Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Why did Lechmere get involved with Paul ?

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

  • Fisherman
    replied
    Originally posted by Elamarna View Post
    Guessed wrong on point 2 Christer.
    On point 1, to be fair I do mention he MAY have used Cross in an earlier RTA, so that relates to point 1.
    However , the next edition also includes the counter arguments to the use of Cross in that incident, by yourself and others.

    Steve,
    Then you do not have "all thatīs needed", Steve. You will have excluded a point that may be all-important. But of course, it WILL have made your book less thick, so ...

    Leave a comment:


  • Elamarna
    replied
    Originally posted by Fisherman View Post

    That is true - if Lechmere was further ahead of Paul than the distance from Pauls lodgings down to Bath Street, it matters not a lot how strong the lights down there was. If this was so, it simply becomes another of the many points of call where Lechmere COULD have gotten lucky, but never did. An incredibly unfortunate carman, he was, unable to get a single break. For whatever reason.
    By the way, the lights were bright ones, shining outside the brewery, not inside it. They were mounted on the facade after 1884, when a storm brought down the old facade.
    Thats the issue, he doesn't to get luck or get a break, such assumes he needs a break.

    thank you for the info on the lights, i may add that to next edition.
    whats the source btw?

    steve

    Leave a comment:


  • Elamarna
    replied
    A pity that article costs Ģ35, the summary is interesting. I will need to put it on my list.

    Leave a comment:


  • Elamarna
    replied
    The time will depend on the accuracy of the clock. Seen or heard makes no difference.
    Even today, public clocks are not syncronizied, as I will demonstrate in my work.

    While Liverpool may have lead the way, it's unlikely to put it mildly that all public clocks would be synchronised. Trains, Ports and Police, probably.

    Leave a comment:


  • Elamarna
    replied
    Guessed wrong on point 2 Christer.
    On point 1, to be fair I do mention he MAY have used Cross in an earlier RTA, so that relates to point 1.
    However , the next edition also includes the counter arguments to the use of Cross in that incident, by yourself and others.

    Steve,

    Leave a comment:


  • Fisherman
    replied
    Originally posted by Elamarna View Post

    If the pair would have seen each other depends not so much on the light from the Brewery, but the exact location of the two as Paul left his house and Lechmere passed the bottom of Foster Street.

    Steve
    That is true - if Lechmere was further ahead of Paul than the distance from Pauls lodgings down to Bath Street, it matters not a lot how strong the lights down there was. If this was so, it simply becomes another of the many points of call where Lechmere COULD have gotten lucky, but never did. An incredibly unfortunate carman, he was, unable to get a single break. For whatever reason.
    By the way, the lights were bright ones, shining outside the brewery, not inside it. They were mounted on the facade after 1884, when a storm brought down the old facade.

    Leave a comment:


  • Fisherman
    replied
    Originally posted by Elamarna View Post


    Hi, of course the only one of the 3 PCs who could see the Albion Brewery, was Thain.
    Neither Neil or Mizen were in positionto see it, although they may have seen other clocks.

    The issue of the non syncronization of time is of course very important in the murders.

    I do consider it in some detail in "Inside Bucks Row", However, I also have a far more detailed look at this issue planned for an upcoming volume of my "Whitechapel Murders" series.
    This will be a single, monogram like, volume looking at the issue of reported times.
    It includes much modern research, showing discrepencies of 3-4 minutes, on different faces of the same clock, and a variation betweeen Public clocks of between 2-10 minutes which are within 800 yards of each other.
    And thats with modern timekeeping and syncronization.

    steve
    Most clocks could be heard to, not only seen. To what degree the clocks were correct in 1888, we canīt say, since no check was carried out - or at least, no such information has been handed down to us. There is of course, always the Liverpool example, quoted here from a scientific paper:

    "This paper explores how nineteenth-century Liverpool became such an advanced city with regard to public timekeeping, and the wider impact of this on the standardisation of time. From the mid-1840s, local scientists and municipal bodies in the port city were engaged in improving the ways in which accurate time was communicated to ships and the general public. As a result, Liverpool was the first British city to witness the formation of a synchronised clock system, based on an invention by Robert Jones. His method gained a considerable reputation in the scientific and engineering communities, which led to its subsequent replication at a number of astronomical observatories such as Greenwich and Edinburgh. As a further key example of developments in time-signalling techniques, this paper also focuses on the time ball established in Liverpool by the Electric Telegraph Company in collaboration with George Biddell Airy, the Astronomer Royal. This is a particularly significant development because, as the present paper illustrates, one of the most important technologies in measuring the accuracy of the Greenwich time signal took shape in the experimental operation of the time ball. The inventions and knowledge which emerged from the context of Liverpool were vital to the transformation of public timekeeping in Victorian Britain."

