Evidence of innocence

[Abby Normal]

wouldnt it be probable that lech and paul had clocks in there home?

[MrBarnett]

wouldnt it be probable that lech and paul had clocks in there home?

Many working people didn’t have them, hence the need for ‘knocking up’.

Lech was apparently somewhat more upmarket than many of his neighbours, so it’s more likely he did.

[MrBarnett]

Would you be able to read the time when Lech left home in the dark ?

Obviously Lech didn’t pass that particular clock on his way to work, but my guess would be that it was illuminated.

[Herlock Sholmes]

wouldnt it be probable that lech and paul had clocks in there home?

We have no way of knowing Abby. As he’d said that he’d left home at “about 3.30” then I’d say that either, a) he might have had a clock or watch somewhere in the house but didn’t look at it as he left the house and so was estimating the gap of time since he’d last seen it (for eg, he might have had an heirloom watch that he kept next to his bed that he only saw when he awoke) or b) he was knocked up at around the same time every day and was estimating the gap of time between knock up and exit. The obvious issues are that clocks and watches can be fast or slow and a Constable ‘knocking up’ couldn’t guarantee to turn up at exactly the same time every day (something might easily have delayed him by a very few minutes)

There’s just no way of sorting out the timings here. If a time could have been - 5 minutes then it could also have been + 5 minutes so the best that we can say is that Lechmere could have had the opportunity of killing Nichols ( let’s face it, he could have lied and left the house at 2.00 but it would speak against a murder in Bucks Row) but nothing about the timings favour it.

[JeffHamm]

wouldnt it be probable that lech and paul had clocks in there home?

That's unclear as I think clocks were relatively expensive. If there were chimes of the quarter hour one could hear, that would be good enough. When you hear the quarter past chime, you know it's time to get ready to go, and would be able to work out if you're ahead or behind time based upon where you are when the half past sounds.

Regardless, both Paul and Cross/Lechmere would have no particular reason to remember the time they left for work on that particular day until after they've heard of the murder. Even then, it may not be something they thought of until talking with the police (or in the case of Paul, with the reporter) and they are asked about it. I could see a reporter asking Paul "the police say they found the body at 3:45", for example, and Paul, wanting to make it clear that he and Cross/Lechmere were there before the police could easily have emphasized that with his "exactly" comment to the reporter. He doesn't say that at the inquest, however, as his memory for the time he left for work is not going to be as "exact" as he might state in the context of an interview with a reporter.

By that time, a few days have probably past before they even consider thinking about what time they left for work on that particular day. As such, their recollection of the time cannot be viewed as particularly accurate, although it's not going to be miles off. The police, however, in their duties does require them to record, or take specific notice, of the times things occurred. As such, the police's statements as to time have to be considered more reliable. Of note, though, is that the recreation does indicate that both of the carmen's statements appear consistent with what would be expected based upon the police testimony. That means, the inquest testimonies about the time sequences cannot be said to be inconsistent, so there's no indication any of their testimonies are problematic or arouse suspicion.

We don't know how any of them knew the time, whether they had clocks, or what clocks they referred to in the street, or if they saw or heard clocks. All we have are a collection of stated times, and starting and end points for stated journeys, which tend to lack specific details as well. So now, all the years later, all we can do is attempt as best we can to recreate those journeys, and base things on general notions of walking speeds. And again, from what we can do there is no indication of any conflict within the testimonies.

There is so much we would want to ask about, to gain details on, and so forth, if this were to be happening today. We can't do any of those things though, so we must work with what we have. Eye witness testimony is not a great source of information because of the known errors it contains. But it is all we have, and all we can say is that the statements do not arouse any cause for suspicion. That's my view anyway.

- Jeff

[drstrange169]

The time issue is a grey area.

Who had clocks, how did they set the time on them, how synchronised were they, who used knocker uppers, what times did their employers use and so on.

Which why the supposed nine minute time gap cops so much flack. It is purely invented to make Lechmere look guilty. It has no scientific structure to back it up.

Which in turn, questions the credibility of Scobie and Griffiths ability to access this particular case, as both appear to have accepted the notion that Cross and Paul's time was definitely synchronised.

Here's a good article on knocker uppers.

https://academic.oup.com/jvc/article/25/3/331/5829726

[GBinOz]

The time issue is a grey area.

Who had clocks, how did they set the time on them, how synchronised were they, who used knocker uppers, what times did their employers use and so on.

Which why the supposed nine minute time gap cops so much flack. It is purely invented to make Lechmere look guilty. It has no scientific structure to back it up.

Which in turn, questions the credibility of Scobie and Griffiths ability to access this particular case, as both appear to have accepted the notion that Cross and Paul's time was definitely synchronised.

Here's a good article on knocker uppers.

https://academic.oup.com/jvc/article/25/3/331/5829726

Hi Dusty,

I agree with your conclusions on the problems with clock times. I read the article from your link, but they didn't appear to address the police involvement in this job. I'm not sure how this would work with the police as it would require the beat to correspond to client's required time of being woken. What if two client's living at the extremities of the beat wanted the same time alarm call? Or the extreme, what if everyone on the beat wanted the same time call. This raises the question, on 15 minute beats, did clients accept inaccuracy up to this limit?

