Who was the first clothes-puller?

[curious]

Bridewell:


"He reported finding the body. What reason is there to believe that he was lying. "

Cross reported the body only in the company of another man. We have no idea whether he would have or not if Paul had not come along.

What strikes me as strange is that two men find a woman they believe to be dying, but they abandon her and head on to work. What sort of people do that?

Now, I don't understand exactly what a car man did, would half of London have been left standing, waiting if they were late?

Cross's apparent dedication to his job is striking -- leaving a dying woman, showing up in court in his work clothes.

HOWEVER, on the same morning he has left a dying woman to rush off to work, he then goes out of his way to walk Paul to his work???? and the next murder in right there at Paul's employment. . . .

Can anyone here sympathize with Cross's dedication? I'm fortunate in that I can stop and help animals along my route and my boss is fine with it. But perhaps others have or have had jobs that require that kind of punctuality?

Anyway, I personally see suggestive behavior here from Cross.

[Rubyretro]

What strikes me as strange is that two men find a woman they believe to be dying, but they abandon her and head on to work. What sort of people do that?

Now, I don't understand exactly what a car man did, would half of London have been left standing, waiting if they were late?

I think that Cross did make himself late for work, by accompanying Paul (if my memory serves me right).

Sadly, reading the papers, people abandon others in distress all the time. I've even witnessed it first hand.

[Fisherman]

Robert:

"Fish, you say that IF Cross was the Ripper, then that's a plus factor for having Stride as one of the series. But you've also been saying that Cross's mother's proximity to the Stride site, is a plus factor for Cross being the Ripper. Aren't you chasing your own tail a bit here?"

If I have said that Crossīmothers proximity to the Stride site is a plus factor for Cross being the Ripper, then Iīve been a bit ridiculous. If this was true, then nobody would have wanted to live close to her, for fear of becoming killers. Or something like that.

... but I believe that you know what I am pointing to, Robert? When trying the Ripperīs hat on Cross, we must look at what factors may or may not be of potential interest to the killing series - it Stride really DID belong to the series, we canīt tell (God, how careful you need to be assessing this ...anyway ...) - but we CAN tell that the geographical positioning of four of the victims works well together with what we may reasonably surmise about Crossīmovements.

Agreed? Or did I step in it...?

The best, Robert!
Fisherman

[Fisherman]

Ruby:

"I think that Cross did make himself late for work, by accompanying Paul (if my memory serves me right)."

He certainly made himself FURTHER late to work by it - but he was already late when speaking to Mizen.

The best,
Fisherman

[Lechmere]

Frau retro (if I may still so call you)
Cross never, so far as we know and we know a lot about how he called himself from a very large number of records, never called himself cross ever - except to mizen.
He was listed as cross in the 1861 census when he was a minor. That would not have been his choice but that of his then step father, Thomas cross - a policeman ten years his mothers junior (an authority figure who I strongly suspect young Charles resented).
Charles's real father was living in Northamptonshire bringing up another family of lechmeres having abandoned his first family when Charles was a babe in arms.
Charles cross was baptised Charles lechmere after his mother remarried Thomas cross. This points to him never having used cross as his name except to mizen and except when his step father completed the census return (which wasn't Charles Cross's responsibility anyway and I am pretty sure he would have been oblivious to the name Thomas cross put down).

[Lechmere]

Madam retro - I might add that I have had a look at mizen's whereabouts and have found no link to Cross's habitations. Cross lived nearly all his life (save a couple if years in hereford) up to when he moved to doveton street in June 1888, in various addresses all within 5 minutes walk of berner street. His mother continued to live in that area until her death around 1901.
If mizen knew of cross then I feel sure it would have been reflected in the testimony of mizen, cross or Paul. We also have the police reports for this aspect of the case and they stubbornly refer to him as cross with mo inkling that he had an other identity.

[Rubyretro]

I seem to have lost my jackboots...forced to capitulate...I get your point.

You may still address me as 'Frau' however.

(I pm'd you here. It's urgent).

[Robert]

"but we CAN tell that the geographical positioning of four of the victims works well together with what we may reasonably surmise about Crossīmovements."

But, Fish, if Stride is counted as one of the four victims, then you need other evidence from the Stride murder - perhaps the throat cut, or the coincidence of it happening just before Eddowes - to support Stride's inclusion. You can't count Cross's mother's proximity as a supporting factor for including Stride, AND say that Stride's murder so close to his mother's residence is a supporting factor for having Cross as the Ripper.

