All roads lead to Lechmere.

[Fiver]

Actually, folks, we know better than that, thanks to poor little Harriet Emma.

M.

Thanks for the info. According to Harriet Emma's baptismal records, the family was still living at 20 James Street on 19 February, 1888. Sometime between then and
12 Jun 1888, the family moved to 22 Doveton Street.

Looking more at what Bett's Street school records are online, James Alfred Lechmere left on 5 March 1888, while his sister Louisa left 11 June 1888.

[Mark J D]

... So we know that the Charles Allen Lechmere family moved to 22 Doveton Street some time between June of 1886 and June of 1888.

Actually, folks, we know better than that, thanks to poor little Harriet Emma.

M.

[Fiver]

1881 James Street

June 1888 Moved to Doveton Street

You are making an assumption about when the Lechemeres moved to 22 Doveton that is not borne out by the records.

30 Nov 1885 - George William Lechmere is admitted as a pupil at Lower Chapman Street School. The family is living at 20 James Street. (The record also shows George William transferred to the Betts Street School 4 June 1886)

12 Jun 1888 - George William, James Alfred, and Thomas Allen Lechmere are admitted as pupils at Essex Street School. The family is living at 22 Doveton Street. (The record also shows all three transferred from the Betts Street School.

19 Jun 1890 - Charles Allen Lechmere, Jr is admitted as a pupil at Essex Street School. The family is living at 22 Doveton Street.

7 Jun 1892 - Albert Edward Lechmere is admitted as a pupil at Essex Street School. The family is living at 22 Doveton Street.

Obviously, none of these 4 dates are moving dates.

Checking Betts Street School records, James Lechmere was admitted 31 May 1886, Louisa Lechmere 21 June 1886. The family is living at 20 James Street.

So we know that the Charles Allen Lechmere family moved to 22 Doveton Street some time between June of 1886 and June of 1888.

[Fiver]

Abberline's report of 19 September 1888 in the MEPO files. You can find it in Skinner & Evans.

Abberline states that Cross found the body at 'about 3.40' and that Paul soon came up behind him.

Abberline had been in court for Lechmere and for Paul's testimony and the report came 2 days after hearing Paul's testimony. So many accounts come from years or even decades later,

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

Abberline's report of 19 September 1888 in the MEPO files. You can find it in Skinner & Evans.

Abberline states that Cross found the body at 'about 3.40' and that Paul soon came up behind him.

I read that book many years ago but do not have a copy with me.

I just found a reference to the report and coincidentally had the gratification of seeing that eight years ago, someone anticipated my finding that based on Holmgren's seven minute estimate of Lechmere's walk to Buck's Row, Lechmere had no more than three minutes to commit the murder and mutilation, and not the nine minutes claimed by Holmgren:


"I beg to report that about 3.40am 31st Ult. as Charles Cross, "carman" of 22 Doveton Street, Cambridge Road, Bethnal Green was passing through Bucks Row, Whitechapel (on his way to work) he noticed a woman lying on her back in the footway...he stopped to look at the woman when another carman (also on his way to work) named Robert Paul of 30 Foster St., Bethnal Green came up...".

(Abberline)



From Abberline's report, it can be seen that the idea that, on the evidence, there was a "major" nine minute gap is dead in the water. For such a gap to have existed, then despite the previous reliance on Cross's testimony as to the time he left his home, it would have had to have been at least six minutes earlier than he testified to. If he left at the time he said he did, and we accept the timing of 7 minutes for him to walk to Bucks Row, then he had no more than 3 minutes to murder Nichols before Paul's arrival. While this might have been physically possible, it does mean that the "9 minute gap" is a gap of fiction and, in my submission, in the light of Abberline's clear timing of events, should not be repeated.

(David Orsam)

https://forum.casebook.org/forum/ripper-discussions/witnesses/8829-inquest-reports-of-mizen-cross-evidence/page2

[rjpalmer]

Can you give some reference to Abberline's analysis?

Abberline's report of 19 September 1888 in the MEPO files. You can find it in Skinner & Evans.

Abberline states that Cross found the body at 'about 3.40' and that Paul soon came up behind him.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

https://www.completefrance.com/news/...ipper-8380810/

JM

It looks as though she is confusing notoriety with fame.

[jmenges]

https://www.completefrance.com/news/my-great-great-grandfather-may-have-been-jack-the-ripper-8380810/

JM

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

I've never quite understood why the far right would prefer the Holocaust to have been a hoax. Hitler would be turning in his grave to see supposedly like-minded people denying all the effort he put in towards his Final Solution.

That aside, I'm now wondering what possible motive the Butlers think Lechmere might have had. I mean, this was a hard-working white man, breeding a small army of sweet little white Lechmeres, just doing his bit in his spare time, trying to clean the streets of the female traitors who would work in any capacity for the Jews and other 'foreigners', who would all be on the next flight to Rwanda today, if 'Leaky Sue' Braverman could make all her dreams come true.

That can't be it - can it?

Love,

Caz
X

It is quite extraordinary that Butler-Stow should have preferred to accuse Aryan Lechmere to Jewish Kosminski, which suggests he must have had some strong motive.

If it was to get at his in-laws, why would Susan go along with it?

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

No, actually I did mention him: Neil. Mizen. Thain.

Stow blithely tells his audience to ignore these three police witnesses. 3/5 relevant witnesses are merely whisked aside.

