So if you live in Bethnal Green, you won´t kill in Whitechapel?

[Fisherman]

(I don’t have my notes to hand, but his children moved to their new school in early/mid 1888 I think? Fish?

It was in June, Gary.

[MrBarnett]

It was in June, Gary.

Thanks, Fish.

[Fisherman]

I honestly tried to work up the will to answer the old "He would not have run", "He seems to have been honest" and "Serial killers don´t make children" arguments, but I really couldn´t make myself do it.

Caz dislikes hearing about psychopaths, so let´s ruin her day while at the same time offer the ones who do not know how these people work get educated. This is a very comprehensive video that basically explains all we need to know about psychopathy. Take twelve minutes and wise up, people:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6dv8zJiggBs&feature=share

Let´s hope that Caz understands who is the real twit after having watched it...

That´s all from me for today.

[Abby Normal]

Great post Caz, I would just like to add would he seriously kill just a week later using the same ruse after narrowly escaping the last time?

Hi DK
Not sure I understand this. the ripper, whether lech or not, did just that.

[Abby Normal]

As I say, I don’t have access to my notes at the moment, but from memory there was a 5-year gap in child production between 1886 and 1891. What that might say about his sex life during that period, I couldn’t say.

Perhaps triggers was the wrong word. Would stressors be better? The trigger may have been the press coverage of the Tabram affair.

Another significant stressor might have been economic. This would have been the time in his life when he had the greatest number of dependents. He was only a lowly carman don’t forget. And yet, according to Charles Booth’s researcher, the family were ‘v. decent’. How did he manage that, I wonder? With the help of his mother, I would imagine. She had received an inheritance from her father who had been the butler of the Clive family (Clive of India’s relatives). So he may have been reliant on his mother’s largesse to maintain standards. And he may secretly have resented that.

Hi Gary
or Tabram could have been the trigger kill. whether lech was the ripper or not. As in the ripper, having these dark fantasies, after a botched attack on Millwood, lays low for a while, until he is accosted by a drunk Tabram and loses it. this time he kills but now hes on the path to no return.

[MrBarnett]

Hi Gary
or Tabram could have been the trigger kill. whether lech was the ripper or not. As in the ripper, having these dark fantasies, after a botched attack on Millwood, lays low for a while, until he is accosted by a drunk Tabram and loses it. this time he kills but now hes on the path to no return.

Yes, could have been, Abbey, although I sort of have Tabram earmarked for someone else.😎

Fish has confirmed that Lechmere’s move was in June, 88, so within weeks of his working out his new route to work, the WM began.

[Abby Normal]

Yes, could have been, Abbey, although I sort of have Tabram earmarked for someone else.��

Fish has confirmed that Lechmere’s move was in June, 88, so within weeks of his working out his new route to work, the WM began.

thanks!
Millwood attacked earlier in year. lech moves then tabram shortly after. Interesting could also explain gap between Millwood and tabram (or Nichols if Tabram wasn't a ripper victim).

[harry]

Andy Griffiths again.What was his most memorable piece of detective work?Regardless of how he compares with posters here,how does he compere with the likes of Aberline and police involved in the Nichol's murder?Whether they knew of the name Lechmere is immaterial,they certainly knew the man who found Nichol's body,were aware of the circumstancs,and had every opportunity to bring Cross to court,yet reported there were no suspects.
Their expertise can be judged to have been as good as Griffiths.Now they cannot appear here,but Griffiths can.I'd like to read his comments.

[Darryl Kenyon]

Hi DK
Not sure I understand this. the ripper, whether lech or not, did just that.

Hi Abby, Sorry for not making myself clear on the old thought process. What i meant was if Lech was Jack he had been seen with the body. Whereas Jack hadn't, no witness descriptions nothing to tie him. So in effect, he was free to kill again

[Darryl Kenyon]

Also, Lech had used his ace up the sleeve with Polly. Would he so readily commit another murder so soon after, without being dealt another hand first? Enquires to Polly's murder were still ongoing, for all he knows his name might have still been in the frame. Perhaps even being followed by an undercover Detective. If he was the killer [and don't forget Lech wasn't on the edge of insanity but a cool calculating murderer, or so his supporters say], I would hazard to guess he would have a cooling off period whilst rethinking how to strike next.

