Casebook: Jack the Ripper - Main
   

Introduction
Victims
Suspects
Witnesses
Ripper Letters
Police Officials
Official Documents
Press Reports
Victorian London
Message Boards
Ripper Media
Authors
Dissertations
Timelines
Games & Diversions
Photo Archive
Ripper Wiki
Casebook Examiner
Ripper Podcast
About the Casebook

Most Recent Posts:
Mary Jane Kelly: If Mrs. Maxwell Didn't See Mary Who Did She See? - by DJA 8 minutes ago.
Hutchinson, George: Any updates, or opinions on this witness. - by harry 16 minutes ago.
Hutchinson, George: Any updates, or opinions on this witness. - by Sam Flynn 16 minutes ago.
Hutchinson, George: Any updates, or opinions on this witness. - by Ben 35 minutes ago.
Mary Jane Kelly: If Mrs. Maxwell Didn't See Mary Who Did She See? - by Sam Flynn 37 minutes ago.
Mary Jane Kelly: If Mrs. Maxwell Didn't See Mary Who Did She See? - by packers stem 1 hour and 11 minutes ago.

Most Popular Threads:
Hutchinson, George: Any updates, or opinions on this witness. - (57 posts)
Mary Jane Kelly: If Mrs. Maxwell Didn't See Mary Who Did She See? - (14 posts)
General Discussion: Masonic and the number 39. - (9 posts)
Torso Killings: torso maps - (3 posts)
Research Related: Henry Kelly - (2 posts)
A6 Murders: A6 Rebooted - (1 posts)

Wiki Updates:
Robert Sagar
Edit: Chris
May 9, 2015, 12:32 am
Online newspaper archives
Edit: Chris
Nov 26, 2014, 10:25 am
Joseph Lawende
Edit: Chris
Mar 9, 2014, 10:12 am
Miscellaneous research resources
Edit: Chris
Feb 13, 2014, 9:28 am
Charles Cross
Edit: John Bennett
Sep 4, 2013, 8:20 pm

Most Recent Blogs:
Mike Covell: A DECADE IN THE MAKING.
February 19, 2016, 11:12 am.
Chris George: RipperCon in Baltimore, April 8-10, 2016
February 10, 2016, 2:55 pm.
Mike Covell: Hull Prison Visit
October 10, 2015, 8:04 am.
Mike Covell: NEW ADVENTURES IN RESEARCH
August 9, 2015, 3:10 am.
Mike Covell: UPDDATES FOR THE PAST 11 MONTHS
November 14, 2014, 10:02 am.
Mike Covell: Mike’s Book Releases
March 17, 2014, 3:18 am.

Go Back   Casebook Forums > Ripper Discussions > Witnesses

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #61  
Old 06-24-2018, 10:30 PM
Fisherman Fisherman is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 17,170
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Elamarna View Post
Ask for a specific example and i will happily oblige.


Steve
Pick any of them, Steve. In what case have you used factual grounds to suggest an innocent explanation where I point to the possibility of a guily one?

Or is the factuality just one of "we know this has happened in other instances, so it could have happened here too"?

Is that what your factuality stretches to?
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #62  
Old 06-24-2018, 11:11 PM
Fisherman Fisherman is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 17,170
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Elamarna View Post
I appears you do not fully read what is posted in response to your own posts.
I refer to your post # 6 in the thread on Mizen's inquest statement, and my post's 7,8,9 &10.
I have followed this up with another post this evening on the same thread.


Steve
... where I have answered it, noticing that you used my vacation to claim that I "avoided" this.

Anything that rocks your boat, Steve ...

Last edited by Fisherman : 06-24-2018 at 11:17 PM.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #63  
Old 06-24-2018, 11:19 PM
Sam Flynn Sam Flynn is online now
Casebook Supporter
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Wales
Posts: 10,038
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fisherman View Post
Pick any of them, Steve. In what case have you used factual grounds to suggest an innocent explanation where I point to the possibility of a guily one?
What had he to gain from doing so? What would he have been trying to hide by only giving his work address? Was he afraid that someone was going to come forward and say, "Yeah. That Charlie Cross from 32 Acacia Avenue is always running kids over"?

He was identified as a Pickfords driver, and that was good enough. The attribution of a sinister motivation is preposterous.
__________________
Kind regards, Sam Flynn

"Suche Nullen" (Nietzsche, Götzendämmerung, 1888)
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #64  
Old 06-24-2018, 11:43 PM
Fisherman Fisherman is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 17,170
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam Flynn View Post
What had he to gain from doing so? What would he have been trying to hide by only giving his work address? Was he afraid that someone was going to come forward and say, "Yeah. That Charlie Cross from 32 Acacia Avenue is always running kids over"?

He was identified as a Pickfords driver, and that was good enough. The attribution of a sinister motivation is preposterous.
You are not answering or commenting on the part you quoted, Gareth. You quote a post where I speak to Steve about how he says that he has factual grounds for what he says out here (implying that somebody else has not).

But never mind! it is clear what you are saying anyhow.

