Lechmere-Cross bye bye

[Columbo]

Yes, and Lechmere wasn't, as someone else has stated in this thread, "caught over the body"-- he was standing in the street looking at it, according to Paul, who came along on his way to work.

Paul, aware of the area's bad name for muggings, tried to step around Lechmere, who stopped him and asked him to look at the woman, which is when they BOTH were "over the body."

I don't know about anyone else, but when I see something unexpected when I'm out walking, I stop still and stare at it.

My mistake. I did say caught over the body. I apologize for the wording.

[Fisherman]

It comes to something when one has to single one's self out.

Carry on, Fish.

Cheers

Chris

I will, Chris!

[ChrisGeorge]

Let me may say this: Here and elsewhere, I don't bother with any thread that descends into personal name calling which happens all too often on the forums. I am not singling you out, Fish. It's just that too frequently a thread becomes poisoned and useless for constructive discussion.

Best regards

Chris

I´m not singling me out either. I´d be very disappointed with myself for being unfair if I did.

I could single others out, though. But I won´t. It is what it is, and sometimes people will see the madness of it all, the underlying reasons included.
That just happened, as a matter of fact. And guess what happens...? Anyone can see for themselves.

It comes to something when one has to single one's self out.

Carry on, Fish.

Cheers

Chris

[Fisherman]

Yes, and Lechmere wasn't, as someone else has stated in this thread, "caught over the body"-- he was standing in the street looking at it, according to Paul, who came along on his way to work.

Paul, aware of the area's bad name for muggings, tried to step around Lechmere, who stopped him and asked him to look at the woman, which is when they BOTH were "over the body."

I don't know about anyone else, but when I see something unexpected when I'm out walking, I stop still and stare at it.

Me too. So we both know how that works. The thing is, if Lechmere ALSO knew, and was the killer, then that knowledge would be very useful to take advantage of.

You need to weigh ALL the factors in. When I speak to the police, I call myself by my registered, correct name, for example. I don´t know about you, but there you are.

[Fisherman]

Let me may say this: Here and elsewhere, I don't bother with any thread that descends into personal name calling which happens all too often on the forums. I am not singling you out, Fish. It's just that too frequently a thread becomes poisoned and useless for constructive discussion.

Best regards

Chris

I´m not singling me out either. I´d be very disappointed with myself for being unfair if I did.

I could single others out, though. But I won´t. It is what it is, and sometimes people will see the madness of it all, the underlying reasons included.
That just happened, as a matter of fact. And guess what happens...? Anyone can see for themselves.

[ChrisGeorge]

I would enjoy a more sane debate a lot more. If I may be so bold as to myself express a view on what I think...?

Let me may say this: Here and elsewhere, I don't bother with any thread that descends into personal name calling which happens all too often on the forums. I am not singling you out, Fish. It's just that too frequently a thread becomes poisoned and useless for constructive discussion.

Best regards

Chris

[Fisherman]

Fish and Ed actually enjoy these sparring bouts. There is no cruelty involved - except perhaps to the amazing quantities of cod which Ed consumes at dinner time.

I would enjoy a more sane debate a lot more. If I may be so bold as to myself express a view on what I think...?

And, of course, Edward enjoyed the debating climate out here so much as to leave Casebook.

[Robert]

Fish and Ed actually enjoy these sparring bouts. There is no cruelty involved - except perhaps to the amazing quantities of cod which Ed consumes at dinner time.

[caz]

Back to Lechmere...
Being alone with the body when it was recently killed is pretty monumental.

Happens pretty much every time a person is killed and left on a public street in a busy town to be found by the next person to come along. The finder will have 'been alone' with the body, whether anyone else sees them there or not.

And, he stated he did not see anybody near the body even though she was reportedly still bleeding.

Too bad no bleeding was reported by Paul when he was with Lechmere. If guilty, Lechmere could easily have claimed to see or hear someone else but chose to tell the truth.

...since Lechmere claimed he saw no one, it would again point directly at Lechmere.

Only if you believe the ripper would have been daft enough to risk incriminating himself so needlessly.

...And I've certainly never known anyone (or even known anyone who's known anyone) who's discovered any dead body, much less a still-warm and bleeding dead body.

Most dead bodies get discovered by someone at some point - and very quickly when left in a public street just as people are on their way to work. Too bad Paul - the only witness with Lechmere during the crucial time - described the body as cold and saw no bleeding. Too bad the first person to see any blood or injuries was PC Neil, making it impossible to know whether the actual murder occurred before, during or after Lechmere's presence.

Love,

Caz
X

[ChrisGeorge]

Like I said, I'm new. But, am I getting this right?

All you well-informed, superior intellect group are standing in a circle, openly teasing and laughing at the fat kid on the playground who happens to stand by his belief that Lechmere is likely the killer and you're getting super duper mad and therefore more sarcastic and snitty because he won't admit he's just the dumb old fat kid who believes in a theory the lot of you think has now become too stupid to even talk about?

