Lets get Lechmere off the hook!

[caz]

This ground has probably been trodden over a zillion times, but If Lechmere did lie to Mizen about a policeman being with the woman, then Mizen wouldn't have been surprised to see PC Neil with the body, obviously. But surely this lie - if it happened - would have been uncovered immediately, because surely PC Mizen would have mentioned the two carmen to PC Neil, who would have denied seeing them. This, then, should have put major suspicion on Lechmere right there and then, but apparently it didn't?

Actually, there is a subtle point here. Whether Mizen heard Lechmere saying he was wanted by a copper, or only thought he heard this, it amounts to the same thing. PC Neil had seen no carmen, and had sent nobody to fetch Mizen. So had Mizen mentioned any of this to Neil at the time, Lechmere's lie would have been exposed at the time. It seems clear then that nothing of the kind was mentioned - which again allows for the benefit of hindsight argument, that is, Mizen only introduced the policeman at the scene detail to Lechmere's words after the event, using the knowledge of who and what he had found there. Whether this was his honest and understandable, though mistaken recall (no witness is immune), or slightly manipulated to account for his not immediately proceeding to the scene of what turned out to be a horrific crime, is anyone's guess. Neither would make him a worse copper than he already was for not immediately going to a vulnerable woman's aid or taking down any witness particulars.

However, only if Mizen was squeaky clean, and blessed with totally accurate recall, could we say that Lechmere must have lied to him, possibly because he was a murderer, evil to the core. But how, in that case, did nobody - Mizen included - notice the lie or do anything about it?

On balance, the fact that PC Neil and both carmen sang from the same song sheet, together with the acceptance that Neil didn't see them and they didn't see him, appears to have outweighed Mizen's sole contradictory voice - which was after all only a reported conversation as he claimed to remember it. Now if only he had had a tape recorder.

Love,

Caz
X

[David Orsam]

This is all far too tortuous.

Cross had not encountered PC Neil who, in turn, had not encountered Cross.

Cross told the truth. PC Neil was not where he should have been on this night of nights.

It makes far more sense to believe that PC Mizen lied in order to place PC Neil where he should have been.

Did PC Mizen did find PC Neil on arriving at the murder scene? Eventually, of course.

Policemen lying under oath? Unthinkable as it is to Ripperology, newspaper letters columns were full of such stories.

Hi Simon,

In another thread (for some reason which I'm afraid I couldn't understand), you said that I was "not too attuned to irony". But what I do find ironic is the number of posters on here who say, oh the explanation is obvious, because:

A. Mizen was obviously mistaken.
B. Mizen was obviously lying.
C. Cross was obviously just trying to get to work on time.

Yes, these are three possible, plausible explanations of the inconsistency in the evidence. I don't know why so many people keep repeating them especially as, despite the confidence with which they are posted, at least two of them must be wrong. But there is a fourth possibility which is that Cross was lying because he was the murderer. To completely discount that possibility on the basis of no evidence whatsoever (other than Cross's own denial) is simply reckless.

[Simon Wood]

Hi David,

Call me reckless.

Why would Cross lie about not having seen [spoken too?] a policeman if the encounter actually happened?

If the encounter actually happened the scenario necessitates said policeman having seen [spoken to?] Cross.

But PC Neil did not see [or speak to] Cross, or anyone else for that matter.

This leaves us with PC Mizen and Cross's phantom policeman.

Regards,

Simon

[Robert]

Hi David

"Inspector: Are you quite sure he told you that you were wanted by a policeman?
Mizen: That is my recollection, sir, as I told the coroner.
Inspector: How do I know you are not mis-remembering?
Mizen: You will have to trust me sir.
Inspector: And how do I know you are not lying to me?
Mizen: You will have to trust me sir."
Fisherman : If I might come in here...
Inspector : Who the bloody hell are you?
Fisherman : Fisherman's the name, detection's the game.
Inspector : Well, what do you want?
Fisherman : This man Mizen should be supported to the hilt. He's been graded.
Inspector : You mean like an egg?
Fisherman : He's been graded as 'good.'
Inspector : Jigger me!
Fisherman : Now look at this Cross fellow. How do we know that he doesn't go home and beat his wife?
Inspector : That's shrewd. That's very shrewd!
Mizen : Good thinking, Fisherman.
Inspector : Thanks, Fisherman!
Fisherman : You're welcome.

