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:
General Suspect Discussion: H H holmes - by Pcdunn 17 minutes ago.
Tumblety, Francis: Tumblety - Hermaphrodite. - by Steadmund Brand 1 hour and 11 minutes ago.
Tumblety, Francis: Tumblety - Hermaphrodite. - by Abby Normal 3 hours ago.
Witnesses: Why doubt a soldier murdered Tabram? - by Abby Normal 3 hours ago.
Witnesses: Why doubt a soldier murdered Tabram? - by Jon Guy 3 hours ago.
General Suspect Discussion: H H holmes - by Abby Normal 3 hours ago.

Most Popular Threads:
Witnesses: Why doubt a soldier murdered Tabram? - (14 posts)
General Suspect Discussion: H H holmes - (3 posts)
Elizabeth Stride: Elizabeth's murder and the double event - (3 posts)
Tumblety, Francis: Tumblety - Hermaphrodite. - (2 posts)
Maybrick, James: Acquiring A Victorian Diary - (2 posts)
General Discussion: Albert Backert - did he emigrate? - (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 > Suspects > Lechmere/Cross, Charles

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1891  
Old 07-16-2017, 11:29 AM
Herlock Sholmes Herlock Sholmes is offline
Inspector
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: The West Midlands
Posts: 1,032
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Orsam View Post
Very good!

It's a little known fact that Simon pays me a small commission for every sale of his book, so I've having a great month.
I think that you should have a crack at The Julia Wallace next

Regards
Herlock
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #1892  
Old 07-16-2017, 12:34 PM
Pierre Pierre is offline
Inactive
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 4,407
Default

[quote=Fisherman;422154]

Quote:
You know the exact answer to that question, Herlock. He lived in 22 Doveton Street, he worked at the Pickfords depot at Broad Street, the two simplest and fastest routes there were the Hanbury Street route and the Old Ontague Street route, both more or less equally timeconsuming.
In 1888 the statistical risk of being murdered in that area as well as becoming a witness to crime and to find a murder victim was much higher than the statistical risk of being the extremely rare serial killer Jack the Ripper.*

Quote:
We know that he walked through Bucks Row at the night of the Nichols murder, he reasonably used it alwyas, since it was the only way through that made sense, and thereafter he would opt for the Hanbury Street route or the Old Montague Street route.
The reason he found Nichols and not any other victim was that she was found at the murder site closest to his home!

Quote:
We do not know that he used either route on the occasions of the deaths of Tabram, Chapman and Kelly, but we know that it is consistent with where he lived and worked to suggest that he did.
What was the problem with living where he lived and working where he worked?*

And all people in that area who used those routes must now be suspects.

Quote:
It is also probable that Tabram, Chapman and Kelly all died at roughly the time when he would have been en route to work
At least it is an historical fact that this was the case with Nichols.

And that is why you have your spurious relation.

Quote:
There was no cctv that caught him, and there is no evidence that puts him there. All there is is a totally logical suggestion that fits with what we know.
Every madness has itīs logic.

Quote:
It was 1888. It is therefore a hell of a lot more than anybody could ask for. And it puts every other suspect in the shade by comparion. No wait, not in the shade - in total darkness.
You have to say that, since your theory is a total twisting of sources.

Quote:
It is a piece of circumstantial evidence that is breathtakingly interesting to anybody with an interest in the case, and a nail in the eye of the Lechmere naysayers.

And that is where it remains.
Your piece of circumstantial evidence is ruling your life.

