Lech versus Kos

[Elamarna]

Sounds good - but prepare yourself for not being able to come as close to the mark as Lechmere did. Not only must you produce a credible agenda for why Kosminski would have traversed the Hanbury/Old Montague Street area, you must also explain why he would do so at the approximate same time as Lechmere trekked to Broad Street, and you must have as good an explanation for where the rag in Goulston Street was found as I have when it comes to Lechmere. Was it in a direct line from Mitre square to Providence Road...?

You will fall short, and I think we both know that. The question is how short.


Steve

Fall short? we will see as we progress,

Lets start with the Apron and Goulston Street.

I see you Favour Lechmere going first to Pickfords, before droping off the apron, is that a correct reading?

From that I assume that you are sticking with the suggestion that the apron was not present at 2.20? or do you think it could have been.

If it was there before 2.20 and just missed, it implies the killer went in that direction sooner rather than later, I accept that in that case, it is more or less a direct line from Mitre Square to Doveton Street.
Rob House argued, and I am not total convinced, that if The killer went North first, to avoid police and then headed South, Goulston street was on a direct route back towards Berner street, and the supposed home of Kosminski, as i say I am not fully convinced about that argument, but it is not unreasonable.


However if we are summising that the killer, headed to a bolt hole first, the situation is a little different.

lets examine Lechmere, he goes to Pickfords, disposes of the entrails, and heads back towards home.

The route suggested is via Wentworth and Old Montague strret, this I will refere to as the southern most route. It is the longest, not by much i agree, route between the two sites, (shortcuts, incorperating Spelman and Handbury are shorter).
In addition, it takes the killer closer to the scene of the the Mitre Square murder than the other routes(either the route we suppose he walked with Paul, or the shortcuts already mentioned), surely he would want to avoid being seen and possible stopped and details taken?

One final issue i have with this is that to drop the apron(and maybe write the GSG, I remain neutral on that) where it was found, requires a small detour, and the risk of exposure. far better surely to do the deed somewhere along Wentworth/Old Montague? of course the killer may just have enjoyed the risk.


Kosminski, if heading for a bolt hole, could have visited Issacc Kosminski at #76 Goulston street, this was not the brother of Aaron, but a different Kosminski, a boot and shoemaker, like pizer.
while it seems that he was not a direct relation of Aaron, at least no records surive to imply such, Kosminski was not that common a name, and at the very least it is possible that they originated from the same general area, and could have known each other.

agree not as secure as the Bolt Hole we KNOW Lechmere could have used, but still perfectly viable.

The largests issue I have against Lechmere droping the Apron, if he first went to a bolt hole, is the choice of route, not the fastest and venturing back into an area he should wish to avoid, carring evidence.

If a particular reason could be shown for Lechmere to drop the Apron at the spot it was found, it would be far more compelling in my view.



Steve

[Fisherman]

To frame Cross,the killer would have to Know that Cross would find the body of Nichols,and that Cross would be passing along the route each time a killing occurred.Perhaps Kosminski was a gypsey who gazed into his crystal ball?This whole theory reeks of a fairground atmosphere,not surprising seeing it was the fairground barker who started it.

Yes, you are right, Harry - it is utterly inconceivable that the dreaded Phantom killer tried to frame Lechmere. Absolutely spot on.

You may have missed that my tongue was placed firmly against my cheek when I made my first post, though.

[Fisherman]

Quick reply, no idea, and neither will anyone else have anything more than a feeling on this.
Without know his exact condition in Autumn 1888, it is guess work.
All I will say his he must have appeared to be in control and relatively "normal" to get close to the victims, that goes for whoever the killer was. If he really was is an entirely different matter.

Sorry it's no clearer than that to me.

Rest to follow.

Steve

A vital enough distinction, Steve. Thanks for that.

[Sam Flynn]

If it was somebody else, that somebody else chose to kill in areas and streets tied to Lechmere, plus also on times that are spot on or close to his working trek times.

The only street definitively "tied" to Cross's working trek was Bucks Row, ditto the timings. That's a paltry one murder out of five, or four if we leave out Stride.

The murders are no more tied to Cross's trajectory than that of the equally mobile Louis Dymshitz, or the more centrally-placed John Davis or "Indian Harry" Bowyer, all three of whom also had the misfortune to be the first to find a body.

[Fisherman]

You only have to look at that photo of Lechmere to see he was the killer. He's got lifeless eyes, black eyes, like a doll's eyes.

Like a shark!! A shark!!!

