The Mizen scam

[Fisherman]

Frank:

"Back in those days, the best chance the police had of catching a killer was to catch him in the act or to get a confession"

... or catch him running away from a murder site, weapon stashed on him. Therefore, what Lechmere seemingly did, is very much in line with this knowledge. If he could bluff his way out, he´d be fine. Once he was past the net, just like you say Frank, there was little risk to get caught. With a confident killer, that was the best way to minimize risks and leave as little as possible to fate.

The best,
Fisherman

[Lechmere]

Why was Paul raided?

All we actually know is that he was raided and dragged out of bed. Dew says that an appeal for him to come forward was sent out and it was unanswered. Dew had forgotten that Paul was located forcibly!

I think he was raided for two reasons.

Firstly because the Annie Chapman murder happened about 150 yards from his workplace, and he was connected to the Poly Stride murder and this was enough to raise suspicion - and rightly so.

Secondly because in his first newspaper interview Paul slagged the police off. The police – then and now p- are not adverse to bearing grudges and making people suffer for such indiscretions. His slag off probably put him on top of their potential hit list and when the Chapman murder took place they had a perfect excuse to nab him.

Was Paul told why he was raided?

Well if he was suspected of the Chapman murder it will have been a bit obvious as he would have been questioned about it.
Would the police have let him know that he was raided because he had slagged them off? Doubtful. Anyway he slagged them off again after his inquest appearance.

Would Paul have been raided if the Chapman murder hadn’t happened at that location and had he not slagged the police off to the press? It seems very doubtful. His inquest testimony didn’t really add anything at all.

Incidentally if you wonder why Paul went to the press to tell his tale when he avoided the authorities, it is easily explained. He was anti-police and anti-authority. But he couldn’t resist trying to associate himself with a major event. To get a bit of the limelight. For the first time in his pathetic life he could comment and be noticed. It is an all too common a phenomena.
We see it with Hutchinson, we see it with Harriet Lilley, the woman who a week after the murder went to the press and said she heard noises at the same time as the train went past. We see it with unreliable witnesses who want a piece of the action and who are taken over by urban myth and the hysteria which quickly enshrouded the Whitechapel Murders.

[FrankO]

To provide yet more perspective, if the killer had been walking down Bucks Row – say on his way to work – for the previous ten or so weeks, then he might be aware that a beat policeman often appeared from a westerly direction at around that time.

Then it’s nothing short of astonishing that the Ripper got away scot-free from Mitre Square, Lechmere, where he supposedly didn’t have the advantage of pre-information and where the circumstances were even riskier than in Buck’s Row.

If this hypothetical killer had got into a ‘killing zone’ that absorbed his mind for maybe 30 or more seconds while he was tearing at Polly’s body and what remaining senses he had were focussed on that westerly direction, then it can be seen that someone could approach from the opposite direction and remain undetected for a short while.

I’ve given you my view and stand by it.

Once he became aware of this someone, this new presence, the hypothetical killer will have been aware that if he fled as quietly and swiftly as possible, just as the new presence reached the body he, the killer, might be alongside the beat copper. If the new presence cried out ‘Murder’ then the beat copper would probably stop him, the killer, in his tracks.

If Cross the killer only heard Paul when he was still some 60-70 yards away from him, he was still closer to the corner of the board school (ca. 40 yards) than to Paul. If Cross would have walked away at the same pace as Paul and at rhyme with Paul’s footfalls, he would be around the corner (and only 30 yards from Wood’s Buildings) when Paul still had to reach the body. Then Paul still had to find out what would have been the matter with the woman first before he would have cried out. At that time Cross could have reached Wood’s Buildings already and I don’t think Paul’s cries would immediately have been heard in Whitechapel Road, some 100 yards away and beyond the houses on the northern side of Whitechapel Road.

I find it slightly remarkable that some posters on here persist in resisting the possibility that a psychopathic killer - bearing in mind the sort of mental traits we would be dealing with – would turn and ‘fight’ rather than ‘fly’.

Firstly, we don’t know whether the Ripper was a psychopath. Based on the little evidence we have, we might say he had some psychopathic traits, but whether he was actually a psychopath is impossible to say. The fact that he took huge risks killing and especially mutilating out on the streets and that he killed numerous times in such a short time span speak against it in my view. They suggest a compulsive killer rather than anything else.

All the best,
Frank

[FrankO]

... or catch him running away from a murder site, weapon stashed on him.

