Framing Charles

[Fisherman]

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 Hereford 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.

It really is a mixture that sounds combustible, although I would not try and establish where such a concoction would lead. Just like you, I have Maria Louisa down as a very resourceful woman. And I know Edward sometimes lean towards her having known that her son was a killer. She has the kind of markers that allow for such a suspicion if you ask me. The fewest do (ask me).

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.

Agreed. You will be aware that I think it was about recognition; Hey you idiots, I am the only killer around here, sort of. Which is why there were no eviscerations. The abdominal incision, running all the way down, was a calling card shoved in the face of the police. And it would be odd in the extreme if the choice of Pinchin Street was just another coincidence, pointing in Lechmeres direction. Like the Goulston Street rag. And the St Phillips Church rag. And the ”misunderstanding” about that other PC in Bucks Row. And the pulled down dress. And the unlucky fact that Nichols went on to bleed for many minutes after Lechmere ”found” her. And how the real killer persisted in killing along Lechmeres logical pathways. And the fact that Stride died close to 1 Maryann Street. And that she necessarily had to do so on a Saturday night. And ..

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.

Pinchin Street is the Ripper Heartland if you ask me.So I wholeheartedly agree.

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...

None - as far as we know.

[MrBarnett]

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...

[Fisherman]

That comes as no surprise. ;-)

I realize that. I keep saying that Lechmere differs a lot from the standard offerings since he can be traced in great detail. That, however, is of course per se not any reason to point a finger at him - it is instead the fact that there are so many details that all lend themselves to an accusation that calls for attention. Not only can we check him in detail, but the details whisper of guilt.
One by one, it is easy to supply alternative innocent explanations. Taken together, such an exercise becomes folly.

And all the time, what I hear is ”All there is, is the name”, ”All there is, is his finding the body”, ”All there is, is the geography”, ”All there is, is the pulled down dress” and so on. And with that approach, all that is needed is a single innocent alternative explanation.

When assessing the whole case, no policeman worth his salt would start looking for a bucket full of such explanations. He would haul the carman in and go looking for the prosecutor.

... but you knew that too, didn’ t you?

[MrBarnett]

Which rings a bell or two and links up with the torso murders.

I genuinely fail to see how he could not be a very good suspect. But you already knew that...

That comes as no surprise. ;-)

[Fisherman]

Islington or Wandsworth - on the banks of the River Wandle no less - HB also had a large operation there.

Which rings a bell or two and links up with the torso murders.

I genuinely fail to see how he could not be a very good suspect. But you already knew that...

[MrBarnett]

Another thing to mention is that the availability of horseflesh produced in the Capital fluctuated considerably. Apparently it was seasonal - more horses dying or requiring to be knackered in the winter for some reason. HB used to contact their provincial suppliers by telegram when they needed extra product. The example we saw above where there wasn’t enough meat on a particular day to warrant its being sent to Camden (where Pickfords had their largest depot) is interesting. There may have been times when CAL had to take horseflesh from Broad Street to HB in Islington - that could have why he (if it was him) was a few streets away from the Islington knacker’s yards when he ran over the small boy in 1876. That would fit very nicely.

Islington or Wandsworth - on the banks of the River Wandle no less - HB also had a large operation there.

[MrBarnett]

Another thing to mention is that the availability of horseflesh produced in the Capital fluctuated considerably. Apparently it was seasonal - more horses dying or requiring to be knackered in the winter for some reason. HB used to contact their provincial suppliers by telegram when they needed extra product. The example we saw above where there wasn’t enough meat on a particular day to warrant its being sent to Camden (where Pickfords had their largest depot) is interesting. There may have been times when CAL had to take horseflesh from Broad Street to HB in Islington - that could have why he (if it was him) was a few streets away from the Islington knacker’s yards when he ran over the small boy in 1876. That would fit very nicely.

[Fisherman]

Tabram, Chapman and Kelly can also be said to have been killed ‘on his route’, especially if he encountered Kelly as he crossed Commercial Street where it appears she was soliciting that night. To shoehorn Tabram in we have to have an alternative work route, which isn’t the end of the world. It’s the timings that don’t fit quite so nicely with these three.

