The Lechmere/Cross "name issue"

[David Orsam]

Scobie was given correct information as far as I can tell. I tend to believe the film crew did a very good job.

One can see the words "at 3.30" in Scobies material. One cannot see if it is preceded by a wordning that says that it is an approximate timing, like "he left home approximately at 3.30 or something like that. At least not as far as I can tell.

Of course one CAN see that it is not proceeded by wording saying that it is an approximate time. We can see the section heading and the very first sentence of that section states:

"Charles Lechmere (as we know now him to be called) is reported as saying he left home for work at 3:30am"

That is the information that Scobie was given and it is wrong.

[David Orsam]

But I CAN tell that if the crew was intent on framing Scobie, they should have used the 3.20 time instead - which they did NOT do. They discerningly avoided that, and to me that means something. Maybe not to you, though.

I think you mean 'framing Lechmere'. But I haven't said that anyone was intent on framing anyone. I have just said that incorrect information was given.

As for the 3.20 point, Scobie was given speculation rather than factual information because the briefing note states that "in other reports he appears to initially say he left home even earlier at 3:20".

All that Scobie should have been told is that some reports gave the time as about 3.20 but that the majority of reports said the time was about 3.30. It is misleading to have told Scobie that Lechmere appears to have "initially" said that he left home earlier. That is an assumption because equally, the newspapers which said 3.20 could simply have included the wrong time.

It's no good you saying "oh well Lechmere might have left at 3.20" because that is to include bias against him. The best evidence we have is that he left his house at "about 3.30".

[David Orsam]

You say that Scobie should not have to assume anything, and a few lines further down, you say it is not hard to imagine how Scobie was fed wriongful information.

There is no contradiction here Fisherman. Scobie should not have had to have assumed anything (for his legal opinion) but I can assume whatever I like about what Scobie was told (for my internet post).

Given that Scobie said that the timings "really hurt" Lechmere, he cannot possibly have been told that Abberline believed that Lechmere found the body at about 3.40am because there was nothing in the timings that "really hurt" Lechmere if he had left his house at about 3.30am. If he left at about 3.30am one would have expected him to have arrived in Bucks Row at about 3.40am. So how is Lechmere "really hurt" by the timings?

If Scobie's underlying facts were wrong then his opinion cannot be relied on can it?

[David Orsam]

Why should your proven imagining things be a better thing than any assumption you do not know if Scobie had to do or not? Is it hard to imagine that he was told by the crew that 3.30 was just one of two suggested times, and that he needed to know that it was not an exact timing? Is a suggestions that the crew led Scobie wrong necessarily better than the suggestion that they led him right?

But one can actually read the briefing note and see that he was told that Lechmere left his house at 3.30, having apparently initially said it was ten minutes earlier than this. It's all wrong. And there must be some reason why Scobie says that the timings "really hurt" Lechmere and that Lechmere had never given a proper answer as to where he was that morning.

That reason can only be that he was also told that there was a missing period of time in the evidence. Given that the documentary says that Paul turned into Bucks Row (and Lechmere found the body) at 3.45 and that it took 7 minutes to walk from Doveton Street to Bucks Row, it isn’t really an assumption at all to work out what Scobie must have been told because he must have been told exactly the same thing that appeared in the documentary mustn't he?

[David Orsam]

right so all we know, he could have left earlier than 3:30 or 3:20, but if he said anything TOO early it makes him look more suspicious-does it not?

I've never understood this point Abby. If Cross was turning into Bucks Row as Paul was turning into Bath Street (or, alternatively, as, or just after, Paul was leaving his house in Foster Street) they wouldn't have seen each other would they?

Or are you aware of any other timings or locations which show something different?

[David Orsam]

it seems to have provided him with time enough to be the killer - as it stands.

But not if he left his house at 3.33 and was seen by Paul in Bucks Row at 3.42?

[FrankO]

right I may be wrong but isn't it mere seconds that once Lech says he noticed the body that paul arrives?

If by mere seconds you mean some 20 seconds, Abbey, then yes, it was mere seconds. Lechmere said that Paul was 30 to 40 yards away from him when he first saw him.

All the best,
Frank

[Fisherman]

Does this apply to all members?

In which case, can you answer the question (which you have previously avoided) as to what route you took when filming the documentary to time the distance between Doveton Street and Durward Street?