We should probably also include Abberlne. He wasn’t there, but he was a contemporary who obviously had access to more information than we have, including witness statements, and he made an analysis that also directly contradicts Paul.

And Paul gave his evidence two weeks after the other relevant witnesses, and the longer the delay, the more inaccurate a witness tends to become.

Further, many seem to think that the behavior of Paul and Crossmere that morning was “callous.” Maybe, maybe not, but it wasn’t a good look to leave a dead woman on the pavement and hurry off to work.

As such, we may not want to ignore that Paul had a motive for overestimating his alleged tardiness.

Can you give some reference to Abberline's analysis?

[Fiver]

For those really wondering about the timings and Lechmere's possible route to work, I can only suggest reading my work.

How many possible routes are there from Doveton Street to Pickfords?
Go on, have a guess?


Would you be surprised at more than 10?

Would you be surprised at more than 25?

Would over 50 variations surprise?

Or over 75?

Well its actually over 100.

Never get told this do we?

Steve

The number of possible routes is not surprising. The question is how many of those routes were likely. Charles Lechmere had been a carman for a couple decades, so he knew the area well. I'd expect him to have a good idea what the shortest routes were.

That could, of course, be modified by taking a slightly longer, but safer route. If there was a safer route - according to Robert Paul, Bucks Row had a bad reputation, yet Paul took that route to work.

[caz]

"According to Searchlight, during her time in the BNP Clapp attended the aforementioned London New Right meeting, addressed by Holocaust denier Michele Renouf, alongside Leppert."

It would be interesting to know whether ‘Stow’ thinks that Renouf uses “sound historic methodology” in determining that the Holocaust was a hoax. He certainly likes to lecture Ripperologists on the subject, even arguing that the Lechmereans are nearly the only ones who ever use it.

This is remarkable considering that Stow told his audience in a recent video that we can safely ignore 3 out 5 relevant witnesses in Buck’s Row when assessing Paul’s estimated time of departure.

That’s the polar opposite of sound methodology.

I've never quite understood why the far right would prefer the Holocaust to have been a hoax. Hitler would be turning in his grave to see supposedly like-minded people denying all the effort he put in towards his Final Solution.

That aside, I'm now wondering what possible motive the Butlers think Lechmere might have had. I mean, this was a hard-working white man, breeding a small army of sweet little white Lechmeres, just doing his bit in his spare time, trying to clean the streets of the female traitors who would work in any capacity for the Jews and other 'foreigners', who would all be on the next flight to Rwanda today, if 'Leaky Sue' Braverman could make all her dreams come true.

That can't be it - can it?

Love,

Caz
X

[rjpalmer]

I noticed that we made the same point about the evidence of timings, although I think you omitted to mention Pc Neil.

No, actually I did mention him: Neil. Mizen. Thain.

Stow blithely tells his audience to ignore these three police witnesses. 3/5 relevant witnesses are merely whisked aside.

We should probably also include Abberlne. He wasn’t there, but he was a contemporary who obviously had access to more information than we have, including witness statements, and he made an analysis that also directly contradicts Paul.

And Paul gave his evidence two weeks after the other relevant witnesses, and the longer the delay, the more inaccurate a witness tends to become.

Further, many seem to think that the behavior of Paul and Crossmere that morning was “callous.” Maybe, maybe not, but it wasn’t a good look to leave a dead woman on the pavement and hurry off to work.

As such, we may not want to ignore that Paul had a motive for overestimating his alleged tardiness.

[Elamarna]

For those really wondering about the timings and Lechmere's possible route to work, I can only suggest reading my work.

How many possible routes are there from Doveton Street to Pickfords?
Go on, have a guess?


Would you be surprised at more than 10?

Would you be surprised at more than 25?

Would over 50 variations surprise?

Or over 75?

Well its actually over 100.

Never get told this do we?

Steve

[Elamarna]

Yes.

I noticed that we made the same point about the evidence of timings, although I think you omitted to mention Pc Neil.

But as far as I recall, Stow never responded to either of us on that point.

I and others have argued that Lechmere's use of the name Cross at the inquests was necessary because that was the name by which Pickfords knew him, and not because he was trying to evade justice.

I am wondering what explanation Mr Butler has for using the name Stow.

I haven't asked him yet.

The arguments presented by the Lechmere theorists, or as they like to be known, Lecimerians, are very simple.

Everyone one else, apart from Paul is wrong. His time is miraculously syncronizied to that of Lechmere.
Even in a recent video, the manipulation was clear.
1st you say very loud that Lechmere said he left home ABOUT 3.30( this is so others can't say you are misleading the viewer, you give the time given in the vast majority of reports)

You then throw in the two, reports that say 3.20, fail to mention that both also say he started at 4am, and are probably from a common source, you don't mention 3.20 is almost certainly a typo. You leave the way open that he left even earlier.

You then time the walk to Brown's Yard, and you admit it's not exactly the route taken in 1888.

You arrive and say it took 6.5-7 minutes ( That's a fair time btw) .

Now the trick, the slight of hand, you say he left home AT 3.30( the "about" is silently forgotten) and you say 3.30 + 7 equals 3.37.

You add to this by insisting everyone else is wrong, and imply Baxter said 3.45, when he actually said not far from

You now have your mythical gap, timings mentioned, but sidestepped.

Illusion complete.