If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Who knows - after Monday the colander seen by some may become a copper bottomed saucepan.
And I'm not answering any more questions unless they are submitted via carrier pigeon before November 1st.
This is true. I've just confirmed with producers that Ed showed up for filming with a carman expert and two bodyguards, but stated he'd answer no questions relating to Lechmere or Jack the Ripper for "legal reasons". Not pleased, the producers did what all British producers do when in a pinch...they had Ricky Cobb taken into custody and grabbed the nearest Swede.
Speaking about that, Gut - when is that scheduled? The hole-picking, I mean?
So far, what Iīve seen is:
-He was allowed to call himself Cross if he wanted to, so thereīs nothing odd with that.
-He would not have killed en route to work, since serialists will not do that.
-He would have run.
These are the legs on which the criticism against the theory has so far not managed to get up.
If I have missed any other "holes" in the theory, please list them once and for all. And then sit yourself down, turn the telly on and wait for it - there are areas in the documentary that should interest you much, I dare say.
Now that Iīve picked holes in your holepicking, and now that you are around to defend yourself ....
Myself, I am going to sleep. I suddenly got tired.
The best,
Fisherman
Question from the other site as you requested I do so
Does the program intend to portray Lechmere/Cross as the Ripper?
Question from the other site as you requested I do so
Does the program intend to portray Lechmere/Cross as the Ripper?
Thanks for moving the issue to a better forum!
Well, I am not the one who made the documentary - it was made by Blink Films UK. So they are the ones who make the calls to a large extent. But of course they will take a look at the viability of casting Lechmere in the Ripperīs role, and they will produce experts to strengthen their arguments. I have actually not seen the documentary myself as yet, so I cannot give you any answer to what exact claims will be made on behalf of the company.
My own claim is that Charles Lechmere is the absolutely best suspect to have surfaced so far. My own personal take on things is that yes, I do think Charles Lechmere was Jack the Ripper.
I had contact with Georgia from Blink in June, and was asked what the latest theories were.
Obviously this was pre shawl, so I didn't mention that, however Cross and Belcher were mentioned, as was Trevor oddly enough.
So you are welcome boys.
Monty
I knew I could rely on you to spread the word, Monty. Actually, Blink contacted Edward in May, so they were at least somewhat up to scratch at that early stage - presumably Georgia was looking for confirmation when she spoke to you.
I know they were looking at Belcher too. I seem to remember that he delivered his milk in the wrong parts of London, though.
I wasnt the killer although I am probably more viable as a suspect than Cross/Lechmere
On what do you ground your misgivings?
You used to be a policeman, right? In the material, we have no confirmation at all of Lechmereīs offered information about how long he was alone with the victim Nichols.
It is Lechmere who says that Paul arrived immediately after him.
It is Lechmere who says Paul was thirty, forty yards behind.
It is Lechmere who says he didnīt cross the street until Paul arrived.
Tell me, as a policeman, if you have a case where a man found beside a freshly killed victim has no corroboration for his claims to have arrived seconds only before the next man did - what would be your aproach to such a thing?
Would you presume that the man by the body told the truth?
Or would you check him out thoroughly?
And if the latter applies, and he had given a name that was not his real one - would the thorough checkout reveal his true name or not?
If you havent got anything else to do on Monday, I do recommend investing an hour of your ripperological life in your tv couch. It should interest you, I think!
I knew I could rely on you to spread the word, Monty. Actually, Blink contacted Edward in May, so they were at least somewhat up to scratch at that early stage - presumably Georgia was looking for confirmation when she spoke to you.
I know they were looking at Belcher too. I seem to remember that he delivered his milk in the wrong parts of London, though.
The best,
Fisherman
Just checking my call log and you are correct Christer,
End of May for me, I knew it was around the time of Robs walk which was early June, as I took another call from Georgia the day before. As I said, other names were mentioned, cannot recall if Eds was, but certainly Cross was discussed. With my book taking a lot of my time at that moment, my recollections re dates may be out.
Yes, I stated such re Belcher, I believe they were also looking at a multiple indenpendent killers idea, however it seems your man won through.
Despite my view of the theory, I welcome this programme, and look forward to it.
Monty
PS I know other Rippeologists were contacted to gauge opinion, not just me I add.
Is the fact that most of the police files are missing mentioned in the documentary ?
I donīt know, Jon. I cannot recall all the things I said, even - it was a very unusual situation to be in, with a camera stuck up your nose. I recall I went totally blank at some occasion (this is not where you Sybil Fawltishly go "Oh, I KNOOOOOW!")
You used to be a policeman, right? In the material, we have no confirmation at all of Lechmereīs offered information about how long he was alone with the victim Nichols.
It is Lechmere who says that Paul arrived immediately after him.
It is Lechmere who says Paul was thirty, forty yards behind.
It is Lechmere who says he didnīt cross the street until Paul arrived.
Tell me, as a policeman, if you have a case where a man found beside a freshly killed victim has no corroboration for his claims to have arrived seconds only before the next man did - what would be your aproach to such a thing?
Would you presume that the man by the body told the truth?
Or would you check him out thoroughly?
And if the latter applies, and he had given a name that was not his real one - would the thorough checkout reveal his true name or not?
If you havent got anything else to do on Monday, I do recommend investing an hour of your ripperological life in your tv couch. It should interest you, I think!
The best,
Fisherman
Don't be silly. That's Marriott you are talking to!
Anyway, he's in no position to criticise anyone else's theory.
I'm looking forward to the programme. I met a nice lady at the conference who was a Cross/Lechmere descendant. She was with Ed, Sadly I didn't get any chance to talk to her.
Comment