Framing Charles

[drstrange169]

>>Or maybe he goes home first to freshen up and then goes to see his mum, daughter, step-father in the early evening.<<

But a mother wouldn't be interested in seeing her daughter?

[drstrange169]

>>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.

[rjpalmer]

You have no idea what Lechmere’s shift patterns were.

Perhaps Fiver doesn't, but one of the main arguments presented in the Lechmere documentary is that the murders coincided with Lechmere's 'shift patterns.'

"his job potentially placed him near four of the killings at the time they occurred" --Jack the Ripper: The Missing Evidence (42:22)

and, a few moments later...

"the timings really hurt him" -- J. Scobie, QC.

It kind of seems like 'dirty pool' to use a supposed time table to implicate Lechmere in four of the murders, and then deny that there was any such time table when someone uses the same table to suggest an alibi.

Unless someone can demonstrate otherwise, I'm going to assume that Pickford & Co. didn't have rotating shifts--which seems like a safe bet-- and Lechmere left for work at 3.30 a.m. with an arrival time of 4.00 a.m.

Don't the Lechmere theorists themselves accept this?

[Abby Normal]

Perhaps Fiver doesn't, but one of the main arguments presented in the Lechmere documentary is that the murders coincided with Lechmere's 'shift patterns.'

"his job potentially placed him near four of the killings at the time they occurred" --Jack the Ripper: The Missing Evidence (42:22)

and, a few moments later...

"the timings really hurt him" -- J. Scobie, QC.

It kind of seems like 'dirty pool' to use a supposed time table to implicate Lechmere in four of the murders, and then deny that there was any such time table when someone uses the same table to suggest an alibi.

Unless someone can demonstrate otherwise, I'm going to assume that Pickford & Co. didn't have rotating shifts--which seems like a safe bet-- and Lechmere left for work at 3.30 a.m. with an arrival time of 4.00 a.m.

Don't the Lechmere theorists themselves accept this?

hi rj
well i wouldt call myself a lechmere theorist, maybe more of a lechmere apologist lol. but yes i agree with your point for the most part.
so four of them tod could be when hes on his way to work and the double event was when he was off the next sunday morning and so ocurred after his work day saturday with no worry about time.

[Fisherman]

>>It is proven that Nichols bled for many minutes after Lechmere left the body.<<

Err ... no!

We don't know if she bled or if she leaked at some stage after Lechmere left, that is why we are all here debating.

One minute your saying people should express there opinions as facts and the next you are doing it!

Neil said that the blood was running from her neck wound and Neil was not in place until many minutes after the carmen left. Mizen said the same. Of course, if they were both mistaken, then she was perhaps not bleeding. But all in all, the evidence there is tells us that she WAS bleeding and so we may safely treat that as a fact.There is not a single source that has either man claiming that she had stopped bleeding, on the contrary.

This is one of those things where I personally think that your zeal to try and deny anything that points to Lechmere becomes counterproductive for you.

You forgot a "not" in your last sentence, by the way. I am not saying that it is a fact that it is a Freudian mistake - but I am saying that it is kind of amusing.

[Fisherman]

I hadn't expected anything less from you, Christer! I'm not so far removed from your conviction. It's just that, as long as I don't read or hear about a serial killer who did something similar to what you propose Lechmere did, "just for fun"/"just because he could"/just because he felt to" (take your pick), my view is that he would only have stayed put if he felt he could no longer get away. But I'd agree that we don't know at what point he would have felt that.

Completely agreed.

Going by Neil's evidence, I think we can safely say that it was possible, from the murder spot, to hear someone walking at the end of the street. Whether Paul's footsteps were evenly loud as Thain's, is something we can't know, nor whether Lechmere would have listened for sounds - even though he would have had very good reason to do so. That's all we can say.

Not really. I think it must be added that Lechmere may have been in a "bubble" that made him hear Paul later than he otherwise would have. Of cpurse, it is only a "may", but I think it is important to add the option as such.