[Fisherman]

Andy Griffiths again.What was his most memorable piece of detective work?

How about a 96 per cent clearing rate as a murder squad leader, Harry? Or choose from this:

"Thirty-five years experience in law enforcement, specialising in investigation, interviewing and intelligence with wide experience of investigating all types of crime. Recognised as international subject matter expert in investigative interviewing and criminal investigation. Well versed in managing risk and achieving outcomes as evidenced by command of large major crime, intelligence and counter-terrorism units; leading both homicide investigations and serious crime operations. As a senior manager experienced in managing high numbers of staff, significant budgets and business change programmes.

Also extensive experience of criminal investigation training design, delivery and policy implementation. This includes development and delivery of specialist interview training, and a significant contribution to development of strategic interview policy both in the UK and abroad, including representing British policing in the USA, Australia, France, Canada and South Korea, and latterly independent work with police forces and government agencies in Armenia, Australia, China, Iceland, Ireland and the USA.

Awarded his doctorate by the University of Portsmouth for research into the real life efficacy of Investigative interviewing by British police officers in major crime cases, and is widely published on investigative interviewing through both books and peer reviewed academic papers. Spent time as a Visiting Professor at John Jay College, New York, and is now an Affiliated Scholar at New York University and a Visiting Research Fellow at the University of Portsmouth.

Specialties: Investigative Interviewing, Crime investigation, Management of crime investigation, Training.

[Fisherman]

Also, Lech had used his ace up the sleeve with Polly. Would he so readily commit another murder so soon after, without being dealt another hand first? Enquires to Polly's murder were still ongoing, for all he knows his name might have still been in the frame. Perhaps even being followed by an undercover Detective. If he was the killer [and don't forget Lech wasn't on the edge of insanity but a cool calculating murderer, or so his supporters say], I would hazard to guess he would have a cooling off period whilst rethinking how to strike next.

What do you want me to say? "Couldn´t have been him, then"? I think the very fewest would deny that Nichols and Chapman were killed by the same man, and so somebody did it in an eight-day period.

If Lechmere had been under suspicion, he would take a risk regardless of when he committed the next murder. These were deeds that did not leave the police in any doubt about a common originator, so no matter if he kille on September 8 or in February next year, if he was under suspicion for murder one, he would be revisited for number two. If he was not under suspicion, then there was never any problem.

Serial killers, not least the opportunistic type, kill when they want to kill, not when they think the police has cooled off. If you add psychopathy to that, you will find that such a man could not care much less about risktaking.

If you find it an impossibility for this kind of killer to strike twice within a week on account of how he should be wary of the police high alert, then maybe you should consider that he struck twice in a DAY the next time.

[Fisherman]

It should also be added here that not only do I think that the killer struck twice within a week when he killed Nichols and Chapman, I actually think he struck three times within that approximate period.
For it was on September 11 that a recently amputated arm was found floating in the Thames, and that arm belonged to the torso found later in the cellar vaults of the New Scotland Yard. There is every chance that this woman died on or about the same day as Annie Chapman died, and I entertain no serious doubt that the killer of the Ripper series was the same man who was responsible for the Torso murders.

So it´s not two and a brazen killer, it´s three and an even worse one.

[Sam Flynn]

and I entertain no serious doubt that the killer of the Ripper series was the same man who was responsible for the Torso murders.

Ridiculous. There's every reason to entertain doubts.

[harry]

Fisherman,
Very interesting list of achievements,one wonders why he doesn't for instance,come onto this or other sites and teach,He did say though,didn't he,that the case against Cross,as it stands,would not succeed in a guilty verdict at trial?If he gave reasons why,I missed it.

One thing you are wrong though,is experience in investigating all types of crime.He would not have have had the legal power to do so.Let me just quote one,crimes under the Customs and Excise Act.He or you can put me right if I am wrong.

96 per cent success rate.Well being that 90 per cent of solved crime is by confession of the offender,that leaves 6 per cent success by other means.Ho w much of that 6 per cent is by intelligent and dogged police work,one can only guess,and then there is the 4 per cent failure.What happened there?Perhaps those went down to undependable subordinates.

Not exactly a Sherlock Holmes is he?