Lechmere's Behavior in Buck's Row

[Wickerman]

I don't think that I can name ten people that could make a credible Jack the Ripper. Many are interesting. Few are - for me - realistic.

Generally speaking, I don't believe anyone named is credible. Though there are a few nameless extra's hovering in the background that I wouldn't mind questioning.

[lynn cates]

not realistic

Hello Patrick.

"I don't think that I can name ten people that could make a credible Jack the Ripper. Many are interesting. Few are - for me - realistic."

Goes double for me, mate.

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

control

Hello Mr. B.

"I doubt that Lech. was anticipating his meeting with Thain at that point.

No dastardly master plan, just an instinctive reaction."

But then, the idea of a person in control is greatly diminished.

Cheers.
LC

[MrBarnett]

Hi Lynn,

I think he quickly and instinctively took control of the immediate situation i.e. managing Paul's response, but it would be a little too far fetched to expect him to react in a way that would fit any future eventuality. I am not aware that anyone, even the most ardent of Lechmereites, is attributing god-like prescience to our 'ever-so-umble' carman - just enough low cunning to get him out of a scrape or two.

Cheers,

MrB.

[Rainbow]

If you were walking at 3:45 AM and found a woman laying on the ground who has been killed no more than some minutes ago , and next to her was a man who you didn't notice his footsteps before , what is the most probability here , this man is just a witness or he is her killer ?! Do the math ..

[MrBarnett]

Hi Rainbow,

How would you know whether the person was dead or dead drunk, and if dead, how recently the death had occurred?

MrB

[MrBarnett]

Hi again, Rainbow,

I get the point you are making. You would be initially suspicious, of course, especially if this was an area known for gang violence. But if the person engaged you in conversation and came across as a nice person, a carman like yourself on his way to work, perhaps your concerns would subside. And maybe, just maybe, that was what he was banking on when he chose not to leg it or come at you with a knife.

MrB

[Lechmere]

Exactly.

And the 'walk calmly away' option leaves Paul's reaction to chance. He may have immediately screamed blue murder.
By approaching him Lechmere exerted a degree of control over the immediate situation. He was able to manage events.
Notice that Lechmere took 'control' of the head area - the neck wound area, while Paul fussed around her chest and legs.

[Wickerman]

If you were walking at 3:45 AM and found a woman laying on the ground who has been killed no more than some minutes ago , and next to her was a man who you didn't notice his footsteps before , what is the most probability here , this man is just a witness or he is her killer ?! Do the math ..

On the other hand, why would you stick around?

Who would be the first to turn and run, the killer, or you?

[Rainbow]

I am not saying because of this he is the killer , but the chance here , whatever happened next , the chane that he Is her killer is certainly more than he was just another passing guy, unless Jack has chosen a miserable place to do his crime , and between you and me , I think Cross has learnt alot from Tapram killing , and when he came to talk to Paul , that not means he didn't want to kill him , maybe he was waiting the right moment and after that he changed his plan when he felt he could be safe enough
you can't put any other suspect ever at the same place cross was .. the police has to pluck his feathers before they let him go ..
talking nicely to Paul will make him innocent ! you most be kidding

[Lechmere]

Gareth
What other unobtrusive nobodies did you have in mind?

[Mr Lucky]

you can't put any other suspect ever at the same place cross was ..

Hi Rainbow

I heartily agree, the importance of this fact can not be overstated.

[Patrick S]

In my experience the disinterested observer finds Lechmere's behaviour suspicious, when the events of that night are deconstructed. That is why the theory gains traction.
The other reason it gains traction is that it is one of the few that is grounded in reality - in that the suspect fits the pattern of what serial killers in the real world tend to be like. The unobtrusive nobody - yet when the spotlight is put on him there are many grounds for suspicion.

Funny you should say that. I've quizzed five people in the last few days. They know nothing of Jack the Ripper, Cross, Nichols, et al. I gave them this scenario: A man kills a woman. Cuts her throat, disembowels her. He hears footsteps behind him. A man is approaching, about thirty yards away. It's dark. Deserted. What does he do? Everyone said, "Run." All five. So I asked, "Let's say he doesn't run. What does he do?" All five said, "Kill the guy." I then presented your scenario. He approaches, asked the the guy to come see. It didn't play well. Mostly, laughter ensured.

[Patrick S]

If you were walking at 3:45 AM and found a woman laying on the ground who has been killed no more than some minutes ago , and next to her was a man who you didn't notice his footsteps before , what is the most probability here , this man is just a witness or he is her killer ?! Do the math ..

I guess your math = two or more people finding her at the same time, or her just lying there forever on the sidewalk, undiscovered? Forever? Let's research how many bodies were found by one person, alone. And then let's see how many of them were the killer.

[DVV]

you can't put any other suspect ever at the same place cross was ..

Ok.
Reeves is the best suspect for Tabram, Davis has killed Chapman, Diemshutz, Stride, Eddowes encountered Watkins-the-Ripper, and Bowyer took care of MJK.

Too bad Isenchmid never bumped into a body, Lynn Cates could be right.