Polly's Skirts - Lechmere The Killer.

[John Wheat]

There are plenty of threads that aren't about CAL.
36k posts on General Suspect Discussion.
24k posts on Maybrick.
20k posts on Hutchnson.
15k posts on Kosminski.
10k posts on Druitt.

Under victims there are
28k posts on Kelly.
22k posts on Stride.
15k posts on Eddowes.

Yes I know but recently Lechmere the witness has been discussed too frequently.

[Geddy2112]

Yes I know but recently Lechmere the witness has been discussed too frequently.

For the reasons I said. Maybe because Edward tries his very hardest to keep it current with his 'films.' So I guess every time a new film comes out there is something to discuss.

I'm not 100% sure but I believe you favour Mr Bury. Why don't you start a thread why you think it's Mr Bury then I'll see you over there for a chat. I really do not know enough about this suspect and keen to learn more, thank you.

[Newbie]

And the argument remains nonsense.

The evidence shows that he identified himself as Charles Allen Cross of 22 Doveton Street, a carman who had been working for Pickfords for the last couple decades and whose shift started at the Broad Street Station at 4am. Who would ever suspect that he was the stepson of Thomas Cross, Charles Allen Lechmere of 22 Doveton Street, a carman who had been working for Pickfords for the last couple decades and whose shift started at the Broad Street Station at 4am? What a baffling mystery! Holmes himself would be stumped!

Charles Lechmere was not trying to hide his identity from the coroner, the police, the press, his family, his neighbors, his coworkers, or his employers.



Elizabeth Lechmere was illiterate. There is no evidence that she was deaf. And her numerous children were literate.



There are whole threads about the name issue.

Like here.

And here.

And here.

Where for God sake did I say Elizabeth Lechmere was dumb?

I suggested that she was illiterate: meaning that she cannot get her news directly from reading the newspaper,
but learns about local events thru neighbors.

At least, I'm glad that you and I agree that she depended on her neighbors for local news stories.
One story that she appeared to miss out on was the one where here husband testified in front of the Polly Nichols inquest.

The entire line of her descendants had no clue that Charles Cross was actually (great) grandpapy Charles Lechmere.

Nothing strange about that, eh!

A delivery route driver, who had ambitions to be a proprieter, shows up at the inquest wearing his work clothes.

Perfectly normal: home was only an 8 minute walk away, but get a kick over those stuffed shirts thinking you are a bum.

However, do you think Pickfords had such an engaging need for him, that he had to race there after the inquest ended?

Those guys generally paid for their replacement and took the day off; or did you hear other wise?


Just strange stuff that weighs down that innocent, innocent, innocent, innocent man.

Did I say that he was innocent after all. Nothing to see there!

[Newbie]

What makes Fiver so tiresome is that he always gets something wrong,
and you constantly have to waste time correcting his errors on what your take is.

Every effen time!

[Newbie]

As I am sure I’ve implied/posted before, surely if Lechmere was the killer he’d kill on the way home from not to work? We are supposed to believe that on that particular night Lechmere happened to meet Polly, having left home just seven minutes earlier than needed, go to the site of her death, perform and attempt to cover up her injuries. If responsible, Lechmere would surely kill on the way home, after all we know that some of the Rookeries never saw true daylight, not happen upon a victim when he was running a few minutes early. Was he present in Whitechapel, yes; was he capable physically of committing the murder, again yes; does it make sense that he did, in my view no.

Paul

He gets off work at 3 - 4pm? Not certain exactly.

Lots of daylight left and lots of people out and about.

[Newbie]

The same is true of Robert Paul's claim to have left for work at 3:45.

And yet you, Ed Stow, and Christer Holmgren treat Paul's statement as gospel in order to "prove" there is a time gap.

It's beyond ridiculous.

I treat a stranger to him, who testified that he was 40 yards away and approaching the body after the attack, as gospel.

The kill someone and then run around the block back to the body theory does not convince me.

How about you?

[Lewis C]

For the reasons I said. Maybe because Edward tries his very hardest to keep it current with his 'films.' So I guess every time a new film comes out there is something to discuss.

I'm not 100% sure but I believe you favour Mr Bury. Why don't you start a thread why you think it's Mr Bury then I'll see you over there for a chat. I really do not know enough about this suspect and keen to learn more, thank you.

Hi Geddy,

While I don't feel as strongly about Bury as John does, I do lean toward him being the strongest suspect. I'll address a post to you in an existing Bury thread. I don't think that a new thread is really needed.

[Fiver]

I suggested that she was illiterate: meaning that she cannot get her news directly from reading the newspaper,
but learns about local events thru neighbors.

You are missing my point. Elizabeth Bostock being illiterate did not limit her to hearing about events from her neighbors. I specifically mentioned that her children were literate. So was her husband. And her mother and father-in-law. And her brothers and their wives and children.