Pierre
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #1893  
Old 07-16-2017, 08:32 PM
Scott Nelson Scott Nelson is offline
Inspector
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,107
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pierre View Post
Your piece of circumstantial evidence is ruling your life.
Isn't that the sad truth for us all?
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #1894  
Old 07-16-2017, 10:56 PM
harry harry is offline
Chief Inspector
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,684
Default

Myself,along with many police from 1888,must be either ,or had been ,deceiving ourselves or been/are ignorant,as we have not considered Cross even a suspect.
On my part,I study the elements of the murder of Nicholls.What the elements are,there are at least two,can be found quite easily by a search on Google.
Take this element.The murderer must have been in the company of Nicholls at the time she was killed.It couldn't have been otherwise. WAs Cross placed in her company while she was alive?,either by direct or circumstantial evidence.Not to my knowledge.
Another essential element.It must be PROVEN that there was an intent to kill.
Can it be proven that Cross left home that morning with an intent to kill?,developed an intent after leaving home?,or formed an intent in some other manner.I haven't heard of such.The only intent, expressed by himself,was to go to work at Pickfords.
So no,on those two elements alone,there is no case against him,either by direct or circumstantial means.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #1895  
Old 07-17-2017, 02:31 AM
Herlock Sholmes Herlock Sholmes is offline
Inspector
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: The West Midlands
Posts: 1,032
Default

[quote=harry;422253
Another essential element.It must be PROVEN that there was an intent to kill.
Can it be proven that Cross left home that morning with an intent to kill?,developed an intent after leaving home?,or formed an intent in some other manner.I haven't heard of such.The only intent, expressed by himself,was to go to work at Pickfords.
[/QUOTE]

Hi Harry

A point that I've made recently is that if CL set out to kill that morning (as it's unlikely in the extreme that a killer of Jack's type would just 'leap' on a prostitute on the spur of the moment) he allowed himself a ridiculously short time to do so. Most reports appear say that he left home at 3.30; the Times said 3.20. This allows him, at most 40 minutes, or probably nearer to 30 to do all he needed to.
First, find a prostitute. Not as simple as it sounds at that time of the morning. He could easily have spent half an hour or more doing so.
Second, find a spot. Wouldn't have taken long as those women knew the places.
Third, do the deed. Probably only 5 minutes at most.
Fourth, we can't know for certain if he would have gotten blood on him and neither could he. Someone heading for work would need to find a place with a bit of light to check himself over for blood. He might then need to clean up (not in the middle of the street either.)
Fifth, he'd have to get to work. Taking into consideration of course that he wouldn't have known where he would have found his victim. It could have been considerably off his route to work. He might, therefore, have still had 15 or 20 mins walking still to do.

The ripper wasn't utterly reckless. He avoided capture (even until now). So it's reasonable to assume that he would have allowed himself sufficient time to cover most possibilities. There's no way he could have expected to find a victim in Bucks Row on his regular walk to work.

Regards
Herlock
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #1896  
Old 07-17-2017, 07:00 AM
Patrick S Patrick S is offline
Sergeant
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 976
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Paddy Goose View Post
Hi Patrick and thanks for your reply. Yes, that was my point, why discuss this? A twelve year old child knows Charles Cross found the body of Polly Nichols. But obviously this is a hobby you enjoy. I would find it a chore, but since you like it, okay.

Thanks again,

Paddy
It keeps the juices flowing, so to speak. Although, I'll admit, it's becoming a chore.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #1897  
Old 07-17-2017, 07:34 AM
Patrick S Patrick S is offline
Sergeant
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 976
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post
So we can say that CL, along with a thousand other blokes on there various ways to work, was in the general area of the 'killing ground' at roughly the times of the murders.

How is this a nail in the eye of the 'Lechmere naysayers?' CL is becoming the Frankenstein's monster of Ripperology! A lifeless corpse that you keep breathing life into by making statements such as the above one. No one has doubted that he could have been in the area. There's nothing breathtaking about it.
Looking at the times. Tabram was probably killed around 2.30. Kelly is debatable due to Maxwell and Eddowes was around 1.30. Chapman was 4.30 according to Phillips but could well have been later considering the evidence of Long and Cadosche. Was CL on flexi-hours?
You also see nothing strange about the idea of killing and mutilating on the way to work. 'I'm off to work love. Now, I must remember to buy a paper, get a packet of fags oh and kill and hideously mutilate a prostitute.'

Herlock the Naysayer
It's a very simple equation and you touched on it. Like thousands of others, Charles Cross operated within the same geographical area as the Whitechapel Murderer. The killer's operation concerned finding and killing prostitutes. Cross' operation concerned getting from his home to his work and back again.

