A Cross by any other name...smells like JtR?

[Sally]

Oh No!!! I've been drawn into a Crossmere thread! Aargh!

I must leave at once.

[lynn cates]

wife

Hello Christer. Thanks.

I think you missed my point. Let's try this. Is there a single case where he used one name or the other which was not:

1. An official document

2. a contact with police?

Perhaps his mailbox? (heh-heh)

Out of curiosity, what, precisely, would any of this mean to his wife, given his cover story of finding a body?

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

threads

Hello Sally. Right.

I think I saw a non-Lechmere thread somewhere. Now, where was that? Maybe not. (heh-heh)

Cheers.
LC

[Lechmere]

Yes Ben - I do rely on what we know, and of course extrapolate without ever ignoring the facts.
If we had it on record that Lechmere had been interrogated, for example, then I would clearly be far less comfortable in suggesting that his true identity remained unknown.
If his involvement was widely discussed by the press, if he had given press interviews, if his statement had resulted in urgent police memos - then I would sensibly expect his background to have been looked into.

But we don't so I go on what we have. And what we have is Lechmere slipping into the case and slipping out, without his true name ever being mentioned and with generations of 'Ripperologists' misreporting this semi anonymous man's involvement.

Sally
Do you think that stepsons of long dead policemen are permitted to use their long dead stepfather's name when involved in a murder investigation?

It is also a fact that Mizen and Lechmere fundamentally disagreed about the nature of their conversation, isn't it?
It is also a fact that we have no other recorded instance of Lechmere using the name Cross - while we have over 100 instances of the use of Lechmere.
It is also a fact that Nichols' abdominal wounds were covered and that this is the only instance (among the Whitechapel Murders) where the abdominal wounds were covered.
It is also a fact that Lechmere delayed in coming forward.
It is also a fact that Paul spotted Lechmere by the body before he raised the alarm.
And so on and so on.
You may wish to put innocent spins of these put it simply isn't true to say that that it was 'just' that he discovered the body

[lynn cates]

spin cycle

Hello Edward.

"You may wish to put innocent spins on these. . ."

Why "spin" since they don't look guilty in the first place?

Cheers.
LC

[Lechmere]

Call me old fashioned but usually giving a false name after being found next to a dead body would be thought of as potentially a sign of guilt.
Similarly when, immediately after leaving that dead body, you end up in a disagreement with a policeman over the fundamental details of that conversation, then that might, just might, be normally regarded as a potential sign of guilt.

PS Lynn - the suggestion is that his wife never learnt of his involvement in the case which is why he gave a false name and went to the inquest as if he was going to work. And which is why the Lechmere family remained in the dark about his involvement.

[lynn cates]

suspect

Hello Edward. Thanks.

"Call me old fashioned but usually giving a false name after being found next to a dead body would be thought of as potentially a sign of guilt."

Well, Mrs. Long passed within a few feet of one, and she had an alias. Same with Jane Oram. I might be suspicious had he actually relied on that name to accomplish something. So far as we know, he did not. (And I think you are the chap who suggested going with what we know.)

"Similarly when, immediately after leaving that dead body, you end up in a disagreement with a policeman over the fundamental details of that conversation, then that might, just might, be normally regarded as a potential sign of guilt."

But, again, what was accomplished by this? Did he avoid inquest? Was his name unlinked from the case? You and I have disagreements about details in the killings. But I never once suspected you. (heh-heh)

Cheers.
LC

[Fisherman]

Hello Christer. Thanks.

I think you missed my point. Let's try this. Is there a single case where he used one name or the other which was not:

1. An official document

2. a contact with police?

Perhaps his mailbox? (heh-heh)

Out of curiosity, what, precisely, would any of this mean to his wife, given his cover story of finding a body?

Cheers.
LC

His wife would have been none the wiser. To begin with, she would not even read it in the papers, to go on, if she WAS informed, then she was informed that a carman named Cross (a name that the Lechmere´s of today have no relation to or memory of) and who worked at Pickfords (as did hundreds and thousands of men) had witnessed in the Nichols case.

All the best, Lynn!
Fisherman

[Fisherman]

Hello Sally. Right.

I think I saw a non-Lechmere thread somewhere. Now, where was that? Maybe not. (heh-heh)

Cheers.
LC

Get used. There´s more coming

Fisherman

[lynn cates]

then . . .

Hello Christer. Thanks.

