Evidence of innocence

[Fiver]

A carman was required to carry a knife at all times, so that he could cut the harness in the event of an accident.

Interesting. What is your source for claiming a carman was required to carry a knife at all times?

[Fiver]

You know quite well that Scobie said that there is a court case that suggests he is guilty, and Scobie is a very qualified man.

Jame Scobie appears to have said ""He was found standing over the dead body of Polly Nichols.. Lechmere was alone with her for longer than he admits. Lechmere then lied to the police and gave false details at the inquest. And the Ripper murders started just after he moved into the area. Wearing blood stained overalls his job placed him at four of the killings at the time they occurred."

It also appears that voice over before Scobie appeared on camera said "The weight of evidence is against Charles Lechmere. He was found standing over the dead body of Polly Nichols. No one saw anyone else at the crime scene. Her wounds were extremely fresh and Lechmere was alone with her for longer than he admits. Lechmere then lied to the police and gave false details at the inquest. And the Ripper murders started just after he moved into the area. Wearing blood stained overalls his job placed him at four of the killings at the time they occurred. Another happened by his mother's house, yet another on his old route to work."

These were part of a entertainment show whose goal was to portray Lechmere as the Ripper. As such, I have grave doubts that Scobie was given complete or balanced information about events. Both the voiceover and Scobie's statements contain many speculative and some provably false statements.

"He was found standing over the dead body of Polly Nichols" - This statement is provably false. Robert Paul testified Lechmere was "standing in the middle of the road".

"Lechmere was alone with her for longer than he admits." - This statement is based on fudging the times. It starts by using 3:20am, the time Lechmere usually left for work, instead of 3:30am, the time Lechmere testified he left for work. It further fudges the time by assuming a ten minute walk would take 7 minutes or less. It fudges the time a third time by ignoring the time estimates of Lechmere and of all three of the first policemen to arrive in favor of the time estimate of Robert Paul.

It also ignores that the Ripper inflicted far worse mutilations in Catherine Eddowes body in only about 10 minutes. If the Ripper had 18 minutes alone with Polly Nichols he could have inflicted all of the actual mutilations and been 10 minutes walk down the street by the time Robert Paul arrived. An 18 minute time gap contradicts the idea that Lechmere was the Ripper, interrupted in his work.

"Lechmere then lied to the police..." - Lechmere's testimony contradicted PC Mizen's testimony. If that's proof that Lechmere was the Ripper, then it also proves Robert Paul was the Ripper, since he also contradicted PC Mizzen. This whole phrase is based on "guilty until proven innocent". It assumes that Lechmere was lying while completely ignoring the possibilities of Mizen lying or Mizen misunderstanding what Lechmere said.

"...and gave false details at the inquest." - Lechmere gave no provably false details at the Inquest. He did use his stepfather's surname as he had done in 1876 in an accidental death case. It's not unusual for men to use a stepfather's surname. It is unusual for men to use a stepfather's surname part of the time and their father's surname part of the time, but Lechmere had started doing that at over a decade before the first Ripper murder. It does not prove that Lechemere "gave false details at the inquest", let alone that he was the Ripper.

"And the Ripper murders started just after he moved into the area." - this statement is provably false. Charles Lechmere's family moved to Whitechapel at least 30 years before the Ripper killings began.

"Wearing blood stained overalls..." - Carmen wore sack aprons. Nobody present at the time noticed bloodstains on Lechmere. Lechmere worked for Pickford's, not a meat packing plant, so a bloodstained apron would have been an occasional on-the-job hazard for those times he carried meat and it was improperly packed.

"...his job placed him at four of the killings at the time they occurred." - this is provably false. Lechmere's job placed him at one of the killings around the time that it occurred - Polly Nichols. Martha Tabram was killed near Lechmere's route to work and might have been killed while he was walking to work. Annie Chapman was killed while Lechmere was at work - he has an alibi. Stride, Eddowes, and Kelly were not killed along Lechmere's route to work and they were not killed on work days.

[Fiver]

I don'; t think Nichols was one of the first victims. I think he had around half a dozen earlier victims at that stage, at least.

So who are these "round half a dozen earlier victims" of the Ripper? There's a definite case for Tabram as a Ripper victim and a possible case for Millwood, but where do you get your other 3 to 5 alleged victims.

[MrBarnett]

Jame Scobie appears to have said ""He was found standing over the dead body of Polly Nichols.. Lechmere was alone with her for longer than he admits. Lechmere then lied to the police and gave false details at the inquest. And the Ripper murders started just after he moved into the area. Wearing blood stained overalls his job placed him at four of the killings at the time they occurred."

It also appears that voice over before Scobie appeared on camera said "The weight of evidence is against Charles Lechmere. He was found standing over the dead body of Polly Nichols. No one saw anyone else at the crime scene. Her wounds were extremely fresh and Lechmere was alone with her for longer than he admits. Lechmere then lied to the police and gave false details at the inquest. And the Ripper murders started just after he moved into the area. Wearing blood stained overalls his job placed him at four of the killings at the time they occurred. Another happened by his mother's house, yet another on his old route to work."

