Lets get Lechmere off the hook!

[Geddy2112]

Cross stated that he didn't hear anyone run away. Does the possibility exist that Jack strangled Polly and had started the mutilation when he heard Cross. Could he have quietly stepped into a nearby position of concealment, and when he heard Paul suggest that Polly may have still been breathing, cut her throat after the carmen left the scene? This would fit the medical evidence that the throat cut had been made after the mutilations.

I've often thought of that scenario, it does make a huge amount of sense. Of course Holmgren and Stow would not agree with you. It also opens up another escape route for the killer eastwards along Bucks Row. However, nobody heard anything to suggest it of course.

[FrankO]

Hi Frank,

I quite agree. If times are to be used to accuse someone of being the killer there is no reason to accept the times stated by the suspected killer.

Hi George,

Even when I think that none of the timings can be used as evidence for any gap, that's a good point.

However, I do find it curious that Paul was supposed to have walked about 60 yards down Bucks Row without hearing the footfalls, or seeing a moving silhouette, of a man in walking in front of him.

While I also find that curious in the sense that it's a pity we don't have the answers to these questions, I find it even much more curious why a guilty Lechmere shouldn't have listened for sounds and why Paul is supposed to have gone deaf just before a guilty Lechmere started to move around & then away from the body - without ever being able to know if Paul could see or hear him or not.

I also find it curious that in a neighbourhood that Paul described as having a reputation for violence, he should allow a man emerging from the darkness to approach and touch him on the shoulder without the customary fight or flight response.

I find this less curious. Paul only mentioned the dangerous character of the locality after he'd spotted a man standing in the middle of the road and he didn't even mention it at the inquest. He could have turned around, but didn't. Before he saw him, he was just hurrying along Buck's Row as he did every day on his way to work. He could have chosen Whitechapel Road, but he didn't. So, the fact that he let Lechmere put his hand on his shoulder, to me, shows that Paul didn't actually feel a fight or flight response or much of it, anyway. He just wanted to avoid Lechmere and continue on his way.

All the best,
Frank

[FrankO]

Cross stated that he didn't hear anyone run away. Does the possibility exist that Jack strangled Polly and had started the mutilation when he heard Cross. Could he have quietly stepped into a nearby position of concealment, and when he heard Paul suggest that Polly may have still been breathing, cut her throat after the carmen left the scene? This would fit the medical evidence that the throat cut had been made after the mutilations.

As I've said on a previous occasion, while it's an interesting idea, why loose precious seconds, if only 2 or 3, cutting her throat twice? And, where would or even could he have hidden within earshot? The best option seems to have been climbing over the gate leading to Brown's stables, but that seems quite difficult, it being 9 or 10 feet high. Do you have any ideas?

Cheers,
Frank

[GBinOz]

I find this less curious. Paul only mentioned the dangerous character of the locality after he'd spotted a man standing in the middle of the road and he didn't even mention it at the inquest. He could have turned around, but didn't. Before he saw him, he was just hurrying along Buck's Row as he did every day on his way to work. He could have chosen Whitechapel Road, but he didn't. So, the fact that he let Lechmere put his hand on his shoulder, to me, shows that Paul didn't actually feel a fight or flight response or much of it, anyway. He just wanted to avoid Lechmere and continue on his way.

All the best,
Frank

Hi Frank,

I find this whole situation to be very strange. I would have expected Cross to have spoken to Paul when he first saw him saying something like " there's a woman lying in the road, come and see". But instead, after Paul deliberately tries to avoid him, Cross follows him and reaches out to...what? From Paul's perspective it could only be to commence an assault. I find it curious that Cross employed this tactic, and even more curious that Paul calmly allowed Cross to reach out at him. I can only suppose that fear caused Paul to freeze.

Best regards, George

[GBinOz]

As I've said on a previous occasion, while it's an interesting idea, why loose precious seconds, if only 2 or 3, cutting her throat twice? And, where would or even could he have hidden within earshot? The best option seems to have been climbing over the gate leading to Brown's stables, but that seems quite difficult, it being 9 or 10 feet high. Do you have any ideas?

Cheers,
Frank

Hi Frank,

I've often wondered how the gate to Brown's stables was secured, and whether Jack could have hidden behind the gate, locking it behind him when he left the scene. I also read at one stage that one of the employees of the slaughter yard actually lived in Bucks Row, but am unable to find that reference to check the street number. The other point is that it is known that people at the time didn't lock their doors, so he could have slipped into a home and listened with the door slightly ajar.

