Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Evidence of innocence

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



  • There is no great mystery to JTR’s identity anymore. Polly Nichols wounds being concealed tells us everything. This is the evidence that tells us who JTR is.

    Imagine if Robert Paul finds Lechmere standing near Nichols horribly mutilated body, with the intestines protruding, her many wounds clearly visible, it’s a different ball game. Paul would be in a panic, and he’d realise he’d just stumbled on a murder.

    Lechmere is the only individual in our drama who would benefit from concealing the wounds. Nobody, not even if JTR was some unknown 3rd party who ran off, would benefit from such a course of action. So if Nichols wounds have been covered up, and I think it’s very clear that they have, then Lechmere is JTR. By examining the crime scene, we can see that JTR never left Bucks Row.

    Moving on, Lechmere has been alone with Nichols and lied about it. This is irrefutable if you look at the geography of Bucks Row. Lechmere’s statement to the inquest about finding Nichols body just as Paul arrived on the scene about 40 yards away is demonstrably false. It’s 140m from the Brady Street entrance to the body. Just to double underline in case you didn’t catch that - Lechmere lied to the inquest. There is a time when Paul is walking up Bucks Row that he has no awareness of Lechmere being there. How can this be - where is Lechmere while Paul walks up Bucks Row ? Paul couldn’t miss anyone walking ahead, or in the middle of the road. He could miss somebody crouched in the dark by the body. Paul is a good distance up Bucks Row before he sees Lechmere - why is that ?
    I think the theory that 2 men walking up Bucks Row could be unaware of each other is nonsense. It couldn’t happen (it’s so quiet that a neighbour can hear a whispered conversation). Lechmere is creating an alibi whereby he has never been alone with the body. This is just not possible. We have caught him in a lie. At a minimum Lechmere is alone with the body from the time Paul enters Bucks Row to the time he first sights Lechmere “standing where the woman was”.

    Then there’s the timing evidence. Time isn’t synchronised, it doesn’t have to be. Lechmere’s usual time for leaving is around 03.20. He is found in Bucks Row around 03.45. Let’s say it’s a 6 minute walk to Bucks Row. He should normally get there about 03.26. We can say conclusively that on this particular morning, the morning he is found “standing where the women was” Lechmere is very, very late. Agreed ?

    He’s approximately 19 minutes late getting to Bucks Row compared to his usual commute. This has got to ring alarm bells. This has to be a red flag. Even if you’re not particularly fast on the uptake you have to see the timing hurts Lechmere. He is found near a recently killed dead body by a witness, and its just a coincidence he 19 minutes or so later than usual.

    This is just a brief look at a few of the issues that crop up when looking at Bucks Row. I don’t see how anyone can look at the crime scene and not see that Lechmere is JTR.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by SuperShodan View Post

      There is no great mystery to JTR’s identity anymore. Polly Nichols wounds being concealed tells us everything. This is the evidence that tells us who JTR is.
      Except that Polly's throat had been cut twice and that was not covered up . Paul failed as did Lech to notice this. If Lech did cover Polly's abdomen injuries up as some suggest why on earth did he ask Paul [ The man touched witness on the shoulder and asked him to look at the woman, inquest testimony ] to look at poor Polly ? It does not make any sense whatsoever, and basically he wouldn't . Because if I looked at a body and saw blood flowing from a very recently cut throat [ which some people on here allege ] , which it must have been doing if said throat had only just been cut , then I would immediately suspect the person behind me and be fearful for my own safety.
      Regards Darryl
      Ps The covering up , as alleged by some to hide Lech's involvement, yet leaving her throat exposed proves that the so called hiding of the abdomen injuries is a complete nonsense.

      Comment


      • Polly’s throat had been cut through to the vertebrae. I would suggest such a severe wound wasn’t noticed as it had very recently been done. It hadn’t started to bleed out yet.
        Lechmere drawing attention to the body is again fairly straight forward. He was caught unawares and had to quickly cover up his handiwork. However, he has to know what Paul has seen. Paul could get past and quickly run for a policeman. Paul could have seen everything. Lechmere calls Paul over to he can find out exactly what he knows.
        It also has a secondary purpose. By calling Paul over Lechmere is establishing an alibi that he has just found the body in Paul’s presence ie he was never alone with the body.
        Lechmere was thinking on his feet, it was instinctive, he had no time to plan. He got lucky, just like Sutcliffe and Dahmer he was caught red handed, but bluffed his way out.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by SuperShodan View Post

