Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Framing Charles

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by drstrange169 View Post
    >>Who’s Ma C? Is this a new addition to the ‘cast of thousands?’ ;-)<<

    Her neighbours would have known her as Tommy Cross's widow. Particularly the one that witnessed his death certificate.
    Some posters are uninterested in sharing information. Charles Lechmere's mother remarried in 1872 to Joseph Forsdike, so she would have been Mrs Forsdike at that time.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by rjpalmer View Post

      Hello Abby - I assure you that I have no theory whatsoever that touches on what the carman Charles Lechmere may or may not have been doing on the night of the 'double event.' As I say, he has no provable alibi, but then neither does the majority of 'suspects' named over the years.

      I was just voicing skepticism at the claim that the murders of Stride and Eddowes being earlier in the evening 'fit nicely' with Lechmere having Sunday off. It seems like a weak indicator, at best, and, indeed, I can't even quite follow the reasoning.

      I suppose what is being suggested is that, since Lechmere would have the opportunity to sleep in, and it was Saturday night, he could have stayed out visiting and boozing until 2 a.m. in the morning.

      Maybe so, maybe not--we might as well argue about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. It could just as easily have been Cutbush or Druitt or Bury or Kosminski out on a spree.

      I am more interested in the supposed 3-3.30 a.m. pattern in the murders of Tabram, Nichols, Chapman, and Kelly that Fish is seeing, that would indicate a man traversing the murder zone within a very narrow window of time.

      But does such a pattern even exist? In at least two of those cases, and possibly in three, the time of death is far from certain. And how compelling is that pattern, if the same theorist is forced to admit murders also occurred two hours earlier, and one body--supposedly in the same series--was dumped two hours later?

      It doesn't make it impossible that the same man was guilty of committing all seven murders, but it clearly weakens the supposed pattern that was pointing at him in the first place.

      I don't think that is a particularly controversial position, is it?

      Unlike 'Fiver,' I don't dispute that the Stride murder occurring close to Ma Lechmere's house is a 'fun fact.' If one believes, as Fish believes, that the Stride murder and the Pinchin Street case are connected to the Nichols murder, I can see why it would excite his interest. But isn't the geographical coincidence enough? Do we have to also pretend, as the 'Missing Evidence' documentary does, that the fuzzy and uncertain 'timing' of the murders is also suggestive?


      R P
      Hi RJ
      yes to me it is. I often put myself in the shoes of the characters involved and pretend im there. its intriguing to me that on the night of the "work route" murders lech is there walking the streets in the dark, very close to the victims in location and time to when they were killed. I mean hes there..near. same with the "visiting ma lech/ double event murders" although admittedly there is speculation on that one--but again the timing and location of those makes sense if he was off on the following sunday. and explains the earlier than usual killing time.

      Its like with Paul walking to work in the dark and lonely street, already on his gaurd, and seeing lech hovering near the body of polly nichols. its just all kind of creepy to me. and yes somewhat suspicious. Lech is very much in the frame for being the killer of Polly.

      and to zoom out a bit, all this time/location proximity is more than we can say for any other suspect in this regard.

      I just simply think hes makes one of the least weak suspects.
      Last edited by Abby Normal; 05-07-2021, 03:35 PM.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by MrBarnett View Post

        There are certain things that really intrigue me about CAL. One is the character of his old Ma. Maybe wrongly, I have her pegged as a very strong character who would have drummed an abhorrence of ‘unfortunates’ into her son. And I’ve just discovered/realised that three close members of her family - two husbands and a daughter - all seem to have died in neighbours’ houses. What does that mean? I’ve no idea, but it’s odd and adds a little more interest to Maria Louisa, the bigamous horse flesh dealer who, as the daughter of a butler to a prominent member of the Herefordshire gentry, had been brought up in a lodge the grounds of a fine country house and yet was forced by circumstances to bring up her son in Tiger Bay.

        Then there’s the Pinchin Street thing. That case always strikes me as a hybrid Ripper/Torso event. It could be a coincidence, but if it isn’t, if it was the Ripper doffing his cap/sticking two fingers up to the Torso killer (or vice versa) or a combined Ripper/Torso man saying ‘look at me - I’m both’, then the choice of the location where the remains were dropped might well have conveyed a message.

