Suspect battle: Cross/Lechmere vs. Hutchinson

[Harry D]

Fair enough, Fisherman. I'm happy to call it quits as we seem to have reached a deadlock. I certainly don't begrudge anyone their pet suspects, it was just the whole "the police probably would've charged Crossmere" line that I thought overstepped the mark, given the lack of damning evidence against him (and any suspect, for that matter).

[Fisherman]

I don't believe a layman could've performed the kind of mutilations carried out by the Ripper, especially that of Annie Chapman. I'm an average schmo and I wouldn't have the first idea how to remove someone's internal organs in that precise manner, let alone in the dark within a matter of minutes. While the jury may indeed be out, I think the evidence alone leans in favour of some kind of anatomical knowledge rather than none.

That Crossmere possibly delivered meat and therefore had butchery experience is pure supposition. It's certainly not implausible but there's nothing to confirm it, so once again you decide to jump to conclusions in order to make the pieces fit. Whereas we know Jacob Levy was a butcher by trade, we know he had a violent potential in his character, we know there were possible triggers for committing the murders, and we can link him to one of the witnesses (who got spooked when he saw Eddowes with her killer).

You are very welcome to think that the killer had anatomical knowledge. Many people do now, many people did back then. There is, however, a difference between the knowledge of a butcher and that of a medico. A butcher would not be required to have the kind of knowledge that Phillips thought he saw in the Chapman case - butchers do not cut out female uteruses and bladders.
So in that context, Jacob Levy (or Charles Lechmere) would not be the kind of suspect we should look for - IF we were to accept expert anatomical knowledge on behalf of the Ripper.
Besides as I have pointed out before, the more common stance among the medicos whas that he had some crude knowledge or no knowledge at all. SO yes, the jury IS out.

As for Lechmere and his familiarity with meat and cutting, I think that the one and only thing we MUST predispose was a trait with the killer, was a fascination with meat and innards and cutting away in flesh.

It would seem that Pickfords on Broad Street handled meat to a very large extent (whether or not they only handled meat is something I am trying to find out), and that is quite enough for me. If Lechmere spent his days amongst animal carcasses and experienced how these carcasses were cut into, he may well have developed a fascination with it and subsequently desires of his own, knit to the trade.
The exact same applies to the catīs meat business - it is all about carving up creatures into small dices of meat, so in a way it is also about annihilating a co-existence, taking itīs soul and itīs life from it, and being the one who is in charge.

Thatīs where I draw the line for the killer and his flesh and cutting connections - a fascination MUST have been there. Whether any skill was there is written in the stars, and I donīt see a need for such a skill to explain how a fascination can grow.

As for Levy, he is no worse than many other suspects, but he certainly cannot be in any shape or form tied to the killings. I think that he is much on par with a fellow like Hyam Hyams, but in his case, there is at least a tentative coupling in Mitre Square, as you may know.

Lechmere was found alone by a dead body, freshly killed. That remains. In itself, it is something that the police would consider very serious. It carries tons of weight.

He lied about his identity, and that too is seriously looked upon by the police.

He apparently conned himself past the police on the murder night, and that would be something that had him accused of murder if the police had known. There can be very little doubt about that - he was alone with the victim, he is in line with the medical timings of death for Nichols, nobody was there to give him an alibi, and nobody else was seen leaving the spot.
That is a very heavy collection of accusations, and if the police had acted on it, only to discover his dual lies, he would have faced an accusation of murder.

Just as I donīt agree with you on Levy, you donīt have to agree with me on this. Itīs fine, Harry. If you think it is wise to call Lechmere a bad suspect, considering these things, then do so. Just be careful so you donīt yell "bad suspect" just because I say the same about Levy.
Suspects will always differ in viability, and this is very much such a case.

The best,
Fisherman

[Harry D]

I don't believe a layman could've performed the kind of mutilations carried out by the Ripper, especially that of Annie Chapman. I'm an average schmo and I wouldn't have the first idea how to remove someone's internal organs in that precise manner, let alone in the dark within a matter of minutes. While the jury may indeed be out, I think the evidence alone leans in favour of some kind of anatomical knowledge rather than none.

That Crossmere possibly delivered meat and therefore had butchery experience is pure supposition. It's certainly not implausible but there's nothing to confirm it, so once again you decide to jump to conclusions in order to make the pieces fit. Whereas we know Jacob Levy was a butcher by trade, we know he had a violent potential in his character, we know there were possible triggers for committing the murders, and we can link him to one of the witnesses (who got spooked when he saw Eddowes with her killer).

