Tweet
In most every account I have read, Robert Paul comes across as a believable dupe. He is frightened when he sees Cross/Lechmere in Buck's Row, and fearful of gang activity, he tries to give him a wide berth. When Lechmere points out the body, Paul checks for signs of life. While the hands are cold, he thinks that she might still be alive. This is a critical point for the Lechmere/Ripper theorists and the evidence of very recent death is further supported by the testimony of PCs Neil and Mizen. Although Paul is late for work, he agrees to Lechmere's suggestion to go off and search for a PC, perhaps unwittingly aiding Lechmere's impromptu get-away plan.
But two things bother me: First, in his story to the press hyperlinked below, Paul describes the body as clearly dead for some time. Paul goes as far to essentially state that the condition of the body suggests that the police were lax on their beats. Given other testimony, this cannot possibly be true, regardless of whether one thinks Lechmere is the Ripper, can it?
Did Paul actually say this or do you think that this was the work of a journalist stirring the pot?
Secondly - and I confess I did not read the 100+ page Mizen scam thread in its entirety - why did Paul let Lechmere do all the talking to Mizen? Of course, this was exceedingly convenient for Lechmere if he was the murderer, but why would Paul not correct an obvious lie (that they were sent by another PC) to Mizen? Because he was late for work? If Paul really thought that there was a woman bleeding to death who might still be alive, why was he OK with this fact not being mentioned to Mizen? He could have corrected Lechmere's account at the scene to Mizen, or to the press, or at the inquest, but he did not. Any ideas why?
But two things bother me: First, in his story to the press hyperlinked below, Paul describes the body as clearly dead for some time. Paul goes as far to essentially state that the condition of the body suggests that the police were lax on their beats. Given other testimony, this cannot possibly be true, regardless of whether one thinks Lechmere is the Ripper, can it?
Did Paul actually say this or do you think that this was the work of a journalist stirring the pot?
Secondly - and I confess I did not read the 100+ page Mizen scam thread in its entirety - why did Paul let Lechmere do all the talking to Mizen? Of course, this was exceedingly convenient for Lechmere if he was the murderer, but why would Paul not correct an obvious lie (that they were sent by another PC) to Mizen? Because he was late for work? If Paul really thought that there was a woman bleeding to death who might still be alive, why was he OK with this fact not being mentioned to Mizen? He could have corrected Lechmere's account at the scene to Mizen, or to the press, or at the inquest, but he did not. Any ideas why?
Comment