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

[Trevor Marriott]

I find it interesting that Trevor says that a "simple carman" could not be the killer.

Apparently, though, a simple sailor could...?

I am looking forward to the explanation.

Typical smart arse journalistic statement ! with the facts wrong again. I used the words "outfoxed the police"

The simple sailor did not have any contact with the police, so no reason for him to become involved with the police, or to mislead them.

But of course it has been proven that Lechmere did not mislead the police, or the coroner, and therefore was never put under suspicion, and never put under surveillance, and never ever mentioned again.

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Columbo]

Seems to have you nailed

No doubt!

Columbo

[Columbo]

I find it interesting that Trevor says that a "simple carman" could not be the killer.

Apparently, though, a simple sailor could...?

I am looking forward to the explanation.

I wouldn't hold my breath for any revelations from heaven. We're gonna get in-depth on Trevors "dissemination of Lechmere" real soon.

Columbo

[Columbo]

Typical smart arse journalistic statement ! with the facts wrong again. I used the words "outfoxed the police"

The simple sailor did not have any contact with the police, so no reason for him to become involved with the police, or to mislead them.

But of course it has been proven that Lechmere did not mislead the police, or the coroner, and therefore was never put under suspicion, and never put under surveillance, and never ever mentioned again.

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

Has it been proven? Where's your proof? Again there is no proof, because if there was we wouldn't have this suspect.

Columbo

[Trevor Marriott]

Has it been proven? Where's your proof? Again there is no proof, because if there was we wouldn't have this suspect.

Columbo

He shouldn't even be regarded as a suspect in or after 1888,

So is there a need to now prove he wasn't regarded as one ?

This man has been suggested as being a suspect without any historical proof to justify that label.

What has been put forward to now suggest he could be a suspect is flawed, and has proven to be so. Now as well as reading up on Feigenbaum I suggest you go and read up on the previous posts by researchers that clearly identify the flaws.

Flaws that the dynamnic duo cant see, or dont want to see.

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Fisherman]

Tottenham and San Antonio... GO Spurs GO!

Yep, go Spurs! Been a Tottenham fan for many a year. Used to be the only British team where the players had heels back in the day.

[Fisherman]

Typical smart arse journalistic statement ! with the facts wrong again. I used the words "outfoxed the police"

The simple sailor did not have any contact with the police, so no reason for him to become involved with the police, or to mislead them.

But of course it has been proven that Lechmere did not mislead the police, or the coroner, and therefore was never put under suspicion, and never put under surveillance, and never ever mentioned again.

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

No, it has not been proven at all. That is either a gross misunderstanding or an outright lie.

And you still need to explain why Feigenbaum could do what Lechmere could not.

And then there´s that part with your questions again - they are non-existant, right? A bluff?

You are welcome to prove me wrong on that point.

Not gonna happen, though.

[Fisherman]

I suggest you go and read up on the previous posts by researchers that clearly identify the flaws.
www.trevormarriott.co.uk

There is not a single flaw. There are alternative explanations. I know that is too subtle a distinction for some, but really...

I can actually prove that there are no flaws. Prove me wrong, otherwise.

[Columbo]

He shouldn't even be regarded as a suspect in or after 1888,

So is there a need to now prove he wasn't regarded as one ?

This man has been suggested as being a suspect without any historical proof to justify that label.

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

That's true, but then many of the suspects fit in that category.

I will point out that I've always maintained Lechmere is a person of interest, as I think the only ones we can call suspects are the ones identified as such by the police in 1888. Feighnbaum as I recall was not a contemporary suspect but he is a person of interest. Little interest to most but of interest.

But as with any accusation, it's up to the accuser to prove it not the accusee. If you accuse Fisherman or anyone on this subject of mis-representing facts or whatever its up to you to prove it. I think fisherman has backed up his allegations to a great degree. There are flaws but not so much as you like to believe.

Columbo

[Trevor Marriott]

There is not a single flaw. There are alternative explanations. I know that is too subtle a distinction for some, but really...

I can actually prove that there are no flaws. Prove me wrong, otherwise.

Otherwise what? more threats, insults, character assassination. all cheap shots Christer but thats par for the course with you when when your theory is threatened.

I have no more time for you, or this fantasy theory you have developed. Your obsession has taken a hold on you to the point where you have lost the sense of reality in all of this.

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[harry]

Certainly Cross was a person of interest.As was Paul,but of interest only as witnesses.Together, their information speaks of the finding and reporting of the body of Nichols.Nothing incriminating of murder can be applied to either's account,and theirs are the only submissions that matter.

[Robert St Devil]

... Feighnbaum as I recall was not a contemporary suspect but he is a person of interest. Little interest to most but of interest...

Columbo

I,d be interested to see if a connection between Feigenbaum and Frances Cole could be made [ie. the violent attack on the jugular, the resemblance of a ship,s fireman]. All general aspects, but still curious...

{Hello Fish. Stumbled on the Tot Hots while I was following SA Spurs this season. My futbol team by default now. Just need a jersey so I can wear to next season,s Spurs games (ie. trend setter)}

[Columbo]

I,d be interested to see if a connection between Feigenbaum and Frances Cole could be made [ie. the violent attack on the jugular, the resemblance of a ship,s fireman]. All general aspects, but still curious...

{Hello Fish. Stumbled on the Tot Hots while I was following SA Spurs this season. My futbol team by default now. Just need a jersey so I can wear to next season,s Spurs games (ie. trend setter)}

Hey Robert,

Unfortunately for Trevor Marriott Feigenbaum can't be tied to any of the victims at all. We're gonna get to that on a new feigenbaum thread in the new future.

There are, in my opinion, only three people tied to victims. Cross found Nichols and Joseph Barnett and George Hutchinson both admit to visiting or speaking with Mary Kelly. I"m sure others will have more information.

Columbo

[Columbo]

Certainly Cross was a person of interest.As was Paul,but of interest only as witnesses.Together, their information speaks of the finding and reporting of the body of Nichols.Nothing incriminating of murder can be applied to either's account,and theirs are the only submissions that matter.

Correct,they were not considered suspects at the time. That is important to remember, but the evidence that has come to light since then has made Lechmere an interesting subject.

Columbo

[Billiou]

There are, in my opinion, only three people tied to victims. Cross found Nichols and Joseph Barnett and George Hutchinson both admit to visiting or speaking with Mary Kelly. I"m sure others will have more information.

Columbo

Strange comment. What about the other people who were the first to find the bodies? Why is Cross any different? ie what about John Davis who found Chapman? or John Richardson the "leather cutting" man from the Chapman scene who said he did not see any body, but the Coroner was interested enough to ask him to produce the knife he used. ie he "produced the knife - a much-worn dessert knife - with which he had cut his boot. He added that as it was not sharp enough he had borrowed another one at the market." Another strange comment.... where was the one he "borrowed"??