[Fisherman]

Harry D: I'd value Bagster Phillips's professional opinion over Bond's. Wasn't MJK the only victim that Bond had first-hand experience with? There wasn't anything leftover in that bloodbath to deduce any kind of anatomical skill from.

There was a lot of cut surfaces, and thatīs how you determine the skill, believe it or not. In this respect, MAry Kelly was the victim that offered most things to go on, by far.
Anyhow, the consensus, more or less, amongst the doctors was that there was little or no skill involved. Phillips was an exception to the rule.

Also, in the case of the first two murders, the medical consensus of Dr Llewellyn, Baxter and Bagster Phillips was that the perpetrator was someone possessing some level of anatomical knowledge.

Llewellyn had Nichols to go on, and he said that the killer would have had some rough anatomical skill, since he had attacked all the vital parts. Whether he did so purposefull or not was open to discussion. Thomas Bodn - much superior to Llewellyn - read the report and disagreed.

Baxter was no medical man at all.

We can go on doing this forever, and it wonīt change that the jury is out on the question of skill, Harry. Most doctors had a very hesitating take on the suggestion.

The key word being 'delivered'.

As you wish. The rest of us will probably take in that Lechmere spent decades around the slaughterhouses and meat depots, being able to pick up on - and perhaps participate in - all sorts of cutting practices.
If you think it is wise to diss that, then be my guest. But it will say a lot more about your readiness to accept important material than anything else.

Chase was completely away with the faeries and yet it took a month before he was caught, in 20th century America no less.

Have a look at where he committed his deeds. Look at how many people were around to disclose him. Then compare to the Ripper murder spots.

Could a schizophrenic have been able to get away with the murders within the seedy East End of Victorian London? I have little doubt that he would. He was targeting vulnerable, down-and-out whores and to borrow a quote, would've only had to ask "I'll give you a shilling for a blowjob" to get them onside.

It all sounds very neat and simple, Iīm sure. And why look at the circumstances?

Just to recap:

Jacob Levy...
1) was a butcher.
2) was a Jew who got carted off to the asylum around the time the murders stopped and died thereafter.
3) his cousin was a potential witness, who got freaked out after seeing Eddowes with her (probable) killer.
4) by his wife's admission wandered the streets at night and harboured feelings of violence.
5) lived in the local area all his life.
6) was suffering (and died from) syphilis.
7) whose brother possibly lived in the Wentworth building, next to where the apron & GSG were found.
8) was arguably the Butcher's Row suspect.
9) is and remains bad suspect. Not worse than many others, but nevertheless bad.

You are welcome to try and discredit Levy as suspect, you've already tried in vain but don't let that stop you. Rest assured that even you should succeed in this quest, it does absolutely diddily squat to bolster Crossmere's case, because if Levy, with all that he has going for him, is considered a weak suspect, I have no idea what that says about Crossmere - a man who's only crime was apparently finding the first victim.

You go on fighting your little war, Harry dear. I have other things to do, so if youīll excuse me...?

The very best,
Fisherman

[Harry D]

You have no idea what knowledge it took. Are you placing yourself knowledgewise over the doctors?
Thomas Bond - who was there and who saw the handiwork of the Ripper - said: In each case the mutilation was inflicted by a person who had no scientific nor anatomical knowledge. In my opinion be does not even possess the technical knowledge of a butcher or horse slaughterer or any person accustomed to cut up dead animals."

I'd value Bagster Phillips's professional opinion over Bond's. Wasn't MJK the only victim that Bond had first-hand experience with? There wasn't anything leftover in that bloodbath to deduce any kind of anatomical skill from.

Also, in the case of the first two murders, the medical consensus of Dr Llewellyn, Baxter and Bagster Phillips was that the perpetrator was someone possessing some level of anatomical knowledge.

Meet Arthur Ingram! Mr Ingram is a transport historian who has written "The story of Pickfords". And he says that the Pickfords Broad Street depot dealt mainly with meat. The carmen knit to the depot delivered meat on a daily basis to Smithfield Market and a large number of butchers throughout the East end."

The key word being 'delivered'.

Chase never existed as a silent killer who left no traces behind. He could not have carried out the Ripper murders and he could not have disappeared without a trace each time. Paranoid schizophrenics dont do that."

