So if you live in Bethnal Green, you won´t kill in Whitechapel?

[Fisherman]

Batman: No, because there are several routes from East Whitechapel to the city centre and none of them passes through murder areas. The burden of proof is on you proving that he did. It isn't defacto that leaving Buck's row going towards the city centre takes you through the murder sites. What it does is take you through Whitechapel which you are saying is synonymous with going through the murder sites.

He passed through Bucks Row. After that, there are not any routes outside of the killing fields that is comparable in terms of time and lenght. Passing through Bucks Row is a prerequsite for taking the shortest route.

What you suggest is that he could have used the route Doveton Street - Chester - Glasgow - Brighton - Broad Street, and yes, he may have. You must be commanded on that find. It is less commendable, though, to suggest illogical routes, based on him not taking Bucks Row - the route we KNOW he used.

I will comment no further on this matter - it has become a tad too dumb.

I couldn't care less about invoking a defence lawyer for people accused of sex crimes to prove your point for you. He doesn't and neither is he an expert in this field. You don't have to have anything more than a map to see through your claim.

He is an expert about what it takes in terms of geography to prosecute a criminal. It has nothing at all to do with sex crimes. Accordingly, although you have full confidence in yourself, I do not - I go with the experts view and I have a good time laughing at your effort to nullify it.


That's not news. That's just a stupid thing for a criminal do if they want to lie about their identity. It's also stupid to hang around for a witness to ID you instead of going away.

Call it circular if you wish, but if he was the killer, he seems to have done alright. And claiming that you think that a person would not do this or that never changed the course of history. Plus, of course, Andy Griffiths, the other expert from the docu said that he would never have run - but he probably forgot that it was a sex crime.

Yeah, you will have to explain it, given that you think giving someone your correct Christian name while trying to hide your identity is a bright thing for criminals to do. Then again, you think Lechmere wrapped his hand in an apron piece covered in poo and blood walked back into Whitechapel and up Goulston St., tossing it and decided to do this just for just 10% of his journey home.

You are confused - I was not the one telling Lechmere how to act, and I certaibly have not said that I think that what he did in this context was clever, so please don´t lie about that. What I say is that he did what he could if he wanted to conceal his identity to the papers while not taking the risk of being checked out by the police after having given them false information.

As for the rag, I have suggested as a possibility that he used it as a bandage. And I think that he would have thrown it, not as a result of a mathematical exercise, but instead once he had stemmed the blood. Whether that happened 9, 18 or 72 % into his journey was reasonably of no interest - once it stopped bleeding, he would leave no blood trail and needed to dispose of the rag.

I will leave it to the readers of the boards to decide whether you are a good judge of this matter - or any other ripper-related matter - or not. My personal thoughts about it is something not fit to print.

Plus, as always, what you are getting wrong here is essentially not even distantly related to what the thread is supposed to be about. Take your, ehrm, points to the correct thread, please.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Have you, Herlock, ever heard of the concept of sarcasm? No? Well, then I will explain to you how it works in this post of mine!

I am not of the meaning that Bury could not be the killer because he lived in Bow. I think any such statement would be utter nonsense. However, Gareth (Sam Flynn) has expressed that any person with an address in Whitechapel is automatically as good or better a suspect geographically speaking than Lechmere on account of how he lived in Bethnal Green!
The fact that he was in place in Bucks Row at the time of that murder and that he in all probability walked through Spitalfields on the rest of the murder mornings there does not - or so says Gareth - weigh up that he lived in Bethnal Green! ANY person with an address in Whitechapel will always be as good or better a bid for the killers role, I am told.

It was therefore very much with tongue in cheek that I said that Bury cannot possibly be the Ripper since he lived in Bow. it was an arrow aimed at Gareths reasoning.

Of course you and me and everybody else - but for Gareth - are completely aware that a man from Bow - or Chelsea, Battersea, Bethnal Green or Ulan Bator - can be the killer. And if such a man is actually recorded as having been in place at a murder site at the relevant time, then screw the fact that he did not live in Whitechapel; once he is present at a murder site, he of course becomes a better suspect than people simply residing in Whitechapel.

It is all about making a decision about who is the better suspect in the Ripper case: a man who is recorded as having been present at one of the murder sites at the relevant time and who reasonably passed through the murder area on a daily basis, or any unknown person who resides in Whitechapel.

It would seem that you and I am not deterred by Lechmere´s Bethnal Green address - we acknowledge that people residing there actually can kill in Whitechapel. Similarly, we realize that living in Bow does not mean that we are non-starters either.

In a perfect world, everybody would acknowledge this. But alas, Ripper country is not a perfect world, is it?

I hope you understand my post better now. Look at what the thread is called!

Understood Fish

The curse of not following the entire thread.

[Fisherman]

Understood Fish

The curse of not following the entire thread.

That´s always a risk, Herlock. No harm done.