These were part of a entertainment show whose goal was to portray Lechmere as the Ripper. As such, I have grave doubts that Scobie was given complete or balanced information about events. Both the voiceover and Scobie's statements contain many speculative and some provably false statements.

"He was found standing over the dead body of Polly Nichols" - This statement is provably false. Robert Paul testified Lechmere was "standing in the middle of the road".

"Lechmere was alone with her for longer than he admits." - This statement is based on fudging the times. It starts by using 3:20am, the time Lechmere usually left for work, instead of 3:30am, the time Lechmere testified he left for work. It further fudges the time by assuming a ten minute walk would take 7 minutes or less. It fudges the time a third time by ignoring the time estimates of Lechmere and of all three of the first policemen to arrive in favor of the time estimate of Robert Paul.

It also ignores that the Ripper inflicted far worse mutilations in Catherine Eddowes body in only about 10 minutes. If the Ripper had 18 minutes alone with Polly Nichols he could have inflicted all of the actual mutilations and been 10 minutes walk down the street by the time Robert Paul arrived. An 18 minute time gap contradicts the idea that Lechmere was the Ripper, interrupted in his work.

"Lechmere then lied to the police..." - Lechmere's testimony contradicted PC Mizen's testimony. If that's proof that Lechmere was the Ripper, then it also proves Robert Paul was the Ripper, since he also contradicted PC Mizzen. This whole phrase is based on "guilty until proven innocent". It assumes that Lechmere was lying while completely ignoring the possibilities of Mizen lying or Mizen misunderstanding what Lechmere said.

"...and gave false details at the inquest." - Lechmere gave no provably false details at the Inquest. He did use his stepfather's surname as he had done in 1876 in an accidental death case. It's not unusual for men to use a stepfather's surname. It is unusual for men to use a stepfather's surname part of the time and their father's surname part of the time, but Lechmere had started doing that at over a decade before the first Ripper murder. It does not prove that Lechemere "gave false details at the inquest", let alone that he was the Ripper.

"And the Ripper murders started just after he moved into the area." - this statement is provably false. Charles Lechmere's family moved to Whitechapel at least 30 years before the Ripper killings began.

"Wearing blood stained overalls..." - Carmen wore sack aprons. Nobody present at the time noticed bloodstains on Lechmere. Lechmere worked for Pickford's, not a meat packing plant, so a bloodstained apron would have been an occasional on-the-job hazard for those times he carried meat and it was improperly packed.

"...his job placed him at four of the killings at the time they occurred." - this is provably false. Lechmere's job placed him at one of the killings around the time that it occurred - Polly Nichols. Martha Tabram was killed near Lechmere's route to work and might have been killed while he was walking to work. Annie Chapman was killed while Lechmere was at work - he has an alibi. Stride, Eddowes, and Kelly were not killed along Lechmere's route to work and they were not killed on work days.

Fiver,

Pethaps you can enlighten us as to where in Whitechapel the Lechmeres lived.

Gary

[JeffHamm]

Fiver,

Pethaps you can enlighten us as to where in Whitechapel the Lechmeres lived.

Gary

Hi Gary,

Lechmere lived at the green dot. The maroon dot is Paul's residence, and the bright red dot the crime scene. Blue dot is where PC Mizen was encountered. Grey dot in the north is the police station where he went to get the cart to move the body. Purple dot is Dr. L's.

Hope that helps.

- Jeff

[drstrange169]

Thanks Jeff, I'd put Paul's residence further up Foster about the middle

[JeffHamm]

Thanks Jeff, I'd put Paul's residence further up Foster about the middle

You may be correct. I recall I had a hard time getting it placed properly, and there were lots of comments as I shifted things around. For some reason I found Paul's residence really tricky to get right and I don't recall if I ever got it to where there was a consensus that it was. One problem is that the map overlay I chose wasn't the best option and I probably should redo it with one of the better ones at some time. So, perhaps people should view Paul's as a "roughly here" location. I think the other locations were fairly well agreed upon though.

With my luck, I overwrote the one we finally settled upon with some early way off version! Sigh

- Jeff

[FrankO]

This is true. and Fisherman will take me to task for it Still given that most of these theories are based on conjecture and what some might call "logical deduction", I could still see this as possibly happening. We just can't prove either way if the two discussed Paul and Cross. Just as we can't prove who the killer was. so I'll take this point away from evidence of innocence. It'll also lessen the punishment from Fisherman I'll be receiving.

Columbo

Don't worry, Columbo. It still stands that there can be very little doubt, if any, that Mizen and Neil didn't have a conversation about the two carmen. Otherwise, it would have been very odd indeed for this to appear in the Daily News of Monday 3 September:
"It is not true, says Constable Neil, who is a man of nearly 20 years' service, that he was called to the body by two men. He came upon it as he walked, and, flashing his lanthorn to examine it he was answered by the lights from two other constables at either end of the street. These officers had seen no man leaving the spot to attract attention, and the mystery is most complete." Apparently, on Sunday night, the police were still unaware of the fact that it had been Mizen who had been called to the body by two men. And this, of course, still supports Mizen's indifference/unresponsiveness/disinterest or whatever one would like to call it. Which, in turn, may still be the cause for the contradiction between Mizen and Lechmere.

