Evidence of innocence

[Fiver]

What you’ve provided us with there, RJ is evidence of how even the poorest Eastender wanted to look smart when it was appropriate to do so.

And yet ‘V. Decent’ Charles Lechmere didn’t even bother to remove his apron when giving evidence at an inquest - or to use his ‘Sunday best’ name.

I wonder how many of those who had to hock their suits every week would end up running several businesses or had wealthy relatives dotted about the country?

This is the most recent example I could find of the claim that witnesses would dress up for an inquest. Now lets try looking at the East London Observer, which provided a lot of description compared to the other newspapers.

"Before the coroner sat the woman who had identified the deceased as Martha Turner, with a baby in her arms, and accompanied by another woman - evidently her mother - dressed in an old, brown figured pompadour." - Tabram Inquest

"The first witness called was a Mrs. Elizabeth Mahoney - a young woman of some 25 or 26 years, plainly clad in a rusty-black dress, with a black woollen shawl pinned round her shoulders." - Tabram Inquest

"Alfred George Crow was the next witness. In appearance, he was a young man of about twenty-three or four, with closely cropped hair, and a beardless, but intelligent face, and wore a shabby green overcoat." - Tabram Inquest

"Mary Ann Connolly, otherwise known as "Pearly Poll", was next introduced, wearing simply an old green shawl and no hat, her face being reddened and soddened by drink." - Tabram Inquest

"Amelia Palmer, the next witness, a pale dark-haired woman, who was poorly clad, said: I live at 35, Dorset-street, Spitalfields, a common lodging-house." - Chapman Inquest

"The next witness was James Cable, a man from Shadwell. A youngish-looking man, with a bullet head and closely cropped hair, and a sandy close-cut moustache; he wore a long overcoat that had once been green, and into the pockets of which he persistently stuck his hands." - Chapman Inquest

"Her evidence was not very material, and she was soon replaced by John Richardson, a tall, stout man, with a very pale face - the result, doubtless, of the early hours he keeps as a market porter - a brown moustache, and dark brown hair. He was shabbily dressed in a ragged coat, and dark brown trousers." - Chapman Inquest

"Piser wore a dark overcoat, brown trousers, and a brown and very battered hat, and appeared somewhat splay-footed - at all events, he stood before the Coroner with his feet meeting at the heels, and then diverging almost at right angles." - Chapman Inquest

But somehow Charles Lechmere wearing his work clothes is supposed to be suspicious.

[A P Tomlinson]

This is the most recent example I could find of the claim that witnesses would dress up for an inquest. Now lets try looking at the East London Observer, which provided a lot of description compared to the other newspapers.

"Before the coroner sat the woman who had identified the deceased as Martha Turner, with a baby in her arms, and accompanied by another woman - evidently her mother - dressed in an old, brown figured pompadour." - Tabram Inquest

"The first witness called was a Mrs. Elizabeth Mahoney - a young woman of some 25 or 26 years, plainly clad in a rusty-black dress, with a black woollen shawl pinned round her shoulders." - Tabram Inquest

"Alfred George Crow was the next witness. In appearance, he was a young man of about twenty-three or four, with closely cropped hair, and a beardless, but intelligent face, and wore a shabby green overcoat." - Tabram Inquest

"Mary Ann Connolly, otherwise known as "Pearly Poll", was next introduced, wearing simply an old green shawl and no hat, her face being reddened and soddened by drink." - Tabram Inquest

"Amelia Palmer, the next witness, a pale dark-haired woman, who was poorly clad, said: I live at 35, Dorset-street, Spitalfields, a common lodging-house." - Chapman Inquest

"The next witness was James Cable, a man from Shadwell. A youngish-looking man, with a bullet head and closely cropped hair, and a sandy close-cut moustache; he wore a long overcoat that had once been green, and into the pockets of which he persistently stuck his hands." - Chapman Inquest

"Her evidence was not very material, and she was soon replaced by John Richardson, a tall, stout man, with a very pale face - the result, doubtless, of the early hours he keeps as a market porter - a brown moustache, and dark brown hair. He was shabbily dressed in a ragged coat, and dark brown trousers." - Chapman Inquest

"Piser wore a dark overcoat, brown trousers, and a brown and very battered hat, and appeared somewhat splay-footed - at all events, he stood before the Coroner with his feet meeting at the heels, and then diverging almost at right angles." - Chapman Inquest

But somehow Charles Lechmere wearing his work clothes is supposed to be suspicious.

He would have had to give very short notice to Pickfords to get the time off his shift to attend, and would probably have to return to work immediately after he was dismissed from proceedings. He may have already put in a good 4 hours before the hearing started...

He would also have quite likely been told that PCMizen would be required to identify him, and when he presented himself to the Police been asked to wear what he was wearing when they met that morning by them.

Like with so many of the pieces of "Evidence" that the police at the time considered perfectly normal behaviour, but people with 21st century sensibilities see rife with suspicion and malice, this is just another example of (to use a colonnial aphorism) there being "No there, there!"
I'm not sure exactly where the common misconception that were he not a psychopath, he would have attended in his "Sunday Best" came from, but I can guess.

[rjpalmer]

He would also have quite likely been told that PCMizen would be required to identify him, and when he presented himself to the Police been asked to wear what he was wearing when they met that morning by them.

