Evidence of innocence

[FISHY1118]

Does Paul's evidence have any real value? Does it matter how Cross was dressed? The theory of Cross having killed Nichols,relies on Cross being at the scene ,and in company of a live Nichols,prior to the arrival of Paul.Where is evidene of that?

Dont you know Harry? ''Possible'' is the new ''Evidence'' around here

[MrBarnett]

You really have to admire this guy’s contribution to Ripperology.

[GUT]

Knowing how the press mangle names I have often wondered if his evidence went something like

”my name is Lechmere, but I am also known by Cross, it was my stepfathers name”

and the press went the easy path Cross easily spelt how is Lechmere?

[Fiver]

Lechmere’s mother left her native Herefordshire, where she had very influential connections, and moved to one of the most violent and vice-ridden quarters of the East End (Tiger Bay) to set up home with a policeman who was little more than a boy, a decade younger than she was. She went through a form of marriage with her toy boy (he lied about his age) which was illegal because her first husband was still alive. Her first husband’s cousin was a policeman in Hereford at about the same time.

One of the most violent and vice-ridden quarters of the East End? Sounds like Maria Lechmere's inheritance disappeared about the same time that her first husband did.

Little more than a boy? Thomas Cross was several years older than the girl John Allen Lechmere was shacking up with in Northamptonshire.

A decade younger than she was? There was an even bigger age gap between John Allen Lechmere and Ann Masters, but you don't mention that constantly.

A form of marriage? It was an actual marriage. As opposed to there being no evidence (so far) that John Allen Lechmere married Ann Masters.

Boy toy? I note you don't use similar disparaging remarks about John Allen Lechmere shacking up with an even younger girl.

Thomas Cross lied about his age? So did John Allen Lechmere, but you don't ding him about it.

Illegal because her first husband was still alive? People have repeatedly shown you that the law did not consider a second marriage bigamous if the first spouse was believed dead. Maria Lechmere's husband had abandoned her about a decade before she married Thomas Cross and by that point John Allen Lechmere had two children with another woman.

As to not staying in Hereford, Maria's parents were dead. I suspect he older sisters had moved away. Her first husband, a drunk, had abandoned her, possibly for a teen-aged lover and possibly after stealing her inheritance. A fresh start, away from the gossip and the shame makes sense.

So there’s another possible reason why CAL did not follow the common procedure and reveal that although he used his stepfather’s name of Cross, his real name was Charles Allen Lechmere. There were a number of people in Herefordshire who when they read that would immediately recognise the pretty well unique name CAL and realise that his mother had committed bigamy.

How would recognizing the name Charles Allen Lechmere tell people in Heresford that his mother had remarried? It doesn't even tell them that she's still alive.

So now we have two entirely plausible reasons why he might have deliberately chosen to conceal his identity.

A more plausible possibility would be that Charles Allen Lechmere didn't want to take the chance that the father who abandoned him and his mother, possibly after stealing his mother's inheritance, might still be alive and looking to for a chance to sponge off of Charles. Or even just be a bad influence for Charles' children, didn't you find a newspaper article that indicated John Allen Lechmere might be a drunkard?

[Fiver]

Knowing how the press mangle names I have often wondered if his evidence went something like

”my name is Lechmere, but I am also known by Cross, it was my stepfathers name”

and the press went the easy path Cross easily spelt how is Lechmere?

That's a very plausible explanation. After all, he did take the unusual step of publicly his middle name, a bad idea for anyone who was actually trying to conceal his identity.

[MrBarnett]

That's a very plausible explanation. After all, he did take the unusual step of publicly his middle name, a bad idea for anyone who was actually trying to conceal his identity.

So, not a single reporter was even willing to have a guess at the name - in 1876 or 1888? You used to make more sense when you filled your posts with emojis.

[MrBarnett]

One of the most violent and vice-ridden quarters of the East End? Sounds like Maria Lechmere's inheritance disappeared about the same time that her first husband did.

