The Lechmere/Cross "name issue"

[Abby Normal]

Indeed, and bear in mind that different forms of ambulation were popular with East Enders at the time. I cite as evidence the fact that Eddowes and John Kelly went hopping to Kent.

LOL. The Minister of Funny Walks agrees.

[David Orsam]

since he says that the deed could have been done in seconds.

Scobie knew quite well that there was no need for a time gap - he stated very clearly that a deed like the Nichols deed could be done in seconds

Twice, within the space of a few posts, you have said that Nichols could have been murdered in "seconds". Where does this come from?

I have already quoted from Scobie's briefing note in which he was told:

"The lack of blood at the [scene of the crime] suggests she was strangled to death before her neck was cut...Death by asphyxia takes a minimum of 2 minutes and a maximum of 4 minutes."

So even if we assume the rather unlikely scenario that Lechmere simply walked up to a woman in the street and, without any prior discussion, and virtually without him breaking his stride, strangled her, that alone will have taken a minimum of 2 minutes, possibly 4 minutes, and he then has to cut her neck and he then has to mutilate the abdomen.

So the idea that this was all done in "seconds" is pure nonsense.

[David Orsam]

He asks the questions "where were you? what were you doing" for this precise reason and says that Lechmere has never given any proper answer, which I take to mean that his answer is uncorroborated and must be so.

Lol! Scobie was quite clear in saying that Lechmere "has never given a proper answer". I think as a Queen's Counsel he knows the difference between someone not giving a proper answer and someone giving an answer which is uncorroborated.

If the answer to the question "where were you?" is "I was at home, then I left my home and started to walk to work", how is that not a "proper answer"?

[David Orsam]

I am not interested in discussing things with somebody who reserves himself the right to decide what is reasonable speculation and what is not, especially not if that self same person has a vested interest in trying to establish that a film crew I got the feeling was well read up, honest, very interested and always asking questions so as not to get things wrong, was instead trying to lead Scobie wrong. And to boot, the detail as such is irrelevant to the full picture.

Well it doesn't matter how read up a film crew is or how much they try not to get things wrong if they DO get things wrong.

We know that they got it wrong in picturing Lechmere as being found by Paul kneeling over Nichols' dead body.

We know they got it wrong in saying of the route between Doveton Street and Bucks Row that "The street layout is the same now as it was over a century ago."

And we now know they got it wrong in briefing a QC that Lechmere said he left his home at 3.30.

BTW I have no idea why you think I have "a vested interest" in anything to do with Lechmere. I have none! Furthermore, I spent most of the first month of my membership on this forum arguing in favour of Lechmere's candidacy as a suspect!

[Abby Normal]

Couple of questions and observation:

do we know how long it takes to walk from lechs home to pickfords? Is there anywhere on record where lech either states what time he usually left for work or how long it took him?

Also, I note that Paul says something along the lines of ruffians about, getting robbed etc. so he tried to avoid lech.

why dosnt lech ever say anything similar? wasn't it common knowledge, exemplified by Paul, that it was rather dangerous at night in the area? But nothing like this from Lech? wasn't it a common ruse to have someone act like they were in need of help, and then the other thugs come up and rob the person who stops to help?

yet no concern from Lech about the area in general or this ruse in particular?
I mean he just came upon a downed woman. and suddenly another man appears?

Lech isn't scared but Paul is?why not?

maybe he was just a bad ass. or he was scared but just didn't act like it or admit it. or.....

[David Orsam]

Where did you get it from that you should be called upon to decide what is "speculation too far" and what is not? You say that it would make no sense for a caveat in another part of the document, but you consistently point out that there would have been lots of sense to do so - it would have cleared the issue away. If that is not sense, then I don´t know! And just how odd would it be if it was added that the timings were not necessarily 100 per cent correct? I see that sort of caveat out on these boards once a week!

I have no idea what you mean by the words I have highlighted in bold. I have not consistently pointed out any such thing.

It is obviously nonsense to suggest that there might be a caveat of the sentence about Lechmere leaving his house in another part of the document. What were they trying to do? Confuse Scobie?

If you are going to qualify the statement that Lechmere left his house at 3.30 you would do it at the time you make that statement. You would not do it in another part of the document.

Your response is just daft. As is the idea that it might have been stated in another part of the document that "the timings" were not 100% correct. That was not the issue. The issue here was about Lechmere's evidence. It's not about whether "the timings" are correct or not. It's about what Lechmere actually said. There is no other place where a caveat could have been inserted.

[David Orsam]

This is where I get off the train. Your arrogance is becoming too much for me.

I am not interested in discussing things with somebody who reserves himself the right to decide what is reasonable speculation and what is not,

It´s just not my cup of tea. You will have to push your propaganda without my participation.

Goodbye.

It has not escaped my notice, and I'm sure it won't escape the notice of others, that your feigned outrage, and decision not to respond further to my posts, just happens to have occurred before you got round to answering my question about what the documentary meant when saying "Robert Paul was in Bucks Row for a full minute before he noticed Lechmere".

I guess we will now never know if this was yet another mistake in the documentary.

