So Cross the Ripper got involved in the investigation. Why did he stop?

[Pierre]

that's not nice. Poetic, but not nice. Trevor does seem to have the air of a grumpy old man who's been proven wrong and can't handle it. Feighenbaum was a big red herring and he can't stand the fact there is another person who found a suspect that is more plausible. I didn't say Cross did it, but he is certainly more plausible then Feighenbaum, and the ex-cop who should know better can't stand it.

Columbo

Lechmere is not more plausible. There is only sparse sources for the murder of Polly Nichols and the sources are not reliable.

The Feigenbaum theory is not specific enough - and the Lechmere theory is too wide given the sources.

There is a clear gap between the sources and the theoretical framework in both these theories.

Just because there are no better theories - if one thinks so - does not mean that these theories are good enough.

Anyway, the vampire was knocking at my window too. I did invite him in. But he will not stay for long.

Kind regards, Pierre

[Harry D]

Personally, I think it's a disgrace that a dead man's memory has been dragged through the mud on the flimsiest of circumstantial evidence.
At least Kos, Druitt & Tumblety were contemporary suspects... and Bury, J. Kelly & Klosowski were proven murderers.

[Fisherman]

Personally, I think it's a disgrace that a dead man's memory has been dragged through the mud on the flimsiest of circumstantial evidence.
At least Kos, Druitt & Tumblety were contemporary suspects... and Bury, J. Kelly & Klosowski were proven murderers.

Yes, But then again, you are such a compassionate guy.

Me, I am a cynic. I see through people. And I really disrespect hipocrites.

So, since the rock bottom has been probed, it´s time to call it a night.

[Trevor Marriott]

Who knows? Trevor is not one to follow any sort of common logic, so anything can happen.

I am wondering about that or those questions he said I was unable to answer; he seems to have forgotten all about it...?

Not questions statements of facts.

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Trevor Marriott]

It seems that you're the victim of a lot of jealousy from Trevor. Keep pushing though back!

Columbo

Well it seems Fisherman has at least one other deluded poster to support his fantasy !

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Trevor Marriott]

Are you gonna lay him right next to feighenbaum?

Not a chance, at least Feigenbaum is a genuine suspect. He did kill, and he did carry a long knife, which he used to kill, and he can be linked to London at the time of the murders. He was even seen to kill, now that`s even better than being found near a "Freshly killed body"

As I dont support the views that there was ever a singular JTR, and that all the victims were killed by the same hand, it is reasonable to believe that he may have been involved in one or some of the murders,

Now before you continue to gob off further, may I suggest you buy a copy of my book and then you will be more informed about Feigenbaum than you are as we speak. Here is the link to help you find it.

There is also a chapter on the dissemination of the Lechmere theory in full.

http://www.trevormarriott.co.uk/?page_id=191

[Columbo]

Not a chance, at least Feigenbaum is a genuine suspect. He did kill, and he did carry a long knife, which he used to kill, and he can be linked to London at the time of the murders. He was even seen to kill, now that`s even better than being found near a "Freshly killed body"

As I dont support the views that there was ever a singular JTR, and that all the victims were killed by the same hand, it is reasonable to believe that he may have been involved in one or some of the murders,

Now before you continue to gob off further, may I suggest you buy a copy of my book and then you will be more informed about Feigenbaum than you are as we speak. Here is the link to help you find it.

There is also a chapter on the dissemination of the Lechmere theory in full.

http://www.trevormarriott.co.uk/?page_id=191

Gob off?

Anyway I won't get into a Feigenbaum argument because I really have no opinion or interest in him, just as I don't have an opinion on Lechmere being JTR.

I don't have a favorite suspect, I just look at the most viable ones from the group and try to find out more about them.

I examined the info against Feigenbaum and found it sorely lacking in evidence. Just alot of conjecture. Much like all the other suspects. So he's not on my radar at the moment.

But here's something you may not have considered: How come all of the suspects who were caught or confessed to murder, i.e. Feigenbuam, Bury, Kelly, Deeming etc, none of them confessed to the Whitechapel murders?
They confess to everything else, why not that?

Because they didn't do it.

Did lechmere do it? I don't know.

Was he on site at one of the murders? Yes

Does he have descrepancies in his story? Absolutely. Good ones too.

So for now he's on my radar.

I don't read JTR books based exclusively on one suspect. It's a general waste of time as the author is usually biased and not always forthcoming with all the information. I'll check it out none the less to see if it's worth my money.

I'll catch you on the Feigenbaum threads when I revisit him later.