        And that location fits very nicely (I don’t think it could be bettered) as somewhere Lechmere might choose if he was trying to convey such a message.

        It was virtually opposite where he had lived as a boy with his old Ma and his PC stepfather, the house they had lived in was still there in sight of the arch; Frederick Street that had run behind where the arch was located had been one of the most notorious of the Tiger Bay streets when he lived there; the torso was dumped a few feet away from the Whitechapel/St Georges boundary. If he, a St Georges boy, was the WM, what other spot in London would have carried anything even close to the significance of that spot?

        Answers on a postcard...
        and the whitehall torso in the basement of NSY a ef off to his PC stepfather?

        Comment


        • Originally posted by rjpalmer View Post

          We'll have to agree to disagree. I've known many 40 year old laboring men who worked the early shift, and it was exceedingly common for them to hit the pub the minute the week's work was over, drink heavily for three or four hours, and then be home dozing in their arm-chair or bed by nightfall.

          Let's keep in mind that either scenario is utter speculation, piled on speculation.


          You seem to be disagreeing with yourself, RJ. One minute you’re suggesting CAL was probably too old to like a pint or two, the next you’re telling us you have personally known many 40-year-old boozers.

          Of course it’s speculation, but there’s fair-minded speculation and there’s the other kind.

          CAL’s age, the shift pattern we might deduce from his very early start on 31st Aug and the likelihood that Sunday was indeed his day of rest all fit very nicely with Saturday night being the one night in the week when he would be likely to enjoy a few beers. And the fact drinking a few beers was the chief please of most Victorian working men also fits nicely with his having done so.

          We might also add the loyalty generally displayed by pub-goers to their ‘local’ - the pub where their mates drank - fits very nicely with his popping over to St Georges to do his drinking.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by MrBarnett View Post

            You seem to be disagreeing with yourself, RJ. One minute you’re suggesting CAL was probably too old to like a pint or two, the next you’re telling us you have personally known many 40-year-old boozers.

            Of course it’s speculation, but there’s fair-minded speculation and there’s the other kind.

            CAL’s age, the shift pattern we might deduce from his very early start on 31st Aug and the likelihood that Sunday was indeed his day of rest all fit very nicely with Saturday night being the one night in the week when he would be likely to enjoy a few beers. And the fact drinking a few beers was the chief please of most Victorian working men also fits nicely with his having done so.

            We might also add the loyalty generally displayed by pub-goers to their ‘local’ - the pub where their mates drank - fits very nicely with his popping over to St Georges to do his drinking.
            im fifty five and after a hard weeks work friday night i occasionally enjoy going out drinking sometimes till all hours of the morning. sure you can be tired but the adreniline to blow off steam kicks in, the energy of the bars nightlife etc. and thats without even being a serial killer out on the hunt.

            Its a non issue.
            Last edited by Abby Normal; 05-07-2021, 03:51 PM.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by MrBarnett View Post

              You seem to be disagreeing with yourself, RJ. One minute you’re suggesting CAL was probably too old to like a pint or two, the next you’re telling us you have personally known many 40-year-old boozers.
              Not in the least. Where did I suggest Lechmere didn't like a pint? It's not a matter of drinking, it's a matter of staying up until 2 a.m. in the morning at the end of the workweek, if you're used to getting up at a "lark's fart." Anyway you slice it, you're having Lechmere pull a 23 hour day, made more palatable by a theoretical cat-nap. I'd be more inclined to accept this scenario if Lechmere was twenty, rather than forty. And perhaps getting drunk with dear old mum was an East End thing on a Saturday night, but my life experience was quite a bit different.

              But, on to something more interesting:


              Originally posted by MrBarnett View Post
              Phillips was of the opinion that the [Pinchin Street] victim had died as as a result of blood loss from a ‘former’ incision of the neck that had ‘disappeared on the subsequent separation of the head.’

              So we have a victim whose throat was most likely cut...

              I think this opinion is on very unsteady ground, Gary.

              Here’s what Donald Swanson wrote: “the dismemberment [ie., of the legs] had taken place at an earlier period than the head for the raw flesh had from continued exposure dried on the surface which presented a blackened appearance in consequence.”

