Originally posted by Darryl Kenyon
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Evidence of innocence
Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
-
-
Originally posted by Fisherman View Post
That reminds me of Harry D, who does not like how Lechmere´s seemingly innocent moves after Paul arrived may actually have been nothing but theatre. Harry says just about the same thing: whatever Lechmere does, he is still looked upon with suspicion.
It must be terribly frustrating.
I’ve asked Ed if the photos of CAL’s kids wearing v. decent clothes are available.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Fisherman View Post
My point was in my former post (and in hundreds of post before it): Although the police had the address, Lechmere could still make it very hard for the public (wife, family, acquaintances etc) to understand that he was the man involved in the errand if he used a name he otherwise didn´t and combined that with keeping his address back.
It’s possible that there were people who would have recognised the name but who had no idea where he worked or lived.
Comment
-
Originally posted by MrBarnett View Post
His style of dress was considered noteworthy at the time. If he’d turned up in a Saville Row suit and a silk cravat, sporting a bejewelled gold watch chain, it would have been mentioned at the time and we’d be justified in wondering what it said about his financial position. If he’d turned up in a presentable, if rather old, working man’s sunday suit, nothing would have been said about it at the time and we wouldn’t be discussing it now.
I’ve asked Ed if the photos of CAL’s kids wearing v. decent clothes are available.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Fisherman View Post
My point was in my former post (and in hundreds of post before it): Although the police had the address, Lechmere could still make it very hard for the public (wife, family, acquaintances etc) to understand that he was the man involved in the errand if he used a name he otherwise didn´t and combined that with keeping his address back.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Fisherman View Post
I know the pic, Gary, and I agree that the Lechmere kids look quite well catered for in it. I do not remember when it was taken, though, but it is later than 1888 so I can predict what comments you will get...
Comment
-
Originally posted by Darryl Kenyon View PostDid it ever occur to you that he may have just wanted some privacy [ not because he was the murderer, but because he was that sort of person, ]
Comment
-
Originally posted by MrBarnett View PostTwo of Lechmere’s kids in the early 1890s(?).
The boy was in the cats’ meat business for most of his life, I believe.
How many East End families could have afforded to have had studio portraits of their kids taken at the time?
Comment
-
Originally posted by Fisherman View PostA question for everybody out here:
How many of you, after having found a person lying on the ground in X Street and after having gone off in search for help as a result of it, would tell the first person you see "A person has been found lying on the ground in X Street" instead of "There´s a person lying on the ground in X Street" or "I found this person lying on the ground in X Street"?
Hands up!
Charles Lechmere's version was:
"There is a woman was lying in Buck's row. She looks to me either dead or drunk." - Lechmere
"I think she's dead." - Paul
Robert Paul's version supported Lechmere's:
"I had told him the woman was dead." - Paul
PC Mizen's version was:
"You are wanted in Buck's row by a policeman; a woman is lying there."
PC Mizen's response is very odd in both the Lechmere/Paul versions and the Mizen veresion.
* In the Mizen version, he makes no attempt to find out what is wrong with the woman or why the other policeman wants him.
* In both versions, Mizen makes no attempt to identify the two witnesses.
* In both versions, Mizen doesn't ask any questions of the witnesses.
* In both versions, Mizen continues knocking up instead of going to Buck's Row.
"The full picture always needs to be given. When this does not happen, we are left to make decisions on insufficient information." - Christer Holmgren
"Unfortunately, when one becomes obsessed by a theory, truth and logic rarely matter." - Steven Blomer
- Likes 1
Comment
-
Originally posted by Great Aunt View PostNot particularly, no, but he comes across as rather lacking in emotion - any emotion - as though it was a tarpaulin he had found on the street. I do find the initial interaction between the two men strange under the circumstances also - I would expect the finder of a body to wait to speak to the approaching person expectantly, even speaking before the second person fully arrived at the scene, but Lechmere chose to wait until they were side by side and felt the need to touch Paul making the contact between them very up close and personal. Maybe Lechmere still hadn't quite decided his next step ...
"Then I noticed that there was something unusual about the ground, but I could not tell what it was except that it was not level. I mean that there was something there like a little heap. But I thought it was only mud or something of that kind, and did not take much notice of it. However, I touched it with my whip-handle, and then I was able to tell that it was not mud." - Lewis Deimschutz on finding Elizabeth Stride's body.
There are other examples, such as the person who found the body of Elizabeth Short in 1947 initially thought it was a discarded store mannequin, In July of this year, Quebec police mistook a woman's body for a mannequin and threw it in the dumpster.
"The full picture always needs to be given. When this does not happen, we are left to make decisions on insufficient information." - Christer Holmgren
"Unfortunately, when one becomes obsessed by a theory, truth and logic rarely matter." - Steven Blomer
Comment
-
Hello Gut
Originally posted by GUT View PostWonder if anyone from Pickfords read the paper (maybe a manager) and thought “Gee who is this Cross bloke who says he works here?”
Comment
-
Originally posted by Paddy Goose View PostHello Gut
Pickfords? No newspapers read there. Latest "research" indicates they were functionally illiterate, every one of em.'
Comment
-
Originally posted by MrBarnett View PostTwo of Lechmere’s kids in the early 1890s(?).
The boy was in the cats’ meat business for most of his life, I believe.
How many East End families could have afforded to have had studio portraits of their kids taken at the time?
Comment
Comment