The cross/lechmere theory - a newbie's thoughts

[The Baron]

Lechmere/Cross theory V2.0 Servicepack 2.3

Updated basic points:


1- Lechmere was seen alone in the dark near a freshly killed woman

2- The victim was last seen alive about half past two, she was alone, there was no sighting of her in company with another man

3- Lechmere didn't notify Mizen that the victim looked as if she had been outraged

4- Lechmere gave just the name Cross at the inquest

5- Lechmere was involved in an accident that killed a boy

6- In one account Lechmere refused to prop the woman up

7- Three constables didn't notice anything unusual and nothing attracted their attention that night before they encountered Lechmer, Paul and a dead body

8- Lechmere might have got a chance to get rid of a knife

9- The true murderer of Nichols hadn't been convicted

10- Neither Lechmere nor Paul noticed a pool of blood under the woman's head or blood oozing from a throat cut, there is a chance that one of them might have been lying

11- According to detective inspector Dew, Lechmere went to the woman, shaked her, and noticed there was something strange about the position of the woman's head (it was almost severed from the body) before meeting with Paul, he failed to notice any blood or cut, and failed to mention this to Mizen or to the Jury

12- Paul didn't see or hear Lechmere walking in front of him before Lechmere appeared standing near the body of Nichols

13- Lechmere was local, certainly knew the different routes and the streets in Whitechapel, it is even possible that he had a general idea of the constables beats

14- Paul said "there are such terrible gangs about. There have been many knocked down and robbed at that spot" He was afraid and tried to avoid Lechmere

15- in one report we have Lechmere leaving home at 3:20 a.m. and in another he left at about half-past three, if he left between 3:20 and 3:30 a.m. there could have been a gap in time unaccounted for.

16- In the inquest it was reported that while Lechmere and Paul were by the body, "just then they heard a policeman coming" but they didn't wait there and chose to leave the scene

17- If Lechmere had noticed that Constable Neil was coming down Buck's Row, then that gives weight to the Mizen Scam theory.



The Baron

[Herlock Sholmes]

Lechmere/Cross theory V2.0 Servicepack 2.3

Updated basic points:


1- Lechmere was seen alone in the dark near a freshly killed woman

According to you and your pal Dr. Phillips John Richardson was alone in a yard with a victim. Therefore he’s a likelier killer than Cross.

2- The victim was last seen alive about half past two, she was alone, there was no sighting of her in company with another man

Which is completely irrelevant. She saw her killer. And even if someone else had seen her they might have been reluctant to come forward knowing what happened to her.

3- Lechmere didn't notify Mizen that the victim looked as if she had been outraged

Because he had no way of knowing if she had or hadn’t. So it wasn’t relevant.

4- Lechmere gave just the name Cross at the inquest

How do you know that? And even if he had why didn’t they ask? There were police there they could have insisted - another red herring - joke after joke.

5- Lechmere was involved in an accident that killed a boy

Was it him? I thought that you Cross defenders said that he always used the name Lechmere?

6- In one account Lechmere refused to prop the woman up

And in one he didn’t. So….irrelevant.

And even if we could prove that he refused to prop her up that would have been entirely normal behaviour. Millions of people are squeamish when it comes to bodies.

7- Three constables didn't notice anything unusual and nothing attracted their attention that night before they encountered Lechmer, Paul and a dead body

Irrelevant. Same applies to all of the murders - you’re just scraping the bottom of the barrel to add points to support a suspect who until a few weeks ago you considered a joke. But now, just because you see an opportunity to annoy people you suddenly start a ‘vote Cross’ campaign.

8- Lechmere might have got a chance to get rid of a knife

Nope. An invention.

9- The true murderer of Nichols hadn't been convicted

Why don’t you add that Cross had legs. This is desperate stuff even for you.

10- Neither Lechmere nor Paul noticed a pool of blood under the woman's head or blood oozing from a throat cut, there is a chance that one of them might have been lying

Or……….it was very dark.

11- According to detective inspector Dew, Lechmere went to the woman, shaked her, and noticed there was something strange about the position of the woman's head (it was almost severed from the body) before meeting with Paul, he failed to notice any blood or cut, and failed to mention this to Mizen or to the Jury

The same Inspector Dew who said that Emma Smith was found unconscious in the street. Ok.

12- Paul didn't see or hear Lechmere walking in front of him before Lechmere appeared standing near the body of Nichols

How can you know that? He was never asked.

13- Lechmere was local, certainly knew the different routes and the streets in Whitechapel, it is even possible that he had a general idea of the constables beats

As did others.

14- Paul said "there are such terrible gangs about. There have been many knocked down and robbed at that spot" He was afraid and tried to avoid Lechmere

Which means that he was afraid of gangs….not Cross. Are these real comments Baron?

15- in one report we have Lechmere leaving home at 3:20 a.m. and in another he left at about half-past three, if he left between 3:20 and 3:30 a.m. there could have been a gap in time unaccounted for.

Nice try. In the majority he said ‘about 3.30.’ Even Fish accepts this…..he just ‘forgot’ it when writing his book and making the documentary,

16- In the inquest it was reported that while Lechmere and Paul were by the body, "just then they heard a policeman coming" but they didn't wait there and chose to leave the scene

Rubbish.

17- If Lechmere had noticed that Constable Neil was coming down Buck's Row, then that gives weight to the Mizen Scam theory.

Rubbish

The Baron

Third time lucky…..rubbish.


Crap suspect. And you are only promoting him because you like to annoy people.