              We see confirmation for this in the notes of Dr. Hebbert: "the cut surfaces at the hips were black and dry, but the surface at the neck moist and red."

              In other words, the legs were removed some days before the head was removed. By all appearances, the woman was murdered or even killed accidently (one suggestion was blows to the head) and her legs were then removed, probably to aid concealment. It wasn’t until days later, and only shortly before the body was dumped, that the head was removed…almost certainly to thwart any attempt at identification, as we see in domestic 'torso' cases.

              How do you square this with street throat slashing cases akin to the 'Ripper'? It seems like a very different sort of crime. Why wouldn't her throat be black if she had her throat cut at the time she was dismembered?

              Okay, I'm off for awhile.

              P.S. I will be amused in the unlikely event that Lechmere's name is ever found on a list of teetotalers. His midnight visit to Ma Lechmere will then have been a prayer meeting. I suppose even in the East End there must have been respectable types that went to bed on a Saturday night, so as not to be late for church services in the morning.
              Last edited by rjpalmer; 05-07-2021, 04:16 PM.

              Comment


              • I’ll go back and read it again, but my impression was that Phillips believed the blood had been drained from the body by a cut/cuts to the neck, but that the head being removed later, all trace of the those earlier cuts had been removed.

                His actual words were:

                ’I believe that death arose from loss of blood.’

                ’The supposition - (and only a supposition) - which presents itself to my mind is that there had been a former incision of the neck, the signs of which had disappeared on the subsequent separation of the head. The loss of blood could not have come from the stomach, and I could not trace it coming from the lungs. I have a strong opinion that it did not.’

                What I think he’s saying is that in his opinion her death was caused by a cut neck/throat severing major blood vessels.’ Same as the others?

                Last edited by MrBarnett; 05-07-2021, 04:48 PM.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Abby Normal View Post

                  im fifty five and after a hard weeks work friday night i occasionally enjoy going out drinking sometimes till all hours of the morning. sure you can be tired but the adreniline to blow off steam kicks in, the energy of the bars nightlife etc. and thats without even being a serial killer out on the hunt.

                  Its a non issue.
                  I’m 66 and can still tie one on when the mood takes, though I gave up all that working malarkey years ago.

                  I ask myself these questions:

                  Is it likely that a 39-year-old East End working man would have liked a few beers? Yes.

                  What is the most likely night of the week that CAL would have gone for a few pints with his mates? Saturday?

                  Where in Aug, 1888 would he most likely have gone for a drink? The Bishopsgate area near where he worked, or St Georges where his mates/neighbours probably drank. And because his mother and daughter were also in St Georges, St Georges edges it.

                  This is all blindingly obvious, but when you have someone (not RJ) suggesting CAL being in St Georges for social reasons on Saturday night is implausible it needs reiterating.

                  As for the sleep thing, there were more than enough hours between 4am and pub closing time for him to do his shift and get his head down for a few hours afterwards before going to the pub. Any sleep deficit could be made up on Sunday.






                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by rjpalmer View Post

                    Not in the least. Where did I suggest Lechmere didn't like a pint? It's not a matter of drinking, it's a matter of staying up until 2 a.m. in the morning at the end of the workweek, if you're used to getting up at a "lark's fart." Anyway you slice it, you're having Lechmere pull a 23 hour day, made more palatable by a theoretical cat-nap. I'd be more inclined to accept this scenario if Lechmere was twenty, rather than forty. And perhaps getting drunk with dear old mum was an East End thing on a Saturday night, but my life experience was quite a bit different.

                    But, on to something more interesting:





                    I think this opinion is on very unsteady ground, Gary.

                    Here’s what Donald Swanson wrote: “the dismemberment [ie., of the legs] had taken place at an earlier period than the head for the raw flesh had from continued exposure dried on the surface which presented a blackened appearance in consequence.”

                    We see confirmation for this in the notes of Dr. Hebbert: "the cut surfaces at the hips were black and dry, but the surface at the neck moist and red."

