Lets get Lechmere off the hook!

[Batman]

All the accounts at the time suggest that Nichols was murdered on the spot within minutes of being found, if not seconds.

This also means someone has blood on their hands, literally.

I don't believe Lechmere could have been surprised by someone passing by quick enough to do a clean up job, especially if he put his hand on someone else at the time and had policemen standing around him questioning him.

What's more likely is JtR will keep going until he completes his fantasy or... and is sometimes the case... get's disturbed.

*Nichols - Probably disturbed in the process.
Chapman - Doesn't seem to have been disturbed.
*Stride - Disturbed.
Eddowes - Doesn't seem to have been disturbed but more than likely could see police torch beams coming.
Kelly - Wasn't disturbed.

Being nearly caught 2 out of 5 times tells us that there is a 40% chance that while JtR commits his crimes he is doing so in a place where a witness will stumble upon him or close to him. In Chapman's case he was boxed in... as with Kelly. Heck during Kelly someone was actually going to go down there and tell her to shut up with the singing and may been there when the assault was just about to take place.

[Fisherman]

Batman:

All the accounts at the time suggest that Nichols was murdered on the spot within minutes of being found, if not seconds.

This also means someone has blood on their hands, literally.

Jason Payne-James, forensic pathologist, from the documentary: "I donīt think that the killer must have had much or indeed any blood on his person".

Many others have said the exact same. There was no blood spurt, going by the signs on the spot, pointing to Nichols being dead as he cut. So the blood would not leap out of the body, it would ooze or run away from it. No innards were taken, there were a number of "probing" cuts to the stomach. So if the killer never got around to reaching into her, then why would he have blood on him? Would the blood have lept up and distributed itself over him? From a dead body?

I don't believe Lechmere could have been surprised by someone passing by quick enough to do a clean up job, especially if he put his hand on someone else at the time and had policemen standing around him questioning him.

Policemen? It was just the one - and he did not question him, he let him go. And it was dark. And he may well have worn clothes that were stained from his occupation.

I am anything but impressed by the "he must have been bloodied" suggestion - he must nothing of the sort.

What's more likely is JtR will keep going until he completes his fantasy or... and is sometimes the case... get's disturbed.

*Nichols - Probably disturbed in the process.
Chapman - Doesn't seem to have been disturbed.
*Stride - Disturbed.
Eddowes - Doesn't seem to have been disturbed but more than likely could see police torch beams coming.
Kelly - Wasn't disturbed.

Being nearly caught 2 out of 5 times tells us that there is a 40% chance that while JtR commits his crimes he is doing so in a place where a witness will stumble upon him or close to him. In Chapman's case he was boxed in... as with Kelly. Heck during Kelly someone was actually going to go down there and tell her to shut up with the singing and may been there when the assault was just about to take place.

Yes. And? This killer was an immense risktaker. If it was Lechmere, we should expect having a psychopath on our hands.

The best,
Fisherman

[Robert]

I see that the word 'ooze' is now undergoing selective reinterpretation.

[jerryd]

This also means someone has blood on their hands, literally.

The Star
Largest Circulation of Any Evening Paper in the Kingdom.
LONDON. WEDNESDAY, 5 SEPTEMBER, 1888.


THE TWO LARGE DROPS OF BLOOD,
clear and undeniable, which were visible on the Buck's*row pavement, 25 and 35 feet above the place
where the body lay, were made by fresh thick blood, and were probably caused by something in the
hands of the murderer as he walked away. Added to this is the slight abdominal hemorrhage, such as
would be the case if the cutting were done after death

[Jon Guy]

Remove the killer five minutes before Lechmere, and we have very serious trouble making the blood evidence fit.

Hi Christer

How long does it take to walk up Bucks Row ?
That`s how long the killer needed to scarper before Cross reached him.

[Fisherman]

I see that the word 'ooze' is now undergoing selective reinterpretation.

Poor you, Robert -am I being devious again? The selective reinterpretation you are speaking of is courtesy of a web dictionary, by the way.

Now, google "blood oozed profusely" on your computer, and tell me what you find. Read the excerpts, some of them quite old. Read and tell me what you learn from it!

The very best,
Fisherman

[Batman]

Batman:
Jason Payne-James, forensic pathologist, from the documentary: "I donīt think that the killer must have had much or indeed any blood on his person".

The contemporary coroner report in summing up said "It seems astonishing at first thought that the culprit should have escaped detection, for there must surely have been marks of blood about his person. If, however, blood was principally on his hands, the presence of so many slaughter-houses in the neighbourhood would make the frequenters of this spot familiar with blood- stained clothes and hands, and his appearance might in that way have failed to attract attention while he passed from Buck's-row in the twilight into Whitechapel-road, and was lost sight of in the morning's market traffic."