[David Orsam]

Thanks David

By my timings 60 seconds walking distance equals about 30 yards.

You must surely be joking.

Do you realise that Fisherman has timed Lechmere's walk from his home in Doveton Street to the scene of the crime as just over 7 minutes?

On your account it would mean that Lechmere lived a mere 210 yards from where the body was found!

I'm fairly sure that's not right.

[David Orsam]

I do think they(or at least Paul) would have noticed each other. But maybe not. it was dark, who knows-but I still lean toward it was close enough to notice each other before Bucks row.

Okay let's run with it. So they should have noticed each other before Bucks Row.

Then why didn't they?

Are you saying this tells us that Lechmere wasn't really there because he was murdering Nichols at the time?

[Abby Normal]

Twice, within the space of a few posts, you have said that Nichols could have been murdered in "seconds". Where does this come from?

I have already quoted from Scobie's briefing note in which he was told:

"The lack of blood at the [scene of the crime] suggests she was strangled to death before her neck was cut...Death by asphyxia takes a minimum of 2 minutes and a maximum of 4 minutes."

So even if we assume the rather unlikely scenario that Lechmere simply walked up to a woman in the street and, without any prior discussion, and virtually without him breaking his stride, strangled her, that alone will have taken a minimum of 2 minutes, possibly 4 minutes, and he then has to cut her neck and he then has to mutilate the abdomen.

So the idea that this was all done in "seconds" is pure nonsense.

Hi David
Death by asphysixia may take two to four minutes, but a blood choke to knock someone out can be as quick as 20-30 seconds. I know this from two personal experiences. from MMA and applying blood chokes such as the triangle choke, or rear naked choke just to name two. also, someone who is exhausted during the fight can even go out sooner. secondly we used to do this as kids to get a high. just apply pressure to the arteries in your neck, start counting and you start to get "dizzy" and start to pass out right around 20 seconds...we would count while doing it.

Polly was drunk, tired probably over all weak. I could see someone doing to her in under a minute, no problem.. shes walking, standing or maybe even sitting down (sleeping? maybe) in buck row. killer comes up to her maybe says a word. grabs her around the neck forces her to the ground, 20 seconds shes out. pulls the knife out slits her throat pulls up her skirt cuts her abdomen. I could see that easily happening very quickly 50 seconds no problem.

[David Orsam]

Hi David
Death by asphysixia may take two to four minutes, but a blood choke to knock someone out can be as quick as 20-30 seconds. I know this from two personal experiences. from MMA and applying blood chokes such as the triangle choke, or rear naked choke just to name two. also, someone who is exhausted during the fight can even go out sooner. secondly we used to do this as kids to get a high. just apply pressure to the arteries in your neck, start counting and you start to get "dizzy" and start to pass out right around 20 seconds...we would count while doing it.

Polly was drunk, tired probably over all weak. I could see someone doing to her in under a minute, no problem.. shes walking, standing or maybe even sitting down (sleeping? maybe) in buck row. killer comes up to her maybe says a word. grabs her around the neck forces her to the ground, 20 seconds shes out. pulls the knife out slits her throat pulls up her skirt cuts her abdomen. I could see that easily happening very quickly 50 seconds no problem.

None of this matters Abby. I was quoting from Scobie's briefing note which was based on information provided by Dr Payne-James.

In other words, Scobie was being told that strangulation takes between 2 minutes and 4 minutes. That is the medical information he was being given. Therefore he cannot have been thinking that Nichols was killed in 'seconds' as Fisherman seems to believe.

[Abby Normal]

You must surely be joking.

Do you realise that Fisherman has timed Lechmere's walk from his home in Doveton Street to the scene of the crime as just over 7 minutes?

On your account it would mean that Lechmere lived a mere 210 yards from where the body was found!

I'm fairly sure that's not right.

uh no. not joking. I dont know what to tell you. I timed myself several times walking 30 yards and its easily done in 60 seconds.

[Abby Normal]

None of this matters Abby. I was quoting from Scobie's briefing note which was based on information provided by Dr Payne-James.

In other words, Scobie was being told that strangulation takes between 2 minutes and 4 minutes. That is the medical information he was being given. Therefore he cannot have been thinking that Nichols was killed in 'seconds' as Fisherman seems to believe.

OK got it. I was just giving another scenario other than asphyxiation to death.
In my scenario(blood choke to knocked out) IMHO all that could have happened to her in under a minute.

[David Orsam]

uh no. not joking. I dont know what to tell you. I timed myself several times walking 30 yards and its easily done in 60 seconds.

Oh yes of course it is easily done in 60 seconds but you said "60 seconds walking distance equals about 30 yards". What I'm saying is that I would expect someone to cover a much greater distance than 30 yards in 60 seconds.

[David Orsam]

OK got it. I was just giving another scenario other than asphyxiation to death.
In my scenario(blood choke to knocked out) IMHO all that could have happened to her in under a minute.

Did you actually understand Fisherman's point though?

Even if Nichols could have been murdered in seconds how would that have "really hurt" Lechmere?

I mean, it would equally explain why a Mr X could have murdered Nichols very quickly and then disappeared before Lechmere arrived on the scene.