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: Kansas Physician Confirms Howard Report - by TradeName 2 hours ago.
General Suspect Discussion: Only one suspect can be shown to have carried a knife. - by Richard Patterson 2 hours ago.
General Suspect Discussion: Only one suspect can be shown to have carried a knife. - by Varqm 2 hours ago.
General Suspect Discussion: Only one suspect can be shown to have carried a knife. - by Richard Patterson 3 hours ago.
General Suspect Discussion: Only one suspect can be shown to have carried a knife. - by Richard Patterson 3 hours ago.
Martha Tabram: Probibility of Martha Tabram Being a JtR Victim - by Wickerman 3 hours ago.

Most Popular Threads:
Motive, Method and Madness: Same motive = same killer - (42 posts)
Martha Tabram: Probibility of Martha Tabram Being a JtR Victim - (13 posts)
General Suspect Discussion: Only one suspect can be shown to have carried a knife. - (13 posts)
Shades of Whitechapel: good riddance-have fun in Hell - (6 posts)
Kosminski, Aaron: My theory on Kosminski - (5 posts)
General Suspect Discussion: Kansas Physician Confirms Howard Report - (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 > Motive, Method and Madness

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old 07-24-2017, 01:20 PM
Pierre Pierre is offline
Inactive
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 4,407
Default Lechmere Triple Event

Hi,

This is a discussion were we are moving away from Buck´s Row and discuss Charles Allen Lechmere on the double event 30th September and the Whitehall victim found 2nd October.

Since the hypothesis about Lechmere being the killer is based on very sparse material, we can know very little, if anything at all, about Lechmere and the three victims found within three days in London 1888. Therefore we must hypothesize without sources for Lechmere. This means the hypothesizing must be purely theoretical.

So what happened during these three days?

Firstly I hypothesize that L (Lechmere, being Jack the Ripper) killed Stride. And Stride became scared and ran away from him. So she was not killed in the place where L had intended to kill her.

This was a terrible mistake and L therefore had to change his MO that night. He did this by cutting off the piece of apron from the next victim and taking it with him as evidence. After that he went to get a piece of chalk. That is why there is a discussion about a time gap between the murder of Eddowes and the GSG.

So writing the GSG was extremely important to L. If he did not write the message he would make an even bigger mistake. Because the failure with the first murder could not be changed. It was a hopeless failure since she had run away.

So Lechmere (having a piece of chalk at home, coming home with the bits and pieces from Eddowes and collecting a piece of chalk) had to write the GSG.

But on this particular weekend he had decided to do a specific event at the new Scotland Yard building. He thought they would find it on the 1st or 2nd and it was found on the 2nd. It was found in the correct place.

And so L had managed to do the Triple Event but it was not perfect. In fact, it was a failure.

So L started to plan for the next murder. It was in late October that he planned it.

His wife would not be able to understand anything of it, although he had come home with the bits and pieces from Chapman and Eddowes.

The motive was that his wife was so domineering. And still, she did not know anything about her husband.

That is the short story about Lechmere and the Triple Event.

But is there evidence for it?

That is something we can discuss.

Cheers, Pierre

Last edited by Pierre : 07-24-2017 at 01:24 PM.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 07-24-2017, 01:41 PM
John G John G is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 4,051
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pierre View Post
Hi,

This is a discussion were we are moving away from Buck´s Row and discuss Charles Allen Lechmere on the double event 30th September and the Whitehall victim found 2nd October.

Since the hypothesis about Lechmere being the killer is based on very sparse material, we can know very little, if anything at all, about Lechmere and the three victims found within three days in London 1888. Therefore we must hypothesize without sources for Lechmere. This means the hypothesizing must be purely theoretical.

So what happened during these three days?

Firstly I hypothesize that L (Lechmere, being Jack the Ripper) killed Stride. And Stride became scared and ran away from him. So she was not killed in the place where L had intended to kill her.

This was a terrible mistake and L therefore had to change his MO that night. He did this by cutting off the piece of apron from the next victim and taking it with him as evidence. After that he went to get a piece of chalk. That is why there is a discussion about a time gap between the murder of Eddowes and the GSG.