Sorry, David - it is exclusively aimed for Dusty. I was rather expecting you to try and hitchhike along...

[Fisherman]

Of course one CAN see that it is not proceeded by wording saying that it is an approximate time. We can see the section heading and the very first sentence of that section states:

"Charles Lechmere (as we know now him to be called) is reported as saying he left home for work at 3:30am"

That is the information that Scobie was given and it is wrong.

No, it is not necessarily wrong - it is incomplete. You are making a mountain out of a molehill. I can see why.

[Fisherman]

I think you mean 'framing Lechmere'. But I haven't said that anyone was intent on framing anyone. I have just said that incorrect information was given.

As for the 3.20 point, Scobie was given speculation rather than factual information because the briefing note states that "in other reports he appears to initially say he left home even earlier at 3:20".

All that Scobie should have been told is that some reports gave the time as about 3.20 but that the majority of reports said the time was about 3.30. It is misleading to have told Scobie that Lechmere appears to have "initially" said that he left home earlier. That is an assumption because equally, the newspapers which said 3.20 could simply have included the wrong time.

It's no good you saying "oh well Lechmere might have left at 3.20" because that is to include bias against him. The best evidence we have is that he left his house at "about 3.30".

Mountain. Molehill.

[Fisherman]

There is no contradiction here Fisherman. Scobie should not have had to have assumed anything (for his legal opinion) but I can assume whatever I like about what Scobie was told (for my internet post).

Given that Scobie said that the timings "really hurt" Lechmere, he cannot possibly have been told that Abberline believed that Lechmere found the body at about 3.40am because there was nothing in the timings that "really hurt" Lechmere if he had left his house at about 3.30am. If he left at about 3.30am one would have expected him to have arrived in Bucks Row at about 3.40am. So how is Lechmere "really hurt" by the timings?

If Scobie's underlying facts were wrong then his opinion cannot be relied on can it?

The timings are hurtful for Lechmere. There is seemingly an overall pattern that is not flattering at all for him.

[Fisherman]

But one can actually read the briefing note and see that he was told that Lechmere left his house at 3.30, having apparently initially said it was ten minutes earlier than this. It's all wrong. And there must be some reason why Scobie says that the timings "really hurt" Lechmere and that Lechmere had never given a proper answer as to where he was that morning.

That reason can only be that he was also told that there was a missing period of time in the evidence. Given that the documentary says that Paul turned into Bucks Row (and Lechmere found the body) at 3.45 and that it took 7 minutes to walk from Doveton Street to Bucks Row, it isn’t really an assumption at all to work out what Scobie must have been told because he must have been told exactly the same thing that appeared in the documentary mustn't he?

"What Scobie must have been told". The arrogance.

[Fisherman]

But not if he left his house at 3.33 and was seen by Paul in Bucks Row at 3.42?

That´s nine minutes. He should have been out of Bucks Row.

Plus, of course, as I have argued before, there is more reason to move the time closer to 3.50 than 3.40.
Am I going to argue the same case again?

No, I am not going to argue the same case again. You seem quite inclined to dig out old posts and try to rub them in various posters faces, so I´ll leave you to it.

[Fisherman]

If by mere seconds you mean some 20 seconds, Abbey, then yes, it was mere seconds. Lechmere said that Paul was 30 to 40 yards away from him when he first saw him.

All the best,
Frank

A quick walking pace is around 2,5 meters per second, and a yard is 91, 44 centimeter, meaning that we are looking at a distance of about 2,7 yards per second, roughly speaking.

30 yards will be covered in a little more than eleven seconds at this speed, whereas 40 yards will demand fifteen seconds.

Do we know that Paul was walking at a fast speed? "I was hurrying along" was what he said.

No certainties,of course - but 20 seconds sounds a bit rich to me.

[Abby Normal]

I've never understood this point Abby. If Cross was turning into Bucks Row as Paul was turning into Bath Street (or, alternatively, as, or just after, Paul was leaving his house in Foster Street) they wouldn't have seen each other would they?

Or are you aware of any other timings or locations which show something different?

Hi David
Thanks for the response. since we don't know for sure what time lech left home(or Paul for that matter)-I'm just going off Lechs and pauls story of how they met in Bucks row.

It seems to me that lech discovers the body and then paul arrives-what? 20-30 seconds later-at most?

if your 20-30 seconds behind someone walking surely they would have seen or heard each other prior to the meeting in Bucks row? no?