Evidence of innocence

[rjpalmer]

Of course, Lechmere ‘raised the alarm’ - twice, once to Paul and once to Mizen. But his hand may have been forced into doing so by the arrival of Paul. That’s the point isn’t it, that if Paul had not found him ‘where the woman was’ he may not have mentioned it to anyone?

Yes, if you're unlucky enough to find a woman lying on the pavement on your walk to work, circumstances do indeed force you to wave down the first passing pedestrian and then contact the police.

How is any of this inconsistent with the actions of a normal, innocent citizen?

[MrBarnett]

Gary, such what ifs are unanswerable, and in reality take us nowhere except up blind alleys.

We have to work with the evidence we have surely. Otherwise literally any suggest taken as equally valid to any other.

Hope you are well


Steve

I am very well, thank you, Steve. I hope you are too.

I agree we have to work with the evidence, but I personally have no issue with those who use the evidence as the basis for conjectural journeys.

It’s when people blur the lines between fact and conjecture that I get a bit irritated. But even that can sometimes lead to challenges that unearth fresh info. Although it can sometimes be annoying, Ripperological argy-bargy is quite healthy I think.

[MrBarnett]

Yes, if you're unlucky enough to find a woman lying on the pavement on your walk to work, circumstances do indeed force you to wave down the first passing pedestrian and then contact the police.

How is any of this inconsistent with the actions of a normal, innocent citizen?

It isn’t. But the situation would have been different if Paul had not come along. Paul’s arrival may well have influenced Lechmere’s subsequent behaviour, irrespective of whether he was innocent or guilty.

[MrBarnett]

I'm not 'siding' with anyone, Abby, but I do like the brickhead moniker. It's a keeper.

It puts me in mind of The Blockheads, Ian Drury’s band.

Is there any connection between Maybrick and Lytham St Anne’s?

[rjpalmer]

Lechmere's refusal to prop up the body is another weak argument.

Many people--perhaps most people--are going to hesitate before handling a street person, out of fear of disease or lice or just out of general distaste. Lechmere may have been enough of a Victorian to find the thought of moving an unknown street woman to be socially awkward.

Further, considering that Lechmere once accidently ran over a boy and killed him, he may have been particularly upset by a body sprawled on the side of the street, and wouldn't want to handle it.

Third, his stepfather was a police constable, so he may have had enough sense to realize that it was best to leave such matters to the police, in case a crime had occurred.

The idea that he didn't want Paul to prop up the body for fear of realizing that Polly's throat had been cut is very unconvincing, considering it was Lechmere who had invited Paul to inspect the body in the first place.

[Abby Normal]

Abby, firstly hi, hope you are ok.
why do people keep saying he didn't raise the alarm?

Within seconds of seeing the body(according to him, anything else is speculation and should not be used to say he didn't raise the alarm) , he calls Paul walking some 40 yards behind him to the body. Is that not raising the alarm?

Or would you suggest, he should have knocked on doors of people who could be asleep, and in doing so allow Paul to walk past?

Do we really think he should have stood in the road, shouting " look at this woman, she may need help" ?
Or should he have raised the incident with the only person he saw, and headed off to find a policeman?

Seriously, what do people think in the scenero where he is walking 40 yards ahead of Paul and sees the body he SHOULD have done?
Specifics?


Steve

hi el
thanks! and same to you!! what i keep saying is hes SEEN near the body before trying to raise the alarm. it has many implications besides just being creepy. im not sure why people are having a such a hard time with this. perhaps too subtle a difference for most i guess.
its an odd time and a very short span to be seen. just at that moment- for an innocent man the chances seem slim, for a not so innocent man the chances seem greater... being hes been with the victim longer.
ive said it many times before but ill say it again... ive seen and read alot of true crime and ive never heard of an innocent "witness" in this type of situation.

and ill add this maybe it helps understand. crow, diemshitz, etc, the other witnesses that found the body, if they were the killer they need not alert anyone. having not been seen near the body they can leave without a care in the world. not so for someone whos seen near the body before trying to raise the alarm, like lech.

hope this helps.

[Abby Normal]

And one important thing that Lechmerians always don't consider:

Rising the alarm for what exactly?!

If a man hardly recognised in the dark there is a woman laying on the ground, should he immediately and before even looking closely or examining her go mad shouting and knocking on the doors and screaming and pulling his hair: hey people come here all of you to me hey hey come here , there seems to be a woman laying here, come everyone all of you to me damn it...






The Baron

no he could be on his way to find help, he could yell for a police man, or simply walk away and ignore. and as i just mentioned to el, it opens up a whole new can of worms re timing.

let me put it this way. if the first we here of lech is mizen or another copper or anyone else saying hes telling him of a women down, then it would be alot less suspicious, than the first we hear of him is hes seen near the body of freshly killed victim.

surely you can see that

[Abby Normal]

Of course, Lechmere ‘raised the alarm’ - twice, once to Paul and once to Mizen. But his hand may have been forced into doing so by the arrival of Paul. That’s the point isn’t it, that if Paul had not found him ‘where the woman was’ he may not have mentioned it to anyone?

yes. yes!! thank god gary!!

my whole point is hes seen alone with her before raising the alarm. of course he does after paul arrives.

[Abby Normal]

The idea he does not raise the alarm, seems to have simply been accepted as fact by many, when a close examination shows such is not true.

