Framing Charles

[drstrange169]

It seems Christer's Cross credibility is taking knocks across multiple threads at the moment, time to start sorting the wheat from the chaff when it comes to stories of guilt.

[rjpalmer]

If Lechmere was not the killer, then somebody else just happened to place all four murders along his logical work treks instead of on the 900 + OTHER Whitechapel streets that had no connection to those treks. And the odds for that is one in five million, if we accept the twentyish streets I outline in the book. If we add twenty more streets, we end up at a one in two and a half million chance.

That is extremely strong geographical evidence in my book.

I'll probably regret bringing this up, but statistical analysis has been the flavor of the month, and, to me, this is another example of 'Ripperologists' misusing statistics.

900+ streets is obviously grossly misleading, because prostitution was not spread evenly among those 900 streets. East End prostitution was anything BUT a random distribution. Women solicited where they would expect to find the greatest amount of foot-traffic at night--which, of course, were the same main streets where hundreds if not thousands of people walked daily.

Indeed, it can be convincingly argued that all the victims, with the exception of Liz Stride (and Rose Mylett) were picked up on the main two drags (Aldgate/Whitechapel Road and Commercial /Leman Street) which would render any such argument null and void; these streets must have accounted for a huge percentage of solicitation on any given night. Thus, the most that can be said is that Lechmere walked through the main drags known for prostitution on nearly a daily basis--the same streets an unknown killer would frequent to find a victim. But this is a far cry from claiming the odds are 5 million to 1 or any other imaginary number.

I'm not finding the original post, but Fish appears to be dividing 900 streets by the 19 or so streets Lechmere used daily, which comes to roughly 47 to 1 odds for any given murder; he then multiplies this three more times (for three more murders) coming up with roughly 5,000,000 to 1.

About all I can say in his defense is that this analysis was evidently the work of a colleague.

If so, it should be discarded because it is obviously invalid.

[Fiver]

Your source is an article that appeared in All The Year Round in 1863 and which describes Pickfords activities at Camden. Their relationship with the LNWR was going through a sticky patch at that time and they moved from Camden around 1864.

Yes, my source is The Year Round in 1863. That's why I added lots of qualifiers, since you can only extrapolate so far from a single source. I would be happy to see additional sources about day to day operations at Pickford's if you have any.

Pickfords were universal carriers, meaning they carried just about anything: consumer goods, foodstuffs, minerals, building materials, fuel...and more besides.

I am aware that Pickfords were universal carriers. I am aware that means that they carried just about anything. I have stated this repeatedly to show that we cannot know what Charles Lechmere carried on any given day.

Do you really believe the few facts and figures you have gleaned about their activities in Camden in 1863 are valid for whatever loads CAL was carrying in 1888?

I used 10 qualifiers in my statements about Pickford's deliveries. So far, you have provided no evidence that any of Pickford's methods being used in 1863 had been changed significantly in 1888.

Here's a second source from 1883. Goods that were shipped from Broad Street Station. One of the witnesses against the carman was the van boy who accompanied him.

Broad Street and Liverpool Street next door were major hubs for butchers meat, fish and cats meat. Deliveries from there would have gone to Smithfield, Billingsgate and Harrison, Barber and a handful of other horseflesh wholesalers.

And what is your point? With over 20 years of service, Charles Lechmere probably delivered horseflesh and other meats during some of the thousands of pickups and deliveries he made for Pickfords.

[MrBarnett]

Perhaps you should read what I actually wrote. I made no attempt to establish what load Charles Lechmere was carrying on any given day. My point was that we cannot know what Charles Lechmere was carrying on any given day.

"From what I can find, the standard for Pickford's was "Each team of horses takes out for delivery, and returns with, two loads of goods daily" and "a full three-horse-van carries between four and five tons". At the time, Pickford's appears to have transported goods for both businesses and individuals. There certainly would be regular bulk shipments to and from large firms, but even those wouldn't necessarily be the same size or be shipped every day. Smaller firms and individuals would be even more irregular in the size and frequency of their shipments."