Fortunately for the Ripper, Fish, even in more difficult situations than the Buck's Row murder, he was quite capable of getting away without being stopped or noticed, as he demonstrated with especially Eddowes' murder.

The best, Fish,
Frank

[Fisherman]

..aaaand it still stands, Frank, that he HAD to get away at Hanbury Street, Berner Street, Mitre Square and Dorset Street. He had burnt his ships when it came to bluffing.

Besides, we don´t know that the other sites provided more difficult situations, do we - Buck´s Row may well have been the one and only venue where he was joined by somebody. It can be reasoned that he had finished what he came to do when he left the other sites, Berner Street excepted. And there, we don´t know why he left the place and how he did it - if it WAS him. He could quite simply have left because he wanted to kill twice that night, as suggested by Tom Wescott. Many other reasons for his take-off can be suggested too.

So maybe Buck´s Row WAS the most difficult situation he was ever faced with. At any rate, he would have had less experience at that stage than on the later occasions!

The best,
Fisherman

[FrankO]

..aaaand it still stands, Frank, that he HAD to get away at Hanbury Street, Berner Street, Mitre Square and Dorset Street. He had burnt his ships when it came to bluffing.

Quite, Fish, just as it still stands that Cross the killer could have gotten away without necessarily running into the arms of Neil, or any other PC for that matter.

Besides, we don´t know that the other sites provided more difficult situations, do we - Buck´s Row may well have been the one and only venue where he was joined by somebody.

The advantage of Buck’s Row over the other sites quite clearly was that he would be able to hear someone coming from 130 yards and, quite possibly, the same would be true for someone coming from the other side, although to a lesser extent.

It can be reasoned that he had finished what he came to do when he left the other sites, Berner Street excepted.

True enough. Yet judging by what was done to Mary Jane Kelly, it can also be reasoned that he just kept going until he was forced to leave because he (thought he) heard someone coming.

All the best,
Frank

[Fisherman]

Frank:

"Quite, Fish, just as it still stands that Cross the killer could have gotten away without necessarily running into the arms of Neil, or any other PC for that matter."

Could POSSIBLY have gotten away, Frank. We don´t know.

"The advantage of Buck’s Row over the other sites quite clearly was that he would be able to hear someone coming from 130 yards..."

Nope. 30-40 yards, and that was it. If he was honest.

"...and, quite possibly, the same would be true for someone coming from the other side, although to a lesser extent."

You lost me there, Frank - I can´t make heads or tails of that. But I think that much as you sell in an advantage here, we have already been forced to buy the disadvantage of Paul coming along. Otherwise, as regards the lay-out, yes, Buck´s Row seems a better venue than, for example, Hanbury Street or Mitre Square. But that only works as long as nothing happens. And Paul happened.

"True enough. Yet judging by what was done to Mary Jane Kelly, it can also be reasoned that he just kept going until he was forced to leave because he (thought he) heard someone coming."

That´s correct, of course. And it offers some sort of possible solution to why he called it a day after Kelly (if that was what he did, which must be questioned!) - he had finally done what he came for.

How do you feel about the medical evidence, Frank? Consulting different net authorities, they are all much in accordance with one another on cut arteries; they will cause a raid bleed-out, some faster, some a little slower - but a cut neck artery will empty the body fairly rapidly, especially if the body is lying down. It´s a matter of minutes, and not many of them; two, three, four perhaps, the first thirty seconds the blood will pump out heartbeatwise, then it will flow, and finally it will ooze out.
Nichols had ALL her neck vessels severed. In her case, the body would arguably have been emptied in them three or four minutes, not very much more, judging by what experts and medicos say on the net. And that of course tallies perfectly with the last of the blood oozing out as Neil saw her if she had been cut within a five minute period before that. It is very tempting therefore, to suggest that she could have been cut at approximately the time when Lechmere was standing by her body in Buck´s Row.
The suggestion that the Ripper could have been long gone as Lechmere arrived seems to be ruled out by this - if he was not Lechmere, then he would probably have rounded the corner at the school as Lechmere entered from Brady Street, and even then we get a six, seven minute period for Nichols to have bled.

He does have a lot going for him, Lechmere...

The best,
Fisherman

[Rubyretro]

.

But he couldn’t resist trying to associate himself with a major event. To get a bit of the limelight. For the first time in his pathetic life he could comment and be noticed. It is an all too common a phenomena.
We see it with Hutchinson, we see it with Harriet Lilley,

Er...no. We can't equate Hutch with either Paul nor Lilley ....there is a great deal more to Hutch's tale than simply 'blabbing to the Press', as you well know.

