Tweet
Consciousness of guilt is defined as “evidence that may include actions the defendant took to “cover up” his alleged crime. Flight, when unexplained, may indicate consciousness of guilt if the facts and the circumstances support it."
So, let’s look at Charles Lechmere’s actions ONLY in Buck’s Row, looking for some indication of “consciousness of guilt” that a prosecutor may have attempted to have used against him.
Early on the morning of August 31, 1888, 31 year old Robert Paul left his home in Foster Street, Whitechapel. Paul worked as a carman for Covent-Garden Market near Hanbury Street in Spitalfields and he was due at work at 4:00am. At around 3:45am, Paul was a little more than a half mile from work when he entered a street called Buck’s Row (today called Dunward Street). To Paul’s mind, the street wasn’t a particularly safe one. “Few people like to come up and down here without being on their guard, for there are such terrible gangs about. There have been many knocked down and robbed at that spot”, he would later say.
His pace quickened as walked through the cool morning darkness. He came upon a man standing in the road a short distance ahead. He attempted to walk around him, but the man, Charles Lechmere, approached Paul, touched his shoulder, and said, “Come and look at this woman.”
STOP! Let’s examine this. Let’s pretend that running or simply walking away wasn’t an option for Lechmere, and this is why he is still in Buck's Row even as he heard Paul approaching. Robert Paul is walking through Buck’s Row. He comes upon Lechmere in the road and attempts to walk around the him. What does Lechmere do? Does he LET Paul walk around him and proceed through Buck’s Row? Does he walk past Paul and proceed in the opposite direction, the direction from which Paul had come? NO. He touches Paul’s shoulder and asks him to come and see the woman lying in the road.
Paul accompanied Lechmere a short distance and found Mary Ann “Polly” Nichols – generally considered to be Jack the Ripper’s first victim - lying motionless on the pavement. She lay on her back, across a closed gateway. Robert Paul felt Nichols’ hands and face and found them cold. Her clothes were “disarranged” and he “helped to pull them down”. He placed his hand on her heart and thought he detected movement, albeit very slight. “I think she is breathing, but very little if she is”, he said to Lechmere. Paul suggested that they prop her up, but Lechmere refused to do so. Neither man wished to be late for work. After spending approximately two minutes with “Polly” Nichols in Buck’s Row, the two men agreed to continue on together, in hopes of finding a policeman to whom to report what they had found.
STOP! Paul thinks the woman may be alive. He thinks he detects movement. Why didn’t Lechmere attempt to corroborate Paul's opinion? He might have said, “You’re right. She’s breathing and dead drunk! Let’s go on to work!” Further, Paul suggests they “give her a prop”. But Lechmere refuses. It was very dark in Buck’s Row. Lechmere had – according to the theory – just killed and mutilated Nichols, mere moments before. Why not assist Paul in moving the body? This would explain the blood that must have been on his person. It’s important to remember that Lechmere – as the theory goes – killed Nichols and hid the murder knife on his person, in his clothing. Thus, he killed a woman, mutilated her abdomen, stuck the knife into his coat, and showed no concern at all that any blood would be visible on his clothing (it was too dark for him to know either way) as he went off with Paul to find a PC with a bloody knife in his coat.
We can later tackle how might find consciousness of guilt in Lechmere accompanying Paul to Baker's Row where spoke with Mizen, where he could have reasonably expected to be inspected by lantern light, with no excuse for any blood that must have been on his clothing, and the bloody knife in his coat. Then we can move on the consciousness of guilt that drove Lechmere to appear and testify at the Nichols' inquest 72 hours after the murder. Mizen hadn't asked his name. Paul didn't know his name. No one had offered any description of him at all. No one asked him to appear at the inquest. But there he was. Submitting himself to questioning, just as he'd submitted himself to inspection by Mizen in Baker's Row.
So, let’s look at Charles Lechmere’s actions ONLY in Buck’s Row, looking for some indication of “consciousness of guilt” that a prosecutor may have attempted to have used against him.
Early on the morning of August 31, 1888, 31 year old Robert Paul left his home in Foster Street, Whitechapel. Paul worked as a carman for Covent-Garden Market near Hanbury Street in Spitalfields and he was due at work at 4:00am. At around 3:45am, Paul was a little more than a half mile from work when he entered a street called Buck’s Row (today called Dunward Street). To Paul’s mind, the street wasn’t a particularly safe one. “Few people like to come up and down here without being on their guard, for there are such terrible gangs about. There have been many knocked down and robbed at that spot”, he would later say.
His pace quickened as walked through the cool morning darkness. He came upon a man standing in the road a short distance ahead. He attempted to walk around him, but the man, Charles Lechmere, approached Paul, touched his shoulder, and said, “Come and look at this woman.”
STOP! Let’s examine this. Let’s pretend that running or simply walking away wasn’t an option for Lechmere, and this is why he is still in Buck's Row even as he heard Paul approaching. Robert Paul is walking through Buck’s Row. He comes upon Lechmere in the road and attempts to walk around the him. What does Lechmere do? Does he LET Paul walk around him and proceed through Buck’s Row? Does he walk past Paul and proceed in the opposite direction, the direction from which Paul had come? NO. He touches Paul’s shoulder and asks him to come and see the woman lying in the road.
Paul accompanied Lechmere a short distance and found Mary Ann “Polly” Nichols – generally considered to be Jack the Ripper’s first victim - lying motionless on the pavement. She lay on her back, across a closed gateway. Robert Paul felt Nichols’ hands and face and found them cold. Her clothes were “disarranged” and he “helped to pull them down”. He placed his hand on her heart and thought he detected movement, albeit very slight. “I think she is breathing, but very little if she is”, he said to Lechmere. Paul suggested that they prop her up, but Lechmere refused to do so. Neither man wished to be late for work. After spending approximately two minutes with “Polly” Nichols in Buck’s Row, the two men agreed to continue on together, in hopes of finding a policeman to whom to report what they had found.
STOP! Paul thinks the woman may be alive. He thinks he detects movement. Why didn’t Lechmere attempt to corroborate Paul's opinion? He might have said, “You’re right. She’s breathing and dead drunk! Let’s go on to work!” Further, Paul suggests they “give her a prop”. But Lechmere refuses. It was very dark in Buck’s Row. Lechmere had – according to the theory – just killed and mutilated Nichols, mere moments before. Why not assist Paul in moving the body? This would explain the blood that must have been on his person. It’s important to remember that Lechmere – as the theory goes – killed Nichols and hid the murder knife on his person, in his clothing. Thus, he killed a woman, mutilated her abdomen, stuck the knife into his coat, and showed no concern at all that any blood would be visible on his clothing (it was too dark for him to know either way) as he went off with Paul to find a PC with a bloody knife in his coat.
We can later tackle how might find consciousness of guilt in Lechmere accompanying Paul to Baker's Row where spoke with Mizen, where he could have reasonably expected to be inspected by lantern light, with no excuse for any blood that must have been on his clothing, and the bloody knife in his coat. Then we can move on the consciousness of guilt that drove Lechmere to appear and testify at the Nichols' inquest 72 hours after the murder. Mizen hadn't asked his name. Paul didn't know his name. No one had offered any description of him at all. No one asked him to appear at the inquest. But there he was. Submitting himself to questioning, just as he'd submitted himself to inspection by Mizen in Baker's Row.
Comment