Charles Lechmere interesting link

[Lechmere]

Christer has made a major error. Quite reprehensible and even laughable.
The picture is likely to be from 1910, not 1912.
I'm afraid it isn't for general release at the moment though.

[Abby Normal]

You can say that again - the pic is from 1912, 24 years after the events...

All the best,
Fisherman

Ahh, got it. I assumed it was from earlier.

I'd like to see it, if possible.

[Fisherman]

Which raises a question to a future argument .. If a description was given that resembled Cross, are we to be informed once again the police didn't put 2 &2 together ..

Which of the witness descriptions given do you think is the most elaborate one (apart from Hutchinson´s, of course)?

And to what extent do you think we may rely on this person -whomever you choose - having been the killer?

To some extent, you have a point - I don´t think Lechmere had a blotchy face and a full, carroty mustache in 1888, for example - but the quality of the different descriptions was such as to lend itself to identifying many, many thousands of men by them. Longs man - seen from the back, BS man - about 30, 5 ft 5 in. complexion fair; hair dark; small brown moustache, full face, broad shouldered, Lawendes man - of shabby appearance, about 30 years of age and 5ft. 9in. in height, of fair complexion, having a small fair moustache. Cox´s man - short, stout, with a blotchy face and a full carrotty moustache.

Even if Lechmere was 5 ft 7, had a fair complexion, sandcoloured and a small sandy moustache, I can´t see the police pouncing on him for that. They would need to pounce on half of the East End male population in that age group.

The best,
Fisherman

[Lechmere]

I think Sally and Patrick should meet up (if they are unacquainted) and hold an indignation meeting.

Moonbeggar
The eye witness descriptions are so vague that Charles Lechmere could match virtually all of them. I personally put little store in the so called eye witnesses as that type of evidence is known to be notoriously unreliable.

[Fisherman]

I took my grandkids to the science museum the other day. They have a machine there that takes a photo of you and can add or subtract years to make you look younger or older.

Why don't you take the photo of Lech there and see what you can come up with.

MrB

Nah - but I would consider cramming myself into that machine...!

The best,
Fisherman

[MrBarnett]

I took my grandkids to the science museum the other day. They have a machine there that takes a photo of you and can add or subtract years to make you look younger or older.

Why don't you take the photo of Lech there and see what you can come up with.

MrB

[moonbegger]

Hello MrB ,

I fear the cat is well and truly out of the bag by now ..

My dear old Nan passed on some time back , as did Granddad ..

I only discovered it by chance last year and immediately posted it , rightly so I believe .. It was quite a shock when I realized I was raised a few doors down , and my Nan and Granddad literally lived next door to it .. talk about right under your nose ..

The Witness thread is "Joseph Lawende's Home" ..

But in all fairness he was just a witness and nothing more .. Unlike how Mr Lechmere is being portrayed , rightly or wrongly .

The funny thing is , all the witness validity will be swept into the unreliable bin by Team L , if there is not a striking comparison with the Lechmere photo , and just the similar profiles will be used to further the debate ..

Which raises a question to a future argument .. If a description was given that resembled Cross ( as he was known ) are we to be informed once again the police didn't put 2 &2 together ..

But I am getting ahead of the game .. But I eagerly await further damming evidence to be placed on the table ..

cheers , moonbegger .

[Fisherman]

That's a tricky one for you, Fish.

You can say that again - the pic is from 1912, 24 years after the events...

All the best,
Fisherman

[MrBarnett]

Patrick,

You can tell by my posts that I'm not buying Lech as 'Jack' but come on man, give some credit where credit is due. They obviously believe their theory quite passionately regardless whether right or wrong. They've contributed so that you and I even have something to talk about. Meeting them would be humbling and doing a tour with them should be an honor regardless of their personal opinions about the case. They've contributed, (I know I haven't), besides arguing, ask yourself what you've contributed. Stick to making awesome posts like you have previously in this thread when you made people actually think.

Cheers
DRoy

Right on, DRoy!

Even if you believe there is nothing of any consequence to Lech's candidacy, surely the research into his life is interesting. And coming up with a photo is a scoop by anyone's standards.

And not all of us on here have high academic standards (speaking for myself here and assuming there may be others of my ilk). I for one find it intriguing that the only person ever discovered by a freshly killed JTR victim had a connection to a horsemeat business in Pinchin Street. Doesn't prove a thing, of course, but it's a curious coincidence, surely.

I don't get why people get so hot under the collar about this stuff. As far as I can tell the Lech theory is based on sound research. If someone feels the wrong conclusions have been drawn, so what? It's not as if anything has been invented (so far as I am aware).

MrB

[Lechmere]

Patrick
The difference - apart from my posts being spread over a longer period - is that I post on topics that I enjoy and am interested in. I critically examine several other suspect theories but only the ones I find interesting. I dont bother at all with the 'laughble' ones. Whereas you seem a bit obsessed with a theory you think is laughable. But then the repeated references you give to your mirth is more reminiscent of hysteria.

[MrBarnett]

Hi Moon,

It's never too late. You could write a history of the house, with Lawende's tenancy as one of the chapters.

And bringing the discussion back on topic, did your nan know that a JTR witness lived a few doors away? Think carefully before you answer. If it's a no, it'll strengthen the case against Lech considerably.

MrB

[DRoy]

What a relief. It's clear that Ed and Fish are simple hucksters. Somehow it's comforting to know they are at least intelligent enough to not actually believe this foolishness. I'll be in London in a few months. I'll have to see what the Crossmere Twins have cooking to raise a buck while I'm in town.

Patrick,

You can tell by my posts that I'm not buying Lech as 'Jack' but come on man, give some credit where credit is due. They obviously believe their theory quite passionately regardless whether right or wrong. They've contributed so that you and I even have something to talk about. Meeting them would be humbling and doing a tour with them should be an honor regardless of their personal opinions about the case. They've contributed, (I know I haven't), besides arguing, ask yourself what you've contributed. Stick to making awesome posts like you have previously in this thread when you made people actually think.

Cheers
DRoy

[moonbegger]

I discovered the House and street that Joseph Lawende resided in during the murders ( in fact I lived a few doors down from him )

I too should have written a book and had a grand unveiling ..

Damn !!! Missed the boat again

cheers , moonbegger .

[MrBarnett]

Patrick,

The ten quid went to a good cause, not into the pockets of team Lechmere.

Assumption of guilt without evidence is never a good idea.

MrB

[Patrick S]

Patrick,

I paid ten quid and stood in the rain for 2 1/2 hours to get my glimpse. I expect my next glimpse will be when I buy the book.

MrB

What a relief. It's clear that Ed and Fish are simple hucksters. Somehow it's comforting to know they are at least intelligent enough to not actually believe this foolishness. I'll be in London in a few months. I'll have to see what the Crossmere Twins have cooking to raise a buck while I'm in town.