Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Favorite suspect/s?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by MrBarnett View Post
    Hi Caz,

    But why didn't he even mention that his 'real' name was Lechmere? Is it likely that it didn't even occur to him to mention that he normally identified himself to the authorities by that name?

    'I'm known at work as Charlie Cross - Cross was my stepdad's name - but my real name is Charles allen Lechmere', sort of thing?

    Gary
    I too find it a little odd that there is no AKAs in the record for lech
    "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

    Comment


    • Aren’t we just looking for mystery where none exists? We are used to living in a world of bureaucracy. People in the 19th century weren’t. Especially the working classes who had far less dealings with ‘officialdom’ than we do. So we have a man who gives his name, when asked, as Charles Alan Cross of 22 Doveton Street. When he filled in any kind of official form he’d obviously been told that he had to use his birth name (Lechmere)and not his preferred one. Of course we have no proof that he used Cross from day to day but it’s a fairly reasonable and likely suggestion when faced with the suggested ‘alternative.’ I.e. that he gave a false name to somehow avoid police attention.

      If he wanted to give the police a false name to throw them off the scent as it were then that’s surely what he would have done and not given them his correct Christian names, the surname of his stepfather (that he’d previously used on a census) and his correct address. Surely the worst attempt in the history of crime at pulling the wool over the eyes of the police? I really can’t avoid the thinking that this ‘name thing,’ whilst being initially an interesting discovery, is just a complete red herring.
      Regards

      Herlock






      "Crime is common. Logic is rare. Therefore it is upon the logic rather than upon the crime that you should dwell.”

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post
        Aren’t we just looking for mystery where none exists? We are used to living in a world of bureaucracy. People in the 19th century weren’t. Especially the working classes who had far less dealings with ‘officialdom’ than we do. So we have a man who gives his name, when asked, as Charles Alan Cross of 22 Doveton Street. When he filled in any kind of official form he’d obviously been told that he had to use his birth name (Lechmere)and not his preferred one. Of course we have no proof that he used Cross from day to day but it’s a fairly reasonable and likely suggestion when faced with the suggested ‘alternative.’ I.e. that he gave a false name to somehow avoid police attention.

        If he wanted to give the police a false name to throw them off the scent as it were then that’s surely what he would have done and not given them his correct Christian names, the surname of his stepfather (that he’d previously used on a census) and his correct address. Surely the worst attempt in the history of crime at pulling the wool over the eyes of the police? I really can’t avoid the thinking that this ‘name thing,’ whilst being initially an interesting discovery, is just a complete red herring.
        And his place of work.
        G U T

        There are two ways to be fooled, one is to believe what isn't true, the other is to refuse to believe that which is true.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post
          Aren’t we just looking for mystery where none exists? We are used to living in a world of bureaucracy. People in the 19th century weren’t. Especially the working classes who had far less dealings with ‘officialdom’ than we do. So we have a man who gives his name, when asked, as Charles Alan Cross of 22 Doveton Street. When he filled in any kind of official form he’d obviously been told that he had to use his birth name (Lechmere)and not his preferred one. Of course we have no proof that he used Cross from day to day but it’s a fairly reasonable and likely suggestion when faced with the suggested ‘alternative.’ I.e. that he gave a false name to somehow avoid police attention.

          If he wanted to give the police a false name to throw them off the scent as it were then that’s surely what he would have done and not given them his correct Christian names, the surname of his stepfather (that he’d previously used on a census) and his correct address. Surely the worst attempt in the history of crime at pulling the wool over the eyes of the police? I really can’t avoid the thinking that this ‘name thing,’ whilst being initially an interesting discovery, is just a complete red herring.
          Hi Mike,

          I doubt he was trying to hide his identity in the sense of preventing anyone from being able to find him at his home or his workplace. 'Charles allen ???/Pickfords carman for 20+ years/22, Doveton Street' would have been enough of a giveaway, surely? Adding or omitting 'Lechmere' to/from the mix wouldn't have made a lot of difference in that respect.

          So why didn't he feel the need to mention his birth name?

          Of course, the use of the name Cross on the 1861 census almost certainly wouldn't have been his decision. He was, what, 11/12 at the time, and the responsibility for providing the info for the return would have been Thomas Cross's as the head of the household. I can imagine possible reasons why TC, even if he was unaware that he was bigamously married, would want to present his stepchildren as Crosses in the official record in 1861, but not why his stepson, 27 years later and long after TC's death, would do so.

          If we stand back from the idea that it might have been because it was to protect himself from being identified as JTR, it's still a bit odd, isn't it?

          Gary
          Last edited by MrBarnett; 06-18-2018, 05:07 PM.