Above I asked what people think he should have done?
I suspect that the truth is some have accepted the idea that he was there sooner than he said as fact, when it's speculation based on manipulation of times given, acceptance of times given , even when there is contradictory evidence.
However, I contend we must use the evidence we have, which says there is no gap between Lechmere and Paul other than 40 or so yards .

So we must I submit, look.at his actions from there and how there compare to other witnesses.

Let's start will Paul, he does not wake people up, he does not knock on doors, he goes with Lechmere to find a policeman.
And of course it's not clear on31st that a Sk is at large. And as The Baron asks, what alarm should be raised?

Davies, in Hanbury Street, sees the body, we have no idea if he looks at it for 5 seconds, 10 or even 30 seconds.
He heads back into the house, sees no one.
Does he knock on room doors to raise the alarm?
No he goes into the street.

Does he knock up those next door?
No he tells the first people he sees and goes to find the police.
I see little , if any difference between him and Lechmere. And by the 8th that a killer is around is well known.

Diemschutz, looks at body, ( By now they know they have a SK in the area, so maybe different response)

He knows people are still in the club, so he goes in there.

Watkins in Mitre Square, he goes to the open door of the warehouse, where he knows Morris is working. He does knock in doors, including that of a fellow police officer.

Bowyer, sees the body, goes back down Miller's Court, apparently tells no one he sees, goes into the shop, tells McCarthy, they then both go the the police .

Again I really don't understand what people mean when they say he didn't raise the alarm, because he clearly did.
That's why I asked, what do people think he should have done?

Steve

but none were seen near the body before raising the alarm and i answered why this makes a difference in my previous post to you.

[Abby Normal]

Lechmere's refusal to prop up the body is another weak argument.

Many people--perhaps most people--are going to hesitate before handling a street person, out of fear of disease or lice or just out of general distaste. Lechmere may have been enough of a Victorian to find the thought of moving an unknown street woman to be socially awkward.

Further, considering that Lechmere once accidently ran over a boy and killed him, he may have been particularly upset by a body sprawled on the side of the street, and wouldn't want to handle it.

Third, his stepfather was a police constable, so he may have had enough sense to realize that it was best to leave such matters to the police, in case a crime had occurred.

The idea that he didn't want Paul to prop up the body for fear of realizing that Polly's throat had been cut is very unconvincing, considering it was Lechmere who had invited Paul to inspect the body in the first place.

i actually agree with this rj. ive always thought this was one of the weakest parts of the argument. although fish would

say its because he didnt want paul to see the extant of the damage, which makes some sense i guess.

[The Baron]

it would be alot less suspicious, than the first we hear of him is hes seen near the body of freshly killed victim.

Completely wrong Abby.

That's not what we've first heard of him.

If he chose to run away no one ever will be talking now about him, and Paul could have very likely missed the body.

It was Lechmere's choice to stand and look and give the Attention to the woman laying on the ground to the first one he saw who could have been anyone even a constable, and he went with him looking for a policeman.




The Baron

[Elamarna]

hi el
thanks! and same to you!! what i keep saying is hes SEEN near the body before trying to raise the alarm. it has many implications besides just being creepy. im not sure why people are having a such a hard time with this. perhaps too subtle a difference for most i guess.
its an odd time and a very short span to be seen. just at that moment- for an innocent man the chances seem slim, for a not so innocent man the chances seem greater... being hes been with the victim longer.
ive said it many times before but ill say it again... ive seen and read alot of true crime and ive never heard of an innocent "witness" in this type of situation.

and ill add this maybe it helps understand. crow, diemshitz, etc, the other witnesses that found the body, if they were the killer they need not alert anyone. having not been seen near the body they can leave without a care in the world. not so for someone whos seen near the body before trying to raise the alarm, like lech.

hope tbhis helps.

Hi Abby, not like you, but you haven't said what he think he should have done.

He raised the alarm with the nearest person, according to him within seconds of seeing the body.

So just say what else you think, in that scenero he should have done?

In am good btw

Steve

[The Baron]

near the body of freshly killed victim.

How could you give a certain TOD ?! She could have been dead for 30 Minutes or more

Don't tell me you swallowed the blood 'evidence' of Fisherman?!



The Baron

[Elamarna]

but none were seen near the body before raising the alarm and i answered why this makes a difference in my previous post to you.

But None were in a position of being 40 yards ahead of someone else were they.

That he is seen, near a body before he raises the alarm is irrelevant IF he is only 40 yards ahead of Paul.
To put it as clearly as possible, if he tells the truth, when else apart from he sees the body COULD he have raised any alarm

Th e brutal truth is that despite the thousands of posts suggesting he is there significantly ahead of Paul, it's nothing but speculation .
Nothing wrong with speculation, but it's just that.


steve

[Harry D]

Unladen carts were occasionally left unguarded by their drivers - and occasionally pinched! And if we are talking about a man consumed with a burning desire to murder and mutilate women in the open streets, we should expect him to be prepared to take a few risks.

Columbo beat me to the punch, but if Lechmere's cargo had been stolen or tampered with, that was a sackable offence. We are being asked to believe that Lechmere was up to tricks like this for decades, committing different strings of murders across London, but in reality he was gainfully employed throughout his life.