Was Lech known as Cross at Pickfords??

[Lechmere]

Cog
The Victorian period was one known for its stifling sentimentality over the sanctity of womanhood. This was no doubt predominantly a middle class affectation but nevertheless in any generation abandoning an unconscious woman and then compounding that act by failing to properly alert a policeman is a sign of extreme callousness.

[DVV]

Cog
The Victorian period was one known for its stifling sentimentality over the sanctity of womanhood. This was no doubt predominantly a middle class affectation but nevertheless in any generation abandoning an unconscious woman and then compounding that act by failing to properly alert a policeman is a sign of extreme callousness.

Extreme callousness has always been. Anyway, Lechemre/Cross did hail a passer-by and alert a constable. Extreme callousness ?

[Cogidubnus]

Precisely Ed...a predominantly pretentious and hypocritical middle class attitude...I suspect you'd find the East-End working classes somewhat differently aligned...else why would folk such as Donovan unceremoniously dump non-paying females back on the streets?

All the best

Dave

[DVV]

Precisely Ed...a predominantly pretentious and hypocritical middle class attitude...
Dave

According to Evelyn Waugh there is nothing callous like the upper-class.

[Ben]

Your debating style seems to usually rely on claiming that more people agree with you or disagree with the point you oppose and so nah-nah-nah.

It doesn't "usually" rely on any such thing, Lechmere, but the way in which the latest version of the Cross theory has been promoted tends to invite precisely that attitude. I'm not suggesting for a moment that you should accede to the views of the majority, but when, for instance, it is pointed out that most people don't find the use of his stepfather's name odd or suspicious, that ought to carry some weight. Similarly, it makes little sense to insist doggedly that there was some sort of "scam" involving PC Mizen when pretty much no-one else thinks there was. It really doesn't bother me, but if you're wondering why the theory's being met with such fierce resistance, that might have something to do with it.

Fleming is a proven user of an alias with no demonstrable family connection, in contrast to Cross who used his stepfather's surname. It is not conclusively proved that Fleming used that alias in 1888, but it is only fair to surmise that the only person reported to have assaulted the most brutally mutilated victim in the "Jack the Ripper" series escaped detection for that reason despite living, in all probability, in the Victoria Home at the time.

Cross did nothing callous in leaving Nichols, incidentally. He set off in the direction of his workplace knowing full well that he'd encounter a policeman en route. An unquestionably reasonable and un-suspicious thing to do under the circumstances.

All the best,
Ben

[Fisherman]

David:

"It shudd be an ascertained fact, Fish, that people are less likely to notice things when they hurry in the gloom than, say, when they're having a peaceful stroll after lunch."

You are not following me here, David - he may well have been frightened, and he may well have been finding it hard to notice anything at all. But that is of no consequence since it is what LECHMERE would have thought about this that ruled the show. He would have had no idea whether Paul was the least or most observant man in the world. Thatīs where you need to reconsider.

The best,
Fisherman

[Fisherman]

Ben:

"most people don't find the use of his stepfather's name odd or suspicious"

These are two different things, Ben, and you need to be able to tell them apart. Whether "most people" donīt find the use suspicious, I canīt really tell, maybe so.
But it is odd no matter how we look upon things.

He used the name Lechmere in ninety-odd (!) recorded instances when communicating with the authoritites.

When he communicated with the police in the Nichols murder case, he used the name Cross.

He has not been proven to use that name in any other context, official or unofficial.

It is therefore by definition odd. (Wikipedia: "Odd is an adjective denoting the quality of being unpaired, occasional, strange or unusual, or a person who is viewed as eccentric.")

Odd is something that goes against the general rule, something that deviates. That is the very definition of what odd is.

So leaving aside the question of how many people regard it as suspicious, it is and remains odd, no matter what people say. It is not a question of tastes or hunches, it is a matter of fact.

The best,
Fisherman

[Lechmere]

Abbey
Sorry for not answering about the other murders - I think it need a fresh thread though.

[Lechmere]

Dvv
I didn't say it was a fact that the police did not take paul's press interview seriously - however the helson-Neil 'press conference' certainly suggests that they didn't take it seriously as they were only concerned with denying that Neil had been sent to the scene by two men.

[Fisherman]

Lechmere:

"I didn't say it was a fact that the police did not take paul's press interview seriously - however the helson-Neil 'press conference' certainly suggests that they didn't take it seriously as they were only concerned with denying that Neil had been sent to the scene by two men."

In a sense they of course DID take the interview seriously - from the outset. After having checked with Neil, however, they would have taken another path, relying more on their own man.

Two things are interesting in combination with this:
1. It may well be that the animosity (if we can call it that) from the policeīs side towards Paul took itīs start right here; it seemed they were dealing with a man who made things up and blamed the police for shortcomings on - as the police would have thought - no good grounds at all.
2. It is very, very clear that the police never coupled the PC Paul spoke of to Jonas Mizen, instead believing that it was Neil that was spoken of. This goes to tell us that Mizen carried on as he had started out - by not coming clear about having met the carmen. He would have been in a position to clear Neil in this respect but did not do so, at least not until late in the process. One may of course imagine a scenario where Mizen approaches his superiors inbetween the press conference and Charles Lechmereīs Jack-in-the-box appearance at the cop shop. Itīs a small window of time, but it is there. And if Mizen used it, then this may explain why his superiors seems to have been none too harsh on him.

