Window of Time for Nichols murder

[The Rookie Detective]

An excellent point. Obviously I have a hard time accepting Cross' behavior making sense, be he a narcissistic psychopath or not, had he killed Nichols. Control, I think, is key.

As Christer has said, Andy Griffiths had it wrong. It was not police presence that made him stay and try his "bluff". It was not the idea that "there was now someone else (Paul) in the street". So, everyone agrees, it seems, that he COULD have walked on but he CHOSE to stay and "bluff it out". But, in doing that he voluntarily introduced a variable (Robert Paul) that he couldn't control. And then he tries to regain control by manipulating Paul. He says that he "won't touch her" because he doesn't want to reveal her wounds. Going off to find a PC. Then the Mizen Scam. After exerting extreme control over his victim: luring her Buck's Row, getting her into position so that he can attack her without her making a sound, ending her life, mutilating her corpse... he then cedes control, insisting the first person who comes along, a complete stranger, become an actor in the chain of events.

I concur with this, it is always about Control.

With regards to the killer "luring her into Buck's Row"... this is another key aspect which we need to try and resolve conclusively.

So, here are a few scenarios...

Scenario 1...

Lechmere/Cross is JTR travelling WEST along Bucks Row and INTERCEPTS Nichols who was most likely travelling EAST from her last known location; Whitechapel High Street
If this is the case, the murder would have been more an impulsive urge to attack Nichols; which also fits into the Lechmere theory of being a "spree killer."
Crucially, there is no "luring" to be had, rather an instinctive urge to kill Nichols


Scenario 2...

Lechmere/Cross is JTR travelling WEST along Bucks Row having "Lured" Nichols into Bucks Row with him from the EAST End of the Road travelling together WEST along Bucks Row.
He then took his opportunity to attack her.
The "luring" theory is consistent with this version.


Scenario 3...

Lechmere/Cross is Innocent travelling WEST along Bucks Row and stumbles across the body of Nichols. Moments later Paul arrives and Lechmere/Cross draws his attention to her body.
This means the killer is more likely to have escaped WEST along Bucks Row, having already "lured" Nichols into Bucks Row from having met her elsewhere.


Scenario 4...

Lechmere/Cross is innocent traveling WEST along Bucks Row, having missed the real killer by minutes after JTR had escaped the scene EAST along Bucks Row.

There are minimal escape routes from Bucks Row
WEST or EAST...


OR..over the train line.


Thoughts please?


The Rookie Detective

[Herlock Sholmes]

I find it hard to believe that Lechmere lured Nichols to Buck’s Row from elsewhere. Why would he take her to a spot that he passed every day at around that time? Why didn’t he take her a street or two away?

[The Rookie Detective]

I find it hard to believe that Lechmere lured Nichols to Buck’s Row from elsewhere. Why would he take her to a spot that he passed every day at around that time? Why didn’t he take her a street or two away?

An excellent point indeed!

The only way that could happen would be if Lechmere attacked Nichols impulsively i.e. saw her isolated and in a drunken state and then got the urge to strike

Outside of that, your point goes a long way to exonerate Lechmere as it would indeed draw too much attention if it was his regular route to work.


the Rookie Detective

[JeffHamm]

Hi,

Maybe this has been suggested before, but looking at the map collection I've been directed to (what a great treasure trove ), I found this overlay (1888-1913), and there's something referred to as a "Casual Ward" right beside the west end of Buck's Row. Now we know Polly was without money for a bed that night. We know she was last seen around Whitechapel and Osborn, and headed off in the direction of Buck's Row.

So, does it not make some sense that she might have been heading towards the Casual Ward (other victims and witnesses talk about spending time in Casual Wards, and this seems to have been a last resort option - presumably because staying there required working to pay off one's bed from the night before, and the work or the beds, etc, was presumably unpleasant enough that one would avoid going there if at all possible). Now, that would put Polly around the west end of Buck's Row, perhaps hoping to either earn enough for a bed somewhere else, or if that failed, to be close enough to the casual ward to go there if necessary. If JtR comes along, and that could be from any direction not necessarily from east-west along Buck's Row, heading up into Buck's Row after PC Neil has just passed, would be an ideal place to conduct a transaction, knowing the police will be some time before coming around on the beat again. In this scenerio, JtR doesn't have to be there when PC Neil has passed by, only Polly needs to know the location is "safe for a bit". And she does have reason to avoid being seen by the police (arrested, or at least hassled, for drunkenness, or suspicion of prostitution, etc).

I don't know enough about what that casual ward is, or if it was one that people like Polly could stay at, etc. I just know that the term "casual ward" comes up a lot, and they seem like places one would go to if all else failed.

Anyone? Anyone? Bueller?

- Jeff

[drstrange169]

>>There are minimal escape routes from Bucks Row WEST or EAST...<<

Once past the Board school there were a number of choices for exiting the area. Plus the board school itself cast shadows that made it very easy to disappear.

[drstrange169]

>>Obviously I have a hard time accepting Cross' behavior making sense, be he a narcissistic psychopath or not, had he killed Nichols. Control, I think, is key.<<

Yes Patrick, control can be a factor with serial killers, but when we look at Lechmere's actions, he exhibits no control.

[drstrange169]

>> I found this overlay (1888-1913), and there's something referred to as a "Casual Ward" right beside the west end of Buck's Row. Now we know Polly was without money for a bed that night. We know she was last seen around Whitechapel and Osborn, and headed off in the direction of Buck's Row.<<

This was in Thomas Street, the workhouse where the controversial mortuary attendant and ripper suspect Robert Mann worked. It had set times for admissions, so Mrs Nichols wouldn't have been going there.

