Evidence of innocence

[Fiver]

I apologise if I asked you this before - I asked someone but can't remember whom now - but do you think it is unlikely that Lechmere usually took the route down Whitechapel Road and Whitechapel High Street to work?

If that was his usual route, he wouldn't have been walking down Buck's Row.

He would then have had to walk roughly northwards to work, but the route would have been more straightforward.

When you are walking to work, I expect the most important thing would be the shortness of the route, not how straightforward it was. And with two decades of experience, Charles Lechmere would have known the streets well.

Does the fact that he turned right into Baker's Row to look for a policeman necessarily indicate that that was his usual route to work?

Theee was some indication in the evidence or interview that the reason Paul and Lechmere turned into Baker's Row was that they had actually spotted the policeman there.

After speaking to PC MIzen, Paul and Lechmere continued together along Hanbury almost as far as Spitalfields Market. Based on both men's testimonies, this was Robert Paul's route to work.

We don't know if it was also Charles Lechmere's normal route to work. It certainly could have been, but Old Montague Street is another possibility.

[Mark J D]

Other than the pink routes, there was also the blue one.

I don't believe so, old bean. Take another look.

'No Through Road', as they say...

Bests,

Mark D.

[Elamarna]

I apologise if I asked you this before - I asked someone but can't remember whom now - but do you think it is unlikely that Lechmere usually took the route down Whitechapel Road and Whitechapel High Street to work?

He would then have had to walk roughly northwards to work, but the route would have been more straightforward.

Does the fact that he turned right into Baker's Row to look for a policeman necessarily indicate that that was his usual route to work?

Theee was some indication in the evidence or interview that the reason Paul and Lechmere turned into Baker's Row was that they had actually spotted the policeman there.

To a great extent, it will depend on where he entered Pickfords.
If we assume he entered via Eldon, than going via Hanbury but turning south at Spelman is the shortest possible route, shorter than via old Montague by a few yards.
But if he could enter Pickfords at one of the other possible entrances, there are many possibilities, over 100. Most of which include Hanbury.

Going via Whitechapel and Aldgate is I suggest very unlikely.
So much so, that I don't even consider it in the 100 plus routes I measured and timed
Hope that helps


Steve

[FrankO]

He didn't need to be at work that night, so why go there anyway?


I agree with you, but Lechmerians have come up with the ingenious argument that Lechmere visited his mother's house, which they say was near Berner Street, on that Saturday night.

My arguments against that are:

There is no evidence that he visited his mother's house that night.

If he did, then since he had nine children at the time, he would probably have taken at least one with him.

Berner Street was not, as they claim, on his route home from his mother's house.

Why would he have travelled almost a mile westwards to the City, which is completely the wrong direction?

Why would he then go north-eastwards to Goulston Street when there was an almost direct route home down Whitechapel High Street?

The answer is that he didn't and that the murderer's movements were consistent with those of someone based in Spitalfields, not Bethnal Green.

If Lechmere was Jack the Ripper (which I don't think he was), then there would be nothing that would have prohibited or hindered him to end up close to Mitre Square, even though we wouldn't see any logic in his decision to go there. My thoughts are that the Ripper (Lechmere or not) would have gone there because he thought he would find a suitable victim in that neighbourhood and. But that's just my view.

[FrankO]

Other than the pink routes, there was also the blue one.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

Hi Fiver,

I've measured it here and found that the detour would be about 140 yards. Regardless of that, I can understand the argument that he killed on his way to work, his work being his destination for that day, but this isn't true for the argument Mark makes. He didn't need to be at work that night, so why go there anyway? And, if he just followed his old route to work, then indeed Duke Street is 140 yards off, so why go there anyway? If he thought to find a suitable victim near St. Botolph's Church, then that's another thing.

The best,
Frank

He didn't need to be at work that night, so why go there anyway?


I agree with you, but Lechmerians have come up with the ingenious argument that Lechmere visited his mother's house, which they say was near Berner Street, on that Saturday night.

My arguments against that are:

There is no evidence that he visited his mother's house that night.

If he did, then since he had nine children at the time, he would probably have taken at least one with him.

Berner Street was not, as they claim, on his route home from his mother's house.

Why would he have travelled almost a mile westwards to the City, which is completely the wrong direction?

Why would he then go north-eastwards to Goulston Street when there was an almost direct route home down Whitechapel High Street?

The answer is that he didn't and that the murderer's movements were consistent with those of someone based in Spitalfields, not Bethnal Green.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

Mitre Square would have been at least 1/3 mile detour off of Lechmere's route between James Street and the Broad Street Station where he worked.

The arguments I have read, heard, or seen in documentaries to bolster the case that Lechmere would have gone to the murder sites at the right times include:

His mother's house was near Berner Street (not very near).

Berner Street was on his route home from his mother's house (not true, as he would have had to make a westwards detour).

Mitre Square was on his way to work. (If he went to work via Spitalfields, then he would not go anywhere near Mitre Square; if he went to work via Mitre Square, then he would not have gone to Spitalfields).

Goulston Street was on his route home from Mitre Square (not true, as he would have gone down Whitechapel High Street, whereas going to Spitalfields would have involved a north-eastwards detour).

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

Appreciate you playing devil's advocate. All ideas should be examined.

Charles Lechmere testified at the Inquest on 3 September, 1888. In addition to the not-so-observant PC Mizen, Inspectors Abberline, Helson, and Spratling, as well as detective Sergeant Enright were at the Inquest.

