Lechmere was Jack the Ripper

[Herlock Sholmes]

Off the top of my head? I can think of one. Christie Mullins, young girl who was murdered in 1975. Her killer took his family "for a walk" and returned to the crime-scene to find the body. He also pretended he saw a dodgy geezer fleeing the scene, which led to the wrongful arrest of a mentally handicapped guy.

Cheers Harry.

This does appear to have been pre-planned though. I don’t think even Fish would suggest that Lechmere planned to be found with the corpse. He made an on-the-spot decision.

Considering the times of the murders I just have the impression that the killer was someone that had more time on his hands than Lechmere did.

Another question of course is why didn’t Lechmere just leave his house at 2.00am on August 31st. This would have given him a whole 2 hours to find a victim, killer her, check himself for blood, clean up if required, then arrive at work, after calming down with a cigarette or two maybe, just before 4am. After all, if he was guilty, that’s what he did for the other murders (except for Chapman of course.)

Doesn’t add up for me.

[Busy Beaver]

Well whatever way Lech came to work through Bucks Row, the Ripper went in the other direction, otherwise Lech would have seen him or bumped into him. Wonder if the Ripper timed it for Lech to find Polly? So whose a good time keeper then?

[Abby Normal]

Cheers Harry.

This does appear to have been pre-planned though. I don’t think even Fish would suggest that Lechmere planned to be found with the corpse. He made an on-the-spot decision.

Considering the times of the murders I just have the impression that the killer was someone that had more time on his hands than Lechmere did.

Another question of course is why didn’t Lechmere just leave his house at 2.00am on August 31st. This would have given him a whole 2 hours to find a victim, killer her, check himself for blood, clean up if required, then arrive at work, after calming down with a cigarette or two maybe, just before 4am. After all, if he was guilty, that’s what he did for the other murders (except for Chapman of course.)

Doesn’t add up for me.

HI HS
I really think if lech was the ripper-this is what he did--or at least give himself an hour or so.

But I know fish has argued against this in the past --saying he would have to leave somewhat around the same time every day and not TOO early--so as to not arose suspicion from his wife.

[Patrick S]

Well whatever way Lech came to work through Bucks Row, the Ripper went in the other direction, otherwise Lech would have seen him or bumped into him. Wonder if the Ripper timed it for Lech to find Polly? So whose a good time keeper then?

A few points. Somewhat related... But I find them interesting.

Buck's Row certainly doesn't seem to have been completely deserted that night, does it? Although, Neil said there "was not a soul about" when he passed through and found Nichols' lying on the pavement, we know that he'd apparently just missed Cross and Paul, both of whom had independently employed Buck's Row on their respective routes to work. All this around 3:45am. I think it's unlikely these were the only two men passing through that night. Also, Neil testified that he'd been through thirty minutes earlier (approx. 3:15am).

We can surmise that Nichols was alive (and quite drunk) at 2:30am, this according to Emily Holland who spoke with her at the corner of Osborne Street and Whitechapel Road. Nichols was off in search of her "doss money", and thus a client. She walked down Whitechapel Road in the direction of Buck's Row, which was a about a ten minutes walk.

So, we've got 75 minutes from the time Holland sees Nichols wobbling down Whitechapel Road until Cross and Paul arrive, a few seconds or minutes apart, finding her lying in Buck's Row. An eternity, really. It's doubtful she walked directly to Buck's Row. She likely searched for - and possibly found - a client (or several), transacting business along Whitechapel Road. In any event, her final client, it would seem, was her killer.

Returning to the idea that Buck's Row wasn't deserted, being on a PCs beat, it was residential, it served as a route to work for some, it's important - I think - to understand that, up until the moment she was attacked (throttled, punched, throat cut, etc.) she was in league with her killer. Her objective was his objective: Meet an individual, find a location suitably private (at least for the time required), and conduct business. She didn't want to be noticed, seen, discovered... any more than her killer did. Thus, it seems Buck's Row offered one thing we've heard from the three men who were there that night: Darkness. And that's why it was chosen, either by her or by her killer.

