented, I actually can prove you wrong.

As an ex-copper, you should be able to tell the difference.

Now, if you please, could you stop insulting me and the experts I have employed, now that you have been tidily undressed and hanged out as being totally wrong? Or do you want to go on making up fairytales about it?

[Fisherman]

It is decidedly odd that anybody should complaint about the angle of a map, as if that would be more damning for Lechmere.

The one thing that counts is that out of all the directions Lechmere could have walked to work and out of all the districts he could have traversed in doing so, the direction and the district that apply are the exact ones that are most damning for the carman. Any other direction and any other district would have been less suggestive of guilt on his behalf.

Out of loads and loads of options, he is stuck with the singular worst one. And that applies no matter which angle we look at the maps from.

[Trevor Marriott]

Embarrassed perhaps by the way their opinions have been manipulated!!!!!!!!!!!!!

It could be fact though if they would come up to proof as you suggest what have they got to fear. Why dont you go ahead and post in full the questions and answers you rely on with Payne and Thiblin after all I have done that all the way through with Dr Biggs then you can be completely transparent !!!!!!!!

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

Its not up to me to post the questions and answers to your experts, you are the one who seeks to rely on what they have allegedly told you based on your questions to them. So the onus is on you to be transparent it is irrelevant what I asked them because they have chosen to not reply and i am therefore entitled to draw and inference from that and its up to you to show the original questions to them not how you have worded a chapter in your book before it has gone to press

Clearly he had concerns !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Herlock Sholmes]

Yes, that is the nature of things. Even if I bring 102 339 pieces of circumstantial evidence pointing to Lechmere to the table, they can ALWAYS be supplied with innocent alternative explanations. That is the very nature of circumstantial evidence, it is not definitive for the eact reason that other suggestions - likely or unlikely - can be produced.

The key to the matter is to know when to stop accepting supplying innocent alternatives as a realistic alternative to guilt.

There’s no reason to stop Fish as there’s very few things to oppose.

[Mark J D]

Pauls information about the timings ... suggests very clearly that he was in Bucks Row at 3.45...

Not that I am the equal of Jeff Hamm, of course; but I do note that the 0.9 of a mile that Paul had to walk from 30 Foster Street to the far end of Corbett's Court could be covered a little inside half an hour at a leisurely 2mph. If he leaves the house "just before a quarter to four", he could be there a few minutes before 4:00 if he walks at 4mph. That walking speed is, I gather, at the top end of 'moderate intensity' exercise nowadays -- and would likely have been higher still in the LVP, given people's slightly shorter average height. From this, it looks to me like he genuinely was late, assuming his arrival time at work was also meant to be 4am. And why wouldn't it have been? Time is money in the capitalist catastrophe; and there were competitor carriers whose carmen -- Lechmere being one -- apparently arrived at 4am. Is it unreasonable to think of 4am as a likely normal time for the start of a carman's early shift in that locality?

M.

[Fisherman]

Its not up to me to post the questions and answers to your experts, you are the one who seeks to rely on what they have allegedly told you based on your questions to them. So the onus is on you to be transparent it is irrelevant what I asked them because they have chosen to not reply and i am therefore entitled to draw and inference from that and its up to you to show the original questions to them not how you have worded a chapter in your book before it has gone to press

Clearly he had concerns !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

I have to hand it to you, Trevor, you are not shy. I would have been extremely embarrased to have been publically undressed the way you have been by now, but it runs off you like water of a ducks back.