So would he have run?

[Lechmere]

Dr Strange

I quite agree there is nothing unusual about the pair, but Lechmere alone? That’s another matter.
Allow me to address the issues you raised.

Did Lechmere hear Paul?
Daily Telegraph’s report of his inquest testimony….
‘He then heard the footsteps of a man going up Buck's-row, about forty yards away, in the direction that he himself had come from.’To be honest whether he heard or whether he saw is immaterial for the case. Paul in his newspaper interview says he saw Lechmere rather than heard him.

Lechmere says he left home at 3.30 or 3.20 (depending on which report you choose) and we know fairly accurately how long it would have taken him to walk the short distance to Bucks Row. We know the time Paul says he left home and he says he knew he was late for work – indeed as Lechmere also claimed. If they both knew they were late for work then presumably they had clocks. In any case if we put Lechmere’s timings to Pauls’ timings they do not add up.
You can claim their clocks were out. All I will say is that given the timings we have – and that is all we have to go on – there is a discrepancy. If here was no discrepancy the case would be weaker. But there is a discrepancy and you can’t do better than that!

As for time of death you know better than Llewellyn?
He said the body had been dead less than half an hour which puts it almost exactly at the time Lechmere was with the body.
Again you can’t do better than that!

If you think the scenario was similar to Dimschutz’s discovery of Stride then think again. Stride was seen by various people on the street and numerous people were seen on the street also.
The nature of Dimschultz’s discovery of Stride was quite different to the discovery of Nichols. Dimschutz raised the alarm in the building adjacent – did Lechmere?

There was no notion in 1888 about not disturbing crime scenes. According to Lechmere’s testimony he was unsure whether it was a crime scene:
"She looks to me to be either dead or drunk; but for my part I think she is dead."
(Daily Telegraph version)

As for the Mizen conversation, Paul initially claimed to have done all the talking. In his inquest testimony he didn’t really go into any details. He is a poor witness to rely on to corroborate Lechmere’s version of that conversation.
The significant point here is that after leaving the body and bumping into Mizen, Mizen claimed Lechmere said one thing, while Lechmere claimed he said something else altogether. Just brushing this aside is in my opinion slightly ridiculous.

The Old Montague Street route is most definitely the shortest – it has been measured. When I first looked at this case I knew immediately which was the shortest route based on my own knowledge of the streets and I have never been a professional driver (as Lechmere was essentially) nor have I lived in that specific area (near by but not so I would have to walk that route).
The Hanbury Street route took him down Dorset Street or one street away. Whatever route he took would have taken him by some bad areas according to Booth’s map.

There is nothing exotic about Lechmere as a suspect – he is the pretty much the most mundane, ordinary and inconspicuous suspect there is.

[Fisherman]

Ben:

There is nothing to indicate that Cross had any idea he was taking a "longer route than necessary". He was new to Doveton Terrace ...

Doveton Street, Ben!
Apart from that, I think it is a very strange thing to imply that a carman with twenty years plus of experience and having grown up in close proximity to these streets would represent a man where no indications of any geographical knowledge are about.
Have you ever noticed how the taxi drivers of for example London will know exactly which route to use at any given time of the day? Sometimes there will be queues in some areas, other times large industries will open their doors, congesting streets and so on. And these guys know all of this like the palm of their hand. Lechmere would have been no different after twenty years experience.

I'm afraid there is no "link" to other murder sites. Mitre Square and George's Yard are both out of that equation in the absence of any evidence that Cross ever took, or even knew about, the Montague Street route to work.

In my book, that is qualified nonsense. Not that we do not know for sure that he ever used old Montague Street for getting to his work, but the suggestion that he would not know it existed, Ben ... ouch! You can do better than that. Or canīt you?

At the end of the day, however, only Tabram was slain along the Old Montague route, and she is a victim that may or may not have been Jacks. The canonical ones are all in the right spots, for reason explained numerous times.
Myself, I am rather convinced that Tabram WAS a Ripper victim. But I am a lot less convinced of that, than I am that Charles Lechmere would have known of Old Montague Streetīs existence.
Really, Ben...!

The best that can be said it that Cross walked through the general area in which the murders were committed, and unfortunately, that counts for very little when there were thousands of men - several of whom are suspects we discuss today - who actually lived IN that area.

... and who were all up and about at 3.30 in the morning, when the streets were all but empty, as professed by Lechmere himself. Geez, Ben!

From the point of view of criminological experience, a person living in the murder region ought to be regarded with a lot more suspicion than a person who had occasion to walk through it.

Not in this case, though. The area Lechmere killed in would have represented a comfort zone to him. Actually perhaps a lot more so than the area surrounding Doveton Street.
As you yourself wisely pointed out, he was new to that area.