          My opinion is that Paul being there was completely unexpected. Paul was running late and used Bucks Row, perhaps for the first time in months, to make up time. Paul wasn’t supposed to be there. This was the curveball that caught Lechmere unawares.
          I don't want to be difficult; but quite apart from the idea that Paul would 'normally' have taken a sub-optimal route, what sensible route to Corbett's Court could Paul have taken that *didn't* involve Buck's Row? I was working on a (very unclear) map earlier, and I don't see that there was an alternative that wasn't madly longer...

          https://scontent-man2-1.xx.fbcdn.net...5f&oe=618AE054

          Originally posted by SuperShodan View Post
          Lechmere moved to Doveton Street in June and he would have walked along Bucks Row 6 days a week for nearly 3 months prior to the murder.
          What better way to work out what routes round those blocks the three coppers patrolled, and how long they took...? Add this to an unusually quiet night, with everyone having gone to watch the dock fire, and he thinks it's time to try again, safely far from where he killed Tabram...

          M.





          Comment


          • Originally posted by SuperShodan View Post
            Polly’s throat had been cut through to the vertebrae. I would suggest such a severe wound wasn’t noticed as it had very recently been done. It hadn’t started to bleed out yet.
            Lechmere drawing attention to the body is again fairly straight forward. He was caught unawares and had to quickly cover up his handiwork. However, he has to know what Paul has seen. Paul could get past and quickly run for a policeman. Paul could have seen everything. Lechmere calls Paul over to he can find out exactly what he knows.
            It also has a secondary purpose. By calling Paul over Lechmere is establishing an alibi that he has just found the body in Paul’s presence ie he was never alone with the body.
            Lechmere was thinking on his feet, it was instinctive, he had no time to plan. He got lucky, just like Sutcliffe and Dahmer he was caught red handed, but bluffed his way out.


            Slitting someone's throat accomplishes 3 things. Severing the trachea (wind pipe) generally below the larynx which prevents screaming/yelling. Second It severs the carotid artery preventing new oxygenated blood from reaching the brain. Lastly, it severs the jugular vein allowing blood to easily flow from the brain.

            These things will bring unconsciousness quickly with death shortly to follow. But it is not like it is in the movies. It is a gruesome thing to see. It takes 30 seconds to a minute till the blood loss /lack of oxygen eventually kills the person. Unconsciousness would have happened much sooner, but the heart will continue to pump squirting blood from the carotid until there is not enough to pump.

            The whole while the person will be taking giant gasping breaths through their severed wind pipe gargling blood and coughing. It is neither quiet nor quick like it is in the movies.

            Comment


            • Well said Darryl, best two posts in a row!



              The Baron

              Comment


              • If Polly had been strangled manually beforehand, the blood would probably seep out rather than squirt but the point is there would still be blood. As Dr Llewellyn says - I found she was dead, and that she had severe injuries to her throat. And - On the left side of the neck, about an inch below the jaw, there was an incision about four inches long and running from a point immediately below the ear. An inch below on the same side, and commencing about an inch in front of it, was a circular incision terminating at a point about three inches below the right jaw. This incision completely severs all the tissues down to the vertebrae. The large vessels of the neck on both sides were severed. The incision is about eight inches long. These cuts must have been caused with a long-bladed knife, moderately sharp, and used with great violence.
                Hard to say, in my opinion, that Lech would take the chance of only half doing a job with injuries like those to poor Pollys neck . And leave those exposed

                Comment


                • Sorry for my late reply, Christer, but I was visiting my elderly parents in Holland.

                  Originally posted by Fisherman View Post
                  Mizen denied that he proceeded to knock people up, he said that he only finished an errand that was already underway. That seems to tell us that he had more customers waiting to get knocked up, where he disobeyed that regulation you mention, if it was in place.
                  Besides the question what a knock up errand already underway would look like (other than that he’d been about to knock up somewhere), I guess you’re right. He may have had others to knock up.

                  Having had a look at the thread “The conflicts of Mizen” it seems that there actually was a regulation in place. It says:
                  The Police are bound to render this [knocking up] or any other service in their power to the inhabitants and any neglect is to be reported, and will be punished".

