Lets get Lechmere off the hook!

[chubbs]

Serial killers don't just commit crimes, they evolve. They adapt, learn from mistakes, and refine their methods over time.

...

Look at Nichols wounds. Why weren't they as brutal as later victims? Why did the Ripper leave the scene without fully displaying his 'work'? Because he didn't have time. He was interrupted. The satisfaction he might have sought was cut short by reality crashing in, by the sudden need to cover his tracks.

Make yer mind up, Mr Baron. Which was it? Was he evolving or was he interrupted. Or are you just desperately trying to cover all the bases, to make your theory fit all eventualities?

[JeffHamm]

Lechmere was in the right place at the right time to 'find' Nichols.. and why he didn’t run into Paul earlier..

The first part yes. The 2nd part was explained by a few different posters (Paul admits that on this night he's running a bit late, and Cross/Lechmere has slowed and stopped, given what he sees. The obvious implications being that the two mean usually do not pass through Buck's Row at the same time, close but no cigar type thing.

Suddenly he was not in the right place and not at the right time!

But he's exactly where he would be around that time on most days? So it's not suddenly at all? How did you manage to draw such an invalid conclusion after what so many people have pointed out?

Incredible! It’s almost like he’s a black hole in the narrative, bending time and space to make sure everything conveniently fits!

It just happened!

The Baron

It's not incredible at all, he's where one would expect him to be. What's incredible is that this seems to be lost upon you because it's not that hard, and it has been clearly laid out, patiently and slow, a few times. Dear oh dear. Perhaps I'm the one being slow and you don't mean what I think you are saying.

- Jeff

[The Baron]

That's absolute rubbish.

You’ve been looking at this case for years, huh, John? Same suspects, same names. William Bury. Classic pick. Feels almost too easy, right? Everyone’s on board, nodding along, it all just fits. It’s that neat little package we’ve all been handed. You think you’ve got it. The pieces fall into place like some simple puzzle, and for a second, the whole thing just makes sense.

It’s 'too' easy, isn’t it? The perfect villain, like some story made just for us.. Comfortable, predictable. You’ve heard it all before, right?

What if I told you there's a twist you could never see coming? Something that completely shatters everything you think you know?


You ready? You sure?


BOOM

William Bury? Innocent.

And Lechmere? That 'innocent witness'... Yeah, he’s the Ripper.


I'll let you process the shock, don’t worry, it’s a lot to unpack. Take your time... I’m sure you’ll come around eventually!



The Baron

[John Wheat]

You’ve been looking at this case for years, huh, John? Same suspects, same names. William Bury. Classic pick. Feels almost too easy, right? Everyone’s on board, nodding along, it all just fits. It’s that neat little package we’ve all been handed. You think you’ve got it. The pieces fall into place like some simple puzzle, and for a second, the whole thing just makes sense.

It’s 'too' easy, isn’t it? The perfect villain, like some story made just for us.. Comfortable, predictable. You’ve heard it all before, right?

What if I told you there's a twist you could never see coming? Something that completely shatters everything you think you know?


You ready? You sure?


BOOM

William Bury? Innocent.

And Lechmere? That 'innocent witness'... Yeah, he’s the Ripper.


I'll let you process the shock, don’t worry, it’s a lot to unpack. Take your time... I’m sure you’ll come around eventually!



The Baron

Lechmere is a terrible suspect and in fact Bury may well have been the Ripper.

[Herlock Sholmes]

We have to allow that Cross was exceptional though Jeff. And not just exception…he appears to have been entirely unique.

In the entire history of serial murder, with all of those thousands of people who discovered those thousands of poor victims outdoors, not a single, solitary one of them ever turned out to be the killer. Cross is a complete one off. And as we all know Jeff, we are on the very thinnest of thin ice if we rely on an explanation which requires something entirely unique.

And on top of that…if that wasn’t enough…no one can name a single example…not one…of a serial killer murdering and mutilating a victim just 20 minutes or so before he was due at work.

So Cross wouldn’t have to have been entirely unique he’d have had to have been doubly unique.

You’re my ‘stats man’ Jeff…care to put odds on that one? And how much of your ‘hard earned’ would you put on it being the case?

PS..and if there’s a Mrs Hamm and she had found out that you had put money on it what method would she have used to kill you?

[Herlock Sholmes]

Lechmere is a terrible suspect and in fact Bury may well have been the Ripper.

If Cross was the ripper John at least we can eliminate Kosminski and the others

I mean, Bury couldn’t have been the killer really because he has too much going for him..

Right age, local man, childhood trauma, early criminal behaviour, drunkard, consorted with prostitutes, known to be violent to women, carried a knife, murdered and mutilated a woman and the murders stopped when he left London. Who would be suspicious of all that when you have…family man, no history of violence, no connection to prostitutes, no insanity, no examples of violence, lived a long and fruitful life, continued to provide well for his family and like thousands of others throughout history…found a body on his way to work.