Cheers, George

[Trevor Marriott]

Hi Dusty,

I agree with your conclusions on the problems with clock times. I read the article from your link, but they didn't appear to address the police involvement in this job. I'm not sure how this would work with the police as it would require the beat to correspond to client's required time of being woken. What if two client's living at the extremities of the beat wanted the same time alarm call? Or the extreme, what if everyone on the beat wanted the same time call. This raises the question, on 15 minute beats, did clients accept inaccuracy up to this limit?

Cheers, George

But the 15 mins beat time is not to be taken on face value. If the officer had casuse to stop and check a property or a person he came across on his beat then his time would be out of sync.

I fail to see what all of these posts regarding times and synching clocks. chiming clocks and watches has to do with this murder. There is no accurate time of death, which could have been anytime bewteen 2.30am-3.45am is Pc Neil lied about his movements, and if that be the case Lechmere is totally innocent, or alternativley the death could have occurred betweem 3.15am-3.45am if Neil is to be believed, and then Lechmere is still innocent because there is still nothing to link him to the murder other than finding the body.

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Herlock Sholmes]

The time issue is a grey area.

Who had clocks, how did they set the time on them, how synchronised were they, who used knocker uppers, what times did their employers use and so on.

Which why the supposed nine minute time gap cops so much flack. It is purely invented to make Lechmere look guilty. It has no scientific structure to back it up.

Which in turn, questions the credibility of Scobie and Griffiths ability to access this particular case, as both appear to have accepted the notion that Cross and Paul's time was definitely synchronised.

Here's a good article on knocker uppers.

https://academic.oup.com/jvc/article/25/3/331/5829726

I just had a skim through the article Dusty (I’ll read it through later) but I didn’t notice any mention of the Police also performing the role in addition to professional ‘knocker up’s,’ despite us knowing that they did this. Maybe I missed it though? I didn’t notice this bit though:

“In the infamous case of Jack the Ripper, the serial killer who operated in the Whitechapel area of London, in 1888, Robert Paul, a knocker up, was amongst the discoverers of the first victims.”

[Herlock Sholmes]

Hi Dusty,

I agree with your conclusions on the problems with clock times. I read the article from your link, but they didn't appear to address the police involvement in this job. I'm not sure how this would work with the police as it would require the beat to correspond to client's required time of being woken. What if two client's living at the extremities of the beat wanted the same time alarm call? Or the extreme, what if everyone on the beat wanted the same time call. This raises the question, on 15 minute beats, did clients accept inaccuracy up to this limit?

Cheers, George

Hi George,

I can only assume that the person requiring ‘knocking up’ had to select a particular round with him telling the Desk sergeant the approximate time that he needed to be woken up. He would be told for example that an officer on a beat that lasted from 2.30am to 3.15am would pass his house around 3.00am every morning. The guy might not have to leave the house until 3.30 but the next pass would be too late for him. So he gets a ‘knock’ at around 3.00 every day but as Trevor said if he had to stop to report an open door or break up a fight or question a suspicious character this would mean that he’d be late.

I bet the one needing ‘knocking up’ couldn’t claim money back for being knocked up late.

[rjpalmer]

RJ,

On this particular topic I’m not putting forward my own theory on whether Paul could have seen a brewery clock, I’m simply pointing out the flaws in your increasingly desperate attempts to argue that he couldn’t.

This is a photo of Pereira Street, the next street along (approx W) from Foster Street. It was on the same alignment as Foster Street and met Bath Street at its southern end. The photo shows the view towards Bath Street and the 14ft wall your theory relies so heavily on. There appears to have been a gateway in the wall at that point, and the towering buildings of the brewery complex are clearly visible beyond the wall.

Can we now at least drop the wall nonsense?

There seems to be something wrong with your information, Gary. What date is this photo? The 1890 Goad map does not show any 14ft wall that would be visible at the end of Pereira Street. It starts further west.

Nor is there any gate or door indicated on the side of the building that would have faced the end of Pereira Street. Are you sure that is even a gate?

[MrBarnett]

There seems to be something wrong with your information, Gary. What date is this photo? The 1890 Goad map does not show any 14ft wall that would be visible at the end of Pereira Street. It starts further west.

Nor is there any gate or door indicated on the side of the building that would have faced the end of Pereira Street. Are you sure that is even a gate?

You’re right about the entrance. If that’s what can be seen at the end of the street in the photo, then you have to wonder whether it was in fact of Pereira Street. But perhaps it isn’t even a gate.

Of course, in terms of what we are discussing here, that doesn’t alter the fact that as Paul left home and walked along Foster Street, no wall of any height would have obscured his view of the tall brewery buildings ahead of him.

[MrBarnett]

Pereira Street was in two sections, so it may be the photo doesn’t show the intersection with Bath Street, but with Merceron Street further north.

This photo is supposedly of the rear of houses in the northern section of Pereria Street. The Brewery buildings still loom large even though it is further away.

[Abby Normal]

Pereira Street was in two sections, so it may be the photo doesn’t show the intersection with Bath Street, but with Merceron Street further north.

This photo is supposedly of the rear of houses in the northern section of Pereria Street. The Brewery buildings still loom large even though it is further away.

wow what a pic

[MrBarnett]

wow what a pic

It’s great, isn’t it?

The Barclay Perkins sign is a bit confusing. That was another brewing company and the sign was on the Freemasons Arms pub.