Lets get Lechmere off the hook!

[Fisherman]

Hi Fishypoo,

I saw your channel 5 prog the other night, and I must say you did the best job yet of getting the poor bugger off the hook. More odour toilette than Chanel 5.

Well done!

Love,

Caz
X

Thereīs a thread for the documentary, Caz. Itīs not this one, Iīm afraid! Do you have any contributions to make for this thread?

The best,
Fisherman

[Bridewell]

I cite the case for the defence presented in your own Rip article, which made clear that all his actions were capable of innocent explanation.

Just want to add that Lechmere's working as a meat delivery carman was an interesting find. Although I don't think it's of evidential value in supporting the contention that he was the killer, it does show the thoroughness of the research behind the documentary - as does the photograph of the man himself in his old age. Many thanks, Christer.

[Jon Guy]

Lovely, Jon - thanks!

The best,
Fisherman

My pleasure, Christer.

I was a little unsure what you may mean by hard evidence so I`ve gone with the counter arguments against the claims against him.

[Fisherman]

My pleasure, Christer.

I was a little unsure what you may mean by hard evidence so I`ve gone with the counter arguments against the claims against him.

Thatīs just fine - everything that can be said in order to dismiss the Lechmere theory in favour of a verdict of innocent is comme il faut.

If you have what you consider hard evidence, then that belongs here too!

The best,
Fisherman

[GUT]

Fisherman once told me that he had studied law. Didn't they teach him that the onus is on the prosecution?

It is all but impossible to prove innocence (Law 101) that's why juries find you not guilty.

[Fisherman]

I cite the case for the defence presented in your own Rip article, which made clear that all his actions were capable of innocent explanation.

Just want to add that Lechmere's working as a meat delivery carman was an interesting find. Although I don't think it's of evidential value in supporting the contention that he was the killer, it does show the thoroughness of the research behind the documentary - as does the photograph of the man himself in his old age. Many thanks, Christer.

Thanks a lot, Colin. I was just going to try and find myself a discount rope to hang myself with after having been thoroughly dissed by Caz. Your post arrived in the nick of time; cheap rope is easy to come by.

It could have gone either way.

Once again thank you, Colin!

The best,
Fisherman

[Fisherman]

Fisherman once told me that he had studied law. Didn't they teach him that the onus is on the prosecution?

It is all but impossible to prove innocence (Law 101) that's why juries find you not guilty.

Perhaps I never got around to that lesson...?

I know that it is impossible to prove innocence. Mrs Praters kitten could not be proven innocent. But thatīs not the point. The point is that many people ask how the criticism of the Lechmere theory looks like, which factors are important to look at if we wish to exonerate the man and so on.

Thatīs why I am collecting the bits and bobs, to put together a file on it that will cover what can be used to counter our hideous accusations with.

Something? Anything?

The best,
Fisherman

[TomTomKent]

A thread in which I would like for people to state what speaks against Lechmere as being the Whitechapel killer.

Here is the perfect opportunity to overwhelm me with good hard evidence that he could not have dun it, inklings why he would be innocent, cleverly thought-out scenarios that must exclude Charles the carman, convictions, expertise, experience - anything that tells us why Charles Allen Lechmere could or would not have been the Ripper.

Once it begins dropping in, I aim to process and list it, and at some stage, I will post the outcome.

Itīs a one-in-a-lifetime chance - who would have thought that I would present a thread by such a mouthwatering name...? Go for it and go hard!

Good luck and all the best,
Fisherman

Not wanting to argue for the sake of argument, or discount the discussion here out of hand, but isn't that a reversal of the burden of proof? I always thought the onus should be on you to convince me he was the Ripper, or a more likely candidate than other suspects? There is no need to out and out discredit the theory if it does not best explain the evidence.

[Sally]

Having considered over tea, I think that this is very simple.

Nothing to date has been put forward by Team Lechmere as an indication of Crossmere's guilt that either:

1. Can't be easily dismissed
2. Isn't wholly conjectural

I don't think the theory amounts to very much more than an imaginative construction. I think it makes a great story, but that's essentially what it is.

I am happy to be shown otherwise, of course - but that will take more than personal speculation.

[Tom_Wescott]

I'd suggest that Harriett Lilley's unbiased though largely misunderstood testimony MIGHT exonerate Charles Cross.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Bitsie]

Not really what you asked for but here are some questions and things I'd like clearer information on:

1) Why would Lechmere give the name Cross and not lie about his whole name?
2) Why did the murders stop? or Evidence that they didn't.
3) Motive/Psychology - any idea what happened with his family?
4) How do we know for sure that there was no blood at the scene when Paul arrived?
5) How do we know for sure how long it would take for blood to flow?
6) If Lechmere was innocent how soon before he arrived would the killer have had to have left the scene.
7) Did Paul speak to Mizen? Are you saying he didn't? (in the other thread)

Cheers!

P.S Isn't burden of proof a lovely get out of jail free card? It's a discussion group isn't it? Not a court. Sheesh!

[Amanda]

A test for you....

Hi Fisherman,

I think your Lechmere theory is worth putting my brain matter to work for.

Think I pretty much put my thoughts on the other thread but I would like to challenge you to a task:

For the documentary, you/Channel 5 managed to find a Pickford's specialist (and I can't imagine there are many of those in existence!), whom I presume has access to documents regarding past employees.
What I would like you to do is randomly select a dozen Pickford car men who worked there at the same time as Lechmere.
Next, take a map and circle the homes of said dozen men, then circle the Pickford's yard.
Lastly, I would like you to plot each man's walk to work (bearing in mind the C5 murder locations) and see how many could have taken the same route as Lechmere.

That's it, simple.
Amanda

[Hatchett]

Hi,

I think that is a very vaulable post, Amanda, considering that Whitechapel wasnt a large area, and from the number of horses, 300 I think it said on the programme, there must have been a lot of employees, all living within walking distance of the company premises, and quite possibly on the same route as Lechemere.

Best wishes.

[Harry D]

Last time I looked Crossmere was already off the hook.

[GUT]

Last time I looked Crossmere was already off the hook.

In fact as far as I can see he was never on it.