Lechmere versus Richardson.

[MrBarnett]

Gary,

Good, you're here manning the Lechmere desk today,

I asked you a question in this post -



Please reply at your convenience

‘Manning the Lechmere desk’?

Very droll, Paddy. :-)

Apologies, I sometimes can’t arsed to scroll back to see what has built up since I last logged in. Could you help with the post number. (I’m a lazy bugger.)

[Paddy Goose]

Certainly, it's post 115 of this thread.

[rjpalmer]

I can’t recall whether there is any evidence of Amelia’s literacy or lack thereof. Was she a witness to John’s wedding?

Possibly. He also had a young sister named Amelia, though. Someone by the name Amelia or Emilia (?) Richardson signed her name with a mark.

[MrBarnett]

Certainly, it's post 115 of this thread.

Thanks, Paddy!

I’m glad you raised that ‘index’ because I’ve just realised something about it that hadn’t occurred to me before.

I’ll respond to your question shortly, although I obviously can’t answer on Mark’s behalf.

[MrBarnett]

Possibly. He also had a young sister named Amelia, though. Someone by the name Amelia or Emilia (?) Richardson signed her name with a mark.

Thanks, RJ, I thought I’d seen that. As you say, it could have been his sister who was the witness. I

Did you or someone else recently mention the pub John Chaffey ran?

[Herlock Sholmes]

Yes, looking at those steps it’s hard to imagine him missing the body. But people do sometimes overlook stuff that is right under their noses.

As for the knife, perhaps he initially didn’t feel the need to elaborate. ‘I sat down on the step to cut a piece of leather from my boot’ is pretty much the same as saying, ‘I sat down on the step with the intention of cutting a piece of leather from my boot.’

No doubt the ultra efficient cops were able to track down the lender of the sharp knife to corroborate his claim.

I find it close to impossible believe that he could have missed the body but I know that Fish for one thinks it perfectly plausible.

The issue with Chandler was that he said that Richardson said nothing about sitting on the step. So you have Richardson and Chandler directly contradicting each other.

Gary, I don’t understand all of this talk about ultra-efficient cops? No one, as far as I’m aware, has ever said that they were ultra efficient. All that I’ve said is that we shouldn’t assume that they were incompetent or dishonest. And so I can’t see an issue with merely suggesting that they might have been in possession of information that we’re unaware of. In fact I’d say that it’s a certainty that they did but we can’t know if it was important or not. But this is just conjecture of course but we surely can’t assume that the police were too stupid to do such basic things like checking alibi’s? Or that someone like Abberline might not, further down the line, have considered having a closer look, or more of a look, at someone like Lechmere? We can’t claim it of course so it’s purely hypothetical and worthless when looking at the pro’s and con’s of Lechmere’s guilt or innocence. That’s all that I’ve ever said about the Police.

[MrBarnett]

I find it close to impossible believe that he could have missed the body but I know that Fish for one thinks it perfectly plausible.

The issue with Chandler was that he said that Richardson said nothing about sitting on the step. So you have Richardson and Chandler directly contradicting each other.

Gary, I don’t understand all of this talk about ultra-efficient cops? No one, as far as I’m aware, has ever said that they were ultra efficient. All that I’ve said is that we shouldn’t assume that they were incompetent or dishonest. And so I can’t see an issue with merely suggesting that they might have been in possession of information that we’re unaware of. In fact I’d say that it’s a certainty that they did but we can’t know if it was important or not. But this is just conjecture of course but we surely can’t assume that the police were too stupid to do such basic things like checking alibi’s? Or that someone like Abberline might not, further down the line, have considered having a closer look, or more of a look, at someone like Lechmere? We can’t claim it of course so it’s purely hypothetical and worthless when looking at the pro’s and con’s of Lechmere’s guilt or innocence. That’s all that I’ve ever said about the Police.

Re the cops, there are those who insist that Lechmere must have been thoroughly investigated, despite there being no evidence that he was. You aren’t one of them, but I do like to highlight any evidence of the police being less than efficient whenever it surfaces.

I suspect he was taken at face value as one of two innocent working men who found the body. Paul got under their skin somewhat by giving his Lloyds interview, but Lech flew under the radar.

[rjpalmer]

Was John Richardson a two-time military deserter? I don't have a subscription to Fold3 so I have no further details, but two entries look interesting.


UK, Military Deserters, 1812-1927

John Richardson

20

Abt 1851

Lambeth, Surrey

24 Jun 1871

Chester

21 Jul 1871

1242

14th Foot

John Richardson

23

Abt 1852

St Luke

12 Apr 1875

Hounslow

11 Jun 1875

7891

4th Middlesx

Richardson is listed as a militiaman in the 1881 UK Census. His birth was registered 1Qt 1852 in Lambeth. The 1861 census has his birth in St. Lukes (Lambeth) He gives his age as 22 in 1873.

[MrBarnett]

Thanks, Paddy!

I’m glad you raised that ‘index’ because I’ve just realised something about it that hadn’t occurred to me before.

I’ll respond to your question shortly, although I obviously can’t answer on Mark’s behalf.