Little more than a boy? Thomas Cross was several years older than the girl John Allen Lechmere was shacking up with in Northamptonshire.

A decade younger than she was? There was an even bigger age gap between John Allen Lechmere and Ann Masters, but you don't mention that constantly.

A form of marriage? It was an actual marriage. As opposed to there being no evidence (so far) that John Allen Lechmere married Ann Masters.

Boy toy? I note you don't use similar disparaging remarks about John Allen Lechmere shacking up with an even younger girl.

Thomas Cross lied about his age? So did John Allen Lechmere, but you don't ding him about it.

Illegal because her first husband was still alive? People have repeatedly shown you that the law did not consider a second marriage bigamous if the first spouse was believed dead. Maria Lechmere's husband had abandoned her about a decade before she married Thomas Cross and by that point John Allen Lechmere had two children with another woman.

As to not staying in Hereford, Maria's parents were dead. I suspect he older sisters had moved away. Her first husband, a drunk, had abandoned her, possibly for a teen-aged lover and possibly after stealing her inheritance. A fresh start, away from the gossip and the shame makes sense.



How would recognizing the name Charles Allen Lechmere tell people in Heresford that his mother had remarried? It doesn't even tell them that she's still alive.



A more plausible possibility would be that Charles Allen Lechmere didn't want to take the chance that the father who abandoned him and his mother, possibly after stealing his mother's inheritance, might still be alive and looking to for a chance to sponge off of Charles. Or even just be a bad influence for Charles' children, didn't you find a newspaper article that indicated John Allen Lechmere might be a drunkard?

The law was quite clear. Going through a form of marriage while a previous spouse was still alive and no divorce had taken place was an act of bigamy and the second marriage was invalid. And if the bigamist was aware that the previous spouse was still living they were considered to have committed a criminal offence. Maria had no reason to suspect her husband was dead and every reason to suspect that if he were still alive, news of the fact might filter through to Hereford.

I’m not sure of the relevance of your John Allen Lechmere whataboutery. There was a similar age difference in the two cases, but John Allen doesn’t seem to have married Ann - possibly because he knew such an action would have been bigamous. So the couple just pretended to be married. Their relationship would have been socially unacceptable, but not criminal.

I’ll explain this one last time. If Lechmere had stood up in court and said, ‘My name is Charles Allen Lechmere, but I am known by the name of Cross, which is my stepfather’s name.’ he would have been announcing to the world that his mother had married someone named Cross. And since his name was a unique one, certain people in Herefordshire (and a particular person in Daventry) would have potentially been made aware that Maria had committed bigamy. That concern must have been ever present in Maria’s mind.

Maria’s legacy was in the form of income, how could her (one and only) husband have stolen it? While living in Blue School Lane in 1861, she was working as a straw bonnett maker. A straw bonnet maker had taken over John Allen’s former business premises, so it seems likely that she was an employer of that person, whose name I can’t recall, but knowing how keen a student of Ma you’ve become, I’ll look it up for you.

Have you taken a crash course in Ma Lechmere’s history, or have you found yourself a secret advisor? There are a few other small points you (or your advisor) have misunderstood, but rather than lecture you on the subject, I recommend you read up on it - and pay closer attention this time!

https://www.jtrforums.com/forum/moti...ld-ma-lechmere

[MrBarnett]

“One of the most violent and vice-ridden quarters of the East End?”


It certainly was. It was called ‘Tiger Bay’. Thomas Cross, Maria’s young boyfriend (who masqueraded as her husband) patrolled its mean streets and must have frequently come into contract with its tigresses. And her adolescent son must also have been aware of the ladies of Frederick Street and the other ‘Tiger Bays’ nearby. Maria would have been a very negligent mother not to have warned her son against the bad streets, bad men, bad children and, above all, the bad women who infested the streets around them.