"The nearest Market appears to have been Spitalfield's Market (fruit, vegetables, flowers), though plenty of other things were available there as well. And there were plenty of business outside the Markets. A period source notes "All day long and all the year round there is a constant Fair going on in Whitechapel Road. It is held upon the broad pavement, which was benevolently intended, no doubt, for this purpose. Here are displayed all kinds of things; bits of second-hand furniture, such as the head of a wooden bed, whose griminess is perhaps exaggerated, in order that a purchaser may expect something extraordinarily cheap. Here are lids of pots and saucepans laid out, to show that in the warehouse, of which these things are specimens, will be found the principal parts of the utensils for sale; here are unexpected things, such as rows of skates, sold cheap in summer, light clothing in winter; workmen’s tools of every kind, including, perhaps, the burglarious jemmy; second-hand books – a miscellaneous collection, establishing the fact that the readers of books in Whitechapel – a feeble and scanty folk – read nothing at all except sermons and meditations among the tombs; second-hand boots and shoes; cutlery; hats and caps; rat-traps and mouse-traps and birdcages; flowers and seeds; skittles; and frames for photographs. Cheap- jacks have their carts beside the pavement; and with strident voice proclaim the goodness of their wares, which include in this district bloaters and dried haddocks, as well as crockery. And one is amazed, seeing how the open-air Fair goes on, why the shops are kept open at all.^""

"The idea that Lechmere would have been delivering a single commodity is wildly unlikely when his van would have been carrying 4 to 5 tons of goods. Even if he was delivering to Spitalfields Market, it is unlikely that the entire cargo would go to a single vendor or consist of a single commodity. Then Lechemere would be expected to return to Broad Street Station with goods that he picked up. Again, this would be wildly unlikely to have been picked up from one location, let alone be one commodity."

"As noted, period standard for Pickford's appears to have been each van doing 2 sets of deliveries and returns. Lechmere might have had the occasional day where he only did one set of deliveries and returns, but it would be an exception and he'd probably have to work later on another day to make up for the lost wages. And, as previously noted, a Pickford's van typically carried both a carman and a conductor, or book carrier."



Clearly you did not read my post. I used 10 qualifiers, which I have now bolded.

I made no comments on how "Pickford's deliveries of provincial horse flesh worked" other than to agree with your statement that as perishables, it would have made sense to deliver them as rapidly possible. I do know that Pickford's had been in business for a long time so there cannot be a single answer for what businesses shipped horsemeat, what businesses or individuals received horsemeat, how much horsemeat was shipped to or from the Broad Street Station, how much was horsemeat shipped on any given day, or what items were carried in the same van load as any individual shipment of horsemeat.

I shan’t waste my time responding to this.

[MrBarnett]

RJ has already shown that, unless she knew John Lechmere was still alive, enough time had passed for her second marriage to be legal.

No he hasn’t.

If, when JAL had been absent for more than seven years, Maria was unaware whether he was alive, she could remarry without committing the offence of bigamy. However, as John was still alive when her subsequent marriages took place, they were null and void.

[Fiver]

Ah, so you’ve established what kind of van he was driving. And what load he was carrying.

Very impressive.

Perhaps you should read what I actually wrote. I made no attempt to establish what load Charles Lechmere was carrying on any given day. My point was that we cannot know what Charles Lechmere was carrying on any given day.

"From what I can find, the standard for Pickford's was "Each team of horses takes out for delivery, and returns with, two loads of goods daily" and "a full three-horse-van carries between four and five tons". At the time, Pickford's appears to have transported goods for both businesses and individuals. There certainly would be regular bulk shipments to and from large firms, but even those wouldn't necessarily be the same size or be shipped every day. Smaller firms and individuals would be even more irregular in the size and frequency of their shipments."