[Batman]

As for the rag, I have suggested as a possibility that he used it as a bandage. And I think that he would have thrown it, not as a result of a mathematical exercise, but instead once he had stemmed the blood. Whether that happened 9, 18 or 72 % into his journey was reasonably of no interest - once it stopped bleeding, he would leave no blood trail and needed to dispose of the rag.

There are numerous problems with this. If you remember Eddowes had 12 pieces of cloth on her when found. She also had a mended apron piece. Yet despite JtR having gone through her stuff (like Chapman, which also links them to the same hand) he cuts off Eddowes' apron piece with blood and poop and uses it instead?

Here is an example of why that view is fraught with problems. -> https://www.casebook.org/dissertatio...-graffito.html

Plus, as always, what you are getting wrong here is essentially not even distantly related to what the thread is supposed to be about. Take your, ehrm, points to the correct thread, please.

How can JtR's route from Mitre Sq., to Goulston St., not be related to your geography claims? You bring it up yourself in order to get him home.

Also, you invoke another previous place of work for him to get him to go down another road instead of his 'usual' route to work because, let's face it, a 'route to work' that covers the C5 is nothing short of a big circle around Whitechapel. Which is why geographically the 'route to work' theory really isn't a good explanation of these murders at all.

[John Wheat]

Not if he lived in Bow, he ain´t. He can´t be.

Why? He owned a horse and cart. Its not that far from Bow to Whitechapel.

[MrBarnett]

There are numerous problems with this. If you remember Eddowes had 12 pieces of cloth on her when found. She also had a mended apron piece. Yet despite JtR having gone through her stuff (like Chapman, which also links them to the same hand) he cuts off Eddowes' apron piece with blood and poop and uses it instead?

Here is an example of why that view is fraught with problems. -> https://www.casebook.org/dissertatio...-graffito.html



How can JtR's route from Mitre Sq., to Goulston St., not be related to your geography claims? You bring it up yourself in order to get him home.

Also, you invoke another previous place of work for him to get him to go down another road instead of his 'usual' route to work because, let's face it, a 'route to work' that covers the C5 is nothing short of a big circle around Whitechapel. Which is why geographically the 'route to work' theory really isn't a good explanation of these murders at all.

Not a previous place of work, but a previous residence. And the WM started just after he moved to his new address.

It helps to understand the detail of a theory before you attempt to rubbish it.

[Fisherman]

Not a previous place of work, but a previous residence. And the WM started just after he moved to his new address.

It helps to understand the detail of a theory before you attempt to rubbish it.

Come now, Gary, don´t crash his party - there are so many things to keep track of and surely it is participating that counts...?

[Fisherman]

Why? He owned a horse and cart. Its not that far from Bow to Whitechapel.

If I may, John, can I direct you to my answer to Herlock a wee bit further up this thread? Believe it or not, but I managed to answer this post of yours in that post before you even posted yours.

[John Wheat]

If I may, John, can I direct you to my answer to Herlock a wee bit further up this thread? Beleive it or not, but I managed to answer this post of yours in that post before you even posted yours.

Great but I don't really care what you and Herlock say. Bury is the best suspect going

[Batman]

Not a previous place of work, but a previous residence. And the WM started just after he moved to his new address.

It helps to understand the detail of a theory before you attempt to rubbish it.

Fine this. My mistake but my point still stands.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Great but I don't really care what you and Herlock say. Bury is the best suspect going

John, I don’t really understand your dismissive attitude? I haven’t made a single comment about Bury not being a good suspect. In fact my last post pretty much said the opposite.

For the record I have Bury in my top 3 suspects. None of whom would I put money on though.

[Fisherman]

Great but I don't really care what you and Herlock say. Bury is the best suspect going

Mmm, I know you think that. The problem is that you DO care about what I say, otherwise you would not try and attack it all the time. A further problem arises when you don´t read and understand what I say.

For example, I think that it would be stupid to rule out Bury as a suspect on account of his living in Bow. If you had been a more careful reader you would know that.

There are other reasons for my ruling Bury out.

[MrBarnett]

Fine this. My mistake but my point still stands.

Where did Lechmere live before? Do you know?

Perhaps it was Dorset Street or Mitre Square.

[John Wheat]

John, I don’t really understand your dismissive attitude? I haven’t made a single comment about Bury not being a good suspect. In fact my last post pretty much said the opposite.

For the record I have Bury in my top 3 suspects. None of whom would I put money on though.

I was replying to Fisherman Herlock. I have no problem with you whatsoever. Sorry if I have given you the impression I do.

[John Wheat]

Mmm, I know you think that. The problem is that you DO care about what I say, otherwise you would not try and attack it all the time. A further problem arises when you don´t read and understand what I say.

For example, I think that it would be stupid to rule out Bury as a suspect on account of his living in Bow. If you had been a more careful reader you would know that.

There are other reasons for my ruling Bury out.

There is nothing that rules Bury out nor indeed anything that rules Lechmere in.