Evidence of innocence

[Mike J. G.]

Agreed. Finding the body makes him a better suspect than many, but there wasn't just one body. Based on the testimony of three witnesses, Chapman was killed after Lechmere started work. Killing Stride and Eddowes would have meant staying up 23+ hours or getting up 3+ hours early on his only day off.

Totally agree.

[Mike J. G.]

Yes and the fibs have been going on for too long -

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/9512928/Was-Jack-the-Ripper-a-cart-driver-from-Bethnal-Green.html

Robert Paul never said that and he was not on his way to Pickfords' he worked somewhere else



Which of course contradicts the quote above but sorry, it should be middle of the road guv'nor...



Nope... Chapman out of hours, Kelly not a work day, Berner St and Mitre square not on those routes... not a bad quote though for near 100% false.



Nope...

Agreed again.

[Mike J. G.]

Hi Mike,

I would suggest that there is a better suspect than Lechmere that can be placed at the scene of a crime: George Hutchinson. I don't think that he's quite the best suspect overall, just the best of those that can be placed at the scene of a crime.

I totally agree that there are a few better suspects than Lech for me. Bury, Chapman, Kelly, for starters. Hutch is arguably better than Lechmere, I'd say, but not better than the 3 I listed, which I'm sure you'd agree with.

[Lewis C]

I totally agree that there are a few better suspects than Lech for me. Bury, Chapman, Kelly, for starters. Hutch is arguably better than Lechmere, I'd say, but not better than the 3 I listed, which I'm sure you'd agree with.

Of the 5 names you mentioned, I'd say Bury is the strongest suspect, Chapman second strongest, and Lech the weakest, with Kelly and Hutch about the same, and stronger than most suspects.

[Geddy2112]

This is not meant to be anything other than a throwaway comment, but I was listening to a retired homicide detective the other night, and he had some interesting things to say about witnesses.

Based on years of experience, two types of witnesses raised his suspicions: those too helpful and eager with information, and those who wanted to tell him nothing.

One can find examples of both 'types' in the Whitechapel Murders case, but I personally don't think Lechmere is a good example of either. To me, he comes across as someone squarely in the middle.

Excellent point that one. Totally agree. When this whole body finding lark happened to me, when I was a teenager I was probably still in shock and probably said not very much, however the next day I was probably speaking too much and can remember being told to just answer the question instead of elaboration which I have found out in later life I do when I'm nervous. You could probably (and someone probably has) write a book on the psychology of the witness. Even though I was 'found next to a freshly killed woman' by my mate I was never thought as suspicious though... thought I best add that.

[FrankO]

But as all people aren’t selfless now RD they certainly weren’t all selfless then. I don’t see how anyone can been seen to be making excuses for 2 men that acted in an entirely normal human way. Do you not think that we are all affected by our environments? I wouldn’t dream of carrying a gun or knifing someone over an argument and neither would you but this happens today. Even kids are behaving like this and it’s not because they’re born bad it’s because of the environment they’ve grown up in and the role models that they’ve had which has de-sensitised them to violence. If a woman had complained of being raped in those days she’d have been told “stop moaning, where’s my supper?” Probably followed by a black eye.

In Cross and Paul’s lives (I’m not talking about childhood) no one helped them. No free medical care, so no money - you suffered. No work no money - you starved or went to the horribly harsh workhouse. There was little or no evidence that politicians gave them a seconds thought until there was a war and then they became prime cannon fodder before losing a leg and spending the rest of their shortened lives as a beggar on the street.

Cross sees a shape that he thinks might be useful to him then when he gets to the middle of the road he finds that it’s a woman that’s no use to him. If he hadn’t heard Paul approaching at that point I wouldn’t have been surprised if he’d just passed by. This is probably what he’d have thought to himself “probably some drunken old ****. Not my problem, I’m not being late because of some gin sodden old ****. Hold on, what if she’s injured? Nah, that’s her problem, shouldn’t be out on the streets. I’m not having her all over me if she wakes up. Anyway there are coppers passing, one of them will find her.”

Cross and Paul acted perfectly normally. There are people today who would think exactly the same RD. I’ve seen footage of people lying in the street and people just walking past. It happens.

Hi Mike & all,

Here's an interesting post by poster Ohrocky on the thread "All roads lead to Lechmere":

08-19-2021, 05:47 PM #92
Here's what happened to me.........

A couple of years ago, late one cold winters evening I was returning home from a late football match. Turning the corner into my quiet, tree-lined steet I saw "something" up against the churchyard wall. I approached and saw that it was a young woman lying there, motionless. I didn't know whether she had been attacked, had a medical episode, or had collapsed through drink and / or drugs.