Every single point about Cross has been rebutted. I call out to all Cross supporters that it’s time to do the honourable thing. Show the world that you still have some integrity left and admit that Cross clearly wasn’t the ripper and that you got carried away on this ludicrous bandwagon. Let it go….you will feel better. Move on. You’ve been conned. Chalk it down as a life lesson and move on. How much time and effort have we wasted on this dishonest joke.

[Fiver]

Lechmere/Cross theory V2.0 Servicepack 2.3

Updated basic points:


1- Lechmere was seen alone in the dark near a freshly killed woman

2- The victim was last seen alive about half past two, she was alone, there was no sighting of her in company with another man

3- Lechmere didn't notify Mizen that the victim looked as if she had been outraged

4- Lechmere gave just the name Cross at the inquest

5- Lechmere was involved in an accident that killed a boy

6- In one account Lechmere refused to prop the woman up

7- Three constables didn't notice anything unusual and nothing attracted their attention that night before they encountered Lechmer, Paul and a dead body

8- Lechmere might have got a chance to get rid of a knife

9- The true murderer of Nichols hadn't been convicted

10- Neither Lechmere nor Paul noticed a pool of blood under the woman's head or blood oozing from a throat cut, there is a chance that one of them might have been lying

11- According to detective inspector Dew, Lechmere went to the woman, shaked her, and noticed there was something strange about the position of the woman's head (it was almost severed from the body) before meeting with Paul, he failed to notice any blood or cut, and failed to mention this to Mizen or to the Jury

12- Paul didn't see or hear Lechmere walking in front of him before Lechmere appeared standing near the body of Nichols

13- Lechmere was local, certainly knew the different routes and the streets in Whitechapel, it is even possible that he had a general idea of the constables beats

14- Paul said "there are such terrible gangs about. There have been many knocked down and robbed at that spot" He was afraid and tried to avoid Lechmere

15- in one report we have Lechmere leaving home at 3:20 a.m. and in another he left at about half-past three, if he left between 3:20 and 3:30 a.m. there could have been a gap in time unaccounted for.

16- In the inquest it was reported that while Lechmere and Paul were by the body, "just then they heard a policeman coming" but they didn't wait there and chose to leave the scene

17- If Lechmere had noticed that Constable Neil was coming down Buck's Row, then that gives weight to the Mizen Scam theory.



The Baron

1. True.
2. Irrelevant. Tells us nothing about who murdered Nichols.
3. Neither did Paul. Your double standard is noted.
4. Irrelevant. It was not an attempt to conceal his identity.
5. Irrelevant. Tells us nothing about who murdered Nichols.
6. A point in Lechmere's favor. Propping the body up would give an innocent excuse for having blood on his hands or clothes.
7. Incorrect. PC Thain saw a couple men on Brady Street shortly before he was alerted by PC Neil. Robert Paul, PC John Neil, Walter Purkiss, Patrick Mulshaw, James Green, Sergeant Henry Kirby, Mr Perkins, the watchman at Schnieder's factory, the watchman at the wool depot, and the watchman at Essex Wharf were all nearby and have no known alibi.
8. Speculation. Tells us nothing about who murdered Nichols.
9. Irrelevant. Tells us nothing about who murdered Nichols.
10. Neither did Paul. Your double standard is noted.
11. Dew was writing from memory 50 years after events that he did not directly witness.
12. False. Paul never said at what distance he heard or saw Lechmere.
13. The same is true of PC Mizen, PC Neil, PC Thain, Robert Paul, Walter Purkiss, Patrick Mulshaw, James Green, Sergeant Henry Kirby, Mr Perkins, the watchman at Schnieder's factory, the watchman at the wool depot, and the watchman at Essex Wharf. Your double standard is noted.
14. Irrelevant. Tells us nothing about who murdered Nichols.
15. Speculation. Tells us nothing about who murdered Nichols.
16. Most newspaper accounts by Cross, Paul, Neil, Thain, and Mizen contradict this.
17. Impossible. If Lechmere noticed PC Neil coming down Bucks Row, then Lechmere and Paul would have encountered Neil, not Mizen.

[Geddy2112]

1- Lechmere was seen alone in the dark near a freshly killed woman

This is Christer's latest gambit. Let me explain something.

Having walked a hundred yards or so, and with the light from the gas lamp as a haze in the distance, he suddenly discerned a man standing still in the middle of the street.

Lechmere was seen alone in the dark near a freshly killed woman

The top quote is from Christer back in 2012 ish and I would say that is probably the last time he told the truth about the events last night or close to it. As you can see his quote and your quote are completely different. His is closer to the evidence we have, yours is the Chinese whisper version of events how it has transcended over the years. It's gone from fairly accurate to complete and utter BS, that is the problem with Lechmere being the killer. If it starts out as being untrue and you keep adding more untrue all you are left with is a larger amount of 'untrue.'

[Lewis C]

If one is going to periodically update a list of points, part of that updating process should include not repeating points that were debunked after the previous update.

[Geddy2112]

If one is going to periodically update a list of points, part of that updating process should include not repeating points that were debunked after the previous update.

The problem is, with the examples I quoted above is in the beginning he was close to the mark - the 'truth' if you like. Now it's a complete and utter load of horse poop. Why? It seems with every passing post more fake bias is added. I know why it's desperation to be accepted. We know by reading any newspaper or watching the news the truth is usually boring and mundane. It has to be spiced up to make it more attractive. I think this applies to the Cross case.

Charles was exactly like what Edward and Christer want him to be a normal, boring, ordinary run of the mill guy. However they need him to be a multiple murderer as well so they have to add to the narrative to do so, often with twisting of evidence and manipulation of the English language, they have to take the mundane and make it extraordinary. In other words they have produce a fictional story from a rather run of the mill non-fictional one.