Lets get Lechmere off the hook!

[rjpalmer]

And here we see how even the shaky possibility that Chapman might have been killed at later time than expected doesn't in any way, form, or shape distract from the Lechmere theory.

Of course, it does!! These idle speculations completely undermine the original theory and turn it to wish-washy mush, exposing its inherent weakness.

I'm not an advocate of the Lechmere theory, but at least Ed Stow had a coherent theoretical framework. The murders were allegedly being committed between 3:30 and 4:00 a.m along Lechmere's route to work. Tabram, Nichols, Chapman, Kelly. It was "one coincidence too many."

If you are now arguing, "Well, in truth, we have no idea when he left for work on any given day, or even if he worked that day. On the day Chapman died he may have left at 5:10 a.m. instead of 3.30"

then how does it not undermine Ed's theory and weaken it?

If you're so willing to abandon the foundation of the theory whenever it becomes convenient, why suspect Lechmere in the first place?

At least Christer Holmgren realized the weakness of this scattergun approach, which is why he argued (not very persuasively, in my opinion) that Chapman had tied within the 'schedule.'

If Chapman was murdered between 3:45 and 4:00, then John Ricardson is lying, and he becomes the prime suspect in that murder. We know the police quietly investigated him.

[Herlock Sholmes]

The Joke Suspect.


> Cross had a simple, risk-free escape which he insanely rejected in favour of the huge and blatantly obvious-to-all risks involved in loitering around to meet a complete stranger who he had absolutely no influence over - On this point alone we can dismiss Cross as a suspect.

> There is absolutely no way that Cross could have walked from the body to the middle of the road with even the minutest level of confidence that the approaching stranger hadn’t seen him doing it. If he had been seen, and he said that he hadn’t been near to the body he would have been signing his own death warrant - Cross would have had to have been stupid or entirely careless of his own safety to have done this. Hardly a good start for a prospective serial killer and hardly the outlook of a man who evaded capture (which surely can’t be put down entirely to luck)

> We cannot name a single example in the entire history of crime of the witness who finds the corpse of his victim outdoors who turned out to have been the serial killer himself - This makes the chances of Cross being the killer about on a par with it being fairy on a unicorn. This point alone kicks this silly ‘suspect’ way out into the long grass of unlikelihood.

> The witness evidence, combined with the 100% certain fact that methods used at the time for judging ToD were unreliable, combine to the inescapable conclusion that Chapman was killed at around 5.30. That Cross killed 90 minutes into his shift is risible and shouldn’t be given a minutes consideration - This again makes Cross unlikely in the extreme as the killer of Annie Chapman.

> No suspect in the history of Ripperology has had so many examples of dishonesty, evidence manipulation, deliberate editing, barking mad ‘connections’ made and startling contortions of the English language been made (plus a propaganda machine in action) to try and shoehorn this innocent man into the role - No valid suspect would require this level ‘assistance.’ Clear evidence of the pathetic weakness of his joke suspecthood.

> The idea that Cross killed and mutilated a woman on his regular route to work, at his regular time of being there, leaving him less than 20 minutes to potentially clean up and get to work on time is a suggestion that can’t be proposed in seriousness - Yet another thing that dumps this pathetic suspect into the unlikely bin and pushes it of toward the horizon.

> Despite the constant cries of ‘he was there,’ we have to acknowledge that the police at the time also knew that he was there. And they knew that he was near to the body before Paul got there. As far as we know they didn’t have the slightest interest in him as a suspect - the police do get things right sometimes.

> Most suspects have something going for them: violence, suspected by the police, insanity, issues with women, issues with or a connection to prostitutes, and explanation for the cessation of the murders, a confession, suspicious behaviour, even a suspect like Gull can be credited with medical/anatomical knowledge - remarkably the feeble suspect Cross has none of these. Not one…and yet he’s a suspect, apparently. How? Oh yes, he was there, he was there, he was there. After all, no one has ever innocently found a body before have they?


Way past time to dump this embarrassment of a suspect.

[The Baron]

If you're so willing to abandon the foundation of the theory whenever it becomes convenient, why suspect Lechmere in the first place?

What an argument! I hope no one from the diary thread is reading this, Let's keep you guessing!



The Baron