I didn't want to be observed touching the young woman or her posessions so moved a couple of yards away from her. Whilst contemplating what to do I saw a woman passing on her way home from a late shift so I attracted her attention and asked her over. Being a female she had no compunction touching the young lady and eventually rousing her and rifling through her handbag. A nearly empty bottle of vodka was found in her bag so the cause of her collapse soon became apparent.

The rest of the tale doesn't really matter. But I now realise that the way I reacted on finding a woman's body out on the street was not too disimilar at all from the way Lechmere reacted on finding Polly Nichols.

The name issue is a total red herring. In the UK it is not unlawful to go by whatever name you choose provided it is not done with the intention to defraud. On another thread I posted a quote from an MJK thread (originally posted by Wickerman) where a witness gave a name but said it wasn't her real name and that not many people went by their real name. This would suggest that it was certainly not unusual for people to use names other than their registered or "official name".

All the best,
Frank

[Herlock Sholmes]

Hi Mike & all,

Here's an interesting post by poster Ohrocky on the thread "All roads lead to Lechmere":

08-19-2021, 05:47 PM #92
Here's what happened to me.........

A couple of years ago, late one cold winters evening I was returning home from a late football match. Turning the corner into my quiet, tree-lined steet I saw "something" up against the churchyard wall. I approached and saw that it was a young woman lying there, motionless. I didn't know whether she had been attacked, had a medical episode, or had collapsed through drink and / or drugs.

I didn't want to be observed touching the young woman or her posessions so moved a couple of yards away from her. Whilst contemplating what to do I saw a woman passing on her way home from a late shift so I attracted her attention and asked her over. Being a female she had no compunction touching the young lady and eventually rousing her and rifling through her handbag. A nearly empty bottle of vodka was found in her bag so the cause of her collapse soon became apparent.

The rest of the tale doesn't really matter. But I now realise that the way I reacted on finding a woman's body out on the street was not too disimilar at all from the way Lechmere reacted on finding Polly Nichols.

The name issue is a total red herring. In the UK it is not unlawful to go by whatever name you choose provided it is not done with the intention to defraud. On another thread I posted a quote from an MJK thread (originally posted by Wickerman) where a witness gave a name but said it wasn't her real name and that not many people went by their real name. This would suggest that it was certainly not unusual for people to use names other than their registered or "official name".

All the best,
Frank

Hi Frank,

Thanks for posting Ohrocky’s example. It’s a really good illustration of the things that can go through anyone’s mind in that situation and it’s not always ‘I must help’ that’s first in line. Ohrocky might have touched her to see if she was ok only for her to wake up screaming that he’d attacked her (who knows how someone might act if they’re drunk or on drugs) so Cross might have hesitated for that same reason. Would he really have wanted to be 20 minutes from work in a darkened street with a woman screaming “help, help” at the top of her lungs? Having someone else there is a good insurance policy. Also I believe that it was a common trick for women to lure a guy over so that he could be attacked and robbed, so maybe Cross was worried that some guy might be waiting in the shadows?

I see nothing suspicious in the actions of Cross or Paul. There aren’t any rules of behaviour and harder times breed harder people. There wasn’t much sympathy going around in those days. This was only 40 years after we as a country did next to zero to stop a million dying during the potato famine.

[FrankO]

Hi Frank,

Thanks for posting Ohrocky’s example. It’s a really good illustration of the things that can go through anyone’s mind in that situation and it’s not always ‘I must help’ that’s first in line. Ohrocky might have touched her to see if she was ok only for her to wake up screaming that he’d attacked her (who knows how someone might act if they’re drunk or on drugs) so Cross might have hesitated for that same reason. Would he really have wanted to be 20 minutes from work in a darkened street with a woman screaming “help, help” at the top of her lungs? Having someone else there is a good insurance policy. Also I believe that it was a common trick for women to lure a guy over so that he could be attacked and robbed, so maybe Cross was worried that some guy might be waiting in the shadows?

I see nothing suspicious in the actions of Cross or Paul. There aren’t any rules of behaviour and harder times breed harder people. There wasn’t much sympathy going around in those days. This was only 40 years after we as a country did next to zero to stop a million dying during the potato famine.

Hi Mike,

What's also interesting about Ohrocky's account is that he first approached the woman, but then moved a couple of yards away from her as he didn't want to be seen touching the young woman. Might something similar have happened in Lechmere's case? All speculation, of course, but might it?

