Scenarios for other murders with Lechmere as culprit

[Lechmere]

If you had been to Liverpool Street Station you would know that the platforms are below street level. Even if the station was open at 4 am ish then you would not be able to cut diagonally across the space shown on the map. You would have to go downstairs and around platforms and back up stairs and so forth. It would take longer than just walking around the streets.
This illustrates the problems inherent with trying to make estimates from maps without walking the routes.
I have walked the routes several times with a stop watch.

And as Fisherman pointed out the depot wasn’t on Bishopsgate so the routes taken from Google maps are probably not strictly accurate.

Having said that it is true that a route up Hanbury Street as far as say Booth Street and then via Fournier Street would be shorter (than the full Hanbury Street route) as it would cut off the top bit of Hanbury Street – but I haven’t timed myself over that short cut. The reason I didn’t is that we know that on the morning in question Charles Lechmere’s walked with Robert Paul all the way up Hanbury Street and did not take this short cut... even though he was supposedly late for work.
I also note that the shortest short cut via Hanbury Street takes in Dorset Street.
So thank you Ben for noticing this short cut – which wasn’t taken!

As for Booth’s ‘Black Streets’ – none of the routes stray very far from ‘Black Streets’.

The long and short of it is that the Old Montague Street route is the shortest.
The next shortest is to take the Booth Street cut off via Dorset Street
On the morning of 31st August Charles Lechmere – a carman of twenty years service and someone who had lived in the area for over thirty years – opted to take a longer route despite being so late for work that he thought it was appropriate to abandon a woman who he thought might just be unconscious and in distress.

So far as the later murders are concerned I would assume he took the main road (Whitechapel Road and Commercial Street) as that is where he would find a potential victim and the main roads were fairly busy all night long and so provided anonymity. Hence the argument about Old Montague Street vs Hanbury Street is really restricted to the aftermath of the Nichols murder.

If he was a wimp and worried about being mugged in the dark back streets I would assume he would have walked on the main roads as well. However we know that Bucks Row was regarded as dodgy and he certainly walked down there. So the idea that he would have avoided Old Montague Street can be disposed of.

Incidentally I suspect that he may have taken different routes. You can get bored walking the same route every day. Unless there is a specific purpose, for example because you are late for work and so in a hurry, you may opt to take a slightly longer route sometimes.
Then again some anally retentive types would always take the same route.

[FrankO]

Do you stop short at Bishopsgate, or do you round Liverpool Street Station, ending up at where the Broad Street Pickfords was situated underground?

Hi Christer!

Yes, I stopped short at the corner of Bishopsgate and Liverpool Street (see below). And because both the routes I measured began at the same point and ended at the same point, it's unnecessary to add any distance to the Hanbury Street route to allow for catching up with the Old Montague Street path.

The best, Fish!
Frank

[FrankO]

This illustrates the problems inherent with trying to make estimates from maps without walking the routes.

Not if you’re avoiding things you don’t/can’t know, Lech.

And as Fisherman pointed out the depot wasn’t on Bishopsgate so the routes taken from Google maps are probably not strictly accurate.

As I’ve pointed out I only measured those parts of the routes that deviated from one another in order to make clear what the difference between them was. Those parts that were the same regardless of what route was taken, don’t have an influence on that difference. So, the stretch from Bishopsgate through Liverpool Street to his work place is of no consequence. And even though measuring with Google maps probably isn’t accurate to the meter or yard, I believe it is quite accurate.

The reason I didn’t is that we know that on the morning in question Charles Lechmere’s walked with Robert Paul all the way up Hanbury Street and did not take this short cut...

The reason I did is because both you and Fish have been claiming that the Old Montague Street route was the shortest and quickest. The measurements I made show there was a route through Hanbury Street that was equally short (perhaps give or take a yard).

The long and short of it is that the Old Montague Street route is the shortest.
The next shortest is to take the Booth Street cut off via Dorset Street

They are equally short (perhaps give or take a yard).

The best,
Frank

[Fisherman]

Frank:

"both the routes I measured began at the same point and ended at the same point"

Aha - you did not make this clear in your former post, but the map shows what you are saying. Thanks for that!