Chase was completely away with the faeries and yet it took a month before he was caught, in 20th century America no less. Could a schizophrenic have been able to get away with the murders within the seedy East End of Victorian London? I have little doubt that he would. He was targeting vulnerable, down-and-out whores and to borrow a quote, would've only had to ask "I'll give you a shilling for a blowjob" to get them onside.

Just to recap:

Jacob Levy...
1) was a butcher.
2) was a Jew who got carted off to the asylum around the time the murders stopped and died thereafter.
3) his cousin was a potential witness, who got freaked out after seeing Eddowes with her (probable) killer.
4) by his wife's admission wandered the streets at night and harboured feelings of violence.
5) lived in the local area all his life.
6) was suffering (and died from) syphilis.
7) whose brother possibly lived in the Wentworth building, next to where the apron & GSG were found.
8) was arguably the Butcher's Row suspect.

You are welcome to try and discredit Levy as suspect, you've already tried in vain but don't let that stop you. Rest assured that even you should succeed in this quest, it does absolutely diddily squat to bolster Crossmere's case, because if Levy, with all that he has going for him, is considered a weak suspect, I have no idea what that says about Crossmere - a man who's only crime was apparently finding the first victim.

[Fisherman]

Yes, Fish, it was the black humour of using the kitten's head as a cricket ball I most enjoyed. (Sorry, cat - lovers!)

Such kids would be desensitised from an early age, their fathers bringing home such treasures as horses eyes and buckets of blood for the garden. And by witnessing casual cruelty towards animals in the markets.

MrB

Sounds feasible enough to me. And one of the points made about the slaughterers is that they would fend themselves off emotionally when cutting the necks of animal after animal, only to carve them up into little pieces afterwards. Killing takes itīs toll, and there is only so much you can do to safeguard yourself.

The best,
Fisherman

[MrBarnett]

Thatīs a nice piece, Mr Barnett - and very well-written too ; ",,, and for ball the head of a kitten".

Actually, it has ties to the research of professor Fitzgerald and other people who have written about the slaughteries in the cities of olden days. A lack of respect for living creatures supposedly develops, and that lack can deepen into something darker - or so the word goes.

The best,
Fisherman

Yes, Fish, it was the black humour of using the kitten's head as a cricket ball I most enjoyed. (Sorry, cat - lovers!)

Such kids would be desensitised from an early age, their fathers bringing home such treasures as horses eyes and buckets of blood for the garden. And by witnessing casual cruelty towards animals in the markets.

MrB

[Fisherman]

Thatīs a nice piece, Mr Barnett - and very well-written too ; ",,, and for ball the head of a kitten".

Actually, it has ties to the research of professor Fitzgerald and other people who have written about the slaughteries in the cities of olden days. A lack of respect for living creatures supposedly develops, and that lack can deepen into something darker - or so the word goes.

The best,
Fisherman

[MrBarnett]

Apologies if this is too long and a little off topic...