"The nearest Market appears to have been Spitalfield's Market (fruit, vegetables, flowers), though plenty of other things were available there as well. And there were plenty of business outside the Markets. A period source notes "All day long and all the year round there is a constant Fair going on in Whitechapel Road. It is held upon the broad pavement, which was benevolently intended, no doubt, for this purpose. Here are displayed all kinds of things; bits of second-hand furniture, such as the head of a wooden bed, whose griminess is perhaps exaggerated, in order that a purchaser may expect something extraordinarily cheap. Here are lids of pots and saucepans laid out, to show that in the warehouse, of which these things are specimens, will be found the principal parts of the utensils for sale; here are unexpected things, such as rows of skates, sold cheap in summer, light clothing in winter; workmen’s tools of every kind, including, perhaps, the burglarious jemmy; second-hand books – a miscellaneous collection, establishing the fact that the readers of books in Whitechapel – a feeble and scanty folk – read nothing at all except sermons and meditations among the tombs; second-hand boots and shoes; cutlery; hats and caps; rat-traps and mouse-traps and birdcages; flowers and seeds; skittles; and frames for photographs. Cheap- jacks have their carts beside the pavement; and with strident voice proclaim the goodness of their wares, which include in this district bloaters and dried haddocks, as well as crockery. And one is amazed, seeing how the open-air Fair goes on, why the shops are kept open at all.^""

"The idea that Lechmere would have been delivering a single commodity is wildly unlikely when his van would have been carrying 4 to 5 tons of goods. Even if he was delivering to Spitalfields Market, it is unlikely that the entire cargo would go to a single vendor or consist of a single commodity. Then Lechemere would be expected to return to Broad Street Station with goods that he picked up. Again, this would be wildly unlikely to have been picked up from one location, let alone be one commodity."

"As noted, period standard for Pickford's appears to have been each van doing 2 sets of deliveries and returns. Lechmere might have had the occasional day where he only did one set of deliveries and returns, but it would be an exception and he'd probably have to work later on another day to make up for the lost wages. And, as previously noted, a Pickford's van typically carried both a carman and a conductor, or book carrier."

Now perhaps you can explain how Pickford’s deliveries of provincial horse flesh worked. Who received them and what other commodities were carried alongside the produce of the knacker’s yards, bearing in mind the strict legal distinction between knacker’s meat and food for human consumption.

How many firms were involved in the horse flesh trade and where were they located?

I’m assuming you have established these facts because you are not using qualifiers.

Clearly you did not read my post. I used 10 qualifiers, which I have now bolded.

I made no comments on how "Pickford's deliveries of provincial horse flesh worked" other than to agree with your statement that as perishables, it would have made sense to deliver them as rapidly possible. I do know that Pickford's had been in business for a long time so there cannot be a single answer for what businesses shipped horsemeat, what businesses or individuals received horsemeat, how much horsemeat was shipped to or from the Broad Street Station, how much was horsemeat shipped on any given day, or what items were carried in the same van load as any individual shipment of horsemeat.

[Fiver]

RJ,

I think you’ll find that whether she had married Cross in the knowledge that John Lechmere was still alive or not, her second marriage was invalid. Ditto her third

RJ has already shown that, unless she knew John Lechmere was still alive, enough time had passed for her second marriage to be legal.

[Fiver]

Here was my thinking. The longer 'Telegraph' account contradicts itself.

It first refers to the bloody clothing as a bodice, but the workmen themselves called it a 'shift,' which was slightly naughty slang for underwear (the use of the word 'shift' by an actor in John Millington Synge's drama "Playboy of the Western World" led to a riot in Ireland--my, how times have changed), so they seem to have identified it as a chemise.

Thus, combining all three references to the garment, we have 2 to 1 in favor of a chemise, and the Pinchin Street victim was already wearing one.

Unfortunately, that's about the best we can do, and Inspector Reid doesn't mention it in his report.

RP

Thanks for your research and for sharing it. If the blood on the undergarment was as fresh as claimed, that makes it unlikely to be associated with the Pinchin Street Torso.

