Lechmere-Cross bye bye

[David Orsam]

The procedure you are discussing with David, or trying to discuss, since David is unclear

Oh very good Pierre, your put downs are absolutely sensational.

David has done no data collecting for Lechmere as far as I know.

That just shows what little you know Pierre because I have collected data on this issue, having timed the walk from Doveton Street to Bucks Row at a number of different walking speeds.

So ask him what his methods are.

Has David performed an internal and external source criticism?
Has David analysed all the sources systematically?
What sorts of perspectives, classifications and operationalisations of concepts from the sources is David using for his analysis?

Are you incapable of asking me these stupid and meaningless questions yourself then?

[Fisherman]

You seem to me to be rambling now Fisherman, in a pretty incomprehensible way. Just thought you should know.

Yeah, just run - don´t face the issue. Wait - where have I heard that before...?

[Fisherman]

Hi Fisherman,

The procedure you are discussing with David, or trying to discuss, since David is unclear, is a normal scientific procedure and there are real words for it.

What you have done, researching Lechmere, is:

1. Data collecting (data for Lechmere and for the murders)
2. Using explicit and systematic methods for data analysis (I hope)
3. Interpretation(s) of the data

David has done no data collecting for Lechmere as far as I know.

And he is trying to give everyone here the impression that he is offering another interpretation - which he is not, since he has not used any explicit and systematic method(s) for analysis of your data.

So ask him what his methods are.

Has David performed an internal and external source criticism?
Has David analysed all the sources systematically?
What sorts of perspectives, classifications and operationalisations of concepts from the sources is David using for his analysis?

And so on and so forth.

He must have used those to get to his "results".

I do not believe that Lechmere was Jack the Ripper but I believe that academic thinking can help us find Jack the Ripper.

Regards, Pierre

Thanks for the advice, but the lesser time I spend on David, the better.

[David Orsam]

Thanks for the advice, but the lesser time I spend on David, the better.

The better for you, for sure. Very revealing Fisherman: because I am asking you questions which are too difficult for you to answer honestly, no doubt.

[Columbo]

Are we gonna get back to the other murders soon?

Columbo

[Columbo]

Oh very good Pierre, your put downs are absolutely sensational.



That just shows what little you know Pierre because I have collected data on this issue, having timed the walk from Doveton Street to Bucks Row at a number of different walking speeds.



Are you incapable of asking me these stupid and meaningless questions yourself then?

Do you have your data posted somewhere? I'm seriously asking, not joking around. I'd like to see a comparison.

Columbo

[Columbo]

Has anyone else collected data onsite like Fisherman and David?

Columbo

[Abby Normal]

Hi Abby,

Cross running late for work comes from the inquest evidence of Cross reported in the Daily Telegraph when the coroner asked him if the other man (Paul) told him who he was, to which Cross replied:

"No, sir; he merely said that he would have fetched a policeman, only he was behind time. I was behind time myself."

So this is certainly referring to a point in time after stopping to examine the body and possibly referring to a conversation between the two of them as they continued to walk for work and were discussing who should go and look for the policeman. The very fact of stopping to look at the body could have knocked Cross off his timetable and now made him late for work.

Consequences? Well if he had left reasonably on time, say shortly after 3.30, it would mean he would not necessarily have been walking quickly. He might have been strolling to work but the delay caused by finding the body made him late. In other words, the 7 minutes that Fisherman has timed the walk from Doveton Street to Bucks Row might have been 8 or 9 minutes.

It should be noted incidentally that, contrary to what was stated in the TV documentary, the route from Doveton Street to Bucks Row is not the same today as it was in 1888 so timings cannot be made with any degree of certainty. And it would only have needed Cross to be delayed by something like having to tie his shoelace or waiting to cross the road until some carriages had passed down the street and a whole minute or two could easily have got swallowed up.

Thank you David

[Abby Normal]

I'm sure Fish will ask! He has to...

Well it dosnt look like he will, according to the last few posts.

so please pray tell!!!

[David Orsam]

Do you have your data posted somewhere? I'm seriously asking, not joking around. I'd like to see a comparison.

Yes, the thread is here Columbo:

http://forum.casebook.org/showthread.php?t=8558

You need to read both #1 and #16 because I did two separate exercises having initially been misled by the TV documentary which said "the street layout is the same now as it was over a century ago". It turns out it isn't!

[David Orsam]

Has anyone else collected data onsite like Fisherman and David?

It should be said that I'm the only one who has published the various routes taken when timing the walk. I've never seen Fisherman's route published.

[David Orsam]

Well it dosnt look like he will, according to the last few posts.

so please pray tell!!!

He might reflect on his attitude overnight and ask me tomorrow!

It's not like me to withhold information but, having said that, it's been hiding in plain sight on this forum for over a year. I'm fairly sure Fish hasn't noticed it otherwise he would have surely said something given that it relates to the timing issue.

[David Orsam]

One of my favourite quotes from the TV documentary is this: After Christer (Fish) said "we’ve got a discrepancy of about 9 minutes or something like that", Andy Griffiths responded by saying "Which was a big difference in that time".

Like 9 minutes was a lot longer than it is today!!! What a very strange remark!

[Columbo]

Yes, the thread is here Columbo:

http://forum.casebook.org/showthread.php?t=8558

You need to read both #1 and #16 because I did two separate exercises having initially been misled by the TV documentary which said "the street layout is the same now as it was over a century ago". It turns out it isn't!

Excellent! Thank you.

I think this type of research gives those of us who live elsewhere a better perspective.

Columbo

[David Orsam]

Excellent! Thank you.

I think this type of research gives those of us who live elsewhere a better perspective.

It's very difficult to do because everyone naturally walks at different speeds. The worry is that you are adding bias to the walk because if you do it fast you know it's going to be a short time whereas if you do it slow, how slow do you go and are you consciously trying to get the walking time up towards 10 minutes? The difference between very fast and very slow over the distance literally makes a difference of minutes so I don't think it's really possible to fix on one time of 7 minutes and say that is the time it must have taken.