[MrBarnett]

Hi Gary,

Lechmere lived at the green dot. The maroon dot is Paul's residence, and the bright red dot the crime scene. Blue dot is where PC Mizen was encountered. Grey dot in the north is the police station where he went to get the cart to move the body. Purple dot is Dr. L's.

Hope that helps.

- Jeff

Thanks, Jeff.

It was a rhetorical question. Lechmere moved from 20, James Street, STGITE to Doveton Street, Mile End, a few weeks before the killing spree started. Neither of those addresses were in Whitechapel. Prior to the move he had lived close to his mother for his entire life.

[JeffHamm]

Thanks, Jeff.

It was a rhetorical question. Lechmere moved from 20, James Street, STGITE to Doveton Street, Mile End, a few weeks before the killing spree started. Neither of those addresses were in Whitechapel. Prior to the move he had lived close to his mother for his entire life.

Ah, true, it's not in Whitechapel, but often the whole general area, including Spittlefields, Mile End, etc, are just referred to collectively as "Whitechapel" in JtR discussions. It's a bad habit, really, but it's common. Hmm, now that I think of it, I'm not sure exactly where the borders are, but I think more of the murders are actually in Spittlefields than Whitechapel?

- Jeff

[MrBarnett]

Of the C5, only Nichols was killed in the parish of St Mary Whitechapel. But if you add in Smith, Tabram, Coles and McKenzie, Whitechapel overtakes Spitalfields (Chapman and Kelly). St Geo E has two (Stride and the Pinchin Street victim), the City, one (Eddowes) and Poplar one (Mylett). I think that’s right.

What I was really challenging was the suggestion that the Lechmere family had lived in the same place (Whitechapel) for 30 years and that CAL hadn’t moved out of his mother’s orbit in mid-1888.

In my opinion, old Ma, Maria Louisa, is the most interesting member of the extended Lechmere family.

[Joshua Rogan]

Ah, true, it's not in Whitechapel, but often the whole general area, including Spittlefields, Mile End, etc, are just referred to collectively as "Whitechapel" in JtR discussions. It's a bad habit, really, but it's common. Hmm, now that I think of it, I'm not sure exactly where the borders are, but I think more of the murders are actually in Spittlefields than Whitechapel?

- Jeff

Not a bad habit at all Jeff. Whitechapel was also the name of a wider administrative district which included the parishes of Whitechapel itself, Spitalfields, St George in the East and several others.
So it is absolutely correct to say the murders (except Eddowes') took place in Whitechapel, although a little confusing.

[Joshua Rogan]

Not a bad habit at all Jeff. Whitechapel was also the name of a wider administrative district which included the parishes of Whitechapel itself, Spitalfields, St George in the East and several others.
So it is absolutely correct to say the murders (except Eddowes') took place in Whitechapel, although a little confusing.

Correction: after finding my glasses, St George in the East was not part of Whitechapel district.

[JeffHamm]

Not a bad habit at all Jeff. Whitechapel was also the name of a wider administrative district which included the parishes of Whitechapel itself, Spitalfields, St George in the East and several others.
So it is absolutely correct to say the murders (except Eddowes') took place in Whitechapel, although a little confusing.

Ah, ok, that makes me feel better.

- Jeff

[Fiver]

Fiver,

Pethaps you can enlighten us as to where in Whitechapel the Lechmeres lived.

Gary

Please don't tell me that you're defending the nonsensical claim that "the Ripper murders started just after he moved into the area."

The 1851 Census shows Charles Lechmere, his mother, and his sister were living in Herefordshire.

The England & Wales, FreeBMD Marriage Index, 1837-1915 shows Charles Lechmere's mother married Thomas Cross in the first quarter of 1858 in Whitechapel, London. That shows Charles Lechmere was living in the area over 30 years before the first Ripper killing.

For more evidence that the claim that "the Ripper murders started just after he moved into the area." is complete nonsense, we have:

* England, Select Births and Christenings, 1538-1975 shows Lechmere was living in the area in 1859.
* London, England, Church of England Births and Baptisms, 1813-1906 also shows Lechmere was living in the area in 1859.
* The 1861 Census (where he is listed as Charles Cross) shows Lechmere was living in the area.
* London, England, Church of England Marriages and Banns, 1754-1921 shows Lechmere was living in the area in 1870.
* The 1871 Census shows Lechmere was living in the area.
* The 1881 Census shows Lechmere was living in the area.
* London, England, Electoral Registers, 1832-1965 shows Lechmere was living in the area in 1882.
* London, England, Electoral Registers, 1832-1965 shows Lechmere was living in the area in 1885.
* London, England, Electoral Registers, 1832-1965 shows Lechmere was living in the area in 1887.

There are also birth records and school records for Lechemre's children that show Lechmere lived in the area long before the Ripper killings occurred.

So do you now accept that claim that "the Ripper murders started just after he moved into the area" is provably false?