So writing the GSG was extremely important to L. If he did not write the message he would make an even bigger mistake. Because the failure with the first murder could not be changed. It was a hopeless failure since she had run away.

So Lechmere (having a piece of chalk at home, coming home with the bits and pieces from Eddowes and collecting a piece of chalk) had to write the GSG.

But on this particular weekend he had decided to do a specific event at the new Scotland Yard building. He thought they would find it on the 1st or 2nd and it was found on the 2nd. It was found in the correct place.

And so L had managed to do the Triple Event but it was not perfect. In fact, it was a failure.

So L started to plan for the next murder. It was in late October that he planned it.

His wife would not be able to understand anything of it, although he had come home with the bits and pieces from Chapman and Eddowes.

The motive was that his wife was so domineering. And still, she did not know anything about her husband.

That is the short story about Lechmere and the Triple Event.

But is there evidence for it?

That is something we can discuss.

Cheers, Pierre
Well one obvious problem is that the Whitehall victim may have been stored for several months, so certainly was not killed on the 2nd October. And not only do we have a different MO, as well as different practically everything else, where did Lechmere store the body? The Lechmere underground storage site, otherwise known as the Lechmere basement?
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 07-24-2017, 02:01 PM
Robert St Devil Robert St Devil is offline
Sergeant
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 717
Default

Are you inserting Lechmere into your own hypothesis pierre? Too much of your story is missing to hypothesize Lechmere (or any suspect's) involvement, would first have to answer why GSG was necessary and how failure was measured in these cases.
__________________
there,s nothing new, only the unexplored
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 07-24-2017, 02:12 PM
Sam Flynn Sam Flynn is offline
Casebook Supporter
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Wales
Posts: 8,587
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert St Devil View Post
Are you inserting Lechmere into your own hypothesis pierre? Too much of your story is missing to hypothesize Lechmere (or any suspect's) involvement, would first have to answer why GSG was necessary and how failure was measured in these cases.
Agreed. This line of thought doesn't require any suspect; indeed, given the propensity of certain suspects to completely derail a thread, why mention one at all? It's asking for trouble
__________________
Kind regards, Sam Flynn

"Suche Nullen" (Nietzsche, Götzendämmerung, 1888)
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 07-24-2017, 02:16 PM
Pierre Pierre is offline
Inactive
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 4,407
Default

[quote=John G;423138]

Quote:
Well one obvious problem is that the Whitehall victim may have been stored for several months, so certainly was not killed on the 2nd October.
She seems to have died in August.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 07-24-2017, 02:25 PM
Abby Normal Abby Normal is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 5,043
Default

So much for the triple event
__________________
"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
  #7  
Old 07-25-2017, 12:43 AM
Henry Flower Henry Flower is offline
Inspector
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Hackney Wick
Posts: 1,068
Default

I predict this will be an unusually short thread.
__________________
What should I do at Rome? I have not learnt
The art of lying


Decimus Iunius Iuvenalis - Satire III
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 07-25-2017, 03:43 AM
kjab3112 kjab3112 is offline
Detective
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: London
Posts: 135
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pierre View Post

Firstly I hypothesize that L (Lechmere, being Jack the Ripper) killed Stride. And Stride became scared and ran away from him. So she was not killed in the place where L had intended to kill her.

Cheers, Pierre

Hi Pierre,

I can see one issue with your hypothesis immediately. Firstly we have a police con stable who states he saw Stride in Berner's Street. For your hypothesis to work (irrelevant of who Jack is), Liz either runs after having her neck cut or is caught at Dutfield Yard. In the latter case Schwartz is suggestive Liz was attacked whilst standing at the entrance (i.e. not running anywhere). In the former, although it would be possible to run with a severely cut throat, her syncopal collapse would have been forward not onto her back.

