Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Why Cross Was Almost Certainly Innocent

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by TopHat View Post

    My point was really that the Ripper was interrupted in his work, that it wasn't a "full" ripper event, and I'm suggesting he was interrupted by the approaching Paul.
    Indeed, so if Paul did not exist and he completed the full Ripper event how late for work would he have been? Considerably and no doubt he had numerous kids and a wife to feed was more important to Cross.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by TopHat View Post

      Calling it a "complete non-issue" won't make this unfortunate name issue that Cross has go away. By using "Cross" he kept himself out of the papers. By keeping himself out of the papers, anyone with suspicions of his character would not know he was the person who "found" the body of Nichols.
      He gave his address and work address. Also his first two names. How does this keep him out the papers? Where people thick as whale omelettes back then?

      Comment


      • Originally posted by TopHat View Post

        * The usage of the name Cross was one of only two known times he used that name (the Nichols murder, and his "accidental" killing of a child).
        It's very misleading of you to put the word 'accidental' in quotation marks (above), as though the young child's accidental death in 1876 may not have been accidental. Sadly for you, it also undermines your judgement on other issues relating to Mr Cross. The 4-year-old child's death WAS accidental. All the eye witnesses at the inquest swore it was an accident and the inquest jury returned a verdict of accidental death.
        The accident happened at around 4pm on the shortest day of the year. The weather was drizzly, foggy and dark (sunset in London is around 3pm on that day). 2 very young children came out from behind a stationary carriage and into the path of Charles Cross's horse & cart, which was travelling slowly. Cross shouted a warning and tried to stop, but tragically the younger child went under the rear wheel and died shortly afterwards at the doctor's surgery. No blame whatsoever was attached to Charles Cross.

        Playing loosely with the facts, in order to make Mr Cross appear more guilty, actually does the opposite - it further weakens your already flimsy case.
        For now we see through a glass darkly, but then, face to face.
        Now I know in part, but then shall I know even as also I am known.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Sam Flynn View Post
          Good points, Fiver, but "Lavender" is merely an anglicisation of Lawende, and they're pronounced almost exactly the same way.
          Hi Sam, I've seen this mentioned before in 'retaliation' of Fiver's point. However do you know who decided this 'anglicisation' or are we just guessing that is what he did? Thanks.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Sam Flynn View Post
            Good points, Fiver, but "Lavender" is merely an anglicisation of Lawende, and they're pronounced almost exactly the same way.
            I have always heard Lavender pronounced as LAV-en-dur. From what I can find online, Lawende appears to be pronounced la-Ven-dah. There are distinct differences in which syllable is emphasized and in the pronunciation of the final syllable.
            "The full picture always needs to be given. When this does not happen, we are left to make decisions on insufficient information." - Christer Holmgren

            "Unfortunately, when one becomes obsessed by a theory, truth and logic rarely matter." - Steven Blomer

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Fiver View Post

              I have always heard Lavender pronounced as LAV-en-dur. From what I can find online, Lawende appears to be pronounced la-Ven-dah. There are distinct differences in which syllable is emphasized and in the pronunciation of the final syllable.
              Let's ask Fish.... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZTdO...=OfficeRockers

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Geddy2112 View Post

                Hi Sam, I've seen this mentioned before in 'retaliation' of Fiver's point. However do you know who decided this 'anglicisation' or are we just guessing that is what he did? Thanks.
                Click image for larger version

Name:	lawende.jpg
Views:	0
Size:	24.9 KB
ID:	847079

                For pronunciation, watch the first few seconds of this...

                Porady ogrodnicze: PRZYCINANIE LAWENDYJAK PRZYCIĄĆ LAWENDĘ, Przycinanie lawendy jest bardzo ważne, dzięki niemu lawenda ma ładniejszy kulisty kształt, gęsty ...
                For now we see through a glass darkly, but then, face to face.
                Now I know in part, but then shall I know even as also I am known.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by chubbs View Post

                  It's very misleading of you to put the word 'accidental' in quotation marks (above), as though the young child's accidental death in 1876 may not have been accidental. Sadly for you, it also undermines your judgement on other issues relating to Mr Cross. e.
                  Putting "accidental" shows one of several possibilities.
                  * TopHat did not read the sources, but assumed the worst of Charles Cross.
                  * TopHat read the sources and deliberately attempted to falsify what they said.
                  * TopHat read the sources, but has such poor analysis skills that he interpreted Cross being exonerated by every eyewitness and the court as meaning Cross probably ran over the child on purpose.
                  "The full picture always needs to be given. When this does not happen, we are left to make decisions on insufficient information." - Christer Holmgren

                  "Unfortunately, when one becomes obsessed by a theory, truth and logic rarely matter." - Steven Blomer

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by chubbs View Post
                    For pronunciation, watch the first few seconds of this...
                    Yes but that is Polish not English. So by Anglicising his name he wanted it to sound like Polish, is that what you are saying? However I was not strictly referring to the pronunciation I was asking who decided that he 'Anglicised' his name by changing it's spelling. Where did that notion come from?

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Fiver View Post

                      Putting "accidental" shows one of several possibilities.
                      * TopHat did not read the sources, but assumed the worst of Charles Cross.
                      * TopHat read the sources and deliberately attempted to falsify what they said.
                      * TopHat read the sources, but has such poor analysis skills that he interpreted Cross being exonerated by every eyewitness and the court as meaning Cross probably ran over the child on purpose.
                      Let's ask TopHat at what time he thinks Charles Cross left home that Aug morning... That will show his true colours.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Geddy2112 View Post

                        Yes but that is Polish not English. So by Anglicising his name he wanted it to sound like Polish, is that what you are saying? However I was not strictly referring to the pronunciation I was asking who decided that he 'Anglicised' his name by changing it's spelling. Where did that notion come from?
                        Sorry for my misunderstanding. No, I'm not saying 'he wanted it to sound Polish' - almost the opposite, in fact. He wanted it to LOOK English.
                        We'll never know 'who' decided to anglicise Lawende, but these things happen, don't they, especially with foreign names in other countries. Spellings are very fluid, especially when someone feels the need to assimilate into their country of choice. It's a tiny step from Lawende to Lavender - they even sound identical. It could easily have happened by mistake in the first instance and latched onto by Lawende. Couple this with the fact that spelling was much more flexible in those days anyway.

                        (I wonder if Ian Lavender [Pikey in Dad's Army] had Jewish ancestors called Lawende.) Edit - no he didn't lol!!!
                        Last edited by chubbs; Today, 06:25 PM.
                        For now we see through a glass darkly, but then, face to face.
                        Now I know in part, but then shall I know even as also I am known.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by chubbs View Post

                          Sorry for my misunderstanding. No, I'm not saying 'he wanted it to sound Polish' - almost the opposite, in fact. He wanted it to LOOK English.
                          Hehe, not sure what this Polish bloke would like to sound like... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AfKZ...nel=trouchelle

                          Comment


                          • whats all this nonsense about lech and paul "cofounding" the body? lech discovered the body and paul discovered lech standing near the body. dont accuse the lechmerians of over egging the pudding ( i have too- and they do) but then do the same.
                            "Is all that we see or seem
                            but a dream within a dream?"

                            -Edgar Allan Poe


                            "...the man and the peaked cap he is said to have worn
                            quite tallies with the descriptions I got of him."

                            -Frederick G. Abberline

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Geddy2112 View Post

                              Hehe, not sure what this Polish bloke would like to sound like... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AfKZ...nel=trouchelle


                              Smith?
                              For now we see through a glass darkly, but then, face to face.
                              Now I know in part, but then shall I know even as also I am known.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X