So would he have run?

[Ben]

Old Montague Street was considered to have been more dangerous than Hanbury Street, and it was not the shortest route Cross could have taken to work. These are facts, and yet they continue to be disputed by those alleging links – actually non-existent ones – between Cross and the Eddowes and Tabram crime scenes. The shortest route took him, after Hanbury Street, across Bishopsgate and down Skinner Street, crossing through Liverpool Street Station itself. He would then have taken a left along Sun Street Passage (still there), and reached the goods depot at the western corner of Elden Street and Finsbury Avenue.

The eastern end of Old Montague Street was shaded black on Booth’s poverty map to indicate a “vicious and semi-criminal” area – something we don’t see in Hanbury Street, Crossmere’s known work route. I think we can credit Charles Booth’s investigations with a little more reliability than a biased modern commentator’s protestations against them.

“However, shopkeepers are wont to live above their shops, and I'd say a fair few of them living on Commercial Street were wealthy enough to own astrakhan coats, gold chains, and horseshoe tie pins. What do you think?”

Probably not.

Even if they could, they would have been streetwise enough not to parade them around that particular district, at the height of the ripper “scare”, at 2.00am in the morning. You’ll note that the red shaded areas encompassed the Britannia pub, and I strongly suspect that Mr. Ringer – that well-known wearer of Astrakhan coats and frequenter of gentleman’s clubs – had gumption enough to leave his horsehoe tie pin at home when sauntering the deserted small-hours streets.

Regards,
Ben

[Fisherman]

Old Montague Street was considered to have been more dangerous than Hanbury Street, and it was not the shortest route Cross could have taken to work. These are facts.
Ben

Oh joy! Facts! That means that you can prove that Old Montague Street was cosidered to have been more dangerous than Hanbury Street.
You cal aslo prove that it was not the shorter route.

So letīs have this settled then: Show us the proof! Who was it that considered Old Montague Street more dangerous than Hanbury Street? Please look at the Old Bailey records before you answer, so you can form an opinion about WHAT kinds of dangers Old Montague Street represented.
What exact distances were the routes involved? You have the numbers, and they cannot be contested - thatīs what it takes to be a fact - IN MY BOOK!!!

Fisherman

[Ben]

Chill out on those exclamation marks, Fisherman!!!

That means that you can prove that Old Montague Street was cosidered to have been more dangerous than Hanbury Street.
You cal aslo prove that it was not the shorter route.

Yes, it does.

Though I cannot take credit, as this must go to Charles Booth's analysis and Frank's research respectively.

Old Montague Street was shaded black in Booth's poverty map to indicate a "vicious and semi-criminal" locale, and despite some very unconvincing pooh-poohing of his in-depth findings, that is the best evidence we're likely to encounter in terms of a "dodginess" comparison between that pooey thoroughfare and Hanbury Street. Old Bailey records are great for when the offender(s) in question is (are) caught, but not so clever for robbings and gang beatings that aren't solved.

What exact distances were the routes involved?

1509 yards for Old Montague Street, apparently - the same as the Hanbury Street route prior to the discovery of the Skinner Street/Sun Street Passage cut-through. The latter must now be considered a lot shorter.

All the best,
Ben

[Fisherman]

Ben:

Old Montague Street was shaded black in Booth's poverty map to indicate a "vicious and semi-criminal" locale.

Oh - you are on about Booth again! Well, I noticed that you actually said that the street was considered to be dangerous, and since the English football team is by some considered to be the worlds greatest, I guess we have a parallel here.

Not that Booth ever mentioned Old Montague Street specifically as being dangerous, and not that he would have concluded that all black-marked houses were dangerous - but I will not deprive you of what miniscule support you have for a cause that is already lost.

You and your "facts", Ben ...!

Old Bailey records are great for when the offender(s) in question is (are) caught, but not so clever for robbings and gang beatings that aren't solved.

Present ONE such case to me from Old Montague Street in the space between 1897-1890. Please?

Conjecturing is great for when you have no proof, but not so clever for making a useful case.

1509 yards for Old Montague Street, apparently - the same as the Hanbury Street route prior to the discovery of the Skinner Street/Sun Street Passage cut-through. The latter must now be considered a lot shorter.

