The Chapman murder and Charles Lechmere

[Lechmere]

Well Ben you may disagree, but what are you basing your disagreement on? Your own opinion?
I am basing my proposition on Paul’s own statement and Dew’s reminiscences. I prefer to come to conclusions based on some sort of foundation.

Nor can I agree with your proposition that a carman would not know the shortest route from A to B - where A is his home and B is his workplace.
I sussed out the shortest route with a few minutes thought and although I have lived in the East End and know the streets well enough, I have never lived in Doveton Street and never worked at Broad Street.

Wasn't Buck's Row supposed to be dodgy? Why didn't he avoid Buck's Row?

[Ben]

Well Ben you may disagree, but what are you basing your disagreement on?

An awareness of what is possible and what isn't, Lech.

If they suspected Paul, it is impossible that the police remained permanently and inexplicably oblivious to the very possibility that the first carmen to discover the body may also be suspicious.

I sussed out the shortest route with a few minutes thought and although I have lived in the East End and know the streets well enough

But there isn't any one shortest route.

There were two or three that were roughly as long as each other, and we have no evidence that he investigated them all beforehand. It was probably a case of "Hanbury Street seems the obvious choice - yep, that works for me".

Wasn't Buck's Row supposed to be dodgy?

Not to the extent that Old Montague Street was considered so.

[MrBarnett]

It's quite possible The Star obtained Lechmere's address from the Clerk of the Court. I was just curious as to why they had not elicited it from his testimony in the first place. The vowel sounds of Bath and Parsons are identical and that may have been all that came across over the hubbub of a packed court. That strikes me as more credible than that either court procedure wasn't followed or that Lechmere was granted some sort of anonymity.


On a slightly different topic (before coming back at long last to the subject of this thread) do we know exactly where Pickford's (Charles') depot was? We use the term Broad Street frequently, but I am sure that in one source Lech's place of work was described as in/or near The City Road.

But to get back to the Chapman murder, how does your theory square the time of death with Lechmere's normal working hours?

MrB

[Lechmere]

Ben
In the annals of police detective work there are countless examples of what in retrospect should have been obvious suspects being waved through, at least initially, as they seemed so plausible. I am sure you are aware of that?
Who’s that bloke beginning with H?
And I rather think there is one shortest route.

Mr B
The – arr sound is the same. But Bath is a short word, Parsons is long. Still doesn’t really make sense to me.

The entrance to the Pickford’s yard was around the side of Broad Street – Eldon Street.

Regarding Chapman’s TOD, there are two versions. The Doctor estimated just before 4.00 am which would tally nicely with Lechmere’s walk to work as given on the day of the Nichols murder.
If three witnesses re to be believed the TOD was nearer 5.30 am, which (if he did it) would mean either Lechmere went to work later (we don’ actually know his shift pattern) or he was on an early morning delivery somewhere reasonably close and left his cart to be unloaded and absented himself for a while.

We know that carman frequently had to wait hours for their carts to be unloaded at their destination, and that cart minders were kept to look after the vehicles and their contents during this time. We know that Carmen did not always stay with their vehicles while this was going on. Alternatively some Carmen took a boy for the purpose and to help unload.

[Scott Nelson]

Yes, I'd say this thread is progressing quite nicely.

[moonbegger]

I would suggest Lechmere went looking for a victim near Paul's workplace and it just happened that he ended up with Chapman in that location.

On his address at the inquest, I would suggest he didn't give it and in the confusion and hubbub it wasn't noticed - that is why the newspapers didn't record it was they did for the others as you point out, except the Star.

Yes I would definitely agree that its most likely " The very exactness and uniqueness of the Star recording of his address points in my opinion to their reporter obtaining the detail of his address from the court clerk" (my Chestnut but my question is still the same, why would the coroner allow him to deviate so far from protocol , in not complying with the request ?

Prior to any major witness giving testimony at a murder inquest .. The Coroner will always ask " will the witness state their full name and Address"

Why was Wynne E Baxter so inclined to let this Major witness get away so lightly ? Baxter heard a multitude of witnesses and gave numerous examples of his direct approach, including this exchange reported in The Daily Telegraph of 4 September:

Baxter, to Henry Tomkins, horse slaughterer: Are there any women about there?
Tomkins: Oh! I know nothing about them, I don't like 'em.
Baxter: I did not ask you whether you like them; I ask you whether there were any about that night.

So again , What other reason would Baxter have had , in ALLOWING Cross to skip past his ritual and fundamental introduction ?

