Evidence of innocence

[Fiver]

Former neighbours who didn’t have his new address. You got there in the end. Unless of course, you imagine that every person he came into contact with during the decade he was living in James Street (not just neighbours but shopkeepers those in pubs etc) was given an invite to his house-warming party at Doveton Street.

Is that what you are suggesting, that every single person who knew him only as Lechmere must have known his new address?

You don't appear to be very good at reading comprehension.

So you claim he was trying to hide his identity from former neighbors that he wasn't close enough to keep in touch with? Even though it would do nothing to keep the police, the press, his family, his current neighbors, his friends, his employers, his coworkers, or prostitutes from recognizing him?

Who's coming up with this cunning plan? The Underpants Gnomes?

[Fiver]

To me, old bean, it's always seemed significant that -- of all those many papers! -- the one that carried Lechmere's address was the one whose reporter had by far the earliest copy deadline.

He didn't hear the address 'given in open court'. He *copied it off a document as early as he could*, because he was smart and knew the clock was against him.

M.

Your theory doesn't make sense. To copy it off of the court document, the reporter would have to ask the court clerk to let him see the information after the inquest ended. Why would the reporter who was in the biggest hurry choose to wait longer than all of the reporters to leave the inquest?

[Fiver]

*duplicate*

[Abby Normal]

Here's a question to ponder, how many witnesses in the entire case appeared at an inquest twice in one morning?

heres a question to ponder. how many innocent witnesses were seen next to dead victim before raising any kind of alarm? right. zero

[Mark J D]

Your theory doesn't make sense. To copy it off of the court document, the reporter would have to ask the court clerk to let him see the information after the inquest ended. Why would the reporter who was in the biggest hurry choose to wait longer than all of the reporters to leave the inquest?

Can't help you, squire.

M.

[John Wheat]

heres a question to ponder. how many innocent witnesses were seen next to dead victim before raising any kind of alarm? right. zero

Doesn't mean there is anything sinister to it. It's highly likely it was a coincidence.

[Fiver]

heres a question to ponder. how many innocent witnesses were seen next to dead victim before raising any kind of alarm? right. zero

There are two with the Nichols case - Charles Lechmere and PC Neil, both of whom deliberately called over the next person they saw.

[Abby Normal]

There are two with the Nichols case - Charles Lechmere and PC Neil, both of whom deliberately called over the next person they saw.

pc neil was never seen alone with a victim before raising any kind of alarm and we know lech was thats the whole point. as a matter of fact i cant think of any case where an innocent witness was.

[Abby Normal]

Doesn't mean there is anything sinister to it. It's highly likely it was a coincidence.

probably john, but its a pretty odd coincidence.at least to me.

[Abby Normal]

You don't appear to be very good at reading comprehension.

So you claim he was trying to hide his identity from former neighbors that he wasn't close enough to keep in touch with? Even though it would do nothing to keep the police, the press, his family, his current neighbors, his friends, his employers, his coworkers, or prostitutes from recognizing him?

Who's coming up with this cunning plan? The Underpants Gnomes?

garys response makes perfect sense if lech was the killer. not just with old neighbors but with anyone. if he was commonly known as lechmere, using cross could help hide his identity whether he gave address or not.

and underpants gnomes dont come up with this cunning plan, if you knew anything about the history of true crime, you would know that its common for criminals to use aliases to avoid detection. at least here in the real world.

[Abby Normal]

This incident occurred a few months prior to Charles Lechmere's incident with the horse and cart in 1876. Could word have traveled to the Lechmere relations living in London? It's a possibility, judging by the name of the paper that reported on it. If so, would that be a reason for Charles Lechmere to use the name of Cross, if he were able to, legally?

West End News and London Advertiser
September 2, 1876

hi jerry
good find. yup of course

[drstrange169]

>>heres a question to ponder. how many innocent witnesses were seen next to dead victim before raising any kind of alarm? right. zero<<

Unless you are privy to information Christer and Ed Stow have yet to find, quite probably ... one.

[JeffHamm]

heres a question to ponder. how many innocent witnesses were seen next to dead victim before raising any kind of alarm? right. zero

Hi Abby,

However, Cross/Lechmere wasn't even sure she was dead (though he claims to suspect she was later, that could be a bit of hindsight), Paul had joined him before he had a chance to even check her (so again, he didn't know she was dead, which would be a weird thing to expect before checking her out), and finally, he did raise an alarm given he and Paul went off to find the police, which they did in PC Mizen. Given they hadn't spotted her injuries, and weren't even sure if she was dead or just drunk, what more could we expect of them? Think about the actions of those who found clearly mutilated bodies, like Chapman or Kelly. They ran off and found other people (non-police) first rather than immediately start shouting - in fact, by not immediately looking for the police they did even less than Cross/Lechmere.

Come to think of it, I think it is only in the case of Stride where people run around the streets yelling for the police; and they had seen the blood and her injuries, unlike Cross/Lechmere. But in all other cases, people ran off and told someone, but didn't really "raise an alarm". So his actions are much like those we we all accept as innocent.

- Jeff

[Abby Normal]

Hi Abby,

However, Cross/Lechmere wasn't even sure she was dead (though he claims to suspect she was later, that could be a bit of hindsight), Paul had joined him before he had a chance to even check her (so again, he didn't know she was dead, which would be a weird thing to expect before checking her out), and finally, he did raise an alarm given he and Paul went off to find the police, which they did in PC Mizen. Given they hadn't spotted her injuries, and weren't even sure if she was dead or just drunk, what more could we expect of them? Think about the actions of those who found clearly mutilated bodies, like Chapman or Kelly. They ran off and found other people (non-police) first rather than immediately start shouting - in fact, by not immediately looking for the police they did even less than Cross/Lechmere.

Come to think of it, I think it is only in the case of Stride where people run around the streets yelling for the police; and they had seen the blood and her injuries, unlike Cross/Lechmere. But in all other cases, people ran off and told someone, but didn't really "raise an alarm". So his actions are much like those we we all accept as innocent.

- Jeff

wrong. he was seen alone next to a freshly killed victim, and only raised the alarm when he saw paul coming close.
its unlike any other innocent witness not only in the ripper case, but in any true crime case ive ever heard.

[John Wheat]

wrong. he was seen alone next to a freshly killed victim, and only raised the alarm when he saw paul coming close.
its unlike any other innocent witness not only in the ripper case, but in any true crime case ive ever heard.

But in the absence of anything incriminating it is not enough to build a case against the man.