Cross would be a far more interesting suspect had he found the body and had no credible reason for being in Buck's Row at 3:40am. Imagine if MJ Druitt had found the body. Druitt lived in Blackheath. Where would he have been coming from? Where would he have been going? Cross lived in Bethnal Green and worked at Pickfords in Broad Street. He was right where he was supposed to be.

Chances were high that someone LIKE HIM would find Nichols.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #1898  
Old 07-17-2017, 07:41 AM
Abby Normal Abby Normal is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 5,278
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Patrick S View Post
It's a very simple equation and you touched on it. Like thousands of others, Charles Cross operated within the same geographical area as the Whitechapel Murderer. The killer's operation concerned finding and killing prostitutes. Cross' operation concerned getting from his home to his work and back again.

Cross would be a far more interesting suspect had he found the body and had no credible reason for being in Buck's Row at 3:40am. Imagine if MJ Druitt had found the body. Druitt lived in Blackheath. Where would he have been coming from? Where would he have been going? Cross lived in Bethnal Green and worked at Pickfords in Broad Street. He was right where he was supposed to be.

Chances were high that someone LIKE HIM would find Nichols.
while I agree with this, I believe Lech is the only "suspect" where it is on record that the victims coincide with his route to work at roughly the same time, and in the case of stride his mother lived very close by. I'm not sure we can get that specific with any other suspect.

however, that being said, one of my biggest problems with Lech as a suspect, is I still have a hard time believing the ripper would be doing his thing on his way TO work. now if it coincided with his getting OFF of work....
__________________
"Is all that we see or seem
but a dream within a dream?"

-Edgar Allan Poe


"...the man and the peaked cap he is said to have worn
quite tallies with the descriptions I got of him."

-Frederick G. Abberline
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #1899  
Old 07-17-2017, 07:59 AM
Harry D Harry D is offline
Superintendent
 
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 2,005
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Abby Normal View Post
while I agree with this, I believe Lech is the only "suspect" where it is on record that the victims coincide with his route to work at roughly the same time, and in the case of stride his mother lived very close by. I'm not sure we can get that specific with any other suspect.
Jacob Levy's brother lived in the Wentworth Building (where the GSG was found) & his cousin, the witness Joseph Levy, was described as having something to hide. He lived right in the hot-zone and he was a butcher.
__________________
Hail to the king, baby!
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #1900  
Old 07-17-2017, 08:15 AM
Herlock Sholmes Herlock Sholmes is offline
Inspector
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: The West Midlands
Posts: 1,032
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Patrick S View Post
It's a very simple equation and you touched on it. Like thousands of others, Charles Cross operated within the same geographical area as the Whitechapel Murderer. The killer's operation concerned finding and killing prostitutes. Cross' operation concerned getting from his home to his work and back again.

Cross would be a far more interesting suspect had he found the body and had no credible reason for being in Buck's Row at 3:40am. Imagine if MJ Druitt had found the body. Druitt lived in Blackheath. Where would he have been coming from? Where would he have been going? Cross lived in Bethnal Green and worked at Pickfords in Broad Street. He was right where he was supposed to be.

Chances were high that someone LIKE HIM would find Nichols.
Exactly Patrick. If CL had found the body and he'd gone and found a Constable on his own he would never have become a suspect. Paul's appearance gives pro-Lechmere fantasists to scream 'caught in the act! I really can't see how Fisherman can say that he's easily the likeliest candidate. The thought of CL leaving his house between 3.20-3.30 finding and killing a prostitute, making sure that he's not bloodstained then getting to work for 4.00 is ludicrous and should pretty much immediately discount him in my view.

I've asked this before but can anyone name another serial killer who committed this kind of murder on the way to work and with such a ridiculously tight time frame?

Add this to the obvious fact that he could have easily walked away to definate freedom and obscurity and we have one of the least likely rippers.

Regards
Herlock
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 09:48 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.