                  This regulation appears in the General Orders for both 1873 (MEPO 8/3) and 1893 (MEPO 8/4) and was thus in force in 1888.


                  So, this may have posed a bit of a problem for Mizen. Was he to continue knocking up or to leave his beat? His choice would not only depend on what he was told (after asking some questions, if necessary), but also on how he interpreted what he was told/how he was told it.

                  The way I see things, Mizen reacted in a way that very much suggests that he had not been told that he could have a murder on his hands, and so I tend to think that this is in line with the suggestion that Charles Lechmere told Mizen lies.
                  What you say is, of course, perfectly possible and you may well be right. And I completely agree that he had not been told he could have a case of murder on his hands. I think that, even if Lechmere had said the woman was either dead or drunk, it’s quite possible that Mizen didn’t take it too seriously and thought she was probably just drunk instead. Which may very well have been due to the carmen not acting with any urgency. As Joshua Rogan wrote some years ago: if you require an urgent response, you really need to deliver the message in the same fashion, which certainly doesn't come across from the evidence of either Mizen or the carmen. The carmen almost seem to have said what they (as a unit) did, literally, in passing (while they were passing him).
                  "You can rob me, you can starve me and you can beat me and you can kill me. Just don't bore me."
                  Clint Eastwood as Gunny in "Heartbreak Ridge"

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Darryl Kenyon View Post

                    Except that Polly's throat had been cut twice and that was not covered up .

                    We do not know this, Iīm afraid. Yes, Neil was able to see it as he arrived, but remember that Paul pulled the dress down as the last thing he did before he left. It may be that he pulled it away from the neck wound in the process. It would be odd if Lechmere covered the abdominal wounds but not the neck wound.

                    Paul failed as did Lech to notice this. If Lech did cover Polly's abdomen injuries up as some suggest why on earth did he ask Paul [ The man touched witness on the shoulder and asked him to look at the woman, inquest testimony ] to look at poor Polly ? It does not make any sense whatsoever, and basically he wouldn't . Because if I looked at a body and saw blood flowing from a very recently cut throat [ which some people on here allege ] , which it must have been doing if said throat had only just been cut , then I would immediately suspect the person behind me and be fearful for my own safety.

                    Lechmere was part of the examination himself. He may well have guided Paul to an extent. If this was the case, I donīt see that he would have feared that Paul would undress Nichols.

                    Regards Darryl
                    Ps The covering up , as alleged by some to hide Lech's involvement, yet leaving her throat exposed proves that the so called hiding of the abdomen injuries is a complete nonsense.
                    And me pointing out that the neck wounds may well have been covered, makes that point somewhat less viable than you argue.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Darryl Kenyon View Post



                      Slitting someone's throat accomplishes 3 things. Severing the trachea (wind pipe) generally below the larynx which prevents screaming/yelling. Second It severs the carotid artery preventing new oxygenated blood from reaching the brain. Lastly, it severs the jugular vein allowing blood to easily flow from the brain.

                      These things will bring unconsciousness quickly with death shortly to follow. But it is not like it is in the movies. It is a gruesome thing to see. It takes 30 seconds to a minute till the blood loss /lack of oxygen eventually kills the person. Unconsciousness would have happened much sooner, but the heart will continue to pump squirting blood from the carotid until there is not enough to pump.

                      The whole while the person will be taking giant gasping breaths through their severed wind pipe gargling blood and coughing. It is neither quiet nor quick like it is in the movies.
                      The squirting and gasping would not have been there with a strangled victim, Darryl. Llewellyn said that the abdominal cutting preceded the throat ditto, and one must assume that Polly would have cried out if the killer attacked the abdomen while Polly was alive and awake, with intact vocal chords. Therefore, I think it is a safe bet that she was strangled before the cutting commenced. It is in line with the evidence on every point.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by FrankO View Post
                        Sorry for my late reply, Christer, but I was visiting my elderly parents in Holland.

                        The best excuse imaginable - relish them while you have them!

                        Besides the question what a knock up errand already underway would look like (other than that he’d been about to knock up somewhere), I guess you’re right. He may have had others to knock up.

                        I reckon some were harder to wake up than others, and so I think he may have knocked once but with no response. If he had not done so, why would he not set off for Bucks Row immediately? Tending to one errand while leaving the rest aside seems an odd thing to do. And I think that Mizens denial that he proceeded his knocking up business tells us that there were customers he left sleeping as he took off.