I agree with you, as a matter of fact, to a degree at least. It would be wrong to assume that there was a sinister motive behind the lacking address.

Then again, I am not assuming that there was. I am saying that there MAy have been such a motive, not least since we have a possible correlation with the inquest material, where it seems the Star reporter could have gotten his home address from a clerk. If this was so, then we have two instances of sudden, violent death with a carman named Charles Cross involved. And in both instances, it seems possible that he omitted to give his home address, whereas others did.

Could be perfectly trivial, could be that the Star reporter was the only one interested in writing his name down in the article and so on and so forth - but it could also be that there WAS a sinister reason. And it IS a tad strange that there are all these things that are so very useful for anyone who makes a case against Lechmere.

But don´t think that I am saying that it is a proven thing that it had a sinister reason - others will take care of that for you, I´m sure. It is a very common thing to misrepresent what I say like that. It seems like the lifeblood of the criticism aimed at the theory.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #65  
Old 06-24-2018, 11:49 PM
Sam Flynn Sam Flynn is online now
Casebook Supporter
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Wales
Posts: 10,038
Default

There MIGHT be all kinds of reasons for just about anything, but it usually boils down to the overwhelmingly likely one.
__________________
Kind regards, Sam Flynn

"Suche Nullen" (Nietzsche, Götzendämmerung, 1888)
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #66  
Old 06-25-2018, 12:29 AM
MrBarnett MrBarnett is offline
Inspector
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Lyme Regis, Dorset
Posts: 1,475
Default Allen?

If your Sunday best (form-filling) name is Charles Allen Lechmere and your workaday one is Charlie Cross, what is the most likely name you would provide to a coroner?

From most to least likely, I'd say:

Charles Allen Lechmere aka Charles Cross
Charles Allen Lechmere
Charles Cross
Charles Allen Cross

For me the 'Allen' sits uncomfortably with the 'Cross'. He felt it necessary to give his middle name but not his real surname?

If an official asked me my name, I'd probably say Gary Barnett. If he asked me for my full name I'd add my middle name. At that point, if my birth cert actually said Gary Gobbledegook, I'm pretty sure I'd mention that.

Last edited by MrBarnett : 06-25-2018 at 12:33 AM.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #67  
Old 06-25-2018, 12:40 AM
Elamarna Elamarna is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: South london
Posts: 4,217
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fisherman View Post
Pick any of them, Steve. In what case have you used factual grounds to suggest an innocent explanation where I point to the possibility of a guily one?

Or is the factuality just one of "we know this has happened in other instances, so it could have happened here too"?

Is that what your factuality stretches to?
Give me an example of something i have claim is probably true, rather than just a possible alternative to one of your suggestions and i will supply evidence to make my view.


Steve
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #68  
Old 06-25-2018, 01:26 AM
Elamarna Elamarna is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: South london
Posts: 4,217
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fisherman View Post
... where I have answered it, noticing that you used my vacation to claim that I "avoided" this.

Anything that rocks your boat, Steve ...
Again misleading, the post in question were posted over a week ago, 15th June.
You were not asked just when you were away for a day or two but on the 15th.
That you did not bother to reply is your choice.
However to claim that a holiday taken a week after the posts is being used to get at you, is just more of the same old tales of being treated unfairly, such as we both are ver0y well aware is untrue.


Steve
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #69  
Old 06-25-2018, 04:17 AM
Fisherman Fisherman is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 17,170
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Elamarna View Post
Give me an example of something i have claim is probably true, rather than just a possible alternative to one of your suggestions and i will supply evidence to make my view.


Steve
But it is not a question of you having said something is probably true, it is a question of you claiming that you lean against factual evidene whereas I do not.

And all along, it is instead a question of you suggesting alternative innocent explanations that have nothing at all in the way of evidence going for them.

That´s what I dislike. When somebody gets on his high horses and calims factual superiority, then that someone needs to be a lot better equipped for that trip than you are.

Example: Lechmere disagreed with Mizen about what he had said on the murder night. If Mizen was right, it furthermore applies that what Lechmere said, was a perfectly shaped phrasing to take him past the police unsearched.

Does that fact go away because you come up with the idea that Mizen could have lied? No. That is speculation only, which tells it apart from the facts of the case. It is of very limited value until proven.

See what I mean?
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #70  
Old 06-25-2018, 04:20 AM
Fisherman Fisherman is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 17,170
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Elamarna View Post
Again misleading, the post in question were posted over a week ago, 15th June.
You were not asked just when you were away for a day or two but on the 15th.
That you did not bother to reply is your choice.
However to claim that a holiday taken a week after the posts is being used to get at you, is just more of the same old tales of being treated unfairly, such as we both are ver0y well aware is untrue.


Steve
Well, it´s good to have it established that you entered this part of the debate with the prejudice that I am deceiving myself if I think I an be honest. After that, it is up to others to say whether that is a fair stance to work from or not, and if it has any influence on this particular debate, where - incidentally - you claim that I have said that the DT and the DN support me on the blood issue, although I have quoted in full exactly what they said so that anybody can check for themselves.

That is what your debating amounts to.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 02:42 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.