Why Cross Was Almost Certainly Innocent

[Herlock Sholmes]

Cross could be lying about what time he left home.

He certainly could have. No one has ever doubted that or claimed that Cross couldn’t have had time to commit the murder as far as I’m aware. It’s certainly physically possible. What we object to is Christer Holmgren’s provably false claim that there was a mysterious ‘gap.’ He doesn’t claim that there might have been one, he claims that there provably was one. This is provably untrue and is a perfect example of how evidence is often manipulated to try and make this clearly innocent man appear guilty.

And if he did leave his house earlier you are left with another problem. Only three things could have happened..

1) Cross left home really early, picked up Mary Nichols elsewhere and took her to Bucks Row to kill her 20 minutes before he was due at work. I’m fairly sure that no Cross supporter favours this nonsense. So…next
2) Cross left home early and stood in Bucks Row waiting on the off chance of a woman showing up until 20 minutes before he was due at work. This is less likely than option one and I know of no one who would support it. Which leaves..
3) Cross left early, bumped into Nichols and killed her.

The problem with 3 though is this…even Christer accepts that this murder would have taken no more that 2 minutes. So if, for example, Cross left the house at 3.25 and got to Bucks Row at 3.32/3.33 then killed Nichols by say, 3.35/6, what the hell was he still doing there when Paul arrived at around 3.40?

Nothing ‘favours’ Cross. Not a single thing.