[rjpalmer]

Hi Fiver:

Things aren't quite as clear-cut as I wrote in my earlier post; accounts differ as to whether the clothing was a chemise or a bodice

Here was my thinking. The longer 'Telegraph' account contradicts itself.

It first refers to the bloody clothing as a bodice, but the workmen themselves called it a 'shift,' which was slightly naughty slang for underwear (the use of the word 'shift' by an actor in John Millington Synge's drama "Playboy of the Western World" led to a riot in Ireland--my, how times have changed), so they seem to have identified it as a chemise.

Thus, combining all three references to the garment, we have 2 to 1 in favor of a chemise, and the Pinchin Street victim was already wearing one.

Unfortunately, that's about the best we can do, and Inspector Reid doesn't mention it in his report.

RP

[rjpalmer]

The following webpage has what is claimed to be an image of the Mill Yard Baptist Church in 'Whitechapel,' but I can't vouch for it.

Mill Yard Baptist Church | Writing Hythe History (wordpress.com)

[rjpalmer]

Thank you for the information. I haven't found a source that mentioned the former site of the Mill Yard Baptist Church. That makes it more similar to the St Philip´s Church apron - both surrounded by a fence, both churches, one under construction and the other under demolition.

I agree that the bloody chemise probably has nothing to do with the Pinchin Street Torso. If they were both parts of the same chemise, that probably would have been noted at the time. The St Philip´s Church apron is even less likely to have anything to do with the Pichin Street Torso, but Fisherman had provided no reason for accepting it while rejecting the Mill Yard Church chemise. Nor any reason why the killer would deliberately leave it on his way home. Nor acknowledged that St Philip´s Church would not have been on Charles Lechmere's way home.

Hi Fiver:

Things aren't quite as clear-cut as I wrote in my earlier post; accounts differ as to whether the clothing was a chemise or a bodice, so, despite my earlier misgivings, it is not entirely clear whether or not this clothing could have belonged to the victim.

the more detailed account appeared in a number of newspapers, including the Sheffield Daily Telegraph






As you can see, in this account the clothing is described as a 'bodice.'

In the earlier reports it was described as a chemise.

[Fiver]

Can you provide me with one example of the press probing the identity of a witness in the Ripper case? They just didn’t. So why on earth do you imagine they would have picked up the use of two names?

There is an example of the press probing the identity of a witness whose name and address were kept secret by the police.

"INFORMATION WHICH MAY BE IMPORTANT was given to the Leman-street police late yesterday afternoon by an Hungarian concerning this murder. This foreigner was well dressed, and had the appearance of being in the theatrical line. He could not speak a word of English, but came to the police-station accompanied by a friend, who acted as an interpreter. He gave his name and address, but the police have not disclosed them. A Star man, however, got wind of his call, and ran him to earth in Backchurch-lane." - 1 October 1888 Star

[Fiver]

This was a strange and unsettling discovery, but there are several problems with it being related to the Pinchin Street case, so perhaps that's why Fisherman has rejected it.

First off, to be nit-picky, it evidently wasn't actually found on Hooper street, but in an enclosed lot just south of it--the former site of the Mill Yard Baptist Church, which had been demolished. The site was surrounded by a tall fence, so entry wasn't automatic, and the clothing was apparently thrown over the fence or shoved through a gap.

One problem is that it was discovered, as you say, at around 7.30 a.m. on the 10th.

But on the 11th, Inspector Reid wrote a report, stating that he had asked the inspector of local dust bin collectors to be on the look-out for any bloody clothing. Oddly, he doesn't mention this relevant discovery at all, though he does mention bloody clothing being found in Batty Street, but dismissed it as related to a pregnancy.

It's possible that a separate report was written about the discovery in the Millyard Passage, but if so, no record of it remains.

But the biggest mark against this having anything to do with the Pinchin Street affair is that is was a chemise. The Pinchin Street victim was still wearing her chemise, and it had been cut open.