Could you post the map in full, the routes marked between Baker´s Row and Bishopsgate, so we can have a look?

All in all, what we will be left with after this exercise, is of course the fact that there were two main thoroughfares to Pickfords, and that Lechmere may well have used both.
If we want no nitpick, we may also say that Old Montague Street was a street he grew up in very close connection to (I dare say this in spite of Ben claiming that the area was new to him ), and so he would have been very accustomed to it, whereas Hanbury Street was further away from him during all the time he lived down in St George´s.

Then again, why nitpick - Hanbury Street and Old Montague Street were the two useful thoroughfares to his work, full stop. And the Hanbury Street tour that Lechmere chose on the murder morning was not the fastest one, for some reason - this we know. No optimizing the route that morning! And though we know that the Hanbury Street route could have been cut some way shorter by using Fournier Street to take the "hump" off the route, it of course applies that we have no evidence that he ever did so, to quote my learned friend Ben. We only have evidence that he used the unnecessarily long Hanbury Street route.
Of course, since I am a rational person, and since I would never suggest that a man who walked day in, day out to his job would never take advantage of the fact that there were optional routes of the same type of lenght, I would not hesitate to say that he would of course have optimized the Hanbury Street route too, when not in company with Paul. That´s what people do, or so I´m told. And that, interestingly, would have him walking through Dorset Street every now and then - that IS interesting, since it means that we don´t even need to have Kelly out on the streets on the murder morning. If Lechmere knew where she stayed, then both the "Kelly-must-have-gone-out-again" camp and the "Nah-she-was-too-drunk" camp have reason to look closer at our carman.

All the best,
Fisherman

[DVV]

Wouldn't Lechmere have run into Kosminski at some point?

More maps are needed.

[FrankO]

Aha - you did not make this clear in your former post, but the map shows what you are saying. Thanks for that!

No worries, Fish!

Could you post the map in full, the routes marked between Baker´s Row and Bishopsgate, so we can have a look?

See below - at your service!

The best,
Frank

[Fisherman]

Thanks for that, Frank!

So what we´ve got is a Hanbury Street route employed on the murder night (probably so, at least - we don´t have it in detail after Corbett´s court) that would have taken about a minute longer than the Old Montague route.

We also have two alternative suggestions for improvements on the Hanbury Street route, both of them practically equal to the Old Montague one.

This means that the Hanbury Street route as employed on the murder morning was slightly longer than the Old Montague route, as has been stated. It also means that one of the alternative Hanbury routes offers a very neat explanation to why Lechmere struck on Dorset Street - if it WAS him.

So as I understand things, the original premise stands - Lechmere made a poor choice of route if he was truly late for work that morning. Plus we can see that what we people do when faced with this area of research, is to look for alternative routes that will optimize the Pickford´s trek. I see no reason at all to think that Lechmere himself would not have done the exact same thing - trying one route one day and another one the next. That is what I would have done myself.

One may of course suggest that he would have been extremely reluctant to try new paths, and that he would make a choice and then stay with that choice, come hell or high tide. Some people are like that.

Others are the exact opposite - when they realize that there are more than one option, they will be very content to make good use of it, and vary their experiences.

So which type was Lechmere? Who can say? That seems impossible to determine. But we CAN easily say that if he was the killer, and if he was a reasonably intelligent killer, then he would have a very good reason not to strike along Hanbury Street only. Mixing the streets up would provide the absolute best cover for his actions.

I´d like to see somebody challenge THAT!

Once again thanks for your kind posting of the map material, Frank, and all the best!
Fisherman

[Cogidubnus]

On the contrary...being the boring sod that I am, I've walked the same route to my bus stop now for very nearly 27 years...there is actually a slightly nearer bus stop with a different route...I tried it out once when I first moved here, and didn't like it...it's a boring walk through a slightly dull area of ex-council housing.

Now in my mind I know it's a shorter walk...and it actually leads to a bus stop slightly nearer my destination...but because it's boring it seems longer, and since that first attempt I've never used it....not even when running late...it simply wouldn't occur to me.

