The Missing Evidence - New Ripper Documentary

[The Good Michael]

A documentary and a book may convince those casually interested in the case that Lechmere was 'Jack' but the true test is convincing us. That was purposely meant to be vain. If posters here can kill DNA evidence, what else would you expect?

this is the real story isn't it? Anyone can write a book presenting a suspect that would look good to the layman. After all, how many books have already sought to close the case? My top two suspect books, Tully's and House's, keep their suspects in my mind as possibilities...they are alive, so to speak. But I'm unconvinced of either man's guilt. How would I even consider Lechmere in the same category just because he was somewhat near the body when he called Paul over to him? That's all that's in the case thus far.

Mike

[Peter Griffith aka gryff]

Timing Issues

Well, I still have issues with the timings given in the documentary.

At 6.37 of the video(on Youtube) the narrator says :

"Just 15 minutes before Polly Nichols was killed a policeman passed the murder site on his regular beat. The street was deserted."

And the CGI graphics show a note - 3.15 am. "All is quiet"

So the video seems to be saying that Polly Nichols was killed at 3.30am. The video however seems to accept that Cross/Lechmere did not leave home till 3.30am.

Just one of the timing issues.

cheers, gryff

[Lechmere]

Robert
Indeed Lechmere was very close to being standing over the body. Close enough to be standing over the body that if he is inadvertently described as standing over the body it is of no material significance.

Sally
You are correct in pointing out that there are a small number of posters on here who vociferously (and regrettably sometimes abusively as some of the newbies have pointed out to their amazement) attack the Lechmere theory - and some who debate it in a civilised fashion to be fair.
But Casebook - even in the wider Ripperological world - is regarded as a place to avoid due to the often poor general standards seen here. So it isn't really a suitable arena to use as a basis to judge the viability of anything much.
I mentioned a short while back in another relayed thread that the Lechmere theory tended to appeal to disinterested intelligent people as it was grounded in reality and required no leaps of faith of evidence ignored.
That is ultimately why Blink chose the theory after going through virtually all other theories while deciding which to choose.

And as Paul approach and said he saw Lechmere where the body was. It is quite legitimate to say that Pail found Lechmere by the body.
You may not like that but actually that doesn't matter a jot.

On his name swap. We know we have no evidence of him ever using Cross and we know that during the life of Thomas Cross most records record their surname as Lechmere and that in 1888 he gave his name as Lechmere four times - yet exceptionally in this case he was willing to lie on oath over his name. When he was clearly well aware what his real and official name was - irrespective of whether the pure speculation over his use of Cross with his mates was true or not.
This is a big anomaly - for tjis man was found by a very freshly slain body whose wounds were hidden and he was embroiled in a dispute with a policeman over what they said yo each other.
We can but guess why he lied about his name. We don't exactly know his circumstances. But to think it must have an innocent explanation betrays a poor grasp for criminological investigation.

Trobert
I presume you must be aware that one of the first people to comment on the incorrect positioning of Lechmere on that graphic was me - and i gave the likely explanation for it
Get over it.

[Robert]

Thanks Rob! That worked a treat.

Fish, I enjoyed the documentary. It went along at a good pace.

The thing that most interested me was the blood argument.

A point re Kelly : one or two people on these boards in the past have actually argued that it would take no more than a few minutes for Jack to do what he did to Kelly. However the documentary says something like 'literally hours of dismemberment,' which I suppose is most people's view (two hours at least). But two hours or more would not fit with Crossmere's work hours.

[Robert]

Ed, it's rather bad form to talk of Casebook being a place to avoid, with poor general standards,and its not being a suitable place to judge the validity of anything much, when you are using it to push your theory.

[Rob Clack]

Thanks Rob! That worked a treat

Your welcome.

A point re Kelly : one or two people on these boards in the past have actually argued that it would take no more than a few minutes for Jack to do what he did to Kelly. However the documentary says something like 'literally hours of dismemberment,' which I suppose is most people's view (two hours at least). But two hours or more would not fit with Crossmere's work hours.

Perhaps he was working a split shift?

[Rob Clack]

Trobert
I presume you must be aware that one of the first people to comment on the incorrect positioning of Lechmere on that graphic was me - and i gave the likely explanation for it
Get over it.

Back to insults? Is this the abusive hostile nature you are talking about?

Anyway, my point is, it was a deliberate mistake to make Lechmere look guilty and not a genuine one.

[Tom_Wescott]

But Casebook - even in the wider Ripperological world - is regarded as a place to avoid due to the often poor general standards seen here. So it isn't really a suitable arena to use as a basis to judge the viability of anything much.

