All roads lead to Lechmere.

[A P Tomlinson]

Considering the Ley Lines, it wouldn't surprise me. I'm waiting for the day they use his naming a son Albert Edward as an excuse to replace John Netley with Charles Lechmere in the Royal Conspiracy.

Oh, you've done it now... the Numerologists will all over that like a rash!"

[Fiver]

Oh, you've done it now... the Numerologists will all over that like a rash!"

Wait till you see the wonders of Forensic Astrology.

(Credit/blame Herlock for finding that one)

[John Wheat]

The main problem with this thread is that no roads lead to Lechmere. He's a terrible suspect. I wish the Lechmere believers would stop smearing a clearly innocent man's name.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Wait till you see the wonders of Forensic Astrology.

(Credit/blame Herlock for finding that one)

Actually Fiver we have Roger Palmer to thank for finding the original article. I was just the sucker who read it.

[A P Tomlinson]

Wait till you see the wonders of Forensic Astrology.

(Credit/blame Herlock for finding that one)

Well... that's something I'm never likely to forget. Thank you Fiver and Herlock for... expanding my boundaries!

There are so many words that I recognise in the phrase, "In his natal Q-chart for Polly’s death-time, there is a telling ‘phrase’ on the IC: JackLondon - Couteau (knife) - Charlier. Asteroids Rip and Eros conjoin his late Gemini Mars, so their Dwads move with Neptune close to the Dwad South Nod" yet still it means nothing to me

But what a stroke of genius to call upon the celestial movements of an asteroid called "Carmen" because... you know... Charlie was a CAR MAN.


The funny thing is that even THAT nutter put the Chapman death as far later than Bagster-Philips reckoned...

[Geddy2112]

Scobie's statements make it clear he was fed a mix of false statements and opinion masquerading as fact

Oh it's clear alright if you freeze frame the video.





Also to note the narrator states Holmgren provided this bundle to Scobie, an email on this very board from the show's director to Eddy Butler states he thanks Holmgren for the evidence bundle to Scobie. The fact the above bundle shows the same lies mentioned twice in his book Cutting Point and also in the video itself spoken by Holmgren seems on the balance of probabilities suggest Holmgren lied to Scobie to get the opinion he wished for, of course Holmgren denies this but when the coincidences mount up and they certainly mount up here it seems to be one coincidence too many for Holmgren surely?

[Lewis C]

Oh it's clear alright if you freeze frame the video.





Also to note the narrator states Holmgren provided this bundle to Scobie, an email on this very board from the show's director to Eddy Butler states he thanks Holmgren for the evidence bundle to Scobie. The fact the above bundle shows the same lies mentioned twice in his book Cutting Point and also in the video itself spoken by Holmgren seems on the balance of probabilities suggest Holmgren lied to Scobie to get the opinion he wished for, of course Holmgren denies this but when the coincidences mount up and they certainly mount up here it seems to be one coincidence too many for Holmgren surely?

Considering that the entire Missing Evidence video is propaganda, it would be surprising if they gave objective facts to Scobie. One would think that they took the same approach to providing a narrative to Scobie that they took in the video as a whole. If they were willing to give Scobie accurate, balanced, objective info, then why wouldn't they also make the whole video that way?

[Mark J D]

... the entire Missing Evidence video is propaganda...

All of it?

Really?

Well, you happily use the word 'entire', so you must think so. Which means you are consciously impugning the honesty of contributor Dr Gareth Norris, who -- last time I looked -- was a Senior Lecturer in the Department of Psychology at Aberystwyth University. Around the time that The Missing Evidence documentary was being released, he was a lecturer in the Law Department at Aberystwyth, having previously been a lecturer in Forensic Psychology. His contribution to the documentary is substantial, and proceeds entirely in line with the Lechmere Hypothesis. Peddling propaganda, was he?

M.

[Tom_Wescott]

Considering that the entire Missing Evidence video is propaganda,

Hi Lewis. for the sake of contrast, can you name a Ripper documentary that isn't (by your personal definition) propaganda?

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Geddy2112]

Well, you happily use the word 'entire', so you must think so. Which means you are consciously impugning the honesty of contributor Dr Gareth Norris, who -- last time I looked -- was a Senior Lecturer in the Department of Psychology at Aberystwyth University. Around the time that The Missing Evidence documentary was being released, he was a lecturer in the Law Department at Aberystwyth, having previously been a lecturer in Forensic Psychology. His contribution to the documentary is substantial, and proceeds entirely in line with the Lechmere Hypothesis. Peddling propaganda, was he?

Is this the same Gareth Norris who came out with this beauty?

…believes Charles Allen Lechmere, a meat cart driver or “carman” who was routinely covered in blood because of his job and who worked in the early hours in Whitechapel, should be seriously looked at as a suspect.

Or this little gem?

Lechmere was found leaning over Ripper victim Mary Ann “Polly” Nichols’ body on Buck’s Row in Whitechapel on August 31, 1888.

Or how about this belter...

He lied to police about his name, calling himself Cross, adding he’d been with the body for only a few minutes, but the researchers say he must have been with her for about nine minutes.

He repeats most of this nonsense and more in the Mail Online 20th of November 2014. He even mentions he knows Lechmere's Routes to work and his walking speed and what time he left home every morning, I mean he must do to know the victims were murdered on his routes at the time he would be passing. Astonishing

He also passed Hanbury Street, Dorset Street and Mitre Square at roughly the same times as the Ripper killings.

He repeats the same rubbish in the Wales Online article.

I've had a propaganda (North East word for a good look ) at the Missing Evidence and yes it appears the good Doctor may be guilty of propaganda... so out of his three main quotes in the fakeumentary he manged to all three factually incorrect. Not bad going. Who would you like to discuss next Thiblin, Payne-James?

[Geddy2112]

Hi Lewis. for the sake of contrast, can you name a Ripper documentary that isn't (by your personal definition) propaganda?

Hi Tom, I can. It's called 'The enduring mystery of Jack the Ripper' by LEMMiNO

I would also add any documentaries by Mr Jones on his Jack The Ripper Tour channel.

[Herlock Sholmes]

More truth in an episode of The Simpson’s.

[Geddy2112]

More truth in an episode of The Simpson’s.

Did they ever do a mick take of the JtR story, or did the Family Guy?

[Herlock Sholmes]

Did they ever do a mick take of the JtR story, or did the Family Guy?

I’m not sure Geddy. It probably wouldn’t have been as funny as some of the stuff that the Cross fan club has come up with though.

[Jon Guy]

All of it?

Really?

Well, you happily use the word 'entire', so you must think so. Which means you are consciously impugning the honesty of contributor Dr Gareth Norris, who -- last time I looked -- was a Senior Lecturer in the Department of Psychology at Aberystwyth University. Around the time that The Missing Evidence documentary was being released, he was a lecturer in the Law Department at Aberystwyth, having previously been a lecturer in Forensic Psychology. His contribution to the documentary is substantial, and proceeds entirely in line with the Lechmere Hypothesis. Peddling propaganda, was he?

M.

Was Dr Norris a student of the case/ Ripperologist ? Or an expert who was given material to study ?