The best,
Fisherman

[Sally]

Ed

The Victorian period was one known for its stifling sentimentality over the sanctity of womanhood. This was no doubt predominantly a middle class affectation but nevertheless in any generation abandoning an unconscious woman and then compounding that act by failing to properly alert a policeman is a sign of extreme callousness.

That's literary sanctity. And Dave is right, is does belong to the middle classes. On the streets of Whitechapel, where the sight of dead-drunk or ill women was a common one, we can hardly expect Cross and Paul to presume that the one in front of them has been murdered. In fact, it appears entirely from the documentary sources as if nobody thought she had been murdered at the time. And why should they?

Cross and Paul had alerted a policeman - they had done their duty; and couldn't afford to be any later for work. No callousness is implied by their actions, contextually.

Fisherman

He used the name Lechmere in ninety-odd (!) recorded instances when communicating with the authoritites.

Hmm. That seems like an awful lot. I've still to see those listed here, in spite of asking for citations several times. I do hope I won't have to count them myself.

[Fisherman]

Sally:

"Hmm. That seems like an awful lot. I've still to see those listed here, in spite of asking for citations several times. I do hope I won't have to count them myself. "

I believe Edward has mentioned how they are grouped and where they come from, roughly. If you donīt find that enough, but thinks he is trying to con you, then you should ask him to list them all, one by one. Maybe he will accomodate you.

In what manner would it make a difference, Sally, by the way? Will you think it less credible that he called himself Cross colloquially if you have all the ninetyish signatures in front of you, or are do you just want to make sure that you are not being lied to?

The best,
Fisherman

[Jon Guy]

Hi Christer

2. It is very, very clear that the police never coupled the PC Paul spoke of to Jonas Mizen, instead believing that it was Neil that was spoken of. This goes to tell us that Mizen carried on as he had started out - by not coming clear about having met the carmen. He would have been in a position to clear Neil in this respect but did not do so, at least not until late in the process. One may of course imagine a scenario where Mizen approaches his superiors inbetween the press conference and Charles Lechmereīs Jack-in-the-box appearance at the cop shop. Itīs a small window of time, but it is there. And if Mizen used it, then this may explain why his superiors seems to have been none too harsh on him.

Poor old Mitzy!

Whilst he`s on his night shift beat in H-Division territory he`s told by some passer by`s that there`s a woman dead or drunk on the pavement in J-Div territory. He wanders over anyway and the first thing he see`s is J-Div`s PC Neal by the body who immediately sends Mitzy off to Leman St to fetch the ambulance. He returns and helps remove the body to Eagle Place mortuary.

Mizen naturally assumes that PC Neil had sent the two carmen to fetch assistance, or that Neil was in place by the body when the carman passed the spot.

Neal of J-Div naturally assumes he is the first to find the body.

Mizen of H-Div finishes his night shift and goes home to bed.

PC Neal of J-Div completes a report for Inspector Helson CID J-Div, both based over in Bethnal Green.


The Importance of Being Jonas!! ;-)

[Fisherman]

Jon:

"Whilst he`s on his night shift beat in H-Division territory he`s told by some passer by`s that there`s a woman dead or drunk on the pavement in J-Div territory. "

No, njet, nein, nej - not necessarily at all! This is something that resurfaces over and over again. Lechmere claims that he and Paul said that the woman was dead or drunk, and adds that Paul himself spoke to Mizen and made it clear that he for his part was of the meaning that she was dead.

But I always warn against relying on what Lechmere says, and it is often very refreshing to read things from the other partīs perspectives. And if we do so this time we will see that Mizen never once admits that Lechmere had spoken of a possibly dead woman. In the Daily Telegraph, Mizen says that he was told that a woman was lying in Buckīs Row, and in the Times he says that he was informed that a woman had been found there. Both descriptions reek of a very minor occasion - a drunkard.
And Paul only says that they (the carmen as one entity) informed Mizen, leaving it entirely open that only Lechmere did so.

Otherwise, you would have it all pretty much spot on, Jon, if Iīm correct. And why wouldnīt I be?

All the best,
Fisherman

[Sally]

Fisherman

I believe Edward has mentioned how they are grouped and where they come from, roughly. If you donīt find that enough, but thinks he is trying to con you, then you should ask him to list them all, one by one. Maybe he will accomodate you.

Roughly isn't really sufficient if TL is basing the strength of their argument on the frequency of use of the name 'Lechmere' in official documents. It is poor scholarship (at least) not to cite your sources. 90 is a lot - and the number does seem to have grown somewhat over the last few months.

That is all.

I have not said, nor implied, that I am being lied to. The general public might feel somewhat differently, however, if they knew that Cross hadn't really been found leaning over the body.

In what manner would it make a difference, Sally, by the way? Will you think it less credible that he called himself Cross colloquially if you have all the ninetyish signatures in front of you, or are do you just want to make sure that you are not being lied to?

You will not find 90 signatures Fisherman - at least, its highly doubtful. You may find the name Lechmere cited on several classes of document. That is not the same thing. The value of such citations to your argument will depend on their context.

And in any case, however many instances of officialdom you produce, you still cannot know whether he called himself Cross colloquially. Nobody can in the absence of positive evidence. Without it, that informaiton is beyond recovery.