The evidence shows that he identified himself as Charles Allen Cross of 22 Doveton Street, a carman who had been working for Pickfords for the last couple decades and whose shift started at the Broad Street Station at 4am. Who would ever suspect that he was the stepson of Thomas Cross, Charles Allen Lechmere of 22 Doveton Street, a carman who had been working for Pickfords for the last couple decades and whose shift started at the Broad Street Station at 4am? What a baffling mystery! Holmes himself would be stumped!

Charles Lechmere was not trying to hide his identity from the coroner, the police, the press, his family, his neighbors, his coworkers, or his employers.

[Fiver]

One story that she appeared to miss out on was the one where here husband testified in front of the Polly Nichols inquest.

That is a a rather large assumption on your part. It assumes that none of her neighbors or relatives ever discussed it with Elizabeth Lechmere or with any of her children.

The entire line of her descendants had no clue that Charles Cross was actually (great) grandpapy Charles Lechmere.

Nothing strange about that, eh!

How can you make any claims about what Elizabeth Lechmere (died 1953), Mary Lechmere (died 1939), Thomas Lechmere (died 1943), George Lechmere (died 1914), James Lechmere (died 1954), Louisa Lechmere (died 1949), Charles Lechmere Jr (died 1973), or Albert Lechmere (died 1969) knew about their father?

How many facts do you know about your great-great grandfather? If I was able to find one that you did not know, would that show that your great-great grandfather deliberately kept the information from his descendants?

[Fiver]

A delivery route driver, who had ambitions to be a proprieter, shows up at the inquest wearing his work clothes.

Ah, the oft repeated myth about people wearing their Sunday best for the 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.

However, do you think Pickfords had such an engaging need for him, that he had to race there after the inquest ended?

Those guys generally paid for their replacement and took the day off; or did you hear other wise?

Better to get paid for a half day's work than for nothing. And paying for a replacement was not cheap.

"Mr. [Robert] Paul says that after he made his statement to our representative, which appeared in Lloyd's, he was fetched up in the middle of the night by the police, and was obliged to lose a day's work the next day, for which he got nothing. He was then summoned to give evidence at the inquest on two different days, and he had to pay a man 5s. each day to do his work, or he would have lost his place. At the close of the inquest he got two shillings, being a shilling for each day." - Lloyds Weekly News. 30th September 1888.

An 1891 article on working conditions for carmen shows pay could be as high as 4 shillings a day.

So Robert Paul lost 12 schillings in wages from having to speak with the police and attend the inquest. And he had to pay 15 schillings to get another man to cover for him so that Paul did not lose his job. And the inquest he was paid 2 schillings.

[Fiver]

He gets off work at 3 - 4pm? Not certain exactly.

Lots of daylight left and lots of people out and about.

Charles Lechmere would have gotten off sometime between 6pm and 10pm.

[Fiver]

I treat a stranger to him, who testified that he was 40 yards away and approaching the body after the attack, as gospel.

The distance that Charles Lechmare heard Robert Paul at does nothing to support what time Robert Paul left home.

[Newbie]

The distance that Charles Lechmare heard Robert Paul at does nothing to support what time Robert Paul left home.

I'm not trying to pinpoint a time when he left home with it fiver ...... remember what I said about you putting words into my mouth and how tiring it is?

[Newbie]

Charles Lechmere would have gotten off sometime between 6pm and 10pm.

Where did you get this?

4 am to 8pm ...... 16 hour work days? The guy wouldn't have lived to be 70.

Paul was accosted by the Lloyd's reporter at 3:30 pm that afternoon.

[Newbie]

Ah, the oft repeated myth about people wearing their Sunday best for the 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.



Better to get paid for a half day's work than for nothing. And paying for a replacement was not cheap.

"Mr. [Robert] Paul says that after he made his statement to our representative, which appeared in Lloyd's, he was fetched up in the middle of the night by the police, and was obliged to lose a day's work the next day, for which he got nothing. He was then summoned to give evidence at the inquest on two different days, and he had to pay a man 5s. each day to do his work, or he would have lost his place. At the close of the inquest he got two shillings, being a shilling for each day." - Lloyds Weekly News. 30th September 1888.

An 1891 article on working conditions for carmen shows pay could be as high as 4 shillings a day.

So Robert Paul lost 12 schillings in wages from having to speak with the police and attend the inquest. And he had to pay 15 schillings to get another man to cover for him so that Paul did not lose his job. And the inquest he was paid 2 schillings.

Its not an issue of the chap not wearing his Sunday best to the inquisition, the bloke wore his work clothes.

I read somewhere that Lech was raised in a family dwelling that got a 'V' decent rating from (census?) inspectors in the rough & tumble neighborhood of Tiger Bay.
Ma Lechmere was raised on the Clive family estate,
you bet he was raised to wear his besties at a event like a Victorian era inquest,

Had he fallen on bad habits of hard liquor and moral dissipation fiver?


I didn't bother to read the rest, you only have 3 chances to come up with something sensible in response and you struck out.
Best of luck next time.