Admittedly, we do not have them all lined up as dying at around 3.30-3.45. However, if Phillips was correct, then Chapman may well fit into that exact slot, and there is no ruling out that Kelly may have died at this time too. It is only Tabram that offers what seems to be a more likely deviation, since Killeen suggested that she would have died at around 2.30-2.45. This was around three hours before the examination Killeen made, and so there will be some wiggle room.
Alfred Crow said that he noticed somebody on the landing at 3.30, and this will with some certainty have been Tabram. So he provides a likely late extreme as far as the timing is concerned.

If Killeen was correct, then Lechmere would have to have started out around an hour earlier on his working trek, and I donīt think that would be in any way odd if he set out to killer before work. Then again, if this was so, then why did he not bring the appropriate tools for eviscerations?

In this grouping, Tabram remains the trickiest victim to place on the list. However, since we do not know the circumstances, it may be that there is a very trivial explanation to things, as is so often the case.

Chapman and Kelly may well be perfect copies of Nichols in terms of timing - although there is no requirement for them to have been so, Lechmere may well have varied his time of leaving Doveton Street in order to allow for himself to kill.

[MrBarnett]

I worked for an international trading company for the best part of 30 years and can waffle on about demurrage/despatch/bills of lading/charter parties as well as anyone. Knowledge of shipping doesn’t help us I’m afraid. What we need to know to work out CAL’s shift patterns is what he carried on his cart.

Here are two options:

He carried small parcels to numerous destinations, weaving through the clogged arteries of Victorian London. Multiple drop-offs and timings at the mercy of the traffic. He might be out and about all day doing that and it would have been a two man job.

He carried perishable goods to a single location (Smithfield/Billingsgate for example) where delivery was required in the early hours and where the unloading was largely done by the customer’s porters. One stop per journey and a bit of hanging about.

As you know, I favour horseflesh as being the commodity he carried and that would have been very similar to delivering fish or meat.

BTW, I also worked at Billingsgate market, so I have first hand experience of the activity there being confined to the early morning. A carman whose job it was to deliver to the early morning markets might well knock off work around midday, after a shift of 8/9 hours and have plenty of time to go home and get a few hours shut-eye before going out for a few jars with his mates and popping in to see his Ma and daughter. If he was feeling flush, he might even pop in to a local shop and buy them a few grapes or something. He knew the area well (he’d spent most of his life there) so he’d know all the convenient little backstreet shops.

[MrBarnett]

We start with the fact that Polly Nichols was killed on the precise route that CAL took to work and at pretty much the same time he was there. That fits very nicely.

Tabram, Chapman and Kelly can also be said to have been killed ‘on his route’, especially if he encountered Kelly as he crossed Commercial Street where it appears she was soliciting that night. To shoehorn Tabram in we have to have an alternative work route, which isn’t the end of the world. It’s the timings that don’t fit quite so nicely with these three.

Stride is completely out of whack in terms of both timing and location re his working route, but if Sunday was his day off, a trip to see his mother/stepfather/daughter and/or old pals in St Georges would fit. That’s how it’s been sold over the years with the ‘Sunday was a day off for most working men’ throwaway.

Now, I’ve often challenged that. Many people worked on Sundays and I saw no reason to believe CAL might not be one of them. Until I found the piece about cats meat being difficult to get on a Sunday because Broad Street was largely unmanned. Add that to my understanding that Sunday was generally a day off for horseflesh dealers and my suspicion that that was what CAL carried on his cart and you have a likely shift pattern that FITS VERY NICELY with CAL being in St Georges around midnight on a Saturday.

[MrBarnett]

You didnīt know? His cart was called the S/S Maria Louisa...

I worked for an international trading company for the best part of 30 years and can waffle on about demurrage/despatch/bills of lading/charter parties as well as anyone. Knowledge of shipping doesn’t help us I’m afraid. What we need to know to work out CAL’s shift patterns is what he carried on his cart.

Here are two options:

He carried small parcels to numerous destinations, weaving through the clogged arteries of Victorian London. Multiple drop-offs and timings at the mercy of the traffic. He might be out and about all day doing that and it would have been a two man job.

He carried perishable goods to a single location (Smithfield/Billingsgate for example) where delivery was required in the early hours and where the unloading was largely done by the customer’s porters. One stop per journey and a bit of hanging about.

As you know, I favour horseflesh as being the commodity he carried and that would have been very similar to delivering fish or meat.

[Fisherman]

It’s odd that you use the word ‘shipping’ to describe road transport.

You didnīt know? His cart was called the S/S Maria Louisa...