The route I walk takes me past part of the old village of South Bersted, a Georgian school, a medieval church, a 19th century former forge and some 18th Century thatched cottages...it's interesting and I meet nice people.

I appreciate that, in Whitechapel, Cross was unlikely to find the same pleasant distractions I do...I merely point out that human beings are creatures of habit and not automatons pursuing a ruthlessly logical course...if he found a reasonably equitable route to work he probably pursued it as a matter of habit...to argue otherwise is perverse.

All the best

Dave

[Fisherman]

Dave:

"I merely point out that human beings are creatures of habit and not automatons pursuing a ruthlessly logical course...if he found a reasonably equitable route to work he probably pursued it as a matter of habit...to argue otherwise is perverse."

Let me get this right: You are saying that any suggestion that Lechmere would have used more than one route to work is perverse? Is that about it? And that "human nature" rules this?

And the proof for this is that you yourself always do so - use the same route? Therefore, others will do the same?

On a side note, does this affect your way of thinking Ripperology too? Like, "if I think along these lines, others will do the same, or they are perverted"?

It would explain a whole lot, see ...

The best,
Fisherman

[Lechmere]

Cog
Your personal reminiscence doesn't add much to the Charles Lechmere route.
It can be said with certainty that:
1) Charles Lechmere took a longer than necessary route to work on the morning of 31st August.
2) That route took him past the next murder scene which was 100 yards or do from where Paul worked.
3) that route allowed him to discover where Paul worked.
4) that route avoided Charles Lechmere to avoid leaving mizen in the direction of the tabram murder scene of a couple of weeks before.
5) that route allowed him to leave mizen with (perhaps via catching up) another man And so reinforced the idea that he and Paul were intrinsically together.
6) the other near by potential and quicker routes to work took Charles lechmere past the murder scenes of tabram, Mackenzie and kelly at similar times in the morning.

[Cogidubnus]

No Fisherman, I said merely what I said - I implied that to view mankind as automatons automatically complying with the most efficient method of doing things would be perverse. Kindly don't attempt to put words in my mouth - if your argument was that sound in the first place, you wouldn't need to attempt to belittle others in this fashion...

Lech - that route could simply be the way he walked to work because he found it pleasant or interesting...why all the convoluted reasoning? Run out of "facts"?

Honestly you two slay me...if you discovered Cross had a pimple on his dick you'd find some reason or another to associate it with a victim...

Dave

[Fisherman]

Dave:

"Kindly don't attempt to put words in my mouth"

If you take the time to re-read my post, Dave, you should no doubt discover that I don´t put anything in your mouth. If, by chance, you should find your left foot in it, then that´s not MY doing - for what I did was to ask a number of questions, questions that you could answer in any fashion you desired. And asking instead of claiming is the exact opposite of putting words in peoples mouths.
Do correct me if I´m wrong...?

On the other hand, you DID write this: "if he found a reasonably equitable route to work he probably pursued it as a matter of habit...to argue otherwise is perverse." And to me it seems you are saying that suggesting that people may vary their routes if given the chance, is a perversion (a perversion which, I hasten to add, I subscribe to myself when given the chance - naughty me!)

In the end, it is a meaningless thing to speculate in this matter if you don´t take into account that it has been suggested that Lechmere was the Ripper.

For if he WAS the Ripper, you may need to agree that if he did any sort of planning at all to avoid getting caught, then that planning may well have involved the precaution not to murder all victims in one street, but instead to take advantage of the fact that he had optional routes to use, that would take him to Pickfords in about the same time, all of them.
Maybe the man was sly enough to take advantage of this, and give the police a harder task?

Maybe you will not agree. Maybe you will tell me not to put any more words into your mouth until you´ve gotten that left foot out of it, I don´t know. But you probably have a point in saying that the man who is suggested to have made these changings of routes was perverse. Good going, Dave!

The best,
Fisherman

[Ben]

A belated thanks, Frank, for your efforts on the mapping front. Most appreciated! All's well here, thanks, and it's great to see you here.

Hi Fisherman,

I'm still not quite sure what you're trying to convince people of here.

