Value of a lie

[GUT]

Next month it will be 2 years of this.

And just after it arrived he said "If I haven't solved it within 12 months I'll go away" or words to that effect.

But still .....

[Elamarna]

Interesting ideas Pierre.

However I would like to ask a question.

With Regards to Lechmere lying, do you have any independent data that shows anyone accepted Mizen's account of what happened?
Or do you have a third party confession recounting the event? (I know the answer to that of course.)

I ask simply because there are sources which suggest Mizen's account was not taken very seriousl, and analysis drawn from other data that it was not!

Steve

[Brenda]

.

Pierre thinks Cross saw a copper, who was the killer. But of course continues to throw out little hints and other types of BS without naming names, though for well over a year has been saying he needs just one little piece of data, or having the guts to set out exactly who and why.

Next month it will be 2 years of this.

[Abby Normal]

I've probably missed something here Pierre but what leads you to believe that CL saw the killer and who do you think it was?

Who cares

[GUT]

I've probably missed something here Pierre but what leads you to believe that CL saw the killer and who do you think it was?

Pierre thinks Cross saw a copper, who was the killer. But of course continues to throw out little hints and other types of BS without naming names, though for well over a year has been saying he needs just one little piece of data, or having the guts to set out exactly who and why.

[Herlock Sholmes]

I've probably missed something here Pierre but what leads you to believe that CL saw the killer and who do you think it was?

[drstrange169]

>>One of these statements is a lie. <<

I would disagree, one of the statements may very well have been a mistake and a mistake isn't a lie.

[Pierre]

In the sources from the Nichols murder there are two hypothetical lies.

They have been used to construct an idea call the Mizen scam.

The whole problem is very simple in itīs structure. There was an inquest. Two men were sworn. One was a police contable. One was a carman.

The police constable stated that the carman told him that another police constable wanted him in Buckīs Row.

The carman, when asked, told the inquest he did not see a policeman in Buckīs Row.

One of these statements is a lie. That is the hypothesis.

But what was the value of a lie for the men at the inquest?

Mizen first. Steve wrote that Mizen was "just a man who has made a mistake, which had no material affect on the crime, trying to protect his reputation." Postulating now that his reputation was nearly destroyed by a newspaper article. Having the terrible story in the papers from Paul. Mizen was desperate. He must do something quickly. Before the police turned their backs on him. Before his reputation was destroyed in London.

What was the value of lying at the inquest, for Mizen?

Conclusion:

The value of the lie is protection of a police constables reputation.

Therefore, to protect his reputation, Mizen lied.

Therefore, to protect his reputation, Mizen took the risk of being exposed as a liar.

Therefore, to protect his reputation, Mizen took the risk of loosing his position.

The carman now. Hypothesizing the carman saw the killer and the killer saw him. He lied to protect his family from the killer.

What was the value of lying at the inquest, for Lechmere?

Conclusion:

The value of the lie is protection of the lives of his wife and his children and himself.

Therefore, to protect his wife and his children and himself, Lechmere lied.

Therefore, to protect his wife and his children and himself, Lechmere took the risk of being exposed as a liar.

Therefore, to protect his wife and children and himself, Lechmere took the risk of being suspected for the murder himself.

The hypothesis is supported by Lechmere giving the name Cross to the inquest.

The killer could not find his wife and children by asking for Mrs Cross. Her name and the name of the children was Lechmere.

The value of the first lie is equal to the protection of reputation.

The value of the second lie is equal to the protection of lives.

Pierre