On the morning of 8 September, Chapman was murdered in Hanbury Street. We know from Lechmere's testimony that this was on the route he and Robert Paul walked after talking to PC Mizen. (We also know from eyewitnesses that Chapman was killed after Lechmere would have arrived at work.)

As you note, to kill again on a direct route from A to B that could be associated with his known movements would be a really, really bad idea.

Yet this is what the Church of Lechmere, Unholy Be His Name, would have you believe that Lechmere killed on a route that he had publicly stated at the Inquest. A route that PC Mizen might have been able to confirm. A route that Robert Paul definitely would have been able to confirm.

And having got away with these mindnumbingly stupid and completely unnecessary risks twice, he then stopped and became crafty.

Also, at the time of Chapman's murder, Robert Paul still had not testified. That wouldn't happen until 17 September, where he would confirm almost all of Lechmere's statements. The only real difference was their estimated times, but that wasn't Paul versus Lechmere, that was Paul versus Lechmere and Mizen and Neil and Thain.

I apologise if I asked you this before - I asked someone but can't remember whom now - but do you think it is unlikely that Lechmere usually took the route down Whitechapel Road and Whitechapel High Street to work?

He would then have had to walk roughly northwards to work, but the route would have been more straightforward.

Does the fact that he turned right into Baker's Row to look for a policeman necessarily indicate that that was his usual route to work?

Theee was some indication in the evidence or interview that the reason Paul and Lechmere turned into Baker's Row was that they had actually spotted the policeman there.

[FrankO]

Mitre Square would have been at least 1/3 mile detour off of Lechmere's route between James Street and the Broad Street Station where he worked.

Hi Fiver,

I've measured it here and found that the detour would be about 140 yards. Regardless of that, I can understand the argument that he killed on his way to work, his work being his destination for that day, but this isn't true for the argument Mark makes. He didn't need to be at work that night, so why go there anyway? And, if he just followed his old route to work, then indeed Duke Street is 140 yards off, so why go there anyway? If he thought to find a suitable victim near St. Botolph's Church, then that's another thing.

The best,
Frank

[Mark J D]

Mitre Square would have been at least 1/3 mile detour off of Lechmere's route between James Street and the Broad Street Station where he worked.

For the newbies and lurkers:








M.

[John Wheat]

Lechmere was the man who killed women in the newly familiar streets he passed through on the way to work from his new Doveton Street address, except in the wee hours of Sunday morning, when he killed women in streets that were very familiar to him from his having passed through them on the way to work from his old James Street address.

M.

Where is the evidence of this?

[Fiver]

Lechmere was the man who killed women in the newly familiar streets he passed through on the way to work from his new Doveton Street address, except in the wee hours of Sunday morning, when he killed women in streets that were very familiar to him from his having passed through them on the way to work from his old James Street address.

M.

Mitre Square would have been at least 1/3 mile detour off of Lechmere's route between James Street and the Broad Street Station where he worked.

[Fiver]

To play devil's advocate here, I suppose there could be an argument for Lechmere realising, after his close call in Buck's Row, that it would be a really, really bad idea to kill again on a direct route from A to B that could be associated with his known movements. He had to be more careful on subsequent outings.

The downside would be if he was ever recognised near another crime scene, where he had no business being, as carman Cross, murder witness in the Nichols case.

Appreciate you playing devil's advocate. All ideas should be examined.

Charles Lechmere testified at the Inquest on 3 September, 1888. In addition to the not-so-observant PC Mizen, Inspectors Abberline, Helson, and Spratling, as well as detective Sergeant Enright were at the Inquest.

On the morning of 8 September, Chapman was murdered in Hanbury Street. We know from Lechmere's testimony that this was on the route he and Robert Paul walked after talking to PC Mizen. (We also know from eyewitnesses that Chapman was killed after Lechmere would have arrived at work.)

As you note, to kill again on a direct route from A to B that could be associated with his known movements would be a really, really bad idea.

Yet this is what the Church of Lechmere, Unholy Be His Name, would have you believe that Lechmere killed on a route that he had publicly stated at the Inquest. A route that PC Mizen might have been able to confirm. A route that Robert Paul definitely would have been able to confirm.

And having got away with these mindnumbingly stupid and completely unnecessary risks twice, he then stopped and became crafty.

Also, at the time of Chapman's murder, Robert Paul still had not testified. That wouldn't happen until 17 September, where he would confirm almost all of Lechmere's statements. The only real difference was their estimated times, but that wasn't Paul versus Lechmere, that was Paul versus Lechmere and Mizen and Neil and Thain.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

Yes, I did read the relevant posts, PI1.

I think we can safely say that as a source, Butler is about as much use as what they had to clear up after the Lord Mayor's Show.

[Clue: begins with d and rhymes with bung, hung and lung. Good for rhubarb apparently.]

Love,

Caz
X

I think Susan Clapp may have a mole on here, which wouldn't surprise me as there seem to be a few dubious characters on here.

She has just found out about our conversation here.

But don't worry; I defended you and gave her what for at the same time.

And everything I wrote to her was strictly factual.

No 'assumptions'.

[Abby Normal]

I see.

I don't think Lechmere is a valid suspect, but I enjoy analysing all the nonsense written by so-called Lechmerians.

well, i dont think everything written by the lechmerians is nonsense. some of it is actually quite intriguing IMHO.
But to each his own.