All roads lead to Lechmere.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

It was not neccessary for the police to clear Cross,he was never,at the time ,accused or believed to have been the murderer.Aberline was present at the inquest,he heard the evidence of Cross.If he Aberline,was satisfied with that evidence,and it appears he was,then no further action needed to be taken.

I agree.

I think the whole idea of someone murdering women on his way to work is more Monty Python than criminal detection work!

One of the great things about Lechmere as a suspect is how he is always in the wrong place or travelling in the wrong direction to have been the murderer.

He and Nichols were obviously walking in opposite directions.

She didn't just bump into someone on his way to work in a deserted, dark street, and get murdered by him.

Take a look at the other four murders.

[Abby Normal]

It wouldn't have taken long to clear him: he had no blood on him and no knife, either.

oh really? i didnt know he was checked for blood or knife. could you please provide the source for this?

[Elamarna]

oh really? i didnt know he was checked for blood or knife. could you please provide the source for this?

He certainly was not checked for a knife Abby, that is correct.
However, both Mizen and Paul stood next to him and apparently noticed no blood.
So I suggest it's a reasonable assumption that he had no blood on his clothing or hands.

Steve

[Fiver]

He certainly was not checked for a knife Abby, that is correct.
However, both Mizen and Paul stood next to him and apparently noticed no blood.
So I suggest it's a reasonable assumption that he had no blood on his clothing or hands.

Steve

Paul did more than just stood by Lechmere, they walked together for about 15 minutes. There's also Lechmere's bosses and coworkers, who would have seen him arrive. And then every pick up and delivery over a shift that could be 14 to 18 hours. After all, he worked for a general delivery service, not a slaughterhouse, there would be no reasonable explanation for blood on his hands or clothing.

[Elamarna]

Paul did more than just stood by Lechmere, they walked together for about 15 minutes. There's also Lechmere's bosses and coworkers, who would have seen him arrive. And then every pick up and delivery over a shift that could be 14 to 18 hours. After all, he worked for a general delivery service, not a slaughterhouse, there would be no reasonable explanation for blood on his hands or clothing.

You don't need to convince me Fiver, I have been arguing this for years.

[John Wheat]

You don't need to convince me Fiver, I have been arguing this for years.

Banging your head against a brick wall for years more like Steve. Like the rest of the sensible posters.

[Elamarna]

Banging your head against a brick wall for years more like Steve. Like the rest of the sensible posters.

Yes, well I gave up trying to convince people that what for some amounts to a belief system may not be as they would want it to be.

Took a break from the site, while writing the book, but am back around, wiser, older with no desire to argue with those who cannot even consider they may be wrong.

Steve

[Abby Normal]

He certainly was not checked for a knife Abby, that is correct.
However, both Mizen and Paul stood next to him and apparently noticed no blood.
So I suggest it's a reasonable assumption that he had no blood on his clothing or hands.

Steve

but they werent looking for blood, certainly not checking him, which was PIs original point

[Harry D]

Paul did more than just stood by Lechmere, they walked together for about 15 minutes. There's also Lechmere's bosses and coworkers, who would have seen him arrive. And then every pick up and delivery over a shift that could be 14 to 18 hours. After all, he worked for a general delivery service, not a slaughterhouse, there would be no reasonable explanation for blood on his hands or clothing.

How much blood would we be looking at here, potentially? Many of Nichols' wounds were superficial, and would there be much arterial splatter if the throat was cut whilst the victim was laid out? Not to mention the dim lighting conditions may have concealed any blood residue on his clothing.

Although I agree in principle, it sounds suicidal for Lechmere to engage with a witness and a policeman whilst carrying the murder weapon and potential bloodstains. I suppose the pro-Lechmere argument would be that was the motive for the "Mizen Scam".

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

oh really? i didnt know he was checked for blood or knife. could you please provide the source for this?

The fact that he had no blood on him can be deduced from the fact that within 1/4 of an hour of the murder having taken place, Charles Allen Lechmere was talking to a policeman and he had not had any chance in the meantime to clean any blood off himself.

Had he been carrying a 6 to 8 inch (or longer) knife, with Nichols' blood on it, he would not have approached a policeman.

I don't recall the murderer approaching a policeman, with his 6 to 8 inch knife on his person, following the murders in Hanbury St, Berner St, Mitre Square, or Miller's Court.

[Elamarna]

but they werent looking for blood, certainly not checking him, which was PIs original point

Agreed, but I think.its safe to assume nothing noticesble

[Elamarna]

but they werent looking for blood, certainly not checking him, which was PIs original point

Even if they had checked him, I am far from convinced that he would actually have any noticible blood on him, maybe his hands of cuffs, but even that's not certain.

My point being that a lack of obvious blood, does not rule him out.

Steve

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

How much blood would we be looking at here, potentially? Many of Nichols' wounds were superficial, and would there be much arterial splatter if the throat was cut whilst the victim was laid out? Not to mention the dim lighting conditions may have concealed any blood residue on his clothing.

Although I agree in principle, it sounds suicidal for Lechmere to engage with a witness and a policeman whilst carrying the murder weapon and potential bloodstains. I suppose the pro-Lechmere argument would be that was the motive for the "Mizen Scam".

The Mizen Scam being that Lechmere told Mizen that a policeman was already with the body, in order to get past Mizen?

Wouldn't it have been easier for Lechmere not to find a policeman at all, in which case there would be no need to get past one by making something up?

The most likely explanation is Mizen's memory played tricks on him, and he attributed to Lechmere knowledge of the policeman whom Mizen later found with the body being with the body.

Mizen's testimony on that point was not corroborated.

[Elamarna]

The Mizen Scam being that Lechmere told Mizen that a policeman was already with the body, in order to get past Mizen?

Wouldn't it have been easier for Lechmere not to find a policeman at all, in which case there would be no need to get past one by making something up?

The most likely explanation is Mizen's memory played tricks on him, and he attributed to Lechmere knowledge of the policeman whom Mizen later found with the body being with the body.

Mizen's testimony on that point was not corroborated.

Hi PI

There are many possible scenero's to why the Evidence from Mizen is different from.the carmen, but it's the first time I have heard his memory played tricks on him, I must say.

He would have written up a report at the end of his duty, and he's giving evidence just over 72 hours later.

I agree his evidence was not corroborated, and the police report of 19th September does not even mention Mizen's version it says
"and on arriving at the corner of Hanbury St. and Old Montague St. they met P.C. 55 .H Mizen and acquainted him of what they had seen"

No mention of another officer.

Before you ask, I certain do not think he was told another officer wanted him.

Steve

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

Hi PI

There are many possible scenero's to why the Evidence from Mizen is different from.the carmen, but it's the first time I have heard his memory played tricks on him, I must say.

He would have written up a report at the end of his duty, and he's giving evidence just over 72 hours later.

I agree his evidence was not corroborated, and the police report of 19th September does not even mention Mizen's version it says
"and on arriving at the corner of Hanbury St. and Old Montague St. they met P.C. 55 .H Mizen and acquainted him of what they had seen"

No mention of another officer.

Before you ask, I certain do not think he was told another officer wanted him.

Steve

Thanks for your reply.

I can't think of any other explanation and wonder which ones you have thought of.