From Reynolds of 18th August, 1861:


““Tiger Bay” [Frederick Street] is simply a once reputable street, which has by some means or another fallen into the tenancy of a number of low brothel-keepers, who harbour several of the worst characters of both sexes, and who are rapidly deteriorating the morals and feelings of the surrounding neighbourhood. Imagine a street of about forty houses, say twenty on each side, at the doors of which are sitting, lolling, or standing dirty, brazen-faced women, with their dishevelled hair hanging about their shoulders, and who are engaged in converse, oftimes in language unfit for “ears polite,” with others of their own sex who are leaning, in a state of semi-nudity, out of the dingy, uncleared windows. Here and there may be seen the tall ungainly form of one of their bullies, stolidly smoking a short dirty pipe; or uttering fierce imprecations on some poor unfortunate who has given him her last coin for the purpose of procuring “a pint”. A shoal of ragged, stockingless, precocious urchins are playing amid the mud and filth of the gutter, or forming a “thief school,” under the patronage of approving nods from grim-featured, sallow-cheeked men, whose hair betrays evidences of having been lately cut at the national expense. Towards nightfall the scene changes. The pale, haggard-faced women, with their ragged dirty dresses, their unclimbed hair, and slatternly appearance, disappear; and in their stead may be seen the gaudily-attired, painted, and smirking damsels of the streets, who are about to roam forth in search of prey.”

[MrBarnett]

John Allen Lechmere was implicated in the demise of a policeman who drank himself to death in Hereford. It was claimed that Lechmere had plied the PC with brandy while he was on duty and there was some talk of charging him with manslaughter. The fallout of that scandalous and highly publicised incident may well have contributed to the failure of Lechmere’s business which depended on the patronage of the local respectable society.

Ironically, shortly afterwards, one of JAL’s cousins was pounding the beat in Hereford City.

[Fiver]

“One of the most violent and vice-ridden quarters of the East End?”


It certainly was.

You have missed my point. I am well aware that Tiger Bay was one of the most notorious parts of the area.

Sounds like Maria Lechmere's inheritance disappeared about the same time that her first husband did. Why else would she have lived in such a horrible neighborhood?

[MrBarnett]

You have missed my point. I am well aware that Tiger Bay was one of the most notorious parts of the area.

Sounds like Maria Lechmere's inheritance disappeared about the same time that her first husband did. Why else would she have lived in such a horrible neighborhood?

She received an income from her father’s estate. She started businesses in her later life. As did her son - several businesses. On a carman’s savings?

Her AWOL husband remained an employee for the remainder of his life.

[MrBarnett]

You have missed my point. I am well aware that Tiger Bay was one of the most notorious parts of the area.

Sounds like Maria Lechmere's inheritance disappeared about the same time that her first husband did. Why else would she have lived in such a horrible neighborhood?

By the way, what do you know about Tiger Bay?

[MrBarnett]

Funny how Lechmere didn’t start his own business until after his mother died. Perhaps he bought a winning lottery ticket on the day after her funeral.

[MrBarnett]

Here’s a question for our newly-informed Lechmere expert (or his advisor), what % of STGE carmen were classified as ‘v. decent’ in 1887?

[Fiver]

The law was quite clear. Going through a form of marriage while a previous spouse was still alive and no divorce had taken place was an act of bigamy and the second marriage was invalid.

It was not a form of marriage. It was a marriage, with the question being whether it was a legal marriage.

There is a legal term called presumption of death. It means that someone who disappeared can be legally presumed dead after a certain length of time. Others have shown you that is how the law worked. People accused of bigamy were declared Not Guilty if they believed their previous spouse was dead.

Here's another example, from 1888.

And an example from 1889.

And another example from 1889.

Maria Lechmere married Thomas Cross in 1858, at least 7 years after John Allen Lechere deserted her.

By 1888, it had been at least 37 years since John Allen Lechmere deserted his wife. and he had been dead for almost a decade.