                    In other words, the legs were removed some days before the head was removed. By all appearances, the woman was murdered or even killed accidently (one suggestion was blows to the head) and her legs were then removed, probably to aid concealment. It wasn’t until days later, and only shortly before the body was dumped, that the head was removed…almost certainly to thwart any attempt at identification, as we see in domestic 'torso' cases.

                    How do you square this with street throat slashing cases akin to the 'Ripper'? It seems like a very different sort of crime. Why wouldn't her throat be black if she had her throat cut at the time she was dismembered?

                    Okay, I'm off for awhile.

                    P.S. I will be amused in the unlikely event that Lechmere's name is ever found on a list of teetotalers. His midnight visit to Ma Lechmere will then have been a prayer meeting. I suppose even in the East End there must have been respectable types that went to bed on a Saturday night, so as not to be late for church services in the morning.
                    I have to pull you up on the ‘cat nap’. There were 20 something hours between him starting work and the pubs closing. Some carmen worked 12 hour shifts, but if his routine involved deliveries to early morning markets, then his shift might have been 8/9 hrs or so. Back at home by 2, he could have got his head down for 5/6/7 hours and still had plenty of time for a pint or three and a quick hello to his old Ma. There’s nothing remotely implausible about that.

                    Comment


                    • I’m off for a while too.

                      Comment


                      • Well, judging by the following, there's little doubt Lechmere was an insomniac.

                        Having killed Martha Tabram at 3 a.m. on August 7th, he then worked his normal shift before heading to the festivities in Woolwich. By 5 pm or so he was having dinner in Hampton Court, and was still boozing it at midnight with his mates made their way back to Woolwich, on the other side of the river. Two hours of shut-eye and he's ready to hit the roads again. No wonder he was running over children.

                        --Just a stab at humor. No harm intended.

                        Click image for larger version

Name:	Beanfeast.JPG
Views:	123
Size:	59.0 KB
ID:	757531

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by rjpalmer View Post
                          Well, judging by the following, there's little doubt Lechmere was an insomniac.

                          Having killed Martha Tabram at 3 a.m. on August 7th, he then worked his normal shift before heading to the festivities in Woolwich. By 5 pm or so he was having dinner in Hampton Court, and was still boozing it at midnight with his mates made their way back to Woolwich, on the other side of the river. Two hours of shut-eye and he's ready to hit the roads again. No wonder he was running over children.

                          --Just a stab at humor. No harm intended.

                          Click image for larger version

Name:	Beanfeast.JPG
Views:	123
Size:	59.0 KB
ID:	757531
                          lol!!!

                          Comment


                          • It looks like Pickford's annual bean-feasts were held on August Bank Holiday week; here's one from 1886, with employees from Hastings, etc. As you can see, it was held on Monday itself.

                            What this means for Lechmere in 1888, I have no idea, or whether he would even be at the celebration in Woolwich. I'm assuming he would have been at some celebration. It's rather odd that the 1888 event was held on a Tuesday. Does this mean that Pickford's employees worked the Bank Holiday weekend and then had Tuesday off?


                            Click image for larger version

Name:	Bank Holiday.JPG
Views:	123
Size:	111.8 KB
ID:	757545

                            Comment


                            • Interesting finds, RJ. Pickfords had hundreds of employees, so their various depots probably had separate bank holiday beanfeasts.

                              A while back I found a list of a Pickfords cricket team in the 1860s. It was the team from their Haydon Square depot. No Cross or Lechmere mentioned.

                              We know that Lechmere had worked for Pickfords for over 20 years, but what we don’t know is where. Haydon Square is interesting because it’s in H Div but it’s quite close to Mitre Square. In fact, if you were in Mitre Square and wanted the nearest exit from the City police jurisdiction, you would head for Haydon Square. Moving east from there you would be just south of Whitechapel High Street and Goulston Street.

                              Comment


                              • I believe that its likely many people could be found that might have taken routes to or from work late at night, or just out and about in the area, perhaps being homeless... that passed one or more murder sites on their respective given nights. Lots of men working at night in warehousing, at the docks, slaughterhouses...etc. One seen over a victim just after the attack might well be due to the act being on the sidewalk on an open ended street and as such just a pass through for foot traffic.

                                I dont think its a real surprise that the next murder is committed well off the street.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X