This is not only untrue it's insulting. It's true that many read and don't post, but that's hardly 'avoiding'. Even if you feel it's true, it's bad form to post it here.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Tom_Wescott]

Why the documentary works

Here are some reasons why this documentary works in terms of convincing the general public that Cross was the Ripper, which of course was its intention.

1. In the wake of the public feeling ripped off by the DNA fiasco, this doc offers a solution based on what appears to be solid historical evidence.

2. This will be the first theory the public has seen in which a suspect was found next to the dead body.

3. Re: above, the doc tells us that it was a 'bombshell' for the police to learn that prior to PC Neil's arrival a man named Robert Paul discovered the body, and standing next to that body was a man who did not want to touch the body for feel of revealing the bloodied neck. Powerful stuff.

4. All the profiling stuff was of course common sense and useless, but the public still believes that serial killer profiling is a real and viable thing, so every time a tack goes into the map, they see another fact condemning Lechmere.

5. The whole changing of the last name is made to sound extremely nefarious. The public doesn't know that in an era before ID cards that many people could and did change their name at will.

6. The bewildering and confusing map of the murders and how it's made to appear that Cross passed each murder site as the murders were happening.

7. The timing of Cross's walk and how he had all this spare time unaccounted for.

8. The knockout punch of the QC at the end.

I've only watched the doc once but can understand how most people would see this and feel that the case has been solved. Of course, they're also told that a Swedish guy came up with all this on his own, and those of us here know how true that is. Because of this documentary, Cross will now be widely thought of as a genuine suspect as opposed to a witness and it's something Ripperologists will have to contend with.

Yours truly

Tom Wescott

[moonbegger]

Ripperology is like Politics ! Whoever spins the best yarn, will indeed fool the masses , regardless of actual validity or content .

As the Great Paul Weller said " That's Entertainment "

moonbegger

[David Andersen]

I have followed this debate closely. The one thing that doesnt seem to have been mentioned. unless I have missed it. is this. If Lechmere killed Polly Nichols, and then accompanied Paul to find a Policeman. What did he do with his weapon? It wasnt found at the murder scene. or anywhere else for that matter. Do we accept that Lechmere kept the knife and had it still in his possession even when reporting the finding of the body? I dont.

[Lechmere]

Moonbeggar
I see you have been discussing the likelihood of the mutual audibility of the footsteps of Lechmere and Paul.
Remember first of all that Neil heard Thane walking at a distance of150 yards in the same street.
If Lechmere was innocent he will have walked past the end of Foster Street at the same time as Paul emerged from his house. One hopes that Paul shut his front door quietly. The front door was 39 yards (approximately) from the junction Lechmere passed and we know Lechmere was only 30-40 years in front of him. Thereafter Pail will have followed behind Lechmere. It seems very unlikely tgat there steps will have been synchronised allergy way until Lechmere walked into the middle of the road and stopped.
When closely looked at, this aspect of the story makes no sense - unless Lechmere was not actually walking 40 yards in front of Paul.

[Lechmere]

Trobert
Don't be so sensitive - you accused me and Christer of deliberately misleading the film makers you naughty fellow - after I has personally brought up the issue you complained of and after I had explained how the error came about.

Tom, Robert
Yes I'm a cad, and you're not the first to notice.
But that don't change the truth none.
And, dare I say, Stewart Evans has made essentially the same observation on numerous occasions without you demuring.

[Lechmere]

David
According to the theory Lechmere left the murder scene with the knife concealed about his person and with Paul. They were continuing to work, with the supposed intention of informing a policeman, who they might or might not have met, on the way.
As it happens they bumped into Mizen at the junction of Hanbury Street, Old Montague Street and Baker's Row (Valance Road).
Whereupon Lechmere bluffed his way past Mizen so that Mizen did not do much as ask for their names, let alone search them.
If Mizen had not been there, there is a good chance Lechmere would have walked down Old Montague Street and left Paul to go down Hanbury Street alone. The Old Montague route was shorter but would have set him walking straight towards the Tabram murder scene (which may have tugged at Mizen's suspicious after he became aware that the woman in Buck's Row was dead) and by going off with Paul he reinforced the impression they were two carmen together, and gave him a chance to bend Paul's ear. And find out were Paul worked.
Had Paul not gone running to the press, we would never have known about the two Carmen.
That is why the knife aspect is not a sign of innocence.

[Lechmere]

Actually Robert (not Robert - I mean trobert, otherwise known as Rob sometimes) I have seen my name credited in the documentary so to be fair you are Robert again.