ON a piping hot summer's day - the thermometer marking 80 in the shade I took it into my head that I would go and see how such weather agreed with a place so terrible as Belle-Isle was made out to be.
It is doubtful if, left to himself, the stranger would ever discover the place in question. Those who are disposed for a similar exploration, however, may accept the following simple direction. Turn up a road called the York-road, by the side of the King's-cross railway station, and follow your nose. Even should the wind be unfavourable, the air will certainly be laden with peculiar indications that may safely be trusted for guidance. Keep straight along the York-road, and gradually you will be sensible of leaving civilization behind you. You will discover on the right-hand side of the way, opposite to some cottages which stand in a street that is "no thoroughfare," a modest pair of gates attached to a red-brick lodge bearing the inscription "Cemetery Entrance." Here it is that bodies intended for interment in out-of-town cemeteries are housed until the stated time arrives for their conveyance down the line.
It is a terribly deserted and melancholy place, looking as though every one connected with its proper and decent keeping had given up the ghost and slipped down the line with the rest. Between the gates and the dismal house where the coffins are stored, there is a space which desperate efforts have been made to con-[-64-]vert into a kitchen garden; but never was there a more ghastly failure. Barren, sickly, yellow-cabbage stalks, that have out-grown their strength, crop out of the ground all aslant; while fierce rank weeds have seized on more tender plants of the green tribe, and strangled them till they are absolutely black in the face. The iron gate has long shed the coat of paint by which it was originally covered, and glows dusky red with rust.
It is evident that no one now resides at the lodge; for there is a board on which are inscribed directions to "apply over the way," and when last I passed a dozen or so of shoeless, almost breechesless young Belle-Islanders were swarming over the wall, and deriving immense satisfaction from the pastime of pitching old tin pots and other gutter refuse upon a sort of high-up window-ledge.
But you do not arrive at Belle-Isle proper until you reach the archway that spans the road. At this point you may dispense with the services of your faithful olfactory guide; indeed, it will be better, provided you do it in a way that shall not be remarkable-for the act is one that the inhabitants may resent - to mask its keen discrimination with your pocket handkerchief. Here, an appropriate sentinel at the threshold of this delectable place, stands the great horse-slaughtering establishment of the late celebrated Mr. John Atcheler.
As a horse-slaughtering establishment nothing can be said against it. I am afraid to say how many hundred lame, diseased, and worn-out animals weekly find surcease of sorrow within Atcheler's gates-or how many tons of nutriment for the feline species are daily boiled in the immense coppers and carried away every morning by a legion of industrious barrowmen. Everything, I have no doubt, is managed in the best possible way; [-65-] but that best still leaves a terribly broad margin for odours that can only be described as nauseating. In the shadow of the slaughter-yard is a public-house-a house of call for the poleaxe men and those who, with a hook to catch fast hold, and an enormous knife, denude the worn-out horses' bones of the little flesh that remains attached to them.
They are terrible looking fellows, these honest horse slaughterers. They seem rather to cultivate than avoid stains of a crimson colour; and they may be seen at the bar of the public-house before-mentioned, merry as sandboys, haw-hawing in the true and original "fee-fo-fum" tone, drinking pots of beer with red hands and with faces that look as though they had been swept with a sanguinary hearth-broom. You can see all this from the gateway where the savage young Belle-Islanders congregate to give fierce prods with pointed sticks at the miserable bare-ribbed old horses as they come hobbling in. Altogether the picture is one to be remembered.
The horse slaughterer's place, however, is by no means the ugliest feature of Belle-Isle. Its inodorous breath is fragrant compared with the pestilent blast that greets the sense of smell before a distance of fifty paces further has been accomplished. The spot that holds the horse slaughter houses is modestly called "The Vale;" the first turning beyond is, with goblin like humour, designated "Pleasant Grove." It is hardly too much to say, that almost every trade banished from the haunts of men, on account of the villanous smells and the dangerous atmosphere which it engenders is represented in Pleasant Grove. There are bone boilers, fat-melters, "chemical works," firework makers, lucifer-match factories, and several most extensive and flourishing dust-[-66-]yards, where - at this delightful season so excellent for ripening corn - scores of women and young girls find employment in sifting the refuse of dust-bins, standing knee-high in what they sift. In the midst of all this is a long row of cottages, each tenanted by at least one family; and little children, by dozens and scores, find delight in the reeking kennels. These are the very little ones; those of somewhat larger growth turn their attention to matters less trivial.
For instance, a knot of half-a-dozen were calmly enjoying, at the wide-open gates of a sort of yard, the edifying and instructive spectacle of a giant, stripped to his waist, smashing up with a sledge-hammer the entire red skeletons of horses that had just been dragged from the cutting and stripping department. Again, the juvenile Bell-Islanders are not so benighted that they have not heard of the game of cricket; nor did a lack of the recognised appliances needed for that noble game frustrate their praiseworthy determination to do something like what other boys do. A green sward was, of course, out of the question; but they had; to the number of eight or ten, chosen a tolerably level bit between two dust-heaps. For wickets they had a pile of old hats and broken crockery; for bat the stump leg of an old bedstead, and for ball the head of a kitten.
This is not romance, but earnest fact. With the thermometer at 80 in the shade, there was the merry young band of cricketers, their faces and the rest of their visible flesh the very colour of the dust they sported among; and, the sun blazing down on their uncovered heads, they were bowling up the kitten's head, giving it fair spanks with the bedstead - leg for ones and twos, and looking out with barbarous relish for "catches." Evidently they were boys employed in some of the sur-[-67-]rounding factories, and this was the way in which they sought recreation in their dinner-hour! I say evidently they were factory-lads, because their fantastic aspect bespoke them such. There were boys whose rags were of a universal yellow tint, as though they were intimately acquainted with the manufacture of sulphur or some such material; boys whose rags were black as a sweep's; and other boys who were splashed with many colours, that made them twinkle in the sun like demon harlequins as they wrestled in the ashes for possession of the "ball."