          Comment


          • I suspect that CAL had a much stronger idea of his 'real' name and its significance that the majority of his Tiger Bay contemporaries:


            http://www.jtrforums.com/showthread....hlight=Roulson

            Comment


            • How many suspect theories have there been so far - 300+? How many more will there be I wonder?

              On my list I have several names I would describe as persons of interest - in the general sense of the term - who haven't yet seen much daylight:

              The Tomkins brothers (Smith +),
              Thomas Fogarty (Tabram),
              Stephen Maywood (Kelly)
              Billy Maher (Austin).

              There must be thousands more who with a bit of spin could be wrestled into suspect material.

              Bring 'em on, I say.

              Comment


              • Except nobody has considered the "real" Ripper, the gas-fitter Henry DeFries who lived on Middlesex Street.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Scott Nelson View Post
                  Except nobody has considered the "real" Ripper, the gas-fitter Henry DeFries who lived on Middlesex Street.

                  There you go, another possibility. Thanks, Scott.

                  Comment


                  • He may well have informed the authorities of his real name, but preferred to use Cross as the name by which he was more usually known, e.g. "professionally" and perhaps socially. Under those circumstances, I don't see why the police or newspapers should have advertised the fact, but respected his wish that he preferred to be known simply as Charles Cross.

                    After all, if he'd enrolled with Pickfords 20+ years ago, it appears likely that he'd have done so whilst Thomas Cross was still his pater familias. It's not much of a stretch to suppose that he'd become widely known as Charlie Cross during his adolescence and in his early career, and it just stuck.
                    Last edited by Sam Flynn; 06-18-2018, 11:38 PM.
                    Kind regards, Sam Flynn

                    "Suche Nullen" (Nietzsche, Götzendämmerung, 1888)

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by MrBarnett View Post
                      How many suspect theories have there been so far - 300+? How many more will there be I wonder?

                      On my list I have several names I would describe as persons of interest - in the general sense of the term - who haven't yet seen much daylight:

                      The Tomkins brothers (Smith +),
                      Thomas Fogarty (Tabram),
                      Stephen Maywood (Kelly)
                      Billy Maher (Austin).

                      There must be thousands more who with a bit of spin could be wrestled into suspect material.

                      Bring 'em on, I say.

                      Yes the Tomkins boys are certainly interesting, particularly in Bucks Row. I suspect Henry is covering up something other than murder, but who knows.


                      Steve

                      Comment


                      • Maybe he just held Cross in high regard or remembered him with fondness and wished to carry his name?

                        Maybe, as has been suggested before (possibly by Gary), he might have simply wanted to keep the Lechmere name out of the newspapers, as his mother was still alive? Then again, thinking about it, why would his mother have reverted to Lechmere after Cross’ death? Did she actually use Lechmere in later life?
                        Last edited by Herlock Sholmes; 06-19-2018, 01:47 AM.
                        Regards

                        Herlock






                        "Crime is common. Logic is rare. Therefore it is upon the logic rather than upon the crime that you should dwell.”

                        Comment


                        • There could be any number of reasons why CL wanted to keep his family name out of the press. Maybe he was just a private kind of guy? Maybe he wanted to protect his family from local gossip?

                          I believe Fisherman's theory is that CL wanted to obfuscate things just enough so that he'd have an innocent explanation if he was caught out on his lie. I don't see the point of a half-truth in this scenario. The man gave his Christian name, home address and place of business, more than enough to identify him. Using his stepdad's surname as some kind of red herring would only arouse suspicion rather than quell it, no?

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Harry D View Post
                            The man gave his Christian name, home address and place of business, more than enough to identify him. Using his stepdad's surname as some kind of red herring would only arouse suspicion rather than quell it, no?
                            I agree, Harry. Furthermore, giving his full address, distinctive forenames, age, occupation and place of work would have risked arousing the suspicion of his neighbours, family, colleagues and employers, if he weren't also known to them as Charles Cross.
                            Last edited by Sam Flynn; 06-19-2018, 03:06 AM.
                            Kind regards, Sam Flynn

                            "Suche Nullen" (Nietzsche, Götzendämmerung, 1888)

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Sam Flynn View Post
                              I agree, Harry. Furthermore, giving his full address, distinctive forenames, age, occupation and place of work would have risked arousing the suspicion of his neighbours, family, colleagues and employers, if he weren't also known to them as Charles Cross.
                              Too true, Sam. And like Caz said, if CL was using his job as an alibi, why would he give the police a surname that wouldn't check out at Pickford's?

                              Comment


                              • I think it is more likely than not that the ripper is someone we never heard of.

                                If I had to pick a most likely suspect of those we know I'd say M J Druitt or Kosminski.

                                Excuse my intrusion

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X