Re Cross walking with Paul, I don't feel there's anything suspicious about that. The two men would have been a bit shaken up, or at least startled to have had their routine disturbed, and they perhaps exchanged words like "Do you think they'll want us for an inquest? That would be inconvenient. Would we be allowed time off work? Do they recompense us for lost wages?" etc.

[Robert]

Lechmere I think that Mizen was a couple of years older than Cross but since he didn't join up until 1873 then you are right, he couldn't have known Cross's stepdad.

[Fisherman]

Robert:

"But, Fish, if Stride is counted as one of the four victims, then you need other evidence from the Stride murder - perhaps the throat cut, or the coincidence of it happening just before Eddowes - to support Stride's inclusion. You can't count Cross's mother's proximity as a supporting factor for including Stride, AND say that Stride's murder so close to his mother's residence is a supporting factor for having Cross as the Ripper."

I just posted that I DONīT count Crossīmothers proximity as a supporting factor per se, Robert. Surely, though, you can see that there is every reason to believe that Cross was very well aquainted with the Berner Street area, having lived in that area for years, plus he had a very good reason to use Berner Street as a means of walking to his motherīs house?

Maybe I am dense, and perhaps I fail to see the subtlety of your argument. Let me just state that:
A/ I am suggesting that Cross is the perhaps best suspect we have for the Ripper title.
B/ I am pointing to the fact that he had his mother staying close to Berner Street.
C/ I am suggesting that this means that he may well have frequented Berner Street quite often, bearing in mind that his daughter lived with his mother.
D/ I am saying that if we look for connection points between Crossīs everyday life and the suggested/potential deeds of the Ripper, then Berner Street is such a connection point, since Stride was killed here.

The best,
Fisherman

[lynn cates]

Add police report. Stir.

Hello Dave. Thanks. I do keep things stirred up, don't I? (Heh-heh)

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

disjunction

Hello Ruby. Did I say that Mrs. Long indeed saw the assailant? I thought I had presented a disjunction?

Cheers.
LC

[curious]

Re Cross walking with Paul, I don't feel there's anything suspicious about that. The two men would have been a bit shaken up, or at least startled to have had their routine disturbed, and they perhaps exchanged words like "Do you think they'll want us for an inquest? That would be inconvenient. Would we be allowed time off work? Do they recompense us for lost wages?" etc.

Ordinarily, I would agree with you, EXCEPT for what might appear to be Cross's "obsession" (for want of a better word that doesn't come to me) with getting to work on time.

He left home extremely early -- to get to work on time??? or why?

He shows up at the inquest dressed in his work clothes.

But, he walks out of his way and makes himself even more late -- this seems out of character and therefore may be important.

Unless, neither of the other work-related possibilities are about his dedication to his job, but about something else.

Just my way of looking at it.

[Robert]

Yes Fish, I see what you're saying. You're saying that if Stride was a JTR victim, then so much the better for the case against Cross (and presumably if she wasn't a Ripper victim, then the case isn't quiite so good, but you can still get him for the other murders). I see that. But whether Stride was a Ripper victim, that's another matter.

[Fisherman]

Robert:

"Yes Fish, I see what you're saying. You're saying that if Stride was a JTR victim, then so much the better for the case against Cross (and presumably if she wasn't a Ripper victim, then the case isn't quiite so good, but you can still get him for the other murders). I see that. But whether Stride was a Ripper victim, that's another matter."

I am slightly baffled by this, Robert. Are you presuming that I WANT Cross to be the killer? Then rest assured, I have no explicit wish for ANYONE to be the Ripper.

I am trying to look at the case and the different suspects with as unbiased eyes as possible, and just as I may look at Cross/Lechmere as a viable suspect today, I may do so with somebody else tomorrow. It all hinges on the surrounding circumstances and the evidence.

In Crossīcase, it was earlier known that he in all probability used Old Montague Street or Hanbury Street to get to work, and we know that this would mean - if it is true - that a number of the victims, canonical as well as uncanonical, were slain roughly along his route to work. Now, I donīt know if accepting this means that you have ascribed to a wish to see him as the killer - for my own part, I am perfectly happy pointing out that it is of interest when trying to establish if a viable case can be built against Cross.

Of course, if it can also be proven that one of the victims that was NOT positioned along his route to work, was actually slain on a street that we had OTHER good reasons to believe that he frequented, then this is of interest too.

I fail to see how any of this should be regarded as in any way unethical or researchwise useless to point to. If you are of another meaning, Iīm afraid you shall have to help me out with this particular issue.

Whether Stride was a Ripper victim or not is not possible to establish, just like you say. And I have done my fair share of pointing to the possibility that she was not, just as I have never said that she could NOT have been.

All the best,
Fisherman