Where is the evidence of other serial murderers killing and disposing of their victims on their way to work?

Who needs it? What we need is the understanding that serialists will kill in the windows of time that are open to them. Nothing more.

All murder series have traits that are unique to them and them only. There is always something we can pick and say: Where are other examples of this? And then we can try to make people belive that we have made a good point. Some will buy it, some not.

Think about Bundy - where are the other examples of killers who have feigned a handicap to lure victims into a VW?

I guess Bundy never did it after all ...

The best,
Fisherman

[Ben]

I'm very pleased to see that you're talking to me again, Fisherman.

Apart from that, I think it is a very strange thing to imply that a carman with twenty years plus of experience and having grown up in close proximity to these streets would represent a man where no indications of any geographical knowledge are about.

It doesn't matter if he lived there for 60 years. If he had no reason to compare the distances between Doveton Avenue and his place of work at Pickfords, there was no reason for him to have any knowledge as to which was ever so slightly longer, and even if he did, he may well have settled on Hanbury Street because he knew it was quick, direct, and safer than the Montague Street alternative. He was not a "taxi driver", he had no reason to walk those particular streets until he lived there, and he didn't have sat-nav or a radio that would inform him "there will be queues in some areas, other times large industries will open their doors, congesting streets and so on".

In my book, that is qualified nonsense.

There is no evidence that he explored, or ever felt the need to explore, alternatives routes to work beyond simple, straightforward, does-the-job Hanbury Street which he doubtless decided upon soon after arriving in Doveton Crescent. He was undoubtedly able to figure out that Old Montague Street headed in more or less the right direction, but may have been put off by its very bad reputation and the various back alleys he had to faff about with after Wentworth Street (which I'm quite sure some of these modern-day route-timers didn't take into account).

Let's put it another way: do we have any evidence that Cross ever set foot on Old Montague Street to get to work?

No.

Good, onwards then...

... and who were all up and about at 3.30 in the morning, when the streets were all but empty, as professed by Lechmere himself.

Very circular, Fisherman.

Whoever the ripper was, he made it his business to be "up and about at 3.30 in the morning", and if he lived in the general vicinity of the crimes, and wasn't due at work in the next few minutes, he'd belong with the vast majority of serial offenders whose crime/disposal locations are all within easy walking distance of each other. If he was someone like Cross, on the other hand, he'd be a "very rare" commuter type of offender who did what nobody else has ever done and kill on the way to work. Now, don't get me wrong, "kan inte uteslutas" and all that, but if we're speaking of statistical likelihoods, the evidence points very mch away from Cross.

Not in this case, though. The area Lechmere killed in would have represented a comfort zone to him.

If my auntie had bollocks, her groin area would represent a testicular zone. Ifs and buts. The fact remains that a serial killer's comfort zone has rarely, if ever, been his route to work, so for Lechmere to be the killer, he would have to fly in the face of criminological precedent. If the murder locations surrounded Doveton Alley, he would be more persuasive as a suspect.

What we need is the understanding that serialists will kill in the windows of time that are open to them.

That's another problem. I don't believe that the "window of time" in which Chapman was "open" to Cross. He would have been due at work well before her likely time of death (and her unlikely one, for that matter).

Regards,
Ben

[Lechmere]

We have a lot more reason to suppose that Charles Lechmere will have walked down Old Montague Street than any other suspect. Given that it was his shortest route to work.
By comparison we have absolutely nothing to go on for Druitt, Tumblety, Kosminsky, Le Grand, Hutchinson, Fleming, Barnett, Bury.... and so on.
I can live with that.

Charles Lechmere had a ready reason to be out on the streets at the hours most of the murders took place.
Can we say the same for Druitt, Tumblety, Kosminsky, Le Grand, Hutchinson, Fleming, Barnett, Bury.... and so on. No.
I would rather work on a suspect who had cause to be out and about than one who didn't - particularly one who would not be able to get admission to his lodgings in the small hours of the morning..

[Fisherman]

Ben:

It doesn't matter if he lived there for 60 years. If he had no reason to compare the distances between Doveton Avenue and his place of work at Pickfords, there was no reason for him to have any knowledge as to which was ever so slightly longer, and even if he did, he may well have settled on Hanbury Street because he knew it was quick, direct, and safer than the Montague Street alternative. He was not a "taxi driver", he had no reason to walk those particular streets until he lived there, and he didn't have sat-nav or a radio that would inform him "there will be queues in some areas, other times large industries will open their doors, congesting streets and so on".

But he WAS an equivalent of a taxi driver. He would have all the streets and distances in his head. It was a working tool of his. Other suggestions are unviable.