First things first. Although it says in the A-Z that the 25th October document was an index to ‘papers on the Nichols murder in the Home Office files’, I wonder whether it wasn’t just an index to Swanson’s 19th October report.

As for the house to house in Buck’s Row, Swanson’s report mentions it as having taken place, so it would seem the coroner’s recommendation was indeed acted upon.

I hope that answers your question, Paddy.

[MrBarnett]

Was John Richardson a two-time military deserter? I don't have a subscription to Fold3 so I have no further details, but two entries look interesting.


UK, Military Deserters, 1812-1927

John Richardson

20

Abt 1851

Lambeth, Surrey

24 Jun 1871

Chester

21 Jul 1871

1242

14th Foot

John Richardson

23

Abt 1852

St Luke

12 Apr 1875

Hounslow

11 Jun 1875

7891

4th Middlesx

Richardson is listed as a militiaman in the 1881 UK Census. His birth was registered 1Qt 1852 in Lambeth. The 1861 census has his birth in St. Lukes (Lambeth) He gives his age as 22 in 1873.

I did see those, RJ and wondered whether it was our guy. I don’t have Fold3 either these days. Perhaps I should sign up for it again, I’ve got other military stuff that I’m looking for.

I must admit, I thought the St Luke’s in question would have been the Old Street one - north of the City. One of the most common mistakes on censuses is the erroneous use of the place of residence as the POB. I suspect that’s what happened here.

Edit: I’ve just noticed the Lambeth birth registration, so perhaps I’m wrong.

[MrBarnett]

I did see those, RJ and wondered whether it was our guy. I don’t have Fold3 either these days. Perhaps I should sign up for it again, I’ve got other military stuff that I’m looking for.

I must admit, I thought the St Luke’s in question would have been the Old Street one - north of the City. One of the most common mistakes on censuses is the erroneous use of the place of residence as the POB. I suspect that’s what happened here.

Edit: I’ve just noticed the Lambeth birth registration, so perhaps I’m wrong.

Lambeth it was.

[rjpalmer]

I don't think there is any question that Richardson was born in Lambeth. The registration lists 'John Finell Richardson' and that's the name he signs on his marriage certificate. He signs one of his children's marriage banns as "John Phenell Richardson" and lists his occupation as a packing case maker.

There is a high likelihood that the two-time deserter was Richardson. It looks like the standard punishment was two pounds or two months with hard labour.

[Paddy Goose]

Thanks Gary,

Okay on to the antisemitism speculated

I've speculated before that Lech might have been a raging antisemite desperate to get out of an increasingly Jewish area.

And the date of June 1888 is supplied that he moved from St George in the East to Bethnal Green.

Okay, does this mean the Lechmerian camp has him pegged for the murder of Emma Smith in April? Therefore in June he is already "Jack the Ripper" and worthy of the "raging" adjective applied to antisemite? As opposed to a" plain old vanilla run of the mill" antisemite, a resident who moved when their neighborhood became too Jewish.

Is this speculation date specific, or are we moving into mass doxing of East Enders of yore here on Casebook? Same as the mass denunciation of all police here by Mark, but now moving to a much expanded group targeted?

I never cease to be amazed at the way white anglophone attitudes to the police manifest all the irrational characteristics of a religion multiplied by an addiction. However much contradictory evidence is available about what the police are and always were, the fundamental faith is never impacted, and the craving comes back worse than before: they're sensible, honest, competent, law-upholding, fair-minded, dedicated, not at all the racist, misogynist boot-boys of private wealth and the violent state, and they definitely, definitely, definitely would have used hundreds of hours of scarce manpower to check out a white Christian working man with a respectable job at a big company...

Now, if the year had been 1988 and Lechmere had been black...

M.

-over to the Lechmere desk

[MrBarnett]

Thanks Gary,

Okay on to the antisemitism speculated



And the date of June 1888 is supplied that he moved from St George in the East to Bethnal Green.

Okay, does this mean the Lechmerian camp has him pegged for the murder of Emma Smith in April? Therefore in June he is already "Jack the Ripper" and worthy of the "raging" adjective applied to antisemite? As opposed to a" plain old vanilla run of the mill" antisemite, a resident who moved when their neighborhood became too Jewish.

Is this speculation date specific, or are we moving into mass doxing of East Enders of yore here on Casebook? Same as the mass denunciation of all police here by Mark, but now moving to a much expanded group targeted?



-over to the Lechmere desk

When I used the word ‘droll’ earlier, I meant it in the sense of ‘irritating’.

There is no Lechmere camp or desk. My contribution to the changing demographics of SGE in the 1880s can be found here:

https://www.jtrforums.com/forum/the-crime-scenes/584235-charles-lechmere’s-lair

[Herlock Sholmes]

Re the cops, there are those who insist that Lechmere must have been thoroughly investigated, despite there being no evidence that he was. You aren’t one of them, but I do like to highlight any evidence of the police being less than efficient whenever it surfaces.

I suspect he was taken at face value as one of two innocent working men who found the body. Paul got under their skin somewhat by giving his Lloyds interview, but Lech flew under the radar.

It’s possible Gary