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

[Pierre]

[QUOTE=Fisherman;379444]

And what does he say at the inquest: "I stepped back...."

What source is this?

Regards, Pierre

[Simon Wood]

Hi All,

So now it's Pierre flogging a dead horse.

Get with it, Pierre. We've all moved on.

Regards,

Simon

[Columbo]

[QUOTE=Patrick S;379483]Quite right. The anger is overwhelming.

I'm not aware of a question, at least not one that didn't seem rhetorical or unserious. Do you honestly wish me to "cite" a post that answered a question without being "snotty"? Is that the question? Okay. Here is the answer: There are many.

I asked about this thread specifically. You've brought a lot of interesting points and I've said so. When you're not fighting with Fisherman you bring a lot to the board. But on this thread you have not (at least as far as I can tell) answered this question.

If you become educated enough in the subject matter to contribute, I'll be happy to politely discuss anything at all. As it stands now, your posts amount to you agreeing with someone (usually "Fisherman"), accusing "dissenters" of being "jealous" and "snotty", and wondering when we can "discuss the other murders".

I've already said when I started posting I'm new to lechmere and ask questions when pertinent and I put in my opinion like everyone else. I'm not new to JTR and I don't try to prove my intelligence about it. I look for others opinions, that's all. I agree with Fisherman quite a bit because when he says something I agree with I say so, just like I've done with you.
Your remarks in this post prove that you're an angry, bitter person who's conversational level is based on insults and negativity, and the need to respond to everything. You don't use the kind of insults that are normal in a discussion, but the kind that people like you use to try to prove your humorous and intellectual at the same time while belittling people. You're the bratty kid at the playground starving for attention.

It's ironic that you take such issue with "snotty" remarks. Even as I realize that your trotting out old standards like "using your mom's computer while the babysitter's not looking" and spouting phrases like "you little bitch" constitute the standard of prose to which we should all aspire. As well, you do seem unable to grasp the concept of "response in kind". "Fisherman" is nothing if not "snotty" in his responses. He never fails to insult, condescend, and taunt. Alas, he does it with some flourish, some literacy, some style. In short, "little bitch" and "mommy's not home" are not part of his repertoire. Simply put, save the faux outrage. Most of us aren't angry. Familiarize yourself with the concept of the 'happy warrior'. Hint: He's not in the Marvel Universe.

I apologized for the remarks and I apologize to you for using them in the first place. It was bad humor that fell flat. That's all. I've only read that poem a few times and I can guarantee you that you are no "Happy Warrior". Nice try at being intellectual though.

Lastly, these threads are now and have been living things. They zig and zag, they detour, they devolve. They are discussions. Often they are quite productive and if we didn't enjoy them, we wouldn't post (alas, you post that you're NOT enjoying them?). We begin new threads, deal with it's topic to some extent, before continuing the overall "Lechmere" discussion on whatever thread is getting the most action at a given time. That's how it works. You don't understand that, clearly. And that's fine. Just stop complaining about it. I don't know what how things go on the WWE Boards your used to. But, this is how thing go here. Also, if the length of posts (particularly mine) bother you there is a solution: STOP READING. It is a simple procedure, one I'm sure that you often employ. And should you read an ENTIRE lengthy post, there's no need to reply, "WHY IS IT SO LONG?????" Such comments aren't useful and do you no favors.

The problem is you don't deal with the topic of the thread. Fisherman or someone starts and you're immediately on the kill to prove the entire theory wrong. I'm sorry that you think I'm such an idiot that I don't know about debating or combative discussion but you're wrong. I enjoy them quite a bit and I'm on several different forums of various subjects where we have a great time doing it. You're just very bad at it. You're mean spirited and lack the mental attitude to constructively debate without being nasty and bitter. As far as the long posts, you should learn what "brevity" means and how to use it. I've never posted that a post was too long I only pointed out that some lengthy posts have been nasty and not useful.

Now don't get me wrong, some of the arguments have been really good and the banter is great, but when it obscures the discussion then it's a waste of time, much like this post I'm writing. But you're lack of everything needs to be addressed.

I'm going to continue posting and agreeing and disagreeing, asking questions and looking for opinions. I just won't be looking for them from you.

AMF!

Columbo

[Columbo]

[QUOTE=Pierre;379487]

What source is this?

Regards, Pierre

Well, I haven't moved on. Good question.

John

[Pierre]

Hi All,

So now it's Pierre flogging a dead horse.

Get with it, Pierre. We've all moved on.

Regards,

Simon

No, I am only interested in the methods that Fisherman is using. Not in the theory about Lechmere having been a serial killer.

Regards, Pierre

[GUT]

I liked Patrick's summary, and agree with it.

As for why Lechmere "the Killer" didn't help out the police again-- he was far too brilliant (despite being "a coarse carman" per one of the police observers) to chance it?
Or he was innocent.

You forgot psychopath.

[John Wheat]

You forgot psychopath.

Is there any evidence Lechmere was a psychopath?

[GUT]

Is there any evidence Lechmere was a psychopath?