There is no evidence that he explored, or ever felt the need to explore, alternatives routes to work beyond simple, straightforward, does-the-job Hanbury Street which he doubtless decided upon soon after arriving in Doveton Crescent. He was undoubtedly able to figure out that Old Montague Street headed in more or less the right direction, but may have been put off by its very bad reputation and the various back alleys he had to faff about with after Wentworth Street (which I'm quite sure some of these modern-day route-timers didn't take into account).

That is equivalent to saying that carmen (and todays taxi drivers) not necessaily feel the need to explore alternative routes. It does not pan out at all.

Let's put it another way: do we have any evidence that Cross ever set foot on Old Montague Street to get to work?

No.

Good, onwards then...

It does not work that way, Iīm afraid. There is every reason to accept that he would have used the shortest thoroughfare to his job, since that is what people normally do for time-saving reasons.
Plus, as I said, Old Montague Street is Tabram territory, whereas the canonicals are not Old Montague Street material.

Very circular, Fisherman.

No, itīs not, actually.

Whoever the ripper was, he made it his business to be "up and about at 3.30 in the morning", and if he lived in the general vicinity of the crimes, and wasn't due at work in the next few minutes, he'd belong with the vast majority of serial offenders whose crime/disposal locations are all within easy walking distance of each other.

Mmm - but you suggested a potential group of THOUSANDS of men, and I think we can very safely say that such a group was NOT on the streets at 3.30. In the Buckīs Row vicinity, not a single one of this huge group of men was to be found.

There is nothing circular in pointing out that the TRUE group of possible perpetrators was the group of men that WAS up and about at 3.30 - and that group was petite, to say the least.

If he was someone like Cross, on the other hand, he'd be a "very rare" commuter type of offender who did what nobody else has ever done and kill on the way to work. Now, don't get me wrong, "kan inte uteslutas" and all that, but if we're speaking of statistical likelihoods, the evidence points very mch away from Cross.

And Bundy could not have done it, eh? Statistics are against it.

Now, take some time and explain to us all why a serial killer with enough time on his hands would not kill on his working trek! What exact parameter would stop it automatically?

If my auntie had bollocks, her groin area would represent a testicular zone. Ifs and buts. The fact remains that a serial killer's comfort zone has rarely, if ever, been his route to work, so for Lechmere to be the killer, he would have to fly in the face of criminological precedent.

The place you live and the place you work and the road to work is normally described as your comfort zone. It translates into "an area where you are at ease and know the surroundings".
Thatīs how much it would "fly in the face of criminological precedent".

With respect, Ben the argument as such is outright stupid.

If the murder locations surrounded Doveton Alley, he would be more persuasive as a suspect.

No, he would not. He had very little experience of that area, whereas he had decades of experience of for example the Pinchin Street/James Street/Berner Street area. That area would be a comfort zone to him, whereas Doveton Street would not. I trust you can see the relevance: well-known area = comfort zone, unknown area = no comfort zone.

That's another problem. I don't believe that the "window of time" in which Chapman was "open" to Cross. He would have been due at work well before her likely time of death (and her unlikely one, for that matter).

Answer: Phillips. Or an errand later in the day. No big deal. No small deal, even. No deal at all.

The best,
Fisherman

[DVV]

I can only see one man running here, David. Please go back to the "Why did Abberline believe Hutch?"-thread, and answer the question I put to you there. As it stands, you have accused posters of doing things that have not been done and then you have avoided to apologize for it.

You are on the run, in other words.

The best,
Fisherman

Hi Fish,

I comment every thread I wish. And won't hijack a quintessential Cross-thread with Hutch-the-Ripper.

Now would you please use your well-known common-sense and agree that Cross had just to walk away if he were Nichols' murderer ?

Cheers

[Roy Corduroy]

Good afternoon Fisherman,

But he WAS an equivalent of a taxi driver.

Fish, I'll buy you a taxi

and get you a taxi dance (click)

if you would just learn to use the Quote feature. You mixed up your quotes and your not quotes in that big post. You bipped when you should have bopped.

Roy

[DVV]

Fish, I'll buy you a taxi
Roy

Then it must be a Volvo, with an Ikea kitchen at the rear.

Cheers Roy, hope you're fine

[Fisherman]

DVV: Hi Fish,

I comment every thread I wish. And won't hijack a quintessential Cross-thread with Hutch-the-Ripper.

Apparently, you also misrepresent and falsely claim things on behalf of other posters on any thread you wish, without retracting it or apologizing afterwards. Shame on you, David.

I have nothing further to add.

Fisherman

[Fisherman]

Good afternoon Fisherman,



Fish, I'll buy you a taxi

and get you a taxi dance (click)

if you would just learn to use the Quote feature. You mixed up your quotes and your not quotes in that big post. You bipped when you should have bopped.

Roy

Yeah, I know. But wouldnīt the world be a dreary place if we all used the quote feature...?