If we'd assume that he was her killer, then, of course, this is very true.

As I respect that you see it differently than I do.

All the best,
Frank

All the best to you too, Frank!

[Fisherman]

I’m not sure I could quantify it. For factory workers, yes; for barmen, policeman and vicars, no. As for carmen, I couldn’t say. It would presumably depend on what they were carrying/for whom they were carrying it.

I’ve read on several occasions that knacker’s yards didn’t operate on Sundays. The report from the Biggleswade paper suggests that carriers moving goods from Broad Street and Camden didn’t operate on a Sunday and furthermore that Broad Street goods station was not fully manned on that day.

It’s the first piece of evidence I’ve seen to suggest that Sunday might indeed have been CAL’s day off.

You should take a ‘paws’ after this.

Even today, in our secularized western world, the commonest day off for workers is Sunday. Back then, religion would have had a much larger influence, and religion stipulates that Sunday is a day of rest. Just as you say, it is hard to quantify, but I do think we can be very certain that Sunday was the working mans day off, broadly speaking.

In our case, we have a single individual to look at, and so of course his own schedule is what counts before any quantified reasoning. In that vein, thanks for expanding on why you think that Sunday was likely a day off for Lechmere.

[Fisherman]

Yes and yes as should have been obvious from my previous post.

To get from Stride's murder site to 23 Pinchin Street, you have to walk south on Berner Street past Fairclough, Boyd, and Everard Street until you reach Ellen Street. Then you walk west to Philip Street, then south past Maryann and Severne Streets to Pinchin Street and then west to 23 Pinchin Street. That is quite a bit more than the "a lame stone´s throw away" that you claimed.

At best, Stride was killed a block off of any of Lechmere's most likely routes to his mother's.

Stride was also killed 2 1/2 hours before Lechmere normally left for work. Nobody gets up 2 & 1/2 to 3 hours early on their day off. If he was the killer, he'd also have to explain to his family why a 25 minute walk to his mother's took 2 & 1/2 hours or more.

When Stride was killed, Lechmere´s mother lived in 1 Maryann Street. One block only separated that address from Berner Street.

[Fisherman]

So you start your line with the Pinchin Street Torso, who was not a Ripper victim and who was deposited at a time Charles Lechmere could not have done it since he was at work.

I settled for this sentence only in hýour longish post since I find it is quite enough to point out how your reasoning is very odd. To begin with, it is not established in any shape or form that the Pinchin Street deed was not a Ripper deed. To carry on, how do you know that Lechmere was at work on this particular day?

There can be no certainty at all concerning these matters. What there CAN be a certainty about is that on the day after the Pinchin Street torso was found, a bloody apron was discovered at the building site of St Philips Church. And St Phillips Church is situated exactly on a direct line drawn from Pinchin Street up to 22 Doveton Street, where Charles Lechmere lived. That, and that only is what I am saying - it would be an almighty coincidence if these geographical implications were NOT due to how Lechmere was the killer. There are scores of things beforehand that point to him (unless they are nothing but a tremendous heap of more coincidences) and so the apron at St Philips is either a completely logical matter or a breathtaking coincidence.

You don´t have to like it, but you need to learn to live with it.

[Fisherman]

Charles Lechmere goes from a red hot suspect to an icy cold one when Annie Chapman is killed while Lechmere was at work and had an alibi. Ditto for the Pinchin Street Torso, he was at work and would have had an alibi.

Even if Chapman was killed at a time that is out of sync with the medical evidence and if Lechmere WAs working at that stage, precisely how does that give him an alibi? Would you care to explain that to us, Fiver?

Of course, you first need to explain to us how you have established that Lechmere was at work on the dumping morning in Pinchin Street.

All in due course!

[Fisherman]

>>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.

So nineteen years after Thomas Cross died, you think that Maria Louisa called herself - and was known as - Maria Cross?

I see.

