So would he have run?

[MrBarnett]

Hi Fish,

It was a simple question: does it necessarily follow that Lech as Jack must have been totally fearless.

There is only one answer to that - NO. So both innocent Lech and Jack Lech may have factored personal safety into their route. In which case there is a third route that should be considered: along the Whitechapel Road.

As for the relative proximity of OM and H streets, I think I have already explained my doubts in that respect, but to rephrase them in your favoured 'Scilly Isles' style:
'Because I live London, does it necessarily follow that I am more familiar with Middlesborough than Crete?'

MrB

[Fisherman]

By the way, if Whitechapel Road is what you propose as a "safe road", Mr Barnett, you may want to consider the Old Bailey registers again. From 1887-1890, that road figured in 21 crime reports, amongst them larceny, sexual offenses and multiple cases of robbery.
Maybe we should paint the houses along that stretch black on our maps?

All the best,
Fisherman

[Observer]

Hi Obs,

Do you happen to have one of the Godfrey reprints of the OS map for Whitechapel and Spitalfields? On the back they show the Post office directory entries for the principal streets of the area. I'm pretty sure Commercial Street would be covered. Sadly my copy seems to have gone walkabout.

That in conjunction with the Goad map (available online) for the street numbers and the Booth map should provide the info you are after.

That's the rather cumbersome way I would go about it, but there
are probably any number of real researchers on here who can suggested a better solution .

Cheers ,

MrB

Hi Mr B

No havn't got any of the Godfrey maps. As I said, for what it's worth, the electoral roll is the answer. I believe they are to be found in the libraries local to the streets you wish to search.

Regards

Observer

[Fisherman]

MrBarnett: 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).

There were a million routes and more to Broad Street. One of them would take him via Rome, Aruba and Silly... sorry, Scilly islands.

We all know that.

What I am saying is that the two LOGICAL routes if one wanted to reach Broad Street with a minimum of time loss, were Hanbury Street and Old Montague Street.

Amongst other things, that is why Lechmere is such an appealing suspect.

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?

Why are we having this discussion? Is it for real? Or am I tucked up in the cozy corner of some looney bin, imagining away?

How do these "arguments" surface, even?

How am I supposed to deliver an answer to such a question? By saying that he was half crazy, doing the Hanbury/Old Montague trips every other day?

How can I possibly know?

I will just leave that question unanswered, if you donīt much mind.

I wonder if anybody ever asked Ridgway if he dared go to the Sea-Tac strip on days when he didnīt kill, if he felt uneasy there...? Did anybody come up with the idea of asking? I doubt it.

What was your aim in asking me this?

All the best,
Fisherman

[Fisherman]

I don't see why he would have been necessarily more familiar with OM St than Hanbury St.

MrB

Because the latter was much further away, how about that? I donīt know about others specifically, but where I live, I tend to know the roads close to my house a lot better than those in the other end of town.

Coming from his home, every time he wanted to visit Hanbury Street, he had to cross Old Montague Street. To get to know both streets equally well, we must work from the presumption that every time he came up to Old Montague Street, he would also proceed up to Hanbury Street.

I would have thought it was simple logic that Old Montague Street was a lot more familiar grounds to him than Hanbury Street.

But everything can be contested, absolutely everything. I know that too from experience.

The best,
Fisherman

[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?

[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

[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]

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

[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]

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: 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]

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]

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]

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