[JeffHamm]

>> I found this overlay (1888-1913), and there's something referred to as a "Casual Ward" right beside the west end of Buck's Row. Now we know Polly was without money for a bed that night. We know she was last seen around Whitechapel and Osborn, and headed off in the direction of Buck's Row.<<

This was in Thomas Street, the workhouse where the controversial mortuary attendant and ripper suspect Robert Mann worked. It had set times for admissions, so Mrs Nichols wouldn't have been going there.

Ah, another wonderful hypothesis shut down by the cruelty of fact. Thanks for that.

- Jeff

[drstrange169]

Fresh eyes and fresh questions, always offer the potential for fresh facts!

[Fisherman]

As Christer has said, Andy Griffiths had it wrong. It was not police presence that made him stay and try his "bluff". It was not the idea that "there was now someone else (Paul) in the street". So, everyone agrees, it seems, that he COULD have walked on but he CHOSE to stay and "bluff it out".

Christer has said nothing of the sort. Griffiths was well aware that Lechmere that there was no obstacle in the way of Lechmere leaving the scene. What Griffiths would have used is a simple colloquialism, meaning that when he said that Lechmere would never flee, he simply stated that he believed it very much likelier that he would not.
Putting slants like this on things is an unsound method of debating, aiming painting people into corners where they do not belong. Griffiths found it very unlikely that Lechmere would run, but he of course realized that he had an option to do so nevertheless.

The fact that I have to step in and point this out says it all. Ripperology at it´s worst, I´m afraid, Patrick.

[Fisherman]

I concur with this, it is always about Control.

With regards to the killer "luring her into Buck's Row"... this is another key aspect which we need to try and resolve conclusively.

So, here are a few scenarios...

Scenario 1...

Lechmere/Cross is JTR travelling WEST along Bucks Row and INTERCEPTS Nichols who was most likely travelling EAST from her last known location; Whitechapel High Street
If this is the case, the murder would have been more an impulsive urge to attack Nichols; which also fits into the Lechmere theory of being a "spree killer."
Crucially, there is no "luring" to be had, rather an instinctive urge to kill Nichols


Scenario 2...

Lechmere/Cross is JTR travelling WEST along Bucks Row having "Lured" Nichols into Bucks Row with him from the EAST End of the Road travelling together WEST along Bucks Row.
He then took his opportunity to attack her.
The "luring" theory is consistent with this version.


Scenario 3...

Lechmere/Cross is Innocent travelling WEST along Bucks Row and stumbles across the body of Nichols. Moments later Paul arrives and Lechmere/Cross draws his attention to her body.
This means the killer is more likely to have escaped WEST along Bucks Row, having already "lured" Nichols into Bucks Row from having met her elsewhere.


Scenario 4...

Lechmere/Cross is innocent traveling WEST along Bucks Row, having missed the real killer by minutes after JTR had escaped the scene EAST along Bucks Row.

There are minimal escape routes from Bucks Row
WEST or EAST...


OR..over the train line.


Thoughts please?


The Rookie Detective

Bucks Row was not the typical prostitute haunt. There is every possibility that Lechmere souhgt Nichols out in for example Whitchapel Street and let her take him to Bucks Row, if that was a place where she was used to doing the business. However, I think that we must not loose sight of how he MAY have come across her in Bucks Row, perhaps lingering there after having serviced another punter.

[Fisherman]

An excellent point indeed!

The only way that could happen would be if Lechmere attacked Nichols impulsively i.e. saw her isolated and in a drunken state and then got the urge to strike

Outside of that, your point goes a long way to exonerate Lechmere as it would indeed draw too much attention if it was his regular route to work.


the Rookie Detective

You may be surprised to learn how many serial killers work in streets and areas they have close links to. A fair number of them kill in their own homes and hide the victims in walls and under floorboards. Others kill in the very street they live in. It is not something that can rule a suspect out, I´m afraid. It´s more like being clever on their behalf.

[Fisherman]

>>There are minimal escape routes from Bucks Row WEST or EAST...<<

Once past the Board school there were a number of choices for exiting the area. Plus the board school itself cast shadows that made it very easy to disappear.

But Lechmere was nevertheless able to discern a body lying there from fifty feet away...?

[Fisherman]

>>Obviously I have a hard time accepting Cross' behavior making sense, be he a narcissistic psychopath or not, had he killed Nichols. Control, I think, is key.<<

Yes Patrick, control can be a factor with serial killers, but when we look at Lechmere's actions, he exhibits no control.

Correct! Calling upon somebody to come and look at a body is no control exhibiting, following that same person out of the street in search of a PC is no control exhibiting, taking the leading role and speaking to the PC is no control exhibiting and so on. It´s good that you pointed that out to those of us who look upon these matters as very clear indicators of a controlling personality!

[Fisherman]

Cheers Frank

Ive never gone for the idea of abdominal mutilations first. Makes little sense to me. Surely thoat cutting achieves the priority most efficiently- silence then death?

Yes, indeed, Herlock! You are spot on - it IS the more efficient way of doing things.

Then again, Llewellyn knew this too. And he nevertheless opted for the abdomen first, going on the medical evidence.

That has to count for something. Saying that cutting the neck first is the smarter way, ergo he cut the neck first is putting the carriage in front of the horse. The medical evidence MUST be weighed in, and it speaks a different language.