Lets get Lechmere off the hook!

[Geddy2112]

The same Paul whose acute hearing would have noticed the sound of footsteps in the night above the sound of his own footsteps as he walked down the street. Deaf as a post when it comes to two people talking a few feet away.
Or at we already at the point where the argument has reached the inevitable point where; "No one said he DIDN'T lead Mizen off down a sidestreet to talk in private, so you need to prove hat he DIDN'T do that!"

The theory is rather incredible when you actually sit back and think about it. The cherry picking of evidence and manipulation of the evidence is remarkable. One coincidence too many eh?

[Geddy2112]

Then again, it was never on in the first place because Christer was absolutely, 100% correct…when he said:

“No, Cross is not a very good suggestion as the Ripper. To begin with, at the inquest Cross stated that he heard the approaching footsteps of Paul from around forty yards away - but still waited for him to come up to the spot where Nichols lay. It was pitch dark - so dark that the two men did not see the blood running from her neck - and there must have been every chance to leave the scene unseen had he been the Ripper.

Also, if he WAS the Ripper, it would be a very strange thing to go looking for a policeman carrying the knife that killed Nichols on his person - for it was not found at the murder site.”

I think that we can safely write off Cross as a contender.

We certainly can.

That is the issue. I think it's admirable someone can change their mind when new evidence comes along, great. However the reasons Holmgren gave for Cross NOT being the Ripper are exactly then are they are today. So it begs the question why did he change his mind? *cough* book sales... *cough*