Then again, one of the best guys I have ever met (and it´s more than forty years ago) was a guy I sensed was going to be a whole lot of trouble when I looked at him.

I was totally wrong - a nicer and more helpful and generous man would be hard to find.

The one and only thing I find unsettling about the photo is how Lechmere is in total control of the process, relaxed and seemingly self-secure. There is a parallel photo, with his wife Elizabeth standing at the exact same spot. She stands in the way so many people stand in old pictures like these ones - stretched up, arms down the side, very uncomfortable; Teeeeension!, sort of.

But that is not what this thread is about - it is about the likelihood that the so called Phantom killer would just happen to strike in the streets and areas we have tied to Lechmere - and at the approximate hours we should have him passing these streets and areas, en route to work.

Any thoughts on that score?

[Fisherman]

This is actually demonstrable and falsifiable. You have a sample size of one, but it needs to be contrasted with other samples and your case for Lechmere isn't currently contrasted with anyone else such as a sample of the working population at the time.

All anyone needs to do is find someone else whose work passes close to the crime scenes. Say going North to South/South to North rather than East to West/West to East. I predict that if you expand your sample size of one, that these individuals will start also popping up.



He probably did try this. As I said, you can be sure he was with unfortunates in places where he didn't feel comfortable and didn't murder them because of that. Like many other SKs of this type, they still visit prostitutes and use them but don't kill all of them, just some, when conditions seem right. Unreported JtR attempts to murder may even have happened with the potential victim getting away and thinking it was just a criminal trying to mug them.



With a sample size of one, you can't know even know that it is a correlation, let alone causation. You need to start with correlation first. What you need to show is that against a backdrop of workers paths around 1888, that Lechmere is unique.

I think all we will find in larger sample sizes is that Lechmere discovered a body or saw something... like Diemshutz or even Schwartz. Schwartz has at least two Whitechapel crime scenes connected to his walking paths. Stride and the Pinchin Street Torso, so I suppose Diemshutz also fits for those two. That's just two separate witnesses both individually connected to two murder sites just off the top of my head. How about Lewende and friends walking by Metre Sq. I wonder where their trips take them? Or plainclothed detectives placed around the place. Or how about people who filled in for the jobs of others? That backdrop must be contrasted with Lechmere if you want to demonstrate something unique and a sample size of one can't do it.

Yes, "all anyone has to do" is to find more men who passed through Bucks Row on a westernly route, taking them through the Hanbury Street/Old Montague Street area at around 3-4 AM in the mornings, and who had ties to the Berner Street area and the Mitre Street area. Plus they must live in a place that makes sense with the Goulston Street rag.

The area from Doveton Street to Bucks Row was deserted on that morning, Lechmere did not meed one soul. And Neil witnessed about how the streets off Whitechapel road were totally empty.

I think you will find the task you are setting yourself impossible. I really don´t think there were many men who made that trek at that hour, and until you find someone who DID, you are welcome to suggest that they were there in thousands. I´d prefer proof to speculation in this case.

It is and remains extremely unexpected if there was another killer and if this anonymous slayer struck in the EXACT three areas we can tie Lechmere to (AND at the approximate hours he passed), the work area, close to Mitre Square, the work trek area between Hanbury Street and Old Montague ditto, and his recently left old haunts down i St Georges in the East.

End of.

[Batman]

Fall short? we will see as we progress,

Lets start with the Apron and Goulston Street.

I see you Favour Lechmere going first to Pickfords, before droping off the apron, is that a correct reading?

I'd also like to know about the apron piece deposit because going to Doveston Street from Mitre Square is basically walking along Whitechapel mains street.

However, it has to include an explanation of the missing hour.

Eddowes is murdered at 1:40am (approx.)
2:20am Long doesn't see apron.
2:50am Long finds apron.
Min. 40min to a Max. of 1hr 10min.
55 minutes (mean).

https://www.casebook.org/dissertations/dst-graffito.html

[Fisherman]

The only street definitively "tied" to Cross's working trek was Bucks Row, ditto the timings. That's a paltry one murder out of five, or four if we leave out Stride.

The murders are no more tied to Cross's trajectory than that of the equally mobile Louis Dymshitz, or the more centrally-placed John Davis or "Indian Harry" Bowyer, all three of whom also had the misfortune to be the first to find a body.

So would you say that Hanbury Street is NOT tied to his work trek?

Would you suggest that he could have walked north of Hanbury Street or south of Old Montague Street? If so, please demonstrate how.