In some respects the Hutch argument is similar to the Lechmere argument.

You may be convinced that Hutch was Toppy, but you failed in making a vital connection, and so there is still a very big doubt that Hutch & Toppy were ever the same person. Infact, circumstancial evidence says that they weren't.

[moonbegger]

Hello,Hello,Hello

judging by what was done to Mary Jane Kelly, it can also be reasoned that he just kept going until he was forced to leave because he (thought he) heard someone coming."

Who disturbed him in the yard of Hanbury Street ?

moonbegger

[Julie Newly]

Hi board members and ripperologists
I've learned alot from reading this thread but I have questions I need to mull over re Lechmere and Paul

I get the impression Lechmere's using the name Cross was a gesture, cocking a snook ( here it's thumbing your nose ) at the police and his late stepfather because he was an ex-policeman

Has anyone researched bank records to see if Lechmere deposited any money for certain days/weeks during the time of the murders?
I think that if Lechmere looked like he was steadily employed and was providing for said wife and children, the scam could go on indefinitely and attention diverted away from him
and possibly quiet said wife from asking questions about his goings-on
Is anything known about Lechmere's relationship with his nuclear family? Mother, stepfathers, sibs?
And what about him being a decendent of peerage?

Thanks

Julie Newly

[Mr Lucky]

Hi Fisherman,

"How about by murdering Chapman a hundred yards from where Paul worked? Surely that would do the trick?"

So you think that the Chapman murder was the reason Paul was fetched up in the night, or at least one of the reasons ?
Do you think Paul looked like Mrs Long's suspect ?

And who was it that fetched him up in the middle of the night, anyway?

Best Wishes

[Mr Lucky]

Hi Lechmere,

Well if he was suspected of the Chapman murder it will have been a bit obvious as he would have been questioned about it.

Yes that my point, Paul thinks he's been fetched up because of the Lloyd's article, If he had thought the police believed he was the murderer that's what he would be telling the press.

He hasn't told them that, he's got a story about been fetched up because of his article and he's grumbling about losing a days pay and the coroner only giving him a shilling per day compo.

Not much limelight, there.

Incidentally if you wonder why Paul went to the press to tell his tale when he avoided the authorities, it is easily explained. He was anti-police and anti-authority. But he couldn’t resist trying to associate himself with a major event. To get a bit of the limelight. For the first time in his pathetic life he could comment and be noticed

He doesn't seem like a braggard to me, he seems a decent man, who's been swept along by events beyond his control.

we see it with Harriet Lilley, the woman who a week after the murder went to the press and said she heard noises at the same time as the train went past.

She heard someone being throttled, that's not what someone who was making up a story for the benefit of press would have said.

They would be talking about cries of 'Murder' and blood-curdling screams if they were making it up

The title of the Lilley paragraph heading in Lloyds is 'A NEIGHBOUR WHO HEARD SCREAMS.' That says it all, that's what the press was expecting and wanting to hear - Drama, not Mrs Lilley barely audiable 'It was a painful moan - two or three faint gasps - and then it passed away'

[icicle]

Hi Icicle,

First of all, welcome to the boards! Secondly, I have a small comment that might give you a little more perspective regarding your remark above. Back in those days, the best chance the police had of catching a killer was to catch him in the act or to get a confession. If a killer could get away from the crime scene without being noticed, there was a very good chance he was never going to be buckled at all. Unless, of course, he himself talked or otherwise attracted suspicion.

All the best,
Frank

Thank you Frank! Ah, of course. I have been assuming though, that the killer has an unusual degree of situational awareness.

[Fisherman]

Mr Lucky:

"So you think that the Chapman murder was the reason Paul was fetched up in the night, or at least one of the reasons ? "

Yes. He was on place at murder site number one, and he worked at Corbett´s court which was very close to site two. That would have presented the police with a connection, and they would in all probability have been not too happy about the interview Paul gave in Lloyd´s Weekly. Now they had a reason to pay back, sort of. And my guess - this is all about guesses - is that they may well have brought the subject of the interview up, so much so, perhaps, that Paul got the impression that it was what lay behind their visit.

Did Paul look like Mrs Long´s suspect? Who knows - not even Mrs Long knew what he looked like, remember ...

The best,
Fisherman

[Sally]

This makes for interesting reading...

http://forum.casebook.org/showthread.php?t=450