    I seem to remember that London was not as early as Liverpool to synchronize the clocks, but we can see how timekeeping was regarded as an important matter in Victorian Britain.
    Last edited by Fisherman; 07-07-2021, 01:47 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Fisherman
    replied
    Originally posted by GBinOz View Post
    Hi Christer,

    I am very glad that you have joined this discussion. When I first saw your Youtube presentation I was super-impressed with your research and thought, case closed. But since then, the terrible if's have accumulated and while I think that Lechmere cannot be eliminated as a suspect because he is the only person to be found standing over a body, there are some questions I would like to ask, but not all at once. First up is the question of clock times. I have done some research and have found that there was a clock tower in the Albion Brewery. I haven't been able to determine if it was multi-faced or if it chimed. Apparently some Brewery clocks did chime, some only the hour and others every quarter. This is to address time synchonicity. Paul stated that he turned into Bucks row at 3:45. Were the PCs basing their times on Albion clock time?

    Big ask after 130 years I know, but there it is.

    Cheers, George
    I donīt think that any of the PCs revealed the source of their time estimates. I think Paul is the best source we have, since he said that it was "exactly" 3.45 as he came into Bucks Row. He was late and so he had reason to keep close track of the time. He also said at the inquest that "on the morning of the murder I left home just before a quarter to four." (Morning Advertiser), meaning that there is a consistency in his testimony. Add to this the fact that coroner Baxter ended up at a view of how the carmen would have found the body at 3.45 since that tallied with the testimony given by various independent sources, and that the latest police report we know of, from October, has Swanson telling us that the carmen found the body at 3.45.

    ... but which clocks were used to establish the time is something we are by and large unknowledgeable about.

    If you have any further questions, Iīd be happy to answer them. With any luck, we can win you over completely!
    Last edited by Fisherman; 07-07-2021, 01:51 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Fisherman
    replied
    Originally posted by Elamarna View Post
    Pity you have not read the book Christer, but just to clear this up.

    I don't go into long converluted arguments about the use of the name Cross. I simply present the facts, so it's two paragraphs, that's all.
    Why so little?
    Because that's all that's needed.

    Steve
    As you may appreciate, telling you that I have not read the book, I donīt know what two paragraphs you used to write "all thatīs needed" about the name issue. If I may have a guess?

    1. The carman did not use the name he otherwise used as he approached the police and inquest.
    2. Changing names so as to evade responsibility or being identifiable is a common practice in the criinal ranks.

    Please let me know if I guessed right. There is always the chance that what one person deems "all thatīs needed" is looked upon differently by somebody else.

    Leave a comment:


  • Elamarna
    replied
    Originally posted by GBinOz View Post

    Wearing their Raybans were they?

    Cheers, George
    If the pair would have seen each other depends not so much on the light from the Brewery, but the exact location of the two as Paul left his house and Lechmere passed the bottom of Foster Street.

    Steve

    Leave a comment:


  • Elamarna
    replied
    Originally posted by GBinOz View Post
    Hi Christer,

    I am very glad that you have joined this discussion. When I first saw your Youtube presentation I was super-impressed with your research and thought, case closed. But since then, the terrible if's have accumulated and while I think that Lechmere cannot be eliminated as a suspect because he is the only person to be found standing over a body, there are some questions I would like to ask, but not all at once. First up is the question of clock times. I have done some research and have found that there was a clock tower in the Albion Brewery. I haven't been able to determine if it was multi-faced or if it chimed. Apparently some Brewery clocks did chime, some only the hour and others every quarter. This is to address time synchonicity. Paul stated that he turned into Bucks row at 3:45. Were the PCs basing their times on Albion clock time?

    Big ask after 130 years I know, but there it is.

    Cheers, George

    Hi, of course the only one of the 3 PCs who could see the Albion Brewery, was Thain.
    Neither Neil or Mizen were in positionto see it, although they may have seen other clocks.