You gang of people seem to use the argument that you have finally resorted to ridicule and laughing at him because he's just so stubborn and you've been driven to this level because HE'S just shouldn't believe in his conclusions so much and he's just so ridiculous and won't admit it. Wow.

I still don't know who super-intellectual Pierre offers up as the killer, but I know who he knows isn't the killer. The final blow for Lechmere NOT being the killer seems to be "nobody agrees with you anyway! So nah!"

Lechmere has so many factors pointing to him that ANY investigation into the JtR case is stopped in its tracks until it can rule him out. The idea that you are so willing to dismiss each and every point of the theory (one after another) simply because it could be some other vague explanation is downright weird.

Using the name Cross could very well have been a quick decision that he wanted to get the benefits of being close to a cop in a world where cops trust their own and he's not known at all. About 100 times in my life I've made a split-second decision which, upon later pondering, I've realized was a stupid decision and could've been much worse for me than it ultimately was.

Lechmere always acted as though he had little to hide. That does not point to his innocence. True, that Lechmere's family and professional life cannot necessarily support him as the killer. But, other than this board's clear mob mentality that the Lechmere theory is laughably stoopid, I'm still not seeing any significant points to show he can confidently be ruled out.

As I've said before, I have no interest in one suspect being proven over another. I still don't know who I believe is the killer, only that ruling Lechmere out is not that obvious.

Hi there

Please dial your hostility down a few notches, if you would. Although we have a few people here who can get hot under the collar, most of us don't have a suspect and are just trying to look at the "evidence" -- such as it is, pretty poor, as you probably already realize. I for one don't have a suspect except to say that the Ripper was more likely to have been a local man than not. On the other hand, I don't think that Lechmere makes a good candidate although some are adamant that he did the murders. The evidence is lacking that says he committed the crimes, as it is for all the other suspects as well. Stick a pin in the pinboard, but first turn round three times, and make your best guess. That's the way it is, and anyone who has studied the crimes should be aware of that situation.

Best regards

Chris

[caz]

Like I said, I'm new. But, am I getting this right?

All you well-informed, superior intellect group are standing in a circle, openly teasing and laughing at the fat kid on the playground who happens to stand by his belief that Lechmere is likely the killer and you're getting super duper mad and therefore more sarcastic and snitty because he won't admit he's just the dumb old fat kid who believes in a theory the lot of you think has now become too stupid to even talk about?

I don't think that's quite right, CS. Christer is not dumb, old or fat. That's me, that is. And I for one would not be admitted to any group professing to have a superior intellect.

I also think you'll find Christer is extremely competent at dishing out as much as he gets, and more on many occasions.

Love,

Caz
X

[Pcdunn]

Found the body, not caught over the body

What most can agree on is that he found the body.

Yes, and Lechmere wasn't, as someone else has stated in this thread, "caught over the body"-- he was standing in the street looking at it, according to Paul, who came along on his way to work.

Paul, aware of the area's bad name for muggings, tried to step around Lechmere, who stopped him and asked him to look at the woman, which is when they BOTH were "over the body."

I don't know about anyone else, but when I see something unexpected when I'm out walking, I stop still and stare at it.

[drstrange169]

>>If direct physical evidence is what thread posters have as a standard of proof, then it seems pointless to engage in discussions at all. <<

Wouldn't that be wonderful?

To some of us the appeal is not in, being the one who reveals the ripper.
It is rather in learning about the people and there lives, free from spin.
To that end there are some fantastic researchers here.

[drstrange169]

>>While defending Lechmere against a perceived character smear campaign seems a noble enough stated endeavor<<

Are the italics an indication that you are "ridiculing" my post;-)

If you re-read my post, you will find I was not referring to any "percieved character smear" but, rather a very real and verifiable one.

I don't see wild accusations flying around that aren't backed up, however circumstantially.

Keep looking.


If the posters on this thread don't rule Lechmere out ... they clearly deny the theory that focuses on him

Correct.


>>... and flat out ridicule the theorist who is willing to stick to that belief.<<

Could you cite the ridicule you are referring to? It's difficult to debater specifically otherwise.

[GUT]

I have to agree with this. If you look at the entire Cross/Lechmere theory, most of what Mr. Holmgrem says would put Charles Cross at the very top of the suspect list only because he was caught over the body. I believe we can all agree that Cross being with the body is a pretty absolute fact.

I do agree that there is probably a lot of information missing and a lot of UN-substantiated information as well. I remember Martin Fido, in a documentary saying Charles Cross jumped into the shadows when Robert Paul came by and this made Paul suspicious. I believe this was in a Timewatch episode. Is that true? what was Fido's source? I don't know but that made me first suspicious about Cross.

Cross is also a more substantial suspect then Lewis Carrol, William Gull, Walter Sickert, Tumblety, Eddie, Cream or Chapman. Why? because he was alone with the body of the first victim. Was he JTR? Unknown, but he's still a great suspect.

What most can agree on is that he found the body.