Just my thoughts

Paul
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 07-25-2017, 04:53 AM
Pierre Pierre is offline
Inactive
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 4,407
Default

QUOTE=kjab3112;423176

Quote:
Hi Pierre,

I can see one issue with your hypothesis immediately. Firstly we have a police con stable who states he saw Stride in Berner's Street. For your hypothesis to work (irrelevant of who Jack is), Liz either runs after having her neck cut or is caught at Dutfield Yard.
Hi Paul,

There is no issue. Original source from Scotland Yard 19th October 1888 gives the time 12.35 for PC Smith having seen "a man and woman" and later identifying her as Stride and it gives the time 1 am for the finding of Stride by Diemshitz.

So there is 30 minutes between the sighting of Smith and the finding of Stride by Diemshitz.

Original inquest sources do not exist for the Stride murder.

And a comment here: the approach of trying to determine minutiae in the past (as in the case of Buck´s Row) gives low reliability and especially so when using newspaper articles - a problem which Fisherman has to handle all the time.

Quote:
In the latter case Schwartz is suggestive Liz was attacked whilst standing at the entrance (i.e. not running anywhere). In the former, although it would be possible to run with a severely cut throat, her syncopal collapse would have been forward not onto her back.

Just my thoughts

Paul
12.45 is the time given by the original source for Schwartz, i.e. 15 minutes before the murder.

So since there is 15 minutes stated in the source as the time between the experience of Schwartz and the murder, there is no issue in that case either.

And given the earlier mentioned problem of trying to establish history on minutiae, we can safely leave those two non issues there.

Cheers, Pierre
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 07-25-2017, 04:57 AM
Elamarna Elamarna is offline
Assistant Commissioner
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: South london
Posts: 3,647
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pierre View Post
Hi,

This is a discussion were we are moving away from Buck´s Row and discuss Charles Allen Lechmere on the double event 30th September and the Whitehall victim found 2nd October.

Since the hypothesis about Lechmere being the killer is based on very sparse material, we can know very little, if anything at all, about Lechmere and the three victims found within three days in London 1888. Therefore we must hypothesize without sources for Lechmere. This means the hypothesizing must be purely theoretical.

So what happened during these three days?

Firstly I hypothesize that L (Lechmere, being Jack the Ripper) killed Stride. And Stride became scared and ran away from him. So she was not killed in the place where L had intended to kill her.

This was a terrible mistake and L therefore had to change his MO that night. He did this by cutting off the piece of apron from the next victim and taking it with him as evidence. After that he went to get a piece of chalk. That is why there is a discussion about a time gap between the murder of Eddowes and the GSG.

So writing the GSG was extremely important to L. If he did not write the message he would make an even bigger mistake. Because the failure with the first murder could not be changed. It was a hopeless failure since she had run away.

So Lechmere (having a piece of chalk at home, coming home with the bits and pieces from Eddowes and collecting a piece of chalk) had to write the GSG.
In this hypothesis he writes the GSG because of the failure in Berner street ?

The GSG is written to show a link between Stride and Eddowes, much as proposed by Tom Wescott .
The GSG in this case would not exist unless the Stride killing was a failure, if it has wider meaning, surely he would have written it anyway and had chalk on him.

There is so a serious issue with Lechmere having time to get home to Doveton Street and Back again before the GSG IS found. The timing is too tight.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Pierre View Post

But on this particular weekend he had decided to do a specific event at the new Scotland Yard building. He thought they would find it on the 1st or 2nd and it was found on the 2nd. It was found in the correct place.

And so L had managed to do the Triple Event but it was not perfect. In fact, it was a failure.

So L started to plan for the next murder. It was in late October that he planned it.

His wife would not be able to understand anything of it, although he had come home with the bits and pieces from Chapman and Eddowes.

The motive was that his wife was so domineering. And still, she did not know anything about her husband.

That is the short story about Lechmere and the Triple Event.

But is there evidence for it?

That is something we can discuss.

Cheers, Pierre
If he planned for the end of October what happened? There is nothing to suggest why this would have been his plan or why it did not occur.

And of course we have no data I am aware of to say he had a domineering wife.

Steve
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 08:27 PM.


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