...and you use the Eldon Street entrance? Yes?
I think Iīll opt for considering YOU a lot shorter - of viable arguments!!!! (Yep, thatīs FOUR exclamation marks)

The best,
Fisherman

[Lechmere]

AS ever Ben is way put of his depth when dealing with facts.
Old Montague Street is the shortest route.
There is zero evidence that Old Montague Street was considered to be more dangerous than Hanbury Street.
As Mr Barnett has pointed out the police notes are based on records taken ten years later - by which time the northern side of Old Montague Street opposite George Yard had been levelled and redeveloped.

In actual fact the 1889 map did show a small section of the northern side of Old Montague Street as black - as there were some lodging houses in that area.

For dangerous streets you are better off looking at crime statistics or perhaps at the records of the Board of Works who dealt with public nuisance.

[MrBarnett]

All,

Unless my old eyes deceive me, the 1889 map shows the whole of OM St. as 'Mixed'. However, beyond the Brick Lane/Osborne St. junction you are into Wentworth St. skirting the Flower and Dean St/Thrawl St/George St area, and that was certainly no garden suburb.

MrB

[Fisherman]

There is zero evidence that Old Montague Street was considered to be more dangerous than Hanbury Street.

Why is it even an issue? We KNOW that women were killed in Old Montague Street or very nearby, so clearly one or more killers were not afraid to go there.

If Lechmere was not our killer, then it could perhaps be interesting to discuss whether he would avoid Old Montague Street or not (as if a carman could choose to... )

Then again, why would we discuss the issue as if he was innocent? The whole reason that we are discussing this, is because he has been put forward as the Ripper.

Is it reasonable to suggest that the Ripper would not dare to venture into Old Montague Street?

Is the reputation Old Montague Street supposedly had (although we still havent seen a single shred of evidence for it!) something that should make us reason that Lechmere is a viable contender for Nichols, Chapman, Stride Eddowes and Kelly, but not for Tabram and Smith since the prospect of killing in Old Montague Street would scare him out of his socks...?

Or should we exclude the Kelly murder too, since we know that this street actually DID had a nasty reputation?

Maybe Lechmere could not have done for Stride either? There is the Lipski murder in adjacent Batty Street to consider before we may reason that he went into those surroundings. That would have told him not to go near the place, I bet!

Come to think of it, surely he would have have avoided visiting his mother and daughter, since they lived in this fearsome territory?

Maybe weīve been wrong all along. Mayby Lechmere spent his days in Doveton Street, fearing to go outside.

Maybe the one time he dared to try and walk to his work was on the morning of the 31:st of August 1888.

And LOOK what happened then! Terrifying!!!

Can we be for real? For once? No?

Fisherman

[MrBarnett]

Hi Fish,

All this talk of alternate Hanbury St /Old Monty St routes gets it's initial 'traction' from Lech's stated and corroborated route on the morning of the Nichols discovery.

But if he was the killer there are a couple of problems with that:

1. He chose Hanbury St that morning to keep an eye on Paul.

2. It is unlikely that Nichols would have been soliciting in Bucks Row, more likely he would have picked her up on the Whitechapel Road.

MrB

[Fisherman]

MrBarnett: Hi Fish,

All this talk of alternate Hanbury St /Old Monty St routes gets it's initial 'traction' from Lech's stated and corroborated route on the morning of the Nichols discovery.

Anybody who looks at a map of the area Lechmere needed to cut through between Doveton Street and Broad Street will easily see that ther are two thoroughfares. It is therefore quite, quite viable to suggest that he would have used these thoroughfares.
It is also of the essence to understand that he always lived closer to Old Montague Street than two Hanbury Street between the ages of nine to thirtyseven, so reasoning that he would for logical reasons have been more aquainted to and familiar with that route is also something that cannot be contested.

This is all very uncontroversial, as long as we allow it to be.

But if he was the killer there are a couple of problems with that:

1. He chose Hanbury St that morning to keep an eye on Paul.

That is not any problem at all. He chose one of the routes we suggest he would choose, and he had good reason to probe Paul if he was the killer. It is totally in line with our overall reasoning, thus.

2. It is unlikely that Nichols would have been soliciting in Bucks Row, more likely he would have picked her up on the Whitechapel Road.

Yes, thatīs quite likely. But not a certainty, of course - Nichols could have for example served another client up at Buckīs Row when Lechmere came along.
But how is this a problem? It would take him thirty seconds to delve down to Whitechapel Road, where he would (arguably!) have known that prostitutes were to be found. Killing in Whitechapel Road would not be a viable method of working, since what people there were around, would to a significant extent be just there. He therefore needed to find his prey there, but kill elsewhere. No problem at all, thus.