Yep Fisherman said he was.

[Errata]

Yep Fisherman said he was.

Do you have any idea how hard it is to spot a reasonably intelligent psychopath?

[harry]

Why did he step away from the body?It couldn't have been that he was interrupted by the sound of Paul's arriving.He didn't become aware of Paul until he had stepped back, and would the Ripper have ceased ripping(he had started on the torso)and stepprd back,unless he was disturbed.

Someone who was interrupted by by Cross's impending arrival,on the other hand,neither stepped back nor accosted Cross.That individual fled.(My opinion).
There you are Colombo.Thats not antagonistic.

[Admin]

Any person indulging in a personal insult on this thread, for the forseeable future, can expect to receive a six month ban. Argue the merits of the case, not the personalities and shortcomings of the people you are arguing against.

[Columbo]

Why did he step away from the body?It couldn't have been that he was interrupted by the sound of Paul's arriving.He didn't become aware of Paul until he had stepped back, and would the Ripper have ceased ripping(he had started on the torso)and stepprd back,unless he was disturbed.

Someone who was interrupted by by Cross's impending arrival,on the other hand,neither stepped back nor accosted Cross.That individual fled.(My opinion).
There you are Colombo.Thats not antagonistic.

Hi Harry,

Well the theory goes that Cross heard the footsteps, pulled down the skirt and stepped back feigning discovery. I don't know if that's what happened of course, but it makes for an interesting scenario.

The next question that comes to mind for me is where did Jack go if Lechmere didn't do it? Did Lechmere disturb him or did Jack do what he wanted to Nichols and left before Lechmere got there?

Both are plausible in my opinion.

seriously antagonism doesn't bother me but childish antics do if they interrupt the flow of the conversation. I am guilty of it as well and apologize to anyone I offended.

Columbo

[Columbo]

Any person indulging in a personal insult on this thread, for the forseeable future, can expect to receive a six month ban. Argue the merits of the case, not the personalities and shortcomings of the people you are arguing against.

I apologize to all posters if I have done so.

Columbo

[drstrange169]

Hello Columbo,

"It always winds up being a debate of the whole theory, instead of providing the bits of information that the creator of the thread desired."

The problem lies in the fact that there is no information currently known to provide, hence the slight and major diversions.


"So, yeah I've seen a lot of jealousy and animosity against not only this theory but the man who came up with it."

By "this theory" did you mean, that Charles Lechmere was Jtr and Christer came up with it?

As Christer will, I'm sure, more than happily tell you, it's not his theory.
Waaay back in the late 1990's early 2000's I was submitting material for a Jtr related magazine called Ripperoo, one of the other contributors, a man named Derek Osbourne wrote an article about Charles Cross being the ripper.

About five years later and quite separately Micheal Conner wrote a series of articles in the Ripperologist that laid out, what is now, the basic case against Charles Lechmere.

The late Chris Scott, was I believe the person that actually discovered that Lechmere and Cross were the same person.

Christer can tell you exactly but I believe he jumped on board the theory in late 2011. Currently the most respected and generally regarded as the number one researcher pushing the Xmere theory is Edward Stow. He has been in contact with the family and has discovered lots of new information. He is writing a book about it.


>>Can any of the long winded dissenters cite any post where they just answered the question of this post without being rude and obnoxious? I doubt it.<<

If you page back you'll see this thread was civil and friendly, though perhaps not always directly on topic, up to post # 43, so it can happen!

[Columbo]

Hello Columbo,

"It always winds up being a debate of the whole theory, instead of providing the bits of information that the creator of the thread desired."

The problem lies in the fact that there is no information currently known to provide, hence the slight and major diversions.


"So, yeah I've seen a lot of jealousy and animosity against not only this theory but the man who came up with it."

By "this theory" did you mean, that Charles Lechmere was Jtr and Christer came up with it?

As Christer will, I'm sure, more than happily tell you, it's not his theory.
Waaay back in the late 1990's early 2000's I was submitting material for a Jtr related magazine called Ripperoo, one of the other contributors, a man named Derek Osbourne wrote an article about Charles Cross being the ripper.

About five years later and quite separately Micheal Conner wrote a series of articles in the Ripperologist that laid out, what is now, the basic case against Charles Lechmere.

The late Chris Scott, was I believe the person that actually discovered that Lechmere and Cross were the same person.

Christer can tell you exactly but I believe he jumped on board the theory in late 2011. Currently the most respected and generally regarded as the number one researcher pushing the Xmere theory is Edward Stow. He has been in contact with the family and has discovered lots of new information. He is writing a book about it.


>>Can any of the long winded dissenters cite any post where they just answered the question of this post without being rude and obnoxious? I doubt it.<<

If you page back you'll see this thread was civil and friendly, though perhaps not always directly on topic, up to post # 43, so it can happen!

Hey Dusty,

You're obviously right about the situation and I do get that. I didn't mean to imply Christer came up with the theory itself, just the evolution of it.

I guess it's taking me a while to acclimate, but I'll get there

Columbo