[Fisherman]

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

Fuzzy?

What is fuzzy about how Charles Lechmere is proven to have made an early morning work trek to Broad Street on the 31st of August 1888, aiming to arrive at 4 AM?

What is unclear about that? Or fuzzy?

What is unclear about how Tabram, Chapman and Kelly were found dead at times that are roughly consistent with the killer having been in place in the early morning hours at the murder sites?

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

To begin with, we KNOW that Nichols was slain at around 3.40-3.45, give or take the odd minute, so she is a given. As for the others, I am not suggesting a "very narrow window of time at all", and I have pointed that out on numerous occasions. I have said that if Lechmere was the killer (and he was, actually), then he would likely be prone to lying. And in fact, although he SAID he left home at 3.20, devious bastards who do these kinds of things may SAY one thing but do another, and so he may have left at 3.00. Or 2.47. Or 3.02. Or any other time he chose to in order to allow for him to find somebody to kill and cut up before proceeding to his work, and then - surprise, surprise - he lied about it at the inquest.

Naughty, I know, but there you are.

In actual fact, although the Ripperīs deeds have been desribed as blitz style murders, they must have occupied some little time. And so, if Lechmere always left home at a time that demanded that he walked briskly to Broad Street, he would be late there on every occasion when he killed. Accordingly, we must allow for the possibility that he added time in order to allow for him to both kill and get to work at 4AM. Once again, this is not rocket science.

Whichever way we look on things, the geographical factor is a dead giveaway for his status as a suspect, since the Spitalfields murders ALL happened in spots that were logically along his fastest route to work. And as professor Larsson worked out, for any other killer to randomly have chosen to kill four times on the twenty streets Lechmere seemingly passed along and in no other Spitalfields street, it boils down to a one in five million chance.

Although this number will not be exact in any way, it remains a number that must be looked upon with tremendous respect.

As I keep saying: If we think that Lechmere is a very good suspect on account of the many things pointing in his direction like the pulled down clothing, the disagreement with the police and so on, and if we decide to have a look at his geography and timings - we could not possibly ask for a more damning result. That is why this thread is called "Framing Charles" - either we have our killer, or we have a set of mindblowing coincidences. And I know which is the easy solution to that particular riddle.

The notion that he had a reason to be on these streets is neither here nor there in that context. It is not something that detracts from his potential culpability in any way. The US has itīs fair amount of highway killings carried out by lorry drivers who pick up women along their working routes. If we were to clear anybody who had reason to be in the spots where they picked their victims up, we may just as well say that once we start work in the morning, we are not eligible for any accusations of foul play until we check out in the evening, because murder is a free time pastime only.

Serial killing is to a very large degree about opportunism for the simple reason that it is also about the murder of strangers. When the opportunity comes along, the fewest serial killers ask their intended prey if they could kindly return to the same spot after working hours.

PS. I am still waiting for your explanation to why there are so many very rare similarities between the two murder series if they are not connected. If you do not have an answer for that or if you do not - for whatever reason - want to share it with the rest of us, please just say so.

[Fisherman]

Was there anything unclear or incorrect in what I said?

I would not go there if I were you.

[Fisherman]

Apparently you know nothing about the shipping business, which believes that every minute counts. Drivers are given a list of deliveries and they don't build slack into that list. A Pickford's driver would be seen at every delivery point and his deliveries would be signed for at each location. It would be virtually impossible to find a space 15 to 20 minutes to wander off, leaving the van unattended. That's before we consider that a carman for Pickford's would typically be accompanied by a book-carrier, who "acts as conductor and delivers the goods" and who at the end of the day "gives a detailed and statistical account of his transactions during the day". If there was no book-carrier, the carman would have to keep and deliver this detailed account. Being 15 to 20 minutes late for any of these deliveries would be noticed by Lechmere's superiors and lead to a reprimand or worse without a very good explanation.

The possibility cannot be ruled out, Iīm afraid, no matter how "virtually impossible" you like to think it is. None of us know the specifics of Lechmereīs work that day and so the door is wide ajar.

At the end of the day, though, I would gladly accept if you could prove (but you canīt) that Charles Lechmere could not possibly have carried out the murder at around 6 Am and while doing his rounds, because I am very sure that Chapman was long dead at that stage.

And that applies regardless about how apparent (or not) it is that I donīt know anything about the shipping business, actually.