Hello A.P.,

my thinking is a little different, though I agree with your general point.

In the 'Missing Evidence' video, the claim is made that Cross would have "potentially" walked past four of the murder sites on his route to work, at the time the murders were being committed, wearing a bloody apron.

It's often pointed out that there is no solid evidence that Cross worked with meat, but I also wonder if he would have worn an apron on his way to work.

Possibly, but as Gary Barnett has pointed out, one of the benefits of these work aprons was to protect one's clothing from the unexpected and unwanted explosions emanating from the rear end of the horse.

I have no direct information on this weighty and deplorably understudied phenomenon, but I rather imagine the aprons would have been scrubbed in the stables at the end of one's shift and hung on a peg, but I merely speculate.

[Darryl Kenyon]

Hello A.P.,

my thinking is a little different, though I agree with your general point.

In the 'Missing Evidence' video, the claim is made that Cross would have "potentially" walked past four of the murder sites on his route to work, at the time the murders were being committed, wearing a bloody apron.

It's often pointed out that there is no solid evidence that Cross worked with meat, but I also wonder if he would have worn an apron on his way to work.

Possibly, but as Gary Barnett has pointed out, one of the benefits of these work aprons was to protect one's clothing from the unexpected and unwanted explosions emanating from the rear end of the horse.

I have no direct information on this weighty and deplorably understudied phenomenon, but I rather imagine the aprons would have been scrubbed in the stables at the end of one's shift and hung on a peg, but I merely speculate.

Hi RJ
Regarding the cleaning of aprons we know for a fact that Mrs Richardson washed her sons, John's apron and left it out to dry in the backyard of 29 Hanbury st. I also would think that Pickford's being around for a number of years would have been quite reputable and would want their drivers to have a certain dress sense [ even if it was Victorian England ], and not turning up with blood, or any other substance for that matter all over their aprons .

Regards Darryl

[Fiver]

Possibly, but as Gary Barnett has pointed out, one of the benefits of these work aprons was to protect one's clothing from the unexpected and unwanted explosions emanating from the rear end of the horse.

Ah, Gary's antigravitational excrement theory.

Here's some pics Pickford's horse vans. The drivers' locations are well above any excrement that conforms to the laws of physics.

[Geddy2112]

Ah, Gary's antigravitational excrement theory.

Here's some pics Pickford's horse vans. The drivers' locations are well above any excrement that conforms to the laws of physics.

Got to love an exploding poop theory. I note both pictures show it being a two man job. Any information either way to if Lechmere had a work buddy? 'Watch me cart mate, just off into no 29's back yard to do a spot of butchery..'

[rjpalmer]

Hi RJ
Regarding the cleaning of aprons we know for a fact that Mrs Richardson washed her sons, John's apron and left it out to dry in the backyard of 29 Hanbury st.

Richardson worked as a porter and at his mother's packing crate business and she had a water tap in the backyard. Lechmere worked at Pickford's and they had a large stable and undoubtedly a water supply.

I'm still not seeing why he would have brought his work apron back & forth, though it is possible.

[Fiver]

Got to love an exploding poop theory. I note both pictures show it being a two man job. Any information either way to if Lechmere had a work buddy? 'Watch me cart mate, just off into no 29's back yard to do a spot of butchery..'

The job of the second man was called van guard or van boy. His son Thomas is listed as a vanguard in the 1891 Census.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Ah, Gary's antigravitational excrement theory.

Here's some pics Pickford's horse vans. The drivers' locations are well above any excrement that conforms to the laws of physics.

It’s hard to imagine Cross leaving a cart in the street with Pickford’s written on the side while he dashes off to do a bit of murdering.

[Geddy2112]

The plot thickens....

[Geddy2112]

It’s hard to imagine Cross leaving a cart in the street with Pickford’s written on the side while he dashes off to do a bit of murdering.

Especially if his son was his van guard... Regardless if it comes out Crossmere had a work buddy it's game over for the theory..

[Fiver]

Especially if his son was his van guard... Regardless if it comes out Crossmere had a work buddy it's game over for the theory..

In 1888, 11 year old Thomas Lechmere was enrolled in the Essex Street school. If Lechmere had a van guard, then that would be a witness who would notice if Lechmere disappeared at the time of the murder and returned covered in fresh bloodstains. If he didn't have a van guard, he'd be leaving a cart full of goods unattended for an extended time, hoping that nothing got stolen. And either way, every customer would have a chance to notice fresh bloodstains on his hands or clothes. Most would have a chance to see them in broad daylight. If he was delivering meat, the customer would be worried about the meat being improperly packaged and having gone bad, so they would be spending extra time checking the product and noting its condition. If he was delivering anything besides meat, the customer would have been worried about the leaking blood ruining their goods, so they would be spending extra time checking the product and noting its condition.

The idea that Lechmere killed while he was at work is laughable.

[FISHY1118]

The idea that Lechmere killed at all is laughable.

[drstrange169]

Lechmere looks pretty flash here and again the seat is very high above the horse.

[rjpalmer]

Lechmere looks pretty flash here and again the seat is very high above the horse.

Would you walk to work through the slums at 3.30 am wearing that apron?