So whoever this bloody chemise belonged to, it apparently wasn't the Pinchin Street victim, unless she was wearing two.

I suppose it's possible, since many women were homeless they might wear all their available clothing at once, but it does make one wonder under what circumstance both would be blood-stained, but only one of them cut open, and the other one left intact.

It doesn't make a heck of a lot of sense.

Thank you for the information. I haven't found a source that mentioned the former site of the Mill Yard Baptist Church. That makes it more similar to the St Philip´s Church apron - both surrounded by a fence, both churches, one under construction and the other under demolition.

I agree that the bloody chemise probably has nothing to do with the Pinchin Street Torso. If they were both parts of the same chemise, that probably would have been noted at the time. The St Philip´s Church apron is even less likely to have anything to do with the Pichin Street Torso, but Fisherman had provided no reason for accepting it while rejecting the Mill Yard Church chemise. Nor any reason why the killer would deliberately leave it on his way home. Nor acknowledged that St Philip´s Church would not have been on Charles Lechmere's way home.

[rjpalmer]

This bloodstained undergarment was found a couple hours after the Pichin Street Torso. Hooper Street is west of Backchurch Lane. Unlike the bloody apron that was found at St Philip´s Church, somebody at the time thought the Hooper Street garment might be related to the Pinchin Street Torso.

This was a strange and unsettling discovery, but there are several problems with it being related to the Pinchin Street case, so perhaps that's why Fisherman has rejected it.

First off, to be nit-picky, it evidently wasn't actually found on Hooper street, but in an enclosed lot just south of it--the former site of the Mill Yard Baptist Church, which had been demolished. The site was surrounded by a tall fence, so entry wasn't automatic, and the clothing was apparently thrown over the fence or shoved through a gap.

One problem is that it was discovered, as you say, at around 7.30 a.m. on the 10th.

But on the 11th, Inspector Reid wrote a report, stating that he had asked the inspector of local dust bin collectors to be on the look-out for any bloody clothing. Oddly, he doesn't mention this relevant discovery at all, though he does mention bloody clothing being found in Batty Street, but dismissed it as related to a pregnancy.

It's possible that a separate report was written about the discovery in the Millyard Passage, but if so, no record of it remains.

But the biggest mark against this having anything to do with the Pinchin Street affair is that is was a chemise. The Pinchin Street victim was still wearing her chemise, and it had been cut open.

So whoever this bloody chemise belonged to, it apparently wasn't the Pinchin Street victim, unless she was wearing two.

I suppose it's possible, since many women were homeless they might wear all their available clothing at once, but it does make one wonder under what circumstance both would be blood-stained, but only one of them cut open, and the other one left intact.

It doesn't make a heck of a lot of sense.

[Fiver]

And claiming that I only base my theory on that factor is just false. But hey, we do what we can, right?

You "forgot":

- the blood evidence
- the covered up wounds
- the name change
- the timing aspect
- the fact that Paul never mentioned seeing or hearing Lechmere in front of himself
- the refusal to help prop Nichols up
- the disagreement with Mizen
- the links to the Torso series

If it wasn´t for that, I may have been charitable and said "Nice try!". But in all honesty, it really is nothing of the sort, is it?

Guess it is time to stop answering your posts again, until you start being a bit more honest.

- the "blood evidence" has already been refuted. If people bled out as fast as you claim, PC Neil is the best suspect.
- Robert Paul testified he pulled down Nichols clothing.
- The name change is odd, but it was first used in 1876, over a decade before the Ripper killings.
- The timing aspect makes very unlikely that Lechmere killed Tabram, Chapman, Stride, Eddowes, or the Pichin Street Torso
- Paul testified to seeing Lechmere in front of him
- helping to prop Nichols up would have been a perfect way to explain any blood in Lechmere's clothes.
- Paul and Lechmere both disgareed with Mizen. That does not make either man more likely to be the Ripper.
- there are no links to the Torso killings and that was clearly a different killer than the Ripper.