[Fisherman]

Hello Christer,

Without any DIRECT comparison, I thought of Carl Grossmann and Fritz Haarmann.

Meat, in poor areas, in times of poverty causes many kinds of strange criminal behaviour.

The meat man and his cart....

best regards

Phil

A fair enough reflection, Phil - there is actually research on the potential link between slaughterhouses and criminality, made by professor Amy Fitzgerald of the Windsor University in Canada. A link of interest would be:

http://www.thestar.com/news/insight/2010/05/14/probing_the_link_between_slaughterhouses_and_violent_crime.html

Hereīs a mouthwatering excerpt from the text, speaking of Fitzgeralds research:

She became fascinated by studies of the environmental effects of slaughterhouses that mentioned crime rates, without explanation, seemed to go up when the factories opened in communities.
Fitzgerald carefully weighed the figures in order to see whether a link really existed. She found that an average-sized slaughterhouse with 175 employees would annually increase the number of arrests by 2.24 and the number of reports by 4.69. The larger the abattoir, the worse the local crime problem.

The best,
Fisherman

[Phil Carter]

All very true, Phil. The hours tick by, I have pointed out that the job Lechmere did was one where he drove meat to butcheries and meat markets, and I have pointed out that he had reason to have bloodstained clothes and to carry a long-bladed, sharp butcherīs knife along with him.

Just like you say, in any other case this revelation would empty the champagne stocks all over town, but in this case all there is, is silence.

Hello out there! The case could be getting cracked, piece by piece, right under your noses! Charles Lechmere was seemingly deeply involved in the butchery business, he would arguably spend his days looking at people carving away at carcasses, cutting limbs away, opening up bellies, taking out entrails, and he may well have participated to some extent. He could reasonably have driven human bodies on his cart, and nobody would ask about the blood afterwards.

But why would anybody care - itīs just Lechmere, the kindly family man, we are speaking of. Who am I trying to fool?

And he would have run anyway.

Thanks for seeing right through it, Phil!

The best,
Fisherman

Hello Christer,

Without any DIRECT comparison, I thought of Carl Grossmann and Fritz Haarmann.

Meat, in poor areas, in times of poverty causes many kinds of strange criminal behaviour.

The meat man and his cart....

best regards

Phil

[Fisherman]

I will try to be patient.

Don't get me wrong, this is a very interesting development as far as I am concerned. I'm particularly interested in the connection between the slaughterhouses in the East End and the Metropolitan Cattle Market in Islington.

Have a safe journey, wherever it is you're off to. I'm off to the Dorset a coast for a few days myself next week, so JTR will take a back seat to family fun.

MrB

Dorset? A beautiful county! Me, Iīm off to Barcelona, which should be nice too - 20 degrees celsius ...

I think the Broad Street depot was closely tied to Smithfield market, which is of course closer to Broad Street than the Metropolitan cattle market.

And I know that you would be interested in all of this - it makes sense. However, since there is such a radical difference in how eartshattering news about Lechmere is received, as opposed to how much smaller bits and pieces concerning the legitimate prospects, if you will, are greeted, I will miss no opportunity to point this out. If this holds true - and I think we will have to accept that it does - then it is a very heavy argument in favour of Lechmereīs candidacy.

I have said over and over again that I expect any forthcoming information concerning the carman to potentially add to his viability as the Ripper, whereas I think that nothing at all will be found to diminish him as a prospect.
So far, this has all held true. When I first said it, the Mizen scam was still not found out, for example. To me, that is the foremost tool we will have for bringing Lechmere down. There will be no certain proof, but the scam alone carries all the indications we need to place him at the top of the list of suspects.
He lied, Lechmere. And we lie for reasons.

And now the meat and butchery connection is arriving! Again, whenever we add information about the carman, we also add to the suspicions.

To Hutchinson, nothing of value has been added since 1888. He gave a detailed description of a man he had seen with Kelly back then, and that is basically still all the Hutchinsonians have to go on.

And what do we have here on Casebook? We have more than twice as many believers in Hutchinsons guilt as we have when it comes to Lechmere, about whom more and more material has been piled up, all of it pointing in the exact same direction.

That, my friend, is pure Ripperology for you!

Enjoy Dorset! Iīll drink to your health in Barcelona. And then I will singlehandedly empty a jug of sangria and dedicate it to the sobering up of people out here.

All the best,
Fisherman

[MrBarnett]

You are going to have to wait for an answer to that one, Iīm afraid. But Iīll get there. I have a few questions of my own that I need answers to, but it will take some time to get them.
Some patience on your behalf is required, Iīm afraid.