If Neil had passed through on his beat he'd have seen nothing because Nichols' was likely still on Whitechapel Road searching for a client. Nichols and her killer - in my view - likely entered Buck's Row sometime around 3:30am. I believe there was some attempt to transact business in the darkness/shadows near closed gateway by which she was found. If others walked through they'd likely not have seen her and her killer in that she was standing on her two legs in the darkness, silent, not wishing to be seen.

I think she was dispatched quickly and her killer did likely exit Buck's Row opposite the direction from which Paul and Cross entered it. Whether he heard Cross' approach or not.

[Herlock Sholmes]

HI HS
I really think if lech was the ripper-this is what he did--or at least give himself an hour or so.

But I know fish has argued against this in the past --saying he would have to leave somewhat around the same time every day and not TOO early--so as to not arose suspicion from his wife.

Hi Abby,

But Eddowes was dead by 1.45am for example. Why would he kill Nichols so close to the time that he had to be at work when he couldn’t possibly have known if he might have needed to clean up before he clocked in?

[Herlock Sholmes]

A few points. Somewhat related... But I find them interesting.

Buck's Row certainly doesn't seem to have been completely deserted that night, does it? Although, Neil said there "was not a soul about" when he passed through and found Nichols' lying on the pavement, we know that he'd apparently just missed Cross and Paul, both of whom had independently employed Buck's Row on their respective routes to work. All this around 3:45am. I think it's unlikely these were the only two men passing through that night. Also, Neil testified that he'd been through thirty minutes earlier (approx. 3:15am).

We can surmise that Nichols was alive (and quite drunk) at 2:30am, this according to Emily Holland who spoke with her at the corner of Osborne Street and Whitechapel Road. Nichols was off in search of her "doss money", and thus a client. She walked down Whitechapel Road in the direction of Buck's Row, which was a about a ten minutes walk.

So, we've got 75 minutes from the time Holland sees Nichols wobbling down Whitechapel Road until Cross and Paul arrive, a few seconds or minutes apart, finding her lying in Buck's Row. An eternity, really. It's doubtful she walked directly to Buck's Row. She likely searched for - and possibly found - a client (or several), transacting business along Whitechapel Road. In any event, her final client, it would seem, was her killer.

Returning to the idea that Buck's Row wasn't deserted, being on a PCs beat, it was residential, it served as a route to work for some, it's important - I think - to understand that, up until the moment she was attacked (throttled, punched, throat cut, etc.) she was in league with her killer. Her objective was his objective: Meet an individual, find a location suitably private (at least for the time required), and conduct business. She didn't want to be noticed, seen, discovered... any more than her killer did. Thus, it seems Buck's Row offered one thing we've heard from the three men who were there that night: Darkness. And that's why it was chosen, either by her or by her killer.

If Neil had passed through on his beat he'd have seen nothing because Nichols' was likely still on Whitechapel Road searching for a client. Nichols and her killer - in my view - likely entered Buck's Row sometime around 3:30am. I believe there was some attempt to transact business in the darkness/shadows near closed gateway by which she was found. If others walked through they'd likely not have seen her and her killer in that she was standing on her two legs in the darkness, silent, not wishing to be seen.

I think she was dispatched quickly and her killer did likely exit Buck's Row opposite the direction from which Paul and Cross entered it. Whether he heard Cross' approach or not.

I wonder if it’s possible that Polly and her killer arrived in Buck’s Row just after 3.15 in time to see the back of PC Neil as he went on his beat. They would then have had an increased level of confidence that they wouldn’t have been disturbed.

[Busy Beaver]

I wonder if it’s possible that Polly and her killer arrived in Buck’s Row just after 3.15 in time to see the back of PC Neil as he went on his beat. They would then have had an increased level of confidence that they wouldn’t have been disturbed.

I reckon it would have been about 3.25-3.30 when Polly and her killer made it to Bucks Row. because did two other Police officers not walk through Bucks Row and saw nothing- PC Thain and someone else. And as the Ripper didn't waste time to kill, Polly was indeed dead by the time Charles Lechmere came across her body.