                        Having had a look at the thread “The conflicts of Mizen” it seems that there actually was a regulation in place. It says:
                        The Police are bound to render this [knocking up] or any other service in their power to the inhabitants and any neglect is to be reported, and will be punished".

                        This regulation appears in the General Orders for both 1873 (MEPO 8/3) and 1893 (MEPO 8/4) and was thus in force in 1888.


                        So, this may have posed a bit of a problem for Mizen. Was he to continue knocking up or to leave his beat? His choice would not only depend on what he was told (after asking some questions, if necessary), but also on how he interpreted what he was told/how he was told it.

                        Basically, the responsibility would lie on the Phantom PC. If Lechmere was lied to about this fleeting existence the way he suggested, then Mizen was not told what was the matter with the woman in the street, and so he could not bank on anything. The logical thing would perhaps be to do what he did - a quick finishing of the ongoing knocking up errand and then off to Bucks Row. Regulations or not, not responding to what may potentially be a grave errand on account of waking people up would not look good.
                        "Why did you choose not to assist PC X-son, leaving him to deal with a horrendeous case of murder on his own? If you had responded, maybe the culprit could have been caught!"
                        "Ehrm - I was waking people up and thought X-son would have to make do on his own, Sir. Regulations, you know."


                        What you say is, of course, perfectly possible and you may well be right. And I completely agree that he had not been told he could have a case of murder on his hands. I think that, even if Lechmere had said the woman was either dead or drunk, it’s quite possible that Mizen didn’t take it too seriously and thought she was probably just drunk instead. Which may very well have been due to the carmen not acting with any urgency. As Joshua Rogan wrote some years ago: if you require an urgent response, you really need to deliver the message in the same fashion, which certainly doesn't come across from the evidence of either Mizen or the carmen. The carmen almost seem to have said what they (as a unit) did, literally, in passing (while they were passing him).
                        Yes, there seems to have been no great commotion caused by the message, and no real rush. So, just as you say, this points to the carman (not the carmen, mind you...) either not being aware of the gravity of the errand - or not wanting Mizen to get to know it.
                        As always, once I make my choice which applies, I look at the rest of the affair - were there more deviations from the ordinary, such as name swaps, covered up wounds and suchlike, and, more pertinently, how does Lechmere fit in geographically and chronologically with the rest of the victims?
                        If he is innocent, there will be no further anomalies, and he will have trodden other paths that the ones traversing the killing fields. But if he is instead guilty ...
                        Last edited by Fisherman; 11-06-2021, 03:19 PM.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Darryl Kenyon View Post
                          If Polly had been strangled manually beforehand, the blood would probably seep out rather than squirt but the point is there would still be blood. As Dr Llewellyn says - I found she was dead, and that she had severe injuries to her throat. And - On the left side of the neck, about an inch below the jaw, there was an incision about four inches long and running from a point immediately below the ear. An inch below on the same side, and commencing about an inch in front of it, was a circular incision terminating at a point about three inches below the right jaw. This incision completely severs all the tissues down to the vertebrae. The large vessels of the neck on both sides were severed. The incision is about eight inches long. These cuts must have been caused with a long-bladed knife, moderately sharp, and used with great violence.
                          Hard to say, in my opinion, that Lech would take the chance of only half doing a job with injuries like those to poor Pollys neck . And leave those exposed
                          The gash in the throat was an inch or two wide, and all the major vessels were severed. That would not result in a slow seeping out of the blood. What blood there was after the abdomen had swallowed itīs part, woiuld be very free to run out.
                          Again, you jumped the gun on the covering up business, Iīm afraid.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by SuperShodan View Post

                            There is no great mystery to JTR’s identity anymore. Polly Nichols wounds being concealed tells us everything. This is the evidence that tells us who JTR is.

                            Imagine if Robert Paul finds Lechmere standing near Nichols horribly mutilated body, with the intestines protruding, her many wounds clearly visible, it’s a different ball game. Paul would be in a panic, and he’d realise he’d just stumbled on a murder.

                            Lechmere is the only individual in our drama who would benefit from concealing the wounds. Nobody, not even if JTR was some unknown 3rd party who ran off, would benefit from such a course of action. So if Nichols wounds have been covered up, and I think it’s very clear that they have, then Lechmere is JTR. By examining the crime scene, we can see that JTR never left Bucks Row.