Much as I would like to get to the bottom of all of this, I have other things to do too ( who would have thought it? ), and I am abroad most of next week. After that, we shall see!

All I can say right now is that the impression I have, is that meat was what Pickfords handled at Broad Street, as per Ingram.

The best,
Fisherman

I will try to be patient.

Don't get me wrong, this is a very interesting development as far as I am concerned. I'm particularly interested in the connection between the slaughterhouses in the East End and the Metropolitan Cattle Market in Islington.

Have a safe journey, wherever it is you're off to. I'm off to the Dorset a coast for a few days myself next week, so JTR will take a back seat to family fun.

MrB

[Fisherman]

Are you telling us that Arthur Ingram says Lech was certainly in the meat transportation business?

If so, and he is correct, it means he either has specific details about Lechmere or he is saying that Pickfords, Broad Street dealt solely in meat.

MrB

Much as I would like to get to the bottom of all of this, I have other things to do too ( who would have thought it? ), and I am abroad most of next week. After that, we shall see!

All I can say right now is that the impression I have, is that meat was what Pickfords handled at Broad Street, as per Ingram. He is actually rather categoric about it. But I donīt mind double-checking when I get the opportunity.

And who knows, maybe itīs even in that book you invested in.

The best,
Fisherman

[MrBarnett]

MrBarnett:
Charles Lechmere seemingly delivered meat.

Seemingly, or possibly?

Certainly, if you ask Arthur Ingram.

The meat business is one associated with cutting flesh and producing blood.

Slaughtering, certainly, and butchery. But not the transporting of the meat.

I donīt know about that. Blood would have seeped out on the carters vehicle, and he may well have been required to cut meat parts. We need to delve deeper in to those specific bits in the future.

He may have employed a long, sharp knife in his line of business.

Good to see you using the word MAY this time.
But it's not very likely that the cart driver was involved in butchery.

Not butchery as such, no - but he may have dealt with meatcutting to some extent. And in Lechmereīs case, he may well have been deeply involved in the catīs meat business too. He would have lived in a world full of hunks of meat and cut-up carcasses, Mr Barnett. To me, that must carry significance.

He would have had an explanation for bloodstains on his person.

Smears, maybe. But not enough to disguise fresh blood spatter.

I think that is somewhat secondary. But I can see where this is going - we now only have a "maybe" attached to the suggestion that he could have had blood on his person, and I think that is slightly ridiculous to be honest. We are speaking of a carter that would have carried parts of animal bodies, slabs of meat and innards onto his cart. It is not a "maybe" that he would get blood on him - it is a certainty.

He had a transporting vehicle which would be ideal to transport human flesh and bodies on, should he wish to.

Which victims are you suggesting were transported by cart? And do you imagine his van boy was complicit in the murders?

Now look at you - you are now introducing a van boy as if it was an absolute certainty that there was such a person around. That is rather hard to establish, Iīd say.
If you read my fomer post, you will know that I said that he COULD transport bodies on the cart, but that he never did so in the Ripper murder series. The Pinchin Street torso was manually carried, and thatīs the one that has links to Lechmere.
However, if he WAS the Torso killer, meaning that the Pinchins Street torso belonged to the Torso tally, then he would have had the perfect transporting vehicle.

That's about it, so far. And thatīs not half bad, is it?

Interesting, but not earth-shattering. When you make the Islington connection, that's when I will really sit up and take notice (pet theory alert!!)


It IS as earth-shattering as it is gonna get in the Ripper discussions - it applies that whenever a suspect that could formerly not be connected to the butchery business, suddenly can be tied closely to it, then the earth WILL tremble. You know that as well as I do. Just ponder what Phil Carter said earlier - imagine that this would be revealed about Kosminski, that he was not a hairdresser but instead Charles Lechmeres van boy, doing the rounds with tons of meat on his cart!

But now it is about Lechmere and not Kosminski, so instead of saying "Wow - thatīs a major, major find and that alters the game totally - good for you!", we instead go "nothing earthshattering".

And thatīs just a bit sad. Then again, you donīt come here to get a fair judgement.

The best,
Fisherman

Are you telling us that Arthur Ingram says Lech was certainly in the meat transportation business?

If so, and he is correct, it means he either has specific details about Lechmere or he is saying that Pickfords, Broad Street dealt solely in meat.

MrB