But supposing she HAD found out that Lechmere had found a body? So what?

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

conversion

Hello (again) Christer. Thanks.

"There are more coming. . ."

Not to worry--you and Edward can change them about. (heh-heh)

Cheers.
LC

[Ben]

Hi Lechmere,

If we had it on record that Lechmere had been interrogated

Except in cases where the only assurance that an "interrogation" took place comes from the person responsible for conducting it, when speaking to his bosses. It doesn't have quite the same resonance if he's writing his own reviews. Maybe I should try it: "I have scrutinised your Crossmere theory this evening, and I am of the opinion that it is extremely unconvincing". You must accept my judgement, because I said "scrutise", and not "gave a half-arsed once over".

If his involvement was widely discussed by the press, if he had given press interviews, if his statement had resulted in urgent police memos

Or if he gave a different name that stood an absolutely zero chance of not being discovered, especially if his address and workplace were also well-known. No possibility of identity concealment there, which tells everyone but Crossmere supporters that he wasn't trying to conceal his identity.

Writing on documents and being known socially are two very obviously different things.

Nothing suspicious at all about his "disagreement" with Mizen, as everyone but the Crossmere supporters recognise that Mizen made the error, including Mizen himself.

Regards,
Ben

[Lechmere]

Lynn
Forgive me for writing in slight shorthand in my previous post.
‘Giving a false name and not giving their true name after being found next to a dead body would be thought of as potentially a sign of guilt’.
Some people who went under different names did not keep their alternative names secret. This is obviously how we know about them. That is not a sign of guilt as it wasn’t a secret – there was no subterfuge. I hope that makes things obvious and clear.

Emily Holland – Jane Oram – of course wasn’t found anywhere near a dead body so I’m not entirely sure why you mentioned her.
Mrs Long wasn’t found standing by a dead body either.

Usually when someone gives an alternative name – or a name they are not usually known by, it is for a particular reason.
If you are having difficulty in comprehending what Lechmere may have been trying to accomplish, then I would suggest it was to mask his involvement in this murder case.
This case, may I remind you, is regarded by most commentators as the first of a particularly gruesome series of unsolved murders.
May I also remind you that he was remarkably successful in masking his involvement as it was only discovered nearly 120 years later. But that isn’t grounds for suspicion?

What did he accomplish by telling Mizen that he was wanted by anther policeman and that the woman was merely lying on her back, i.e. without telling him she was dead?
Are you seriously asking such a question?
Presume he was the killer for a moment if you will.
He would have had a knife on him. He needed to get past Mizen without being searched. Or brought back to the body.
If it had not been for Paul coming forward and blabbing to the press then he would not have had to come forward himself.
So there were obvious reasons why a guilty man would want to get past the policeman with the minimum of fuss.

So what if his wife had found out?
This is a rather naive question to ask. Maybe if his wife knew he was connected to the murder she might have suspected him. If he was the murderer he in all probability acted at home sometimes in a way that would have made her put two and two together.
Also, my presumption is that the killer would have wanted to kill again and so he would not want suspicion or extra vigilance over his movements at home. This should be rather obvious
The evidence points to his wife not finding out.

[Lechmere]

Ben
You seem to be performing a soft shoe shuffle to cast doubt on an interrogation.
I wouldn’t feel comfortable about doing that for any theory I subscribed to.
If a senior and very well respected policeman claimed in black and white to have interrogated Lechmere then I would feel bound to accept that and I would have to accept that it diminished the chances of his being the guilty party.

So far as we can determine Lechmere did conceal his identity from the police his family and from generations of ‘Ripperologists’. So he seems to have stood considerably more than zero chance of being discovered.

Should Lechmere’s presumed appearance at a police station to make a statement followed by his testimony at the inquest be regarded as social calls? Where he gave the name he supposedly (without a shred of evidence to back it up) used with his muckers down the pub? In preference to the name he used on all those other occasions?
Yeah.

Are you claiming that Mizen recognised that he made an error?

[Bridewell]

Could the ripper have simply learned the police beats by following the detective on his first round?

Beats are worked by uniformed officers, not detectives who are assigned to an area. Could he have learned beats by following the beat officers on their first circuit? How would he know which officer to follow? Even if he identified the officer whose beat posed the greatest risk there were also additional officers, some of them in plain clothes, to be negotiated.

I think you credit this killer with more guile than he probably possessed.