                            Moving on, Lechmere has been alone with Nichols and lied about it. This is irrefutable if you look at the geography of Bucks Row. Lechmere’s statement to the inquest about finding Nichols body just as Paul arrived on the scene about 40 yards away is demonstrably false. It’s 140m from the Brady Street entrance to the body. Just to double underline in case you didn’t catch that - Lechmere lied to the inquest. There is a time when Paul is walking up Bucks Row that he has no awareness of Lechmere being there. How can this be - where is Lechmere while Paul walks up Bucks Row ? Paul couldn’t miss anyone walking ahead, or in the middle of the road. He could miss somebody crouched in the dark by the body. Paul is a good distance up Bucks Row before he sees Lechmere - why is that ?
                            I think the theory that 2 men walking up Bucks Row could be unaware of each other is nonsense. It couldn’t happen (it’s so quiet that a neighbour can hear a whispered conversation). Lechmere is creating an alibi whereby he has never been alone with the body. This is just not possible. We have caught him in a lie. At a minimum Lechmere is alone with the body from the time Paul enters Bucks Row to the time he first sights Lechmere “standing where the woman was”.

                            Then there’s the timing evidence. Time isn’t synchronised, it doesn’t have to be. Lechmere’s usual time for leaving is around 03.20. He is found in Bucks Row around 03.45. Let’s say it’s a 6 minute walk to Bucks Row. He should normally get there about 03.26. We can say conclusively that on this particular morning, the morning he is found “standing where the women was” Lechmere is very, very late. Agreed ?

                            He’s approximately 19 minutes late getting to Bucks Row compared to his usual commute. This has got to ring alarm bells. This has to be a red flag. Even if you’re not particularly fast on the uptake you have to see the timing hurts Lechmere. He is found near a recently killed dead body by a witness, and its just a coincidence he 19 minutes or so later than usual.

                            This is just a brief look at a few of the issues that crop up when looking at Bucks Row. I don’t see how anyone can look at the crime scene and not see that Lechmere is JTR.
                            I wonder whether Lechmere would have been able to see that it was a woman from the middle of the road, in the dark. It could have been a pile of clothes or some rubbish or a body yet not necessarily female, yet Lechmere didn't say "I think it's a woman". He knew it was a woman ....
                            Last edited by Great Aunt; 11-06-2021, 03:48 PM.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Dickere View Post

                              But Paul said he was running late too. Maybe he normally would have walked through there before Lechmere did, so Lech was 'unlucky' that morning ?
                              Paul was closer to his site of employment (about 1 mile away): so if his intentions were to arrive to work at 4 am, he'd leave quite a bit later than Lech. It would take the typical person 15 - 20 minutes to travel his distance to work. Leaving home between 3:40 am and 3:45 am would be an appropriate time for Paul - unless he wanted to arrive early each morning. Like most people, he probably wanted to arrive just on time.

                              But you are correct: Paul did say that he was running late; and the time he stipulated when encountering the body was 3:45 am (newspaper interview?). During the inquest, he mentions leaving home at 3:45 am; both times were around the typical time he left for work.

                              In actuality, after leaving Mizen at 3:45 am, Paul would have still arrived to work early - despite the delays.

                              The only possible conclusion is that he left earlier for work than his usual time and didn't realize it.
                              Last edited by Newbie; 11-06-2021, 08:56 PM.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Harry D View Post

                                If Lechmere had time to stop what he was doing, stand up and back up into the middle of street, presumably at the sound of Paul's footsteps, then he had time to spin on his heels and be away. There was no guarantee that Paul was going to stop to inspect Nichols or assume she had been killed and start shouting bloody murder. Even had this worst case scenario occurred, Lechmere would've been long gone at that point. Paul was trying to avoid Lechmere. Lechmere could've actually let Paul carry on past him. Instead, a guilty Lechmere approaches an evasive Paul and directs him to the murder scene! And then, to cap it off, agrees to go looking for a policeman whilst presumably carrying the murder weapon on him. These were all unnecessary risks that Lechmere took when he could've simply walked away. The only rationalization from the prosecution is that it's in a psychopath's nature to behave this way. Despite the fact you'd have to prove Lechmere was a psychopath without circular reasoning, and two that's a myth.