[Patrick S]

I wonder if it’s possible that Polly and her killer arrived in Buck’s Row just after 3.15 in time to see the back of PC Neil as he went on his beat. They would then have had an increased level of confidence that they wouldn’t have been disturbed.

I reckon it would have been about 3.25-3.30 when Polly and her killer made it to Bucks Row. because did two other Police officers not walk through Bucks Row and saw nothing- PC Thain and someone else. And as the Ripper didn't waste time to kill, Polly was indeed dead by the time Charles Lechmere came across her body.

If Neil is accurate he passed through Buck's Row at around 3:15am, and again (when he found Nichols) around 3:45am. His beat took him "down Buck's-row, Whitechapel, going towards Brady-street". Thain's beat didn't pass through Buck's Row, it's "nearest point on his beat....was Brady-street. He passed the end (of Buck's Row) every thirty minutes on the Thursday night, and nothing attracted his attention until 3.45 a.m." when he says he was signaled by Neil (upon his finding Nichols' body).

[Trevor Marriott]

If Neil is accurate he passed through Buck's Row at around 3:15am, and again (when he found Nichols) around 3:45am. His beat took him "down Buck's-row, Whitechapel, going towards Brady-street". Thain's beat didn't pass through Buck's Row, it's "nearest point on his beat....was Brady-street. He passed the end (of Buck's Row) every thirty minutes on the Thursday night, and nothing attracted his attention until 3.45 a.m." when he says he was signaled by Neil (upon his finding Nichols' body).

I would suggest that it is unsafe to totally rely on times given by witnesses for the reasons that should be cleary visible to all.

public clocks being either fast or slow
personal time pieces being either fast or slow.
Times given by witnesses who didn't have a time piece and simply guessed the time.

Despite all of that we still see researchers firmly relying on these times given by witnesses in trying to prove a theory

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Elamarna]

I would suggest that it is unsafe to totally rely on times given by witnesses for the reasons that should be cleary visible to all.

public clocks being either fast or slow
personal time pieces being either fast or slow.
Times given by witnesses who didn't have a time piece and simply guessed the time.

Despite all of that we still see researchers firmly relying on these times given by witnesses in trying to prove a theory

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

Couldn't agree more Trevor, a recent post by Bridewell showed how 0 and 5 were by far the most popular times mentioned by witnesses, rounding up or rounding down.


Steve

[Trevor Marriott]

Couldn't agree more Trevor, a recent post by Bridewell showed how 0 and 5 were by far the most popular times mentioned by witnesses, rounding up or rounding down.


Steve

Bu as we know witness timings are paramount in some of the murders, where a witness timing that could be 2-3 mins out can have a bearing on the whole scenario.

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Abby Normal]

Hi Abby,

But Eddowes was dead by 1.45am for example. Why would he kill Nichols so close to the time that he had to be at work when he couldn’t possibly have known if he might have needed to clean up before he clocked in?

HI HS
I believe the argument is the night of the double event he wasn't working the next morning and was visiting mummy who lived nearby.

[Patrick S]

I would suggest that it is unsafe to totally rely on times given by witnesses for the reasons that should be cleary visible to all.

public clocks being either fast or slow
personal time pieces being either fast or slow.
Times given by witnesses who didn't have a time piece and simply guessed the time.

Despite all of that we still see researchers firmly relying on these times given by witnesses in trying to prove a theory

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

Agreed. For me the times are simply markers of a sort, giving a general idea how much time may have elapsed between events and a general idea of time. I think it's folly to rely upon times as reason for suspicion or to establish any kind of reliable time-frame(s). I think we can gain a general idea. That's about it.

[Herlock Sholmes]

HI HS
I believe the argument is the night of the double event he wasn't working the next morning and was visiting mummy who lived nearby.

Hi Abby,

I’ve never really gone for this suggestion though. If someone is stopped for questioning at say 2.15 on the morning of a murder the alibi “I’m off to visit my mum” isn’t really going to hold much water.

[Abby Normal]

Hi Abby,

I’ve never really gone for this suggestion though. If someone is stopped for questioning at say 2.15 on the morning of a murder the alibi “I’m off to visit my mum” isn’t really going to hold much water.

im on my way home from Mums, stopped off at the pub