    The issue of the non syncronization of time is of course very important in the murders.

    I do consider it in some detail in "Inside Bucks Row", However, I also have a far more detailed look at this issue planned for an upcoming volume of my "Whitechapel Murders" series.
    This will be a single, monogram like, volume looking at the issue of reported times.
    It includes much modern research, showing discrepencies of 3-4 minutes, on different faces of the same clock, and a variation betweeen Public clocks of between 2-10 minutes which are within 800 yards of each other.
    And thats with modern timekeeping and syncronization.

    steve

    Leave a comment:


  • GBinOz
    replied
    Hi Christer,

    I am very glad that you have joined this discussion. When I first saw your Youtube presentation I was super-impressed with your research and thought, case closed. But since then, the terrible if's have accumulated and while I think that Lechmere cannot be eliminated as a suspect because he is the only person to be found standing over a body, there are some questions I would like to ask, but not all at once. First up is the question of clock times. I have done some research and have found that there was a clock tower in the Albion Brewery. I haven't been able to determine if it was multi-faced or if it chimed. Apparently some Brewery clocks did chime, some only the hour and others every quarter. This is to address time synchonicity. Paul stated that he turned into Bucks row at 3:45. Were the PCs basing their times on Albion clock time?

    Big ask after 130 years I know, but there it is.

    Cheers, George

    Leave a comment:


  • Elamarna
    replied
    Pity you have not read the book Christer, but just to clear this up.

    I don't go into long converluted arguments about the use of the name Cross. I simply present the facts, so it's two paragraphs, that's all.
    Why so little?
    Because that's all that's needed.

    Steve









    Leave a comment:


  • GBinOz
    replied
    Originally posted by drstrange169 View Post
    [I][B]>>
    Christer claims it was brightly lit, I see no evidence to support that, as the lights were directed into the brewery not away from it, but it's irrelevant anyway, as the pair could be close and still not see the other.
    Wearing their Raybans were they?

    Cheers, George

    Leave a comment:


  • Fisherman
    replied
    Originally posted by drstrange169 View Post
    Hah, I see Christer's appeared, you might want check his book out too,. "Cutting Point". It's NOWHERE NEAR as detailed as Steve's book, but at least you'll get an opposing view point and it's an easy, well written read.
    I for one never believed that a thick book is always going to be better thatrn a less thick one. Strictly speaking, "thick" was never a judgement I considered flattering. I will quote myself from Cutting Point:
    "my aim is to be as short and succinct as possible"

    You see, Dusty, I never wanted to write a thick book. I wanted to write a book that was as short as possible, while still including all the important aspects of my theory.

    As an aside, I find that books that aim to establish something that can actually not be established since it has no true ground to stand on will more often than not pile on as much material as possible in an effort to veil their shortcomimgs in fog. That, of course is a general assessment only, and it does not relate to Steves book. It could never do so for the simple reason that I have not read it. You are welcome, though, to pick any one detail where Steve published information that I omitted to mention - and poiunt put how his choice makes the book a better source than mine. Perhaps it instead simply makes a different choice than mine, by naming details that he thinks point to innocence on Lechmereīs behalf whereas I donīt agree? You see, if I write that Lechmere gave a name he otherwise never used with the authorities becasue he wanted to conceal his true identity, others out here can write that he perhaps did so because:

    -He wanted to honour his ded stepfather
    -He actually called himself Cross at Pickfords
    -He had been given the go ahead by the inquest, who wanted to protect him
    -He wished not to sully the family name of Lechmere
    -He liked the sound of Cross better than that of Lechmere
    -He didnīt want to look as if he tried to sound posh
    -He had forgotten what his real name was
    -He had been adviced by a friend to try and stay out of the whole affair
    ...and so on and so on. This is the character of providing innocent alternative explanations - they can be produced in very large numbers.

    For me, though, the one explanation that is in line with my theory is that he wanted to conceal his name. And that is what I suggest in my book. I donīt go into extreme detail about how the alternative innocent explanations would work, the way I beleive Steve may have done (although I have not read the book, as I said).

    If you take this into account, you may understand how and why some books become thick, while others go in the other direction. It is never about the possibilities of much detail, therefore - it is about the relevance of the detail provided.

    Last edited by Fisherman; 07-07-2021, 11:08 AM.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X