Cheers,
Frank

[Geddy2112]

One November afternoon in the 1980s a teenage boy had a paper round. Often on this paper round he was met by a friend, they both went to different secondary schools so met up when they could, but by the timings it was usually at a similar point. The mate did the odds one side of the road the lad did the evens on the other. This enabled the round to get finished sooner so the lad was always helpful of the help and of course shared the wages and any treats offered by the customers.
One such customer was disabled and lived in a section of 'old persons bungalows' this was the only part of the route where the odds and evens were separated by a grassed area. The lad always did the bungalows and this one person always was waiting at her gate at the correct time no matter what the weather. They suspected it was because she did not have much company and at least a very brief chat with the paper lad was better than nothing.
On the afternoon in question the lad was a bit surprised to note the woman was not at her gate to greet him, so whilst his mate was across the green delivering papers he decided to walk down the path towards the side entrance to her house, it was not fully dark but dark enough. It was not 'around 3:30' however that will have been the approx time the lad left the newsagent ironically. The lad noticed the door was opened a bit so pushed it further open and to his horror he saw the woman lying there with what seemed to be a head injury, a lot of blood. The lad jumped back out of the door way in shock and seemed to freeze for what seemed like over a minute. The lad's mate concerned he was not talking at the gate to the woman crossed the green to actually witness the lad moving back from the doorway. The poor woman had been murdered with horrific injuries.
The lads decided to go together to meet the first person they could to raise the alarm. They found someone in their garden across the road and they rang for the Police. The woman had not been dead that long, so in fact the paperboy had been found 'alone near a freshly killed woman' but oddly enough once the Police had done some initial investigations and some brief questioning they were sure the paper lad and his mate were not involved and no suspicion was ever placed on them.
People say of course no suspicion would be placed on two teenage boys being where they were supposed to be but it turned out one of the real murderers was even younger at just 11.

A interesting story you might say, well yes but the most interesting bit about the story is it is a true story and I was that paper boy.

[Mike J. G.]

Of the 5 names you mentioned, I'd say Bury is the strongest suspect, Chapman second strongest, and Lech the weakest, with Kelly and Hutch about the same, and stronger than most suspects.

I wouldn't disagree too much, although I'm content with the idea that the police questioned Hutch and ruled him out. I've got Kelly higher than Hutch, but I honestly don't have a suspect, it's just that those 3 names for me, along with Kos, are the more likely. I'd still be inclined to go with an unknown, although in all likelihood they were questioned at one point and their name could be out there.

My favourite part of the whole Lechmere debacle is that Christer got a case of the willies looking into his eyes. Just goes to show how perceptions can be affected by the most average pictures of average people.

Put Lechmere's picture in a newspaper under the headline "Pensioner Saves Child From Speeding Car" and he's a warm, safe hero of the community.

Put Lechmere's picture in a newspaper under the headline "Pensioner In Stolen Car Solicits Child" and you'll probably shudder looking at the poor sod.

Poor Lech, if only he knew the extent of the waffle being thrown about the place all because he found a body on his way to work.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Hi Mike,

What's also interesting about Ohrocky's account is that he first approached the woman, but then moved a couple of yards away from her as he didn't want to be seen touching the young woman. Might something similar have happened in Lechmere's case? All speculation, of course, but might it?

Cheers,
Frank

Hi Frank,

I think it could have. Especially if, when he saw that it was a woman, he might have seen that her skirts were raised. If she’d been raped and had fallen unconscious then to wake up with a strange man standing over her, perhaps touching her (innocently), could easily have led her to have screamed out. Might Cross have been afraid of being blamed with the woman in a confused state?

[Geddy2112]

I did it again...

To tell the truth, Charles Lechmere should not even have been in Buck´s Row at 3.45 in the morning. For he claimed that he had left his home at 3.30

From the Sydsvenskan, Swedish newspaper article.

Herlock Sholmes I now make that twice in his book, once on the (still) Missing Evidence video, once on the freeze frame documents given to Scobie Doo, numerous times here and on the JtR forums that he, according to him 'forgot' to put the 'about' in.

Astonishing to be honest.

[FrankO]

Might Cross have been afraid of being blamed with the woman in a confused state?

I agree, Mike. He may well have wanted to investigate when he realized it was a woman lying on the other side of the street. So, he walked over and then, when hearing footsteps, he thought it wiser to not be found kneeling next to the woman in the state she was in, whatever state that turned out to be.

Cheers,
Frank

[Herlock Sholmes]

I did it again...



From the Sydsvenskan, Swedish newspaper article.

Herlock Sholmes I now make that twice in his book, once on the (still) Missing Evidence video, once on the freeze frame documents given to Scobie Doo, numerous times here and on the JtR forums that he, according to him 'forgot' to put the 'about' in.

Astonishing to be honest.

When was the article Geddy?

[Geddy2112]

When was the article Geddy?

I believe it was December 2012. It's how it started for Christer. https://www.jtrforums.com/forum/pers...678#post243678 (I have a copy of the English translation if required.)

Himself and Stow have been whinging lately about being misquoted in the Daily Telegraph of 2012

Here - https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...nal-Green.html

and here - https://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/w...veiled-8138328

and here - https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...inologist.html

It's astonishing all these papers and the Missing Evidence seem to make the exact same misquotes. What did Scobie say about coincidences mounting up. I suggest deliberate not misquoting.