So in this retro-forensic analysis we have to say Payne-James is not in agreement with the Coroner's suggestion. I am open to the idea that the murderer didn't get blood on his hands throughout any of this, but that would be more to do with a person with medical knowledge than someone thinking they can slash someone without getting a blood stain on them.

If JtR has left behind witnesses, some who may have disturbed him before he could finish, then we should accept there is a history there or precidence for saying people stumble across his victims very close to when he is murdering them.

[Fisherman]

Hi Christer

How long does it take to walk up Bucks Row ?
That`s how long the killer needed to scarper before Cross reached him.

Yes, but no.

Lechmere very clearly said that he would have noticed if anybody stirred up at Browns Stable yard as he got into Bucks Row. So there was nobody there for that one minute plus walk.
And before that, the killer had spent time covering up the wounds - for whatever reason. Silly, wasnīt it, since he was not there!
And if we are to believe people out here (But why should we? Good point!), the killer FIRST cut Nicholsī neck, and THEN he cut the abdomen. So there goes another minute or two!

And that takes us to seven to nine minutes before Mizen saw her, if Lechmere didnīt cut her. And look what should have happened with the blood, Jon:
Blood coagulates in about three minutes and a half; the coagulation is usually completed in seven minutes and in twelve minutes the mass becomes firm.

Wow. But the mass was not firm, was it? It was still in the process of congealing as Mizen saw it.

Now, who do you think fits the frame best? Your conjured up killer, or the real Charles Lechmere? The man who gave the wrong name to the police, the man who seemingly fed Mizen the lie of the century?

Why are you so keen on protecting him, Jon? Tell me, Iīm intrigued by the farce put on out here by numerous posters.

The best,
Fisherman

[Fisherman]

Batman: The contemporary coroner report in summing up said "It seems astonishing at first thought that the culprit should have escaped detection, for there must surely have been marks of blood about his person. If, however, blood was principally on his hands, the presence of so many slaughter-houses in the neighbourhood would make the frequenters of this spot familiar with blood- stained clothes and hands, and his appearance might in that way have failed to attract attention while he passed from Buck's-row in the twilight into Whitechapel-road, and was lost sight of in the morning's market traffic."

The coroner was not any medico, Batman, let alone any pathologist like Payne-James. Tell me WHY the killer should have gotten bloodied? How would that have come about?

So in this retro-forensic analysis we have to say Payne-James is not in agreement with the Coroner's suggestion. I am open to the idea that the murderer didn't get blood on his hands throughout any of this, but that would be more to do with a person with medical knowledge than someone thinking they can slash someone without getting a blood stain on them. Possible if coupled with that but again, not the contemporary view.

There were contemporary medicos who would not necessarily have expected any significant amount of blood on the killer if my memory serves me. And once again - exactly why and how would he get bloodied if there was no blood pressure?

The best,
Fisherman

[Robert]

Unable to find what you wanted me to find, Fish, but I'll look at any links you care to post.

Strictly speaking, 'oozed profusely' is a contradiction in terms.

There is a sense in which 'ooze' has a slightly different meaning, if it is spoken with the emphasis on 'ooze' e,g. :

"There isn't much jam in these doughnuts."
"Nonsense! They're oozing with it."

So, if for example PC Neil was a vampire, he might have said, licking his lips 'blood was oozing out.' But I doubt if Neil was a vampire, Fish.

[Dane_F]

Yes, but no.

Lechmere very clearly said that he would have noticed if anybody stirred up at Browns Stable yard as he got into Bucks Row. So there was nobody there for that one minute plus walk.

When are we suppose to believe what Lechmere says and when are we suppose to believe he is lying?

[Batman]

Tell me WHY the killer should have gotten bloodied? How would that have come about?

The best,
Fisherman

Okay I will deal with this technicality first and then back to the Coroner capacity issues.

Blood moves because the heart pumps it. Without the heart blood will move because of gravitational forces. However just because the heart isn't pumping doesn't mean that interaction with the body with a tool be it a knife or a surgical instrument doesn't cause the blood to still move because of physics. Basically there are other vectors other than the heart. That's why even when working on small toxic blood samples respirators and surgical masks are a must and they are not slashing anything but carefully inserting syringes etc. You might say thats just aerosol composition where the blood amount is too small to see, but this is just a degree of disturbance, and she was violently slashed elsewhere. I don't think the coroner's inquest used lack of blood in places as evidence for the murderer having no blood on them, but simply that the corpse lacked the look of being stabbed while vertical or while defending themselves.

