The Missing Evidence - New Ripper Documentary

[Fisherman]

If I have missed something then I apologize but aside from the census records where does it say in 1888 that the Charles Cross who gave evidence on oath at the inquest, the same Charles Cross that found the body, resided at Doveton Road?

In the police report, as evinced by the coronerīs protocol and the quotation from it in the Star.

The best,
Fisherman

[Trevor Marriott]

In the police report, as evinced by the coronerīs protocol and the quotation from it in the Star.

The best,
Fisherman

and not forgetting Swansons report !

[Fisherman]

This is good stuff:

Originally Posted by Lechmere:

Robert Paul who seemed to.know he was late and so presumably knew the time, said he found Lechmere at 3.45, so it is misleading to suggest that is a wrong fact.

Robs answer: Sorry I would rather go by an experienced Policeman has to say.

Originally Posted by Lechmere:

According to an experienced policeman with a very good record and a religious outlook on life, Lechmere told him he was wanted by another policeman and did not say the woman was dead. So saying 'no he didn't' to that is blatantly misleading.

Robs answer: Not according to Lechmere and Paul.

If I have gotten this wrong, please correct me, but it would seem that Rob "would rather go by an experienced policeman" only when the experienced policeman supports his own thinking.

When the experienced policeman Mizen expresses a view that displeases Mr Clack, his desire to listen to experienced policemen suddenly flies out the window, and he goes with Lechmere and Paul instead. And yes, itīs the same Paul he dissed before, in favour of experienced policemanship. Odd, that.

I have read a few pages of this very unbecoming criticism of a documentary that nobody has seen, and it looks the exact way I expected it to. The above is a very good example.

I think I will be a sparse commentator on the thread fortwith, at least until the documentary has been shown. After that, we will all know what differences there are inbetween the ramblings of Lechmere haters and the judgements of those who are in a position to give a professional verdict.

Like it or not.

The best,
Fisherman

[Rob Clack]

Don't do sarcasm do you?

Both Neil and Thain were in Bucks Row at 3:45. Lechmere and Paul were long gone.

I am drawing my conclusions from two very poor newspaper articles. One of which has Eds involvement.

Unbecoming criticism? So you have no problem with Lechmere being described as meat delivery driver working his shifts covered in blood? No I don't suspect you would, don't let the facts get in the way of a good story.

[Lechmere]

Monty

I would hesitate for a long time before dissing anything that Swanson said in one of his contemporary reports - bearing in mind that he would have compiled these reports from other reports, most of which are lost.

Would I gave him a blank cheque for general opinions on the case, or of his powers of recollection many years later?
No.
Superintendents in that late Victorian period were not experienced in dealing with serial killers and the type of people that they would have expected to be guilty of such crimes.
Furthermore the police were not practised in investigating such crimes. As the sole conduit through which information on the Ripper murders flowed in and out of Scotland Yard, it would have been impossible for him to not suffer from information overload. He would have been inhuman of he did not later suffer from details getting muddled up in his mind.

[Lechmere]

Actually Robert neither story really had my involvement and providing a link does not imply endorsement either.
I told the East London Advertiser that a television program was in the offing and a few details about it and that was it. As far as I am aware they did not speak to Blink either but rushed a piece out - hence a few errors - but you should know that already.
As for the meat delivery - it isn't something I would over emphasise personally, but I presume you are unaware of the source for this claim, so I rather doubt you are in a position to comment on it.

[Rob Clack]

Actually Robert neither story really had my involvement and providing a link does not imply endorsement either.
I told the East London Advertiser that a television program was in the offing and a few details about it and that was it. As far as I am aware they did not speak to Blink either but rushed a piece out - hence a few errors - but you should know that already.
As for the meat delivery - it isn't something I would over emphasise personally, but I presume you are unaware of the source for this claim, so I rather doubt you are in a position to comment on it.

Then why is yours and Sues face splashed over it? Is Sue not quoted?

I would think in your capacity as a Lechmere supporter deny or confirm the meat delivery quote. Unless of course you are not in the loop.

[Lechmere]

Trevor and Robert (I associate you two together) - Trebert perhaps?

I did respond:
I know Andy Griffiths took care to study the evidence thoroughly and Scobie was no push over either.

I’m not pinning my hopes on any experts but I find it interesting that these experts have looked closely at the case and are generally speaking in complete agreement with the conclusions reached by me and Christer.