[David Orsam]

Hi David

Hi Robert - I don't know why you addressed that post to me. I am not Fisherman!

[David Orsam]

Why would Cross lie about not having seen [spoken too?] a policeman if the encounter actually happened?

If the encounter actually happened the scenario necessitates said policeman having seen [spoken to?] Cross.

Simon - I don't understand what you are saying here. The scenario is that Cross has just killed Nichols, he has a knife on his person and, together with Paul, encounters PC Mizen. He fears that if he simply tells Mizen he has found a dead body in Buck's Row then Mizen will insist he accompanies him to Buck's Row where he might then be searched. So he invents a fictional policeman to ensure that Mizen lets him go on his way.

Incidentally, the reason that you have offered for Mizen lying doesn't make sense which I will explain in a separate post.

[David Orsam]

It makes far more sense to believe that PC Mizen lied in order to place PC Neil where he should have been.

Did PC Mizen did find PC Neil on arriving at the murder scene? Eventually, of course.

If you are saying that PC Mizen was first on the scene and PC Neil only turned up later, then, far from making "far more sense" this actually doesn't make any sense! PC Thain arrived at the murder site before PC Mizen and was requested by PC Neil to summon a doctor. So, unless Mizen, Thain and Neil are all involved in some kind of crazy conspiracy, it was Neil who found the body (after Cross and Paul).

[Simon Wood]

Hi David,

Why do you choose to believe three policemen with very suspicious stories for the morning in question rather than Charles Cross/Lechmere/Crossmere?

Regards,

Simon

[Robert]

David, I addressed it to you because I was trying to show how your scenario was at odds with what the Lechmerians are saying, i.e. that the choice between Mizen and Crossmere was a no-brainer, but the police somehow lacked the brains to make it.

[David Orsam]

David, I addressed it to you because I was trying to show how your scenario was at odds with what the Lechmerians are saying, i.e. that the choice between Mizen and Crossmere was a no-brainer, but the police somehow lacked the brains to make it.

I don't care if my scenario is at odds with what "the Lechmerians" are saying.

[David Orsam]

Hi David,

Why do you choose to believe three policemen with very suspicious stories for the morning in question rather than Charles Cross/Lechmere/Crossmere?

Regards,

Simon

I see the element of humour in your question but it looks to me like you really do believe there was some kind of crazy conspiracy going on here! There clearly wasn't. The reason Thain ran off to fetch a doctor and Mizen ran off to fetch an ambulance, while Neil remained with the body, is because Neil was the first officer on the scene and was calling the shots.

[Simon Wood]

Hi David,

Element of humour?

I was being perfectly serious.

I don't believe there was a crazy conspiracy going on unless, of course, you mean three cops desperately trying to get the timing of their stories straight.

Regards,

Simon

[David Orsam]

I don't believe there was a crazy conspiracy going on unless, of course, you mean three cops desperately trying to get the timing of their stories straight.

Go on then, I'm listening.

Do explain to me how and why three police constables all invented a completely false story about the finding of the body. And please tell me what really happened.

[Chris]

The scenario is that Cross has just killed Nichols, he has a knife on his person and, together with Paul, encounters PC Mizen. He fears that if he simply tells Mizen he has found a dead body in Buck's Row then Mizen will insist he accompanies him to Buck's Row where he might then be searched. So he invents a fictional policeman to ensure that Mizen lets him go on his way.

I thought the scenario was that Paul wasn't with Cross/Lechmere when he invented the fictional policeman. He must have been reckless indeed if he lied to Mizen in the hearing of someone who knew he was lying!

[David Orsam]

He must have been reckless indeed if he lied to Mizen in the hearing of someone who knew he was lying!

I agree with that. It's certainly a weakness.