Columbo

[Columbo]

Personally, I think it's a disgrace that a dead man's memory has been dragged through the mud on the flimsiest of circumstantial evidence.
At least Kos, Druitt & Tumblety were contemporary suspects... and Bury, J. Kelly & Klosowski were proven murderers.

It's no different. They were only suspects and only one can be guilty. So we're all essentially dragging all these names through the mud, no matter if they killed before or not.

Columbo

[GUT]

It's no different. They were only suspects and only one can be guilty. So we're all essentially dragging all these names through the mud, no matter if they killed before or not.

Columbo

More than one can be guilty if they weren't all killed by one hand.

[drstrange169]

RE Emily Lechmere

You KNOW it could happen?
Wow.
Well, I can only disagree. I am very certain that it never happened.

We were talking about the possibility of a sibling going public about a family killer.
I cited one case, Columbo cited another.

You wrong pure and simple.

And that´s mainly because Emily Lechmere had been dead for around twenty years in 1888. She died six months earlier than Thomas Cross.

Oh dear! This is an unpleasant turn of events.

It seems you have been deliberately misleading the list.

You made no mention that she was dead in your Post #83. Here it is.

So are you suggesting that Emily Lechmere would give away her own brother?
Do you really think that there is even an off chance that such a thing could happen? It would be truly priceless!

I was responding in good faith that you were being honest with me. Why didn’t you mention her death in that post instead of implying she was still alive?

“So are you suggesting that Emily Lechmere would give away her own brother? “

Did anyone else on the list understand this sentence to mean she was dead?

As for whether it is my week or not, I leave that for others to decide. All I can say is that it certainly does not seem to be yours!

Then again, when IS it your week...?

You are right, it’s never my week when I’ve been deceived. I find no joy in it whatsoever.

[drstrange169]

Hello Azarna.

The murders were very big news. Elizabeth Cross surely must have heard about the murder at some point. It only requires part of the story for her to think "oh, a murder in Buck's Row at just the time Charles must have been going by on his way to work, I wonder if he saw anything"... and ask him.
Would not friends or neighbours have also thought of this too?...

Elizabeth may have learnt to read by 1888 but we don’t know for sure. We do know her children went to school. Elizabeth, Thomas and George would have been 14, 11 and 9 respectively, old enough to read, old enough for classmates and their parents to read.

[drstrange169]

One thing I forgot to mention about Elizabeth Lechmere ...

Not only did she marry Mrs. Cross's son.
Not only did she share a house 11 MaryAnn Street, with Mrs Cross.

Thomas Cross also lived and died at 11 MaryAnn Street.
We know the neighbours knew them because it was a Margret Low of 14 MaryAnn Street who reported his death.

It was only 7 months after Thomas's death that Charles and Elizabeth married.
As I noted before, Charles and Elizabeth would have known each other prior to the wedding. It is entirely possible that Elizabeth met Thomas Cross at some stage. Even if she didn't, his death was recent enough to have come up in conversation with the family or neighbours at some stage.

[Columbo]

There is also a chapter on the dissemination of the Lechmere theory in full.

http://www.trevormarriott.co.uk/?page_id=191

My mistake. This is a link to your latest book, which looks interesting.

A whole chapter on Lechmere alone?

Columbo

[harry]

Normally a person does not come under suspicion,untill a statement by that person is given,and that statement assessed.Cross made a statement under oath.He gives an innocent account of his presence in Bucks Row,and no evidence of an incriminating nature was,or has been found, that connected Cross to the killing of Nichols.He was never considered a suspect.He shouldn't be now,at least,not on the information that he used the name Cross,a name he was entitled to use.

[Fisherman]

We were talking about the possibility of a sibling going public about a family killer.
I cited one case, Columbo cited another.

You wrong pure and simple.




Oh dear! This is an unpleasant turn of events.

It seems you have been deliberately misleading the list.

You made no mention that she was dead in your Post #83. Here it is.
I was responding in good faith that you were being honest with me. Why didn’t you mention her death in that post instead of implying she was still alive?

Did anyone else on the list understand this sentence to mean she was dead?


You are right, it’s never my week when I’ve been deceived. I find no joy in it whatsoever.

Deceived? It was YOU who wrote about how Emily Lechmere would be a risk for Charles. It was YOU who were misinformed. It was YOU who brought her up.

I told you, plain and simple, that it would be truly priceless if she had turned her brother in.

I have no responsibility to inform you about the facts of the case. And when you present matters like this on account of ignorance on your part, I don´t think that you should waste too much breath about calling me deceptive.

You have been factually wrong before. You have placed Lechmere dozens of yards away from the body, and you have done so by cutting away the relevant parts of a quote.

If you truly want to discuss deception, you may want to start there. Being underinformed about the case facts is nothing you should blame me for.