Anyone is only able to form opinions based on what they know. You (Trevor) for example have formed opinions on this theory even though you have demonstrated in this tread that you are unaware of some of the basic details.
I did not tell any of the expert witnesses anything. They were provided with original records the press reports of the inquest and the initial police reports and other press reports, they were told about the theory and they drew their own conclusions. I know they also did their own checking and were no push overs and provided their own insights, with a fresh set of eyes.
No evidence was excluded.
The alternative explanations for events are obvious and do not take any intelligence to bring forward and weigh up.
I had a chat with Andy Griffiths and brought up some of the counter arguments which he dismissed with more rapidity than I would have done.
When I had a long briefing session with Blink they double checked everything I said and cross questioned me on virtually every substantive point after trawling trough Casebook.
When I met Blink I put forward the alternative explanations at each point in the narrative.
It was a thorough process.
The producer (David McNab) knew the entire Ripper story off pat and was previously (I think I’m right in saying) a misguided Tumbletyite.
The counter arguments are well known.

[Lechmere]

Trobert
Those pictures were taken over a year ago.

Why should I confirm or deny the meat delivery quote?
What the program Trobert - over a nice cup of Rosey Lee.

[Rob Clack]

Trobert
Those pictures were taken over a year ago.

Why should I confirm or deny the meat delivery quote?
What the program Trobert - over a nice cup of Rosey Lee.

I won't respond to the insult as I have already had a two point infraction the other day.

And the interview with Sue, that was over a year ago as well?

Well you don't have to confirm or deny the meat delivery quote. But if you want to hold back information that is your privilege.

[Fisherman]

Don't do sarcasm do you?

Both Neil and Thain were in Bucks Row at 3:45. Lechmere and Paul were long gone.

I am drawing my conclusions from two very poor newspaper articles. One of which has Eds involvement.

Unbecoming criticism? So you have no problem with Lechmere being described as meat delivery driver working his shifts covered in blood? No I don't suspect you would, don't let the facts get in the way of a good story.

Sarcasm? Saying that you rather believe an experienced policeman, and then not doing so when it does not fit your thinking is applying double standards. That goes without saying. And without sarcasm.

If you prefer an experienced policemans word to that of a carman, then you have only one choice when it comes to deciding who of Lechmere or Mizen was probably correct - Mizen, the experienced policeman is your choice, since you rather believe such a man. By your own admission.

There is no way out of that.

You claim that I have no problems with the description of Cross as a meat delivery man. Why do you do that? Have I said that I have no problems with it? No. Have I said that I have problems with it? No.

What I have said is that it is not something my own research has turned up, and that we need to see more information before we decide where to stand on the issue. There is information in the documentary that I and Edward have not brought up, it was a process that took shape as we moved along to an extent. People in the crew evaluated it all and arrived at the conclusion that we were probably correct. I am told that "everyone" at Channel 5 think the riddle has been solved.
It was and is an altogether different atmosphere than the one out here, and a very refreshing one at that.

Now Iīm out. I very much dislike all the criticism the unseen documentary is subjected to.

Adios,
Fisherman

[Bridewell]

I'm looking forward to this programme and am actually quite glad that questions aren't being answered in advance. I hope it's well received.

[Rob Clack]

P.C. Neil, P.C Thain and Robert Paul said they were in Bucks Row at 3:45

Your a smart man, you work it out.

Close the door on the way out.

[Fisherman]

P.C. Neil, P.C Thain and Robert Paul said they were in Bucks Row at 3:45

Your a smart man, you work it out.

Close the door on the way out.

I think the policemen estimated the time, as is often the case, and that Paul worked from a clock since he is very adamant on the time. It will be a difference of a few minutes only, and if the policemen adjusted to the closest quarter of an hour, they could all be right, just as Mizen could.

But this is not what we are discussing. We are discussing why you say that you rather trust an experienced PC - just like you do with Neil and Thain - but then you distrust an experienced PC when it comes to the scam.

You claim an important principle to diss a theory and then you abandon it when it points the other way. If you can distrust a PC in that case, then the issue of the timings in Buckīs Row quickly becomes a non-issue.

Did you hear that loud bang?

That was me closing the door behind me.

Til tomorrow!

Fisherman

[Fisherman]

I'm looking forward to this programme and am actually quite glad that questions aren't being answered in advance. I hope it's well received.

Every no and then, thereīs a breath of fresh air even in the darkest of realms. I want to thank you sincerely for this very graceful and decent approach, Colin, and you are ever so welcome to produce whatever criticism you feel needed tomorrow - I promise that I will do my best to answer whatever quiries you may have. Provided I am still around to do so, that is!

Thanks for allowing me to leave the thread until tomorrow on such a positive note!

All the best,
Fisherman