The best,
Fisherman

[bolo]

Hello Fisherman,

But wouldnīt the world be a dreary place if we all used the quote feature...?

no, it would be a more readable, less cluttered place...

Best wishes,

Boris

[DVV]

DVV: Hi Fish,

I comment every thread I wish. And won't hijack a quintessential Cross-thread with Hutch-the-Ripper.

Apparently, you also misrepresent and falsely claim things on behalf of other posters on any thread you wish, without retracting it or apologizing afterwards. Shame on you, David.

I have nothing further to add.

Fisherman

Oh yes, Fish.

Shame on me.

How can I survive post 114 ?

Aiuto !

[Ben]

Roy and David, you crack me up as always, and giggles are much needed on threads such as these, which are often very un-chilled out.

“We have a lot more reason to suppose that Charles Lechmere will have walked down Old Montague Street than any other suspect. Given that it was his shortest route to work.
By comparison we have absolutely nothing to go on for Druitt, Tumblety, Kosminsky, Le Grand, Hutchinson, Fleming, Barnett, Bury.... and so on.”

You can’t be remotely serious with that one, Lechmere.

Hutchinson and Fleming lived opposite the entrance to Old Montage Street, less than ten feet away. Old Montague Street merged onto Wentworth Street, so they lived on it, pretty much. If they popped over the road for a pint at the Princess Alice, they were on Old Montague Street.

Hutchinson and Fleming were infinitely more likely to be on Old Montague Street than Cross.

Old Montague Street was not "the" shortest route to work for Cross on Doveton Drive. There in no evidence that it was any shorter than Hanbury Street, Wilkes Street and so on.

I’m perplexed by this stuff about Cross having a “reason” to be out and about in the small hours, and even more so by your claim that none of the other suspects did. That is a circular argument. If any one of those other suspects was the killer, he had a very good "reason" to be on the streets at that time – he was looking for a prostitute to kill. I think you’ll find that very few other serial prostitute killers were on the streets late at night for any other reason than that fairly obvious one.

“particularly one who would not be able to get admission to his lodgings in the small hours of the morning.”

Ah, so any suspect who tried to get into their lodgings in the small hours but couldn’t do so for that very reason must also have had a “ready reason to be out on the streets”? I guess you must like Hutchinson as a suspect then, seeing as you insist he meets this criterion of yours: “I would rather work on a suspect who had cause to be out and about than one who didn't”...?

Interesting.

All the best,
Ben

P.S. I'm coming back for your post, Fisherman. Be scared.

[Fisherman]

I'm coming back for your post, Fisherman. Be scared.

I remember when the British newspapers used that headline with a picture of Wayne Rooney, preceding a football game that us Swedes won; "Be scared. Be very, very scared" or something like that.
Funny how such things regularly fall flat to the ground when they are put to the test, donīt you think?

Iīwill accomodate you to some degree, though, by seemingly fleeing for a number of days - Iīm off for a mini-vacation with some friends. Midsummer is a big deal over here.

But when I come back, I am going to want my answer to the question about what mechanism it is that steps in and hinders killers from killing en route to work.

Lechmere did his work trek in the dead hours of the night, when the streets were much deserted but for the odd night-rambler or prostitute - it would have been the best time available for a street killer.

His work trek would every morning take him past these prostitutes, always gnawing away on him. The inspiration was always there during these treks.

He would quite possibly be able to add some little time to the time needed just to reach Pickfords, and thus enable him to kill and eviscerate, which was a swift enough affair in his case.

We donīt know what awaited him up at Broad Street - he could have been first to arrive, he could have his own premises etcetera - he was a faithful and quite possibly trusted employee, and so he could have had the perfect premises to stash trophies and clean up.

It is not until we can point to something that would have himdered him from killing en route to work that it becomes useful criticism. Saying that nobody else has done it before and that it would be a criminological sensation is to divert the focus from where it should lie.

Lechmereīs working trek provided him with a prime opportunity to approach prostitutes and folllow/lead them to secluded areas. All the while he did so, he would have an alibi for being out in the streets. It would have offered a very good setting.

The suggestion that it would be criminologically unviable to kill under these circumstances is therefore totally lacking in insight.

Right, Ben, now Iīll go and shudder in fear for whatīs to come!

The best,
Fisherman

[Fisherman]

Hutchinson and Fleming lived opposite the entrance to Old Montage Street, less than ten feet away. Old Montague Street merged onto Wentworth Street, so they lived on it, pretty much. If they popped over the road for a pint at the Princess Alice, they were on Old Montague Street.

Canīt resist this one though, Ben: If Hutchinson and Fleming wanted to have a drink, then surely they would avoid having it in Old Montague Street, where the risk of getting whacked/robbed/sneered at was so overwhelming...?

The best,
Fisherman