It has been established, courtesy of Frank, that one of the fastest routes to work did involve walking onto Hanbury Street, despite it being erroneously claimed for months that Old Montague Street was the shortest*. We've also established that Cross walked the whole of Hanbury Street, despite it being quicker to take an earlier left onto Booth Street. Why did he do this? Let's consider the options.

1) He was new to that particular area, knew that Hanbury Street took him in the right direction, and didn't know about the Booth Street-Princelett Street cut-through (and didn't bother to investigate alternatives). He simply stuck to what he knew, and what worked well (which Lechmere finds "anally retentive" for some odd reason).

2) He knew about it, but didn't realise it was shorter.

3) He knew about it, but wanted to use the busier thoroughfares wherever possible (see Robert Paul's interview about his fear of the "gangs").

4) He was Jack the Ripper and thought that if he followed Paul to his workplace, he could then concoct a cunning plan to implicate him by committing the next murder along that Hanbury Street work route...perhaps forgetting that the crafty plan could backfire once he'd advertised to all and sundry that he also took the same work route.

Given the astounding simplicity of the first three options, can you really see many people going for option 4? I can't.

All the best,
Ben

*In the absence of any good reason to think that he couldn't walk through the terminus building (and no, it really isn't an obstacle to walk up and down a few stairs and cross bridges over platforms!), the Hanbury Street route is slightly shorter, as he could have cut through to Broad Street from Bishopsgate, rather than walking as far south as Liverpool Street.

[Fisherman]

Ben:

"It has been established, courtesy of Frank, that one of the fastest routes to work did involve walking onto Hanbury Street, despite it being erroneously claimed for months that Old Montague Street was the shortest"

And it has been established, courtesy of Charles Lechmere, that he did not USE that fast Hanbury Street route on the murder morning. And it has been established, courtesy of you, that we have no evidence that Lechmere EVER used any other stretch than the murder morning one.

It therefore applies that the Old Montague Street route that he did NOT use on the murder morning WOULD have been quicker than the route he DID use on the murder morning. Therefore, the anomaly remains: He claimed to be late, and still did not use the quickest option.

"He was new to that particular area"

That´s new to ME! I am of the meaning that having grown up and spent decades of your life in an area kind of prohibits suddenly being "new" to it.

"...knew that Hanbury Street took him in the right direction".

Dear me - we agree! Yes, Ben, Hanbury Street ran in an East-Westernly direction, it was situated between 22 Doveton Street and Broad Street, and therefore, it unquestionably DID take Lechmere in the right direction. On a separate note, so did all routes situated between 22 Doveton Street and Broad Street, and running in an East-Westernly direction.

However, Ben. However! I do NOT think that we ought to work from the assumption that a guy who grew up in St Georges, in comfortable walking distance from ALL the murder venues, and who had been learning how to traverse the East End streets in a professional capacity for more than twenty years, before which he had walked the same streets in an unprofessional capacity in a further one and a half decade,would be unaquainted with that area in any sense at all. He would arguably know each of them streets just as well as any taxi driver does today - extensively, utterly, wholly and by heart. Now, since you have been trying to push Lechmere as a newcomer on these streets before, feeling his way forward like a blind rat, I very much suspect that you may raise the argument again. If so, please keep in mind that post 119 of this thread holds the answer to your query!

"Given the astounding simplicity of the first three options, can you really see many people going for option 4? I can't."

You sadly forgot option FIVE, Ben - but that was to be expected! Never mind, I will tell you about it!

5/ He was the killer, he wanted to find out how much Paul knew, and wanted to see where he worked, so that he could get to him if he wanted to in the future. He also knew the roads inside out, and he intentionally spread the killings so as not to give himself away by killing on one street only.

Say what? Oh, no no, don´t thank me - it was a pleasure!

The best,
Fisherman

[Lechmere]

I have walked the walks.
Briskly and evenly.
Corner of old Montague and Hanbury to corner of Liverpool street.

Old Montague street route - 12 minutes 30 seconds
Hanbury street route - 13 minutes 45 seconds
Hanbury street / princelet street cut off route - 13 minutes.

The winner - old montague