Lets get Lechmere off the hook!

[DJA]

you call that a knife - Google Search

[Herlock Sholmes]

1) He was at the scene of a murder not long after a victim had been killed.

2) His testimony was at odds to PC Mizen's.

3) He was 'forced' to go to the inquest.

4) Some of the murders happened close to his probably route to work.

5) We do not know what time he left home on the 31st Aug 1888.

6) He refused to prop up Polly Nichol's body.

7) We can't account for his movements prior to 3:40am on 31st Aug 1888.


....who are we talking about here? Charles Lechmere or Robert Paul?

If Cross was cunning enough to come up with the silly Mizen Scam then why couldn’t Paul have been cunning enough a killer to have killed Nichols and then doubled back to ‘come upon’ whoever discovered the body? There is more that is ‘suspicious’ about Paul. There is more that is ‘suspicious’ about Richardson.

Time to let go of Cross and let him go sit with Gull and Sickert and Mann and Barnado and Lewis Carroll and Hardiman under a tree somewhere. For me a suspect should have to have at least some of the criteria of a killer (violence, insanity, hatred of women/prostitutes, etc) or the police should have shown some interest in them (unless they can be dismissed by an alibi that the police weren’t aware of at the time) This would leave us with a shorter list devoid of people who were simply alive and in the area at the time.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Hi Herlock,

As is too often the case, we are polar opposite in our opinions on this subject. JtR murdered his victims without coming to the notice of the police, so murdering and mutilating his wife and turning himself into the police fails to fit the profile. I see nothing exceptional about Bury. He was a drunken little no-hoper that married a woman to secure access to her inheritance, and disposed of her when he had squandered that inheritance and she had outlived her usefulness. He was the type of person that our American cousins would describe as a dime a dozen on any street corner - brainless and heartless. He is only obvious in that he fulfils the need to endlessly and interminably re-examine named suspects while the actual perpetrator buries himself in obscurity. Sorry for the rant my friend. I guess there was just one too many "there is no evidence against anyone but Bury".

Cheers, George

Hi George,

My point wouldn’t be that anyone should be considered as a A+ suspect but whatever anyone’s opinion of Bury he can’t fail to be a better suspect than Cross. Whatever the circumstances of Bury’s murder of his wife he still killed and mutilated her. He was still a violent man. He still had a connection to prostitutes and his move to Dundee provides an explanation for the cessation. Cross was in Bucks Row, just like every other man, woman or child in the history of crime who found a body outdoors (and he did it at just the place and time that we would have expected to have found him - which increases further the likelihood of his innocence)

I don’t get it George. I genuinely don’t. There’s not a single, solitary thing that suggests that Cross should be considered and a whole pile that suggests that he was innocent. Compare this to a murder/mutilator living in Bow. My opinion would be - could Bury have been the ripper, possibly. Could Cross have been the ripper, almost certainly not.

We could go on like this forever George but there’s no real point is there. We have a difference of opinion.

[Geddy2112]

I'd say Paul, because the police had to track him down at home, following his interview, and get him to the inquest.
Lechmere went on his own.

Indeed, however Team Lechmere tend to argue he was 'forced' to go to the inquest because he read the 'Remarkable Statement.' (Which of course we have no evidence to support.)

[Pcdunn]

1) He was at the scene of a murder not long after a victim had been killed.

2) His testimony was at odds to PC Mizen's.

3) He was 'forced' to go to the inquest.

4) Some of the murders happened close to his probably route to work.

5) We do not know what time he left home on the 31st Aug 1888.

6) He refused to prop up Polly Nichol's body.

7) We can't account for his movements prior to 3:40am on 31st Aug 1888.


....who are we talking about here? Charles Lechmere or Robert Paul?

I'd say Paul, because the police had to track him down at home, following his interview, and get him to the inquest.
Lechmere went on his own.