At the end of the day, we have ALL of the murders happening along his logical routes to work or close to his motherīs place.

Once again:
How many streets were there?
How many of these streets did Lechmere logically use on his working trek?
How large part of the total number of streets do his working trek streets compose? A thousand of the total?
How large is the chance that any worker, walking the streets at hours when just about noboy else did, would have all these murders happening along his routes?
I want an answer to that question! Not necessarily from you, but from somebody.

All the best, Mr Barnett!
Fisherman

[MrBarnett]

Fish,

I have a question for you - and anyone else who might care to answer:

If your home was on one side of a sink estate, notorious for drug dealing, prostitution and muggings, and your place of work was on the other side, would you walk through the estate in the early hours of the morning or would you consider a slightly longer detour? It would be the detour for me every time.

Isn't it possible then that a timid carman, wishing to avoid trouble, might usually take the admittedly longer, but probably safer and more straightforward Whitechapel Rd/High Street/Aldgate/ Houndsditch route? The western end of that route would almost certainly be the exact route he had taken while living in St George's.

MrB

[Fisherman]

MrBarnett: Fish,

I have a question for you - and anyone else who might care to answer:

If your home was on one side of a sink estate, notorious for drug dealing, prostitution and muggings, and your place of work was on the other side, would you walk through the estate in the early hours of the morning or would you consider a slightly longer detour? It would be the detour for me every time.

Personally, I would consider the detour.

But we donīt know whether Hanbury Street and Old Montague Street differed in terms of being dangerous in the first place! My guess is that they would have been much the same.

Plus if I was used to do the stroll through dangerous territory, I think that would have had an impact too.

Isn't it possible then that a timid carman...

Anything is possible - but I am NOT reasoning from a view of a "timid carman". I am suggesting he was a vicious killer!

Isnīt it possible that a killer like this could care no less?

The best,
Fisherman

[MrBarnett]

It is also of the essence to understand that he always lived closer to Old Montague Street than two Hanbury Street between the ages of nine to thirtyseven, so reasoning that he would for logical reasons have been more aquainted to and familiar with that route is also something that cannot be contested.

I'll have a try!

The area of St Geo's, between the Commercial Road and Cable St, where Lech. spent most of his early life was very different from Spitalfields/Whitechapel. A distinct district I would suggest. His route to work all those years would most likely have been along the Commercial Road, OM St wouldn't have come into it.

He may well have frequented the markets in Brick Lane/Middx St etc and been familiar with the general area, but I don't see why he would have been necessarily more familiar with OM St than Hanbury St.

MrB

[Lechmere]

Mr Barnett
First of all - yes I was confusing myself over 'Old Montague Street' - when I use that term it is shorthand for the route down Old Montague Street - which turns into Wentworth Street, where the black bit is.

Secondly - yes, if he was a timid and innocent carman, living in fear of gangs, he would have gone down Whitechapel Road and avoided the back streets altogether - it wouldn't have added that much time to his journey.

[MrBarnett]

MrBarnett: Fish,

I have a question for you - and anyone else who might care to answer:

If your home was on one side of a sink estate, notorious for drug dealing, prostitution and muggings, and your place of work was on the other side, would you walk through the estate in the early hours of the morning or would you consider a slightly longer detour? It would be the detour for me every time.

Personally, I would consider the detour.

But we donīt know whether Hanbury Street and Old Montague Street differed in terms of being dangerous in the first place! My guess is that they would have been much the same.

Plus if I was used to do the stroll through dangerous territory, I think that would have had an impact too.

Isn't it possible then that a timid carman...

Anything is possible - but I am NOT reasoning from a view of a "timid carman". I am suggesting he was a vicious killer!

Isnīt it possible that a killer like this could care no less?

The best,
Fisherman

I was reacting to to the assumption that there were only two possible routes between Doveton Street and Broad Street. If we factor in concerns over safety and familiarity, a third appears (albeit slightly longer).

When his blood was up our killer was demonstrably reckless. But does it follow that on the thousands of days when he did not kill on his way to work he did not consider his personal safety?

MrB

[MrBarnett]

Mr Barnett
First of all - yes I was confusing myself over 'Old Montague Street' - when I use that term it is shorthand for the route down Old Montague Street - which turns into Wentworth Street, where the black bit is.

Secondly - yes, if he was a timid and innocent carman, living in fear of gangs, he would have gone down Whitechapel Road and avoided the back streets altogether - it wouldn't have added that much time to his journey.

Unless he was late one morning and decided to risk it?