I am still of the opinion that the very fact Charles Lechmere's step Father was a Police officer, tied together with the fact he may well have disturbed the actual Murderer or murderers ( as was the opinion at the time ) and was fearful for his, and his family's safety (from the High Rip or Nichols gang or whoever ) led to not only his address being omitted from the public inquest but also his new name . it still happens today folks !

Cheers

moonbegger .

[Scott Nelson]

Of course, none of the last five or six pages of this thread have had nothing to do with the Chapman murder.

Back on track.

But nobody commented on the subconcious double negative. Maybe I was wrong about the Goulston Street writing?

[MrBarnett]

Hi Moonbegger,

A very interesting idea. But don't forget that Thomas Cross had been dead for some twenty years. Is it likely that the stepson of a long-dead P.C., who had apparently moved on and rejected his Cross identity, would have that kind of clout with police and the coroner?

MrB

[Lechmere]

Moonbeggar
Yes I recall the issue of Lechmere’s true address was one of your observations. I seem to think you made another one of note – but unfortunately I forget what!
My guess is that in the confusion Lechmere’s omission (whether deliberate or accidental) was just passed over. The Coroner would have had his address in front of him anyway.
If Lechmere was allowed to give a false name and no address why did he give his workplace?
It would mean that the court clerk was most negligent in giving the address to the Star reporter.
Also there is no hint of your suggested back story in the extant police files that mention Lechmere (as Cross of course), nor in any memoirs –such as Dew’s.

Scott
My apologies – I and everyone else must clearly pay more attention to the subtleties contained in your posts.

[MrBarnett]

My copy of Ripperana no. 37 arrived this morning. The 'To The Ripper a Son' article was short but interesting. Derek Osborne came to the 'Cross was Lechmere' conclusion on the basis of the electoral rolls, but hadn't discovered the remarriage of Charles' mother to Thomas Cross.

He then went on to link Lechmere with the letter received by Dan Farson from someone in Australia who signed himself as 'G.W.B.' and claimed to be the son of Jack the Ripper, on the basis that Lechmere had a son George William.

What he didn't mention, so presumably he didn't know, was that George William Lechmere had indeed emigrated in 1905, albeit to Canada.

MrB


In my last post I realised I had called Moonbegger, Moonbeggar, hence my hasty last minute edit and misspelling of misspelling.

[moonbegger]

Hi Moonbegger,

A very interesting idea. But don't forget that Thomas Cross had been dead for some twenty years. Is it likely that the stepson of a long-dead P.C., who had apparently moved on and rejected his Cross identity, would have that kind of clout with police and the coroner?

MrB

Hello Mr B ,

It just seems to me to inconceivable , that a witness who was first on the scene of a fresh murder , then painted with a coat of suspicion in a news article by the second on the scene .. ( showing up or pulled in ) to the police station, would fail to declare his honest copper dad ( albeit stepdad ) as someone who could vouch for his credentials ( albeit posthumously) elevating him ever so slightly above the ranks of suspicion ... Would we not all do that , guilty or not ?

I still talk proudly of my (long since past) grandfathers endeavors during the war when talking to other like minded people .. and the respect and gratitude is still very much present .. I think the Police would be much the same .

Then once we concede this is a very likely scenario .. we can see how his step fathers name [Cross] may have become stapled to his chest .
Further more with the distance of time under his apron, did he, or would he have even felt the need to mention Thomas Cross was not his real father
but his step father ?

Add to too the mix the fear of retribution by gangs or whoever for disturbing the attack .. Why then , would the powers that be , offer up for possible sacrifice , one of their own colleagues sons ?

I do however concede .. this could have all been CrossMere's master plan to get away with it in the first place ..

Lech ..

If Lechmere was allowed to give a false name and no address why did he give his workplace?
It would mean that the court clerk was most negligent in giving the address to the Star reporter.

Well playing devils advocate , what if Cross/Lechmere was known as Lechmere at work ? he would be safe from the hoodlums that looked for him there as Cross .. Also he was a carman , never really there anyway , also He would have had people there to help him if trouble came looking , His family would not be involved ...ect .. ect

As for the clerk .. We all know how the press work !!!

Cheers ..

moonbegger

[MrBarnett]

Hi Moonbegger,

At the risk of being called ' wishy washy' by Ed, I am with you on the credibility of Lech. using his stepfather's name as a 'get out of jail free card' when faced with officialdom. What I don't find credible is that this would carry any weight with the coroner.

MrB

p.s. Why begger and not beggar? Anything to do with Moon Staring Hares?

[Lechmere]

I think this George William came back in 1906 and died in Woodford in 1914.

[MrBarnett]

Ed,

Phew! that's a relief. I thought his old man might have been Jack the Ripper.

MrB

[Lechmere]

He was