[The Baron]

Lechmere is a terrible suspect and in fact Bury may well have been the Ripper.

That’s not an argument, John. That’s denial dressed up as confidence.


Sit down, breathe, and let the truth do its work. It’ll break through eventually... just try not to fight it too hard. Reality has a way of winning in the end.



The Baron

[Geddy2112]

Sit down, breathe, and let the truth do its work. It’ll break through eventually...

Stop avoiding people's questions it's counter productive and rather rude.

1) What is the truth that shows up Charles Allen Cross was Jack The Ripper?

Now instead of the flowery copy and pasted fantasy posts you are coming up with, stand up for convictions and answer some questions. Then we can see where we are at.

[Fiver]

Whoa, look who’s back! I was getting worried there for a
second starting to think maybe you’d been kidnapped by a band of rogue squirrels or something..


Missed your usual ‘That’s rubbish’.. honestly, my posts felt so empty without it!



The Baron

All of your posts have been empty - they don't just ignore, they contradict the evidence.

[Fiver]

Make yer mind up, Mr Baron. Which was it? Was he evolving or was he interrupted. Or are you just desperately trying to cover all the bases, to make your theory fit all eventualities?

It's standard Lechmerian Schrodinger's suspect - have him be two contradictory things at the same time to prop up the theory and hope that no one notices the contradiction..

[Fiver]

What if I told you there's a twist you could never see coming? Something that completely shatters everything you think you know?

You ready? You sure?

BOOM

William Bury? Innocent.

And Lechmere? That 'innocent witness'... Yeah, he’s the Ripper.

I'll let you process the shock, don’t worry, it’s a lot to unpack. Take your time... I’m sure you’ll come around eventually!


The Baron

Twists are quite popular in fiction. A good twist is "I didn't see that coming." A bad twist is "Where did that come from?"

Your flowery language doesn't hide the fact that you have just repackaged the standard Lechmerian nonsense. You have yet to provide any evidence against Charles Cross. Most of your posts deliberately ignore, and in many cases, directly contradict the evidence.

* There is no physical evidence against Cross.
* There is no eyewitness evidence against Cross.
* There is no evidence of violence or criminal behavior by Cross.
* Cross had no knowledge of anatomy.
* The idea of hiding bloodstained clothing and trophy organs in a house full of small children is laughable.
* The timing of the Chapman, Stride, and Eddowes murders make it wildly unlikely that Cross killed them.
* Cross lived for over three decades after the murders ended.

[chubbs]

If Cross was the ripper John at least we can eliminate Kosminski and the others

I mean, Bury couldn’t have been the killer really because he has too much going for him..

Right age, local man, childhood trauma, early criminal behaviour, drunkard, consorted with prostitutes, known to be violent to women, carried a knife, murdered and mutilated a woman and the murders stopped when he left London. Who would be suspicious of all that when you have…family man, no history of violence, no connection to prostitutes, no insanity, no examples of violence, lived a long and fruitful life, continued to provide well for his family and like thousands of others throughout history…found a body on his way to work.

...not forgetting that he'd been given the clap by these low-life prostitutes and he'd passed it onto his wife. That really counts him out. Why on earth would an evil character like Bury want to get revenge on the people he blamed for giving him the bad disease? I dare say he forgave them and prayed for them daily.

[John Wheat]

That’s not an argument, John. That’s denial dressed up as confidence.


Sit down, breathe, and let the truth do its work. It’ll break through eventually... just try not to fight it too hard. Reality has a way of winning in the end.



The Baron

There is no denial. Bury could have been the Ripper. Lechmere wasn't.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Twists are quite popular in fiction. A good twist is "I didn't see that coming." A bad twist is "Where did that come from?"

Your flowery language doesn't hide the fact that you have just repackaged the standard Lechmerian nonsense. You have yet to provide any evidence against Charles Cross. Most of your posts deliberately ignore, and in many cases, directly contradict the evidence.

* There is no physical evidence against Cross.
* There is no eyewitness evidence against Cross.
* There is no evidence of violence or criminal behavior by Cross.
* Cross had no knowledge of anatomy.
* The idea of hiding bloodstained clothing and trophy organs in a house full of small children is laughable.
* The timing of the Chapman, Stride, and Eddowes murders make it wildly unlikely that Cross killed them.
* Cross lived for over three decades after the murders ended.

Well summed up Fiver.

Cross is a big zero as a suspect. Someone that requires invention and manipulation to be made to ‘look’ suspicious.

[Herlock Sholmes]

...not forgetting that he'd been given the clap by these low-life prostitutes and he'd passed it onto his wife. That really counts him out. Why on earth would an evil character like Bury want to get revenge on the people he blamed for giving him the bad disease? I dare say he forgave them and prayed for them daily.

Good point Chubbs. It’s amazing isn’t it that someone could go for Cross before Bury. As I’ve said before, it’s like saying “Mohammed Ali wasn’t the greatest heavyweight ever…Frank Bruno was.”