Now, having said that, I am off the opinion in other threads that the raising of JtRs victims legs is done deliberately to add gravitational forces to the heart pumping blood out of the neck, so it is not just a sexual signature but very much a practical one. However this doesn't mean he will have no blood on him, just less blood.

For example, JtR has experience before Eddowes, yet Eddowes apron is blood stained in a fashion suggesting cleaning up.

Wynne E. Baxter while occupying a judicial place doesn't have medical experience as you say, but if he is mistaken, why is that mistake not highlighted by others in the contemporary? Like why didn't they tell him he was wrong?

[Fisherman]

Unable to find what you wanted me to find, Fish, but I'll look at any links you care to post.

Strictly speaking, 'oozed profusely' is a contradiction in terms.

You canīt find it? No?

Okay, I will help out with a few examples from the net, with sources given. Please donīt tell me that I am deceiving and behaving fraudulently - these are examples of english speaking people and how they use the word profusely. As I said, I got more than 800 hits for oozed profusely, so it may be that the phrasing is not a contradiction in terms at all. I think you are the one contradicting, actually, and itīs little use.

Here you are. If you want more examples, just shout:

*According to Gavan, there was only one open wound at the back from which blood oozed profusely. Subsequently, he issued a medical certificate (Exhibit "A"), stating the cause of death as "profuse internal hemorrhage, secondary to penetrating wounds."

http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1975/jun1975/gr_33641_1975.html

One student got three rubber bullet wounds behind the tibia while the other three were shot with live bullets leaving gaping wounds from which the blood oozed profusely.

(https://books.google.se/books?id=-4G...ely%22&f=false)

*The accused tried to pull at her two tolas gold chain and when she raised an alarm, he hit her on her face and mouth due to which two of her teeth came off and blood oozed profusely.

http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp-national/tp-andhrapradesh/youth-trying-to-rob-woman-handed-over-to-police-reward-for-neighbours/article4616538.ece

Blood oozed profusely from the cuts and when he called for help, a witness went to the scene and succeeded in snatching the knife from the accused after a struggle.

http://www.ghanaweb.com/GhanaHomePage/NewsArchive/artikel.php?ID=180381

The father of three and resident of Muchuiri Village denied their offer and forged ahead with his journey as they closely followed and monitored his steps. They later attacked and mercilessly rendered 10 cuts of pangas on his head as blood oozed profusely.

http://m.news24.com/kenya/MyNews24/Head-teacher-killed-in-Laikipia-20120628

“I received about five phone calls from different people and rushed home only to find a huge crowd in my compound and saw four women holding my wife at the gate while blood oozed profusely from his head where he bore two deep cuts,” said Munyaka.

http://www.the-star.co.ke/news/article-6138/suspected-limuru-rapist-lynched

*From these injuries blood oozed profusely and fell on the ground and splashed over the pillar, diagonal wall, pole and inner corner formed by the pillar and wall of the overbridge.*

http://www.the-laws.com/Encyclopedia/Browse/ShowCase.aspx?CaseId=105002350100

Blood oozed profusely but this did not stop Donaire from unleashing jarring punches to the face and body before the referee stopped the fight after four rounds due to the eye injury.

http://manilastandardtoday.com/mobile/2014/06/02/azkals-lose-but-donaire-saves-our-weekend/

All the best,
Fisherman

[Fisherman]

When are we suppose to believe what Lechmere says and when are we suppose to believe he is lying?

Find yourself a man that has broken the law and afterwards tried to lie his way out of it. There are loads of examples, sadly.
Then look at HOW he shapes his lies.
Basically, it all boils down to coming as close as possible to the truth without giving yourself away.

Have a look, if you will, at how Lechmere told the police that he was Charles Cross of 22 Doveton Street, working at Pickfords.

If he did not want to go public via the press, this is the perfect example of what Iīm saying. If the police decided to check him out and he had claimed to be Harry Hollingsworth of 16 Gower Street, working for the City council, he would have been in deep trouble.
He took the chance that he would be able to get away with using Cross. Using that name, and zipping up about the address before the inquest, was as best as he could have done in this department. It is a perfect weighing of lying, telling the truth and saying nothing.

The best,
Fisherman

[Bridewell]

Interesting as all this is, I don't see how recent infliction of the fatal injuries necessitates their being attributed to Lechmere rather than to a killer who had left the scene within the previous 5 minutes. How long would it take to walk from the Browns Yard gateway around the corner and out of sight onto Winthrop Street? Has anyone timed it? My guess would be less than a minute.