[Fisherman]

Perhaps Fiver doesn't, but one of the main arguments presented in the Lechmere documentary is that the murders coincided with Lechmere's 'shift patterns.'

"his job potentially placed him near four of the killings at the time they occurred" --Jack the Ripper: The Missing Evidence (42:22)

and, a few moments later...

"the timings really hurt him" -- J. Scobie, QC.

It kind of seems like 'dirty pool' to use a supposed time table to implicate Lechmere in four of the murders, and then deny that there was any such time table when someone uses the same table to suggest an alibi.

Unless someone can demonstrate otherwise, I'm going to assume that Pickford & Co. didn't have rotating shifts--which seems like a safe bet-- and Lechmere left for work at 3.30 a.m. with an arrival time of 4.00 a.m.

Don't the Lechmere theorists themselves accept this?

It really is of little consequence what I "accept" since it will sadly have no impact on the facts in retrospect. I do, however, reason that to my mind, the likely thing is that Lechmere´s normal workday would have him arriving in Broad Street at 4 AM. And that is of course why I say that there seems to be a correlation with the Spitalfields victims just as there seems to be an explanation for the St George/Aldgate murders taking place in other geographical and chronological settings.

What this does not mean, however, is that there is proof that:

1. Lechmere could not have killed Chapman, or that

2. Lechmere could not have dumped the Pinchin Street torso

These are easily overcome matters, whereas it is hard in the extreme to explain why to simultaneously active serial killers in the same geographical area would somehow get it into their respective heads that they need to cut their victims open from ribs to pubes, that they need to extract uteri and hearts from them, that they need to try cutting away their abdominal walls in large sections and that they really should take rings from their victims fingers.

That is a whole different ballgame when it comes to REALLY hard questions. Having swopped a working day with a mate or having changed schedules, for example, is not exactly earthshattering, is it?

You should try to answer the more important matters before you turn to mere trivialities, R J.

Can you?

[MrBarnett]

Perhaps Fiver doesn't, but one of the main arguments presented in the Lechmere documentary is that the murders coincided with Lechmere's 'shift patterns.'

"his job potentially placed him near four of the killings at the time they occurred" --Jack the Ripper: The Missing Evidence (42:22)

and, a few moments later...

"the timings really hurt him" -- J. Scobie, QC.

It kind of seems like 'dirty pool' to use a supposed time table to implicate Lechmere in four of the murders, and then deny that there was any such time table when someone uses the same table to suggest an alibi.

Unless someone can demonstrate otherwise, I'm going to assume that Pickford & Co. didn't have rotating shifts--which seems like a safe bet-- and Lechmere left for work at 3.30 a.m. with an arrival time of 4.00 a.m.

Don't the Lechmere theorists themselves accept this?

I was reacting to Fiver’s statement that Lechmere would have been at work when the Pinchin Street torso was deposited. I assume nothing about Lechmere’s working times.

[MrBarnett]

>>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.

Death certificates aren’t witnessed, Dusty. Do you mean that one of their neighbours was the informant? That’s interesting - do you have a name for the neighbour? And and the address where TC died?

I wonder how many of Maria and Joe Forsdike’s neighbours in Mary Ann Street in 1888 had known her when she was masquerading as Mrs Cross.

[MrBarnett]

Death certificates aren’t witnessed, Dusty. Do you mean that one of their neighbours was the informant? That’s interesting - do you have a name for the neighbour? And and the address where TC died?

I wonder how many of Maria and Joe Forsdike’s neighbours in Mary Ann Street in 1888 had known her when she was masquerading as Mrs Cross.

The neighbour was Margaret Low(e). She doesn’t appear to have been living in Mary Ann Street in 1881 or 1891.

Although Thomas Cross’s address was 11, Mary Ann Street, he died at 14, MAS.

5 months earlier, CAL’s sister, Emily, had died. Her address was also 11, MAS, but she died at no. 24.

I think it was the same when Joe Forsdike died, he lived at one address in Cable Street but died at another.

That’s an odd little pattern.