                                Says who? No one knew the identity of the carman and there was nothing they could charge him with. Given the choice between keeping a low profile or attending a police inquest and making yourself known to the authorities, I can't see many killers choosing the latter. Lechmere's conduct only makes sense if you view him without the prism of guilt. Lechmere wilfully engaged with the police TWICE when he had no need to. These are not the actions of a known serial killer.
                                No need to attempt to resort to saying that his actions were due to his psychopathic nature (I don't think anyone is claiming that). If you are looking for a response that absolutely determines that the only rational course of action is the one that he took, i won't be of help. But your conviction that he could not have possibly acted that way if he was the killer is simply erroneous.

                                He had several options and chose one of them: it worked quite well for him.

                                No, there was no guarantee that Paul (or whoever) would have stopped and looked at the body, recognized the situation in a timely fashion, and sounded out an alarm to authorities having heard the receding footsteps. Only the recognition that the newcomer may well have would tempt the killer towards considering alternative options...depending on the circumstances

                                So, lets look again at the situation that confronted Lech (I will assume he's the killer). The problem on his end were four-fold:

                                1. Lech was at least 100 meters, either way, from leaving Buck's row...in working boots (unless he's Usain Bolt, the long gone bit is out the window)
                                2. If you are Lech, you weren't anticipating anyone coming at that time - having scoped out the street traffic over the course of two months; so you might have not been as attentive, and recognized the footsteps immediately.
                                3. There is the assumption that one can recognize from which direction the approaching footsteps were coming. Based on the orientation of the murder victim, that would be impossible. Considering the alignment of Polly Nichols body (her head was pointed eastward), the murderer would have been aligned likewise
                                while making his incisions. His ears would be parallel to the street and the sound waves of the oncoming footsteps would have entered both ears at the same time. He wouldn't be able to determine distance, nor direction with this type of auditory information. He would have been momentarily confused on what to do.
                                4. Running would attract the interest of the PCs nearby who would be curious as to what could prompt someone to flee somewhere at 3:38 am. Neil said that at a normal
                                pace, his route only took 12 minutes.


                                So his choices would be: walk away immediately, with the body most likely splayed and the mayhem easy to recognize, not knowing where exactly is the newcomer; or wait until your auditory system ascertains correctly distance and direction, and then leave in the opposite direction; or just say to hell with it, and prepare the body so that the depraved murder which just took place is not so apparent while bluffing your way out of trouble.

                                He chose to bluff his way out, determined to pretend to be another passer by; and the idiot Paul tried to avoid him. If he let Paul walk by, whether guilty or innocent, he would be a person of extreme interest if Paul ever communicated it to the police. An unknown man standing next to the body, dressed as a carman going to work....and you have the witness Paul who can help them further if need be: I don't know why you insist he was at that point home free, or that he could just lay low while still going to work. If the police were motivated to find this person they quite possibly would have. But once again, i would guess he already determined how he would approach it, and he had expectations on how Paul would/should respond.

                                The irony of all this is that you insist he would have kept on choosing the worst option: not fleeing, trying to detain Paul, going to the police (on two separate occasions); and yet he came out smelling like a rose: no one suspected him. Whether he was innocent or not, he was the first to the scene of a horrific murder, and never was remotely a suspect.


                                What would have been a huge risk would be not leaving the murder scene. Whether he thought her dead, injured or drunk; being uncertain, staying is what a decent person would have done. Leaving to locate Mizen was a very small risk. Just give him the impression that it was another dead, drunk vagrant to deal with: and don't mention anything about murder. He did have a PC for a stepfather for many years who no doubt gave him an impression on how PCs went about their job.


                                However, since his conduct makes sense when not viewing him through the prism of guilt, explain to me why:

                                1. Paul testified that he was first aware of Lechmere by sight, instead of by hearing him march steadily ahead of him up Brady and then Buck's row
                                2. Lech gave the court a name only immediate family members would recognize
                                2. Lech showed up at the inquest in a carman's outfit
                                3. Lech did not offer his address to the jury when most likely asked
                                4. there was no recognition by his descendants that Lech was the first to find Polly Nichol's body

                                To someone biased like me, it sure seems like he left well before 3:30 am, and was trying to keep information from his wife concerning the inquest.
                                Last edited by Newbie; 11-07-2021, 03:21 AM.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X