The murders are tied to Lechmere much more than to Diemschitz or Davis because we KNOW that Lechmere would have had a reason to pass each murder spot in the Hanbury Street/Old Montague area, whereas we cannot know how and where Diemschitz´and Davis´routes were, we only know that they were present in the area. It´s like Paul, he too was present there - but he had no reason to visit Dorset Street (which was a shortcut from Hanbury Street for Lechmere) or George Yard, let alone Berner Street or Mitre Square. Nor would either man have any reason to be out on the streets at 3-4 AM.

Now, THIS is what a load of pony looks like, Gareth! You need to learn to live with the realities and accept things for what they are. Living in flat out denial of facts is never a good thing.

[Batman]

I think you will find the task you are setting yourself impossible. I really don´t think there were many men who made that trek at that hour, and until you find someone who DID, you are welcome to suggest that they were there in thousands. I´d prefer proof to speculation in this case.

It is actually a task for everyone, including yourself and it isn't impossible because Lechmere when investigated enough provided you with your data points. A sample size of one is speculatory without direct evidence. It's contrasting with larger sample sizes that would support your theory as being a correlation (JtR could be Lechmere). Then you can move onto causation (Jtr is Lechmere). It is the analysis of Lechmere that biases it towards Lechmere, especially with just a sample size of one. Imagine if you poured that work into the individuals I mentioned already. How many of them would start popping up near other crime scenes? As we said, they already have... and that's even without any deeper research like done on lechmere.

I would actually like to one day read how the Lechmere map was made based on what facts exactly. Or does it involve quite a bit of speculation also?

[Fisherman]

I'd also like to know about the apron piece deposit because going to Doveston Street from Mitre Square is basically walking along Whitechapel mains street.

However, it has to include an explanation of the missing hour.

Eddowes is murdered at 1:40am (approx.)
2:20am Long doesn't see apron.
2:50am Long finds apron.
Min. 40min to a Max. of 1hr 10min.
55 minutes (mean).

https://www.casebook.org/dissertatio...-graffito.html

As I said before, if he deposited the innards and cleaned up at the Pickfords depot up at Broad Street, that would fit with the apron and it would explain why there was an hour "lost".

[Fisherman]

It is actually a task for everyone, including yourself and it isn't impossible because Lechmere when investigated enough provided you with your data points. A sample size of one is speculatory without direct evidence. It's contrasting with larger sample sizes that would support your theory as being a correlation (JtR could be Lechmere). Then you can move onto causation (Jtr is Lechmere). It is the analysis of Lechmere that biases it towards Lechmere, especially with just a sample size of one. Imagine if you poured that work into the individuals I mentioned already. How many of them would start popping up near other crime scenes? As we said, they already have... and that's even without any deeper research like done on lechmere.

I would actually like to one day read how the Lechmere map was made based on what facts exactly. Or does it involve quite a bit of speculation also?

Any- or everyone is welcome to present a man who fits the criteria geographically. Anytime, any day. Keep them coming!

The part about my total decline in judgment and falling into the trap of hell (bias) is good reading, but it does not alter what I say - if the killer was NOT Lechmere, then it was instead somebody who killed in the areas where he would have moved or had reason to move, and at the times he would have reason to be there.

Once you find a parallel, we can start looking at who of them was found with a body and who disagreed with the police over what was said on the murder night. I fear, though, that we will never be able to move to that discussion, since I believe you will fail to turn up anybody who matches the criteria.

[Harry D]

But that is not what this thread is about - it is about the likelihood that the so called Phantom killer would just happen to strike in the streets and areas we have tied to Lechmere - and at the approximate hours we should have him passing these streets and areas, en route to work.

Any thoughts on that score?

Re: Chapman's murder. I happen to put some stock in the evidence given by Cadosch and Richardson, which puts Annie's murder between 5.15 - 5.30am. Wouldn't Lechmere have been late for work if he had dabbled at this time?

[Sam Flynn]

So would you say that Hanbury Street is NOT tied to his work trek?

The timing isn't and, as I've pointed out before, we don't know for sure that he was even working on the day in question. What we do know is that the Nichols inquest was still in progress, so whether he'd commit an even more daring murder whilst he was a key witness at that inquest is questionable.

[Harry D]

I also wonder if Lechmere would've murdered on his work route a week later after his close shave in Buck's Row? As you've admitted in the past, Fish, he could not rely on that excuse a second time. Therefore, it seems more believable that Lechmere would've waited until the weekend before striking again.

[Sam Flynn]

Any- or everyone is welcome to present a man who fits the criteria geographically.

It's rather easy to find men who fit the geographical criteria better than Cross, who lived a little out of the way in relation to the majority of the murders.