All complete speculation for a purely barnstormed idea of course, but that is really why we are all here....isn't it?

Best regards, George

[Geddy2112]

Of course a serial killer is likely to lie in order to avoid the noose, that goes without saying. However the timings Lechmere gives tallies up with the other timings in the case, i.e. Mizen, Neil, Thain, Llewellyn and Abberline. So even if you do ignore Lechmere there are other witnesses to back up his chain of events.

Paul's hearing is a curious one and really a nail in the coffin for the Lechmere Theory. If killer Lechmere was slashing away at Polly's abdomen and heard Paul from the 40 or so yards away how did an 'on alert' Paul not hear killer Lechmere move away from the body? The obviously answer is because Lechmere never did move away from the body. If you take Lechmere as innocent then he might not have been in a state of high alert like a killer would be but Paul was because of his claim of it being a dangerous area. So again Paul does not hear Lechmere move away from the body because he was stood still in the middle of the road. Whichever way around you look at it the 'audibles' suggest Lechmere is innocent.

[GBinOz]

"Cross stated that he didn't hear anyone run away. Does the possibility exist that Jack strangled Polly and had started the mutilation when he heard Cross. Could he have quietly stepped into a nearby position of concealment, and when he heard Paul suggest that Polly may have still been breathing, cut her throat after the carmen left the scene? This would fit the medical evidence that the throat cut had been made after the mutilations."

A theory I proposed many years ago. One that I'm not entirely comfortable with nowadays, but still don't discard.

Hi Dusty,

When I previously proposed this theory it was not well received. What has caused your subsequent discomfort with the theory?

Cheers, George

[The Baron]

Hi Frank,

I find this whole situation to be very strange. I would have expected Cross to have spoken to Paul when he first saw him saying something like " there's a woman lying in the road, come and see". But instead, after Paul deliberately tries to avoid him, Cross follows him and reaches out to...what? From Paul's perspective it could only be to commence an assault. I find it curious that Cross employed this tactic, and even more curious that Paul calmly allowed Cross to reach out at him. I can only suppose that fear caused Paul to freeze.

Best regards, George

This is one great post, I am not Fisherman and I have no interest in selling the Cross was the Ripper T-shirts online, but I do like to anlyse the situation that night in depth, the persons, timings and reactions involved, and the post above demonstrated just that.

To Frank, You think I didn't answer your question but I did, according to Lechmere and Paul's timings there is a gap, but you don't have to believe it, and no conviction can be built upon it, equally you cannot throw this remark out of the window either, this is a concept that supports their theory, and it is a fair one at that, I'll give them that.


The Baron

[Geddy2112]

As I've said on a previous occasion, while it's an interesting idea, why loose precious seconds, if only 2 or 3, cutting her throat twice? And, where would or even could he have hidden within earshot? The best option seems to have been climbing over the gate leading to Brown's stables, but that seems quite difficult, it being 9 or 10 feet high. Do you have any ideas?

If you follow the theory according to Holmgren. In the time it took Paul to get closer than the 40 yards enough to see Lechmere (10 seconds?) Lechmere the killer would have had to cease his goal of abdominal mutilations, pull down her skirts, cut her throat twice, wipe his knife, wipe his hands. Hide knife and bloody rag about his person, plot his bluff, step back to the middle of the road some 4 yards away and be calm and in total control to tell Paul all about it.. worse still tap him on the shoulder with the knowledge of not knowing if he would transfer wet blood to him.

I suggest that is not just highly improbable but rather neigh on impossible...

[Geddy2112]

To Frank, You think I didn't answer your question but I did, according to Lechmere and Paul's timings there is a gap, but you don't have to believe it

There is only a gap if you believe Robert Paul's Remarkable Statement which was said to a reporter and not under oath. However if you believe five witness all under oath then the time gap disappears. There is no time gap if you believe Lechmere's 'about 3:30am' for leaving home.


Unfortunately the same notebook used to supposedly back up his Mizen Scam would have been used to back up his timings putting Paul's 'exactly 3:45am' in the dust bin. Unfortunately for Mr H he can't have his cake and eat it although he tries so hard to do.

[GBinOz]

If killer Lechmere was slashing away at Polly's abdomen and heard Paul from the 40 or so yards away how did an 'on alert' Paul not hear killer Lechmere move away from the body?

Neil heard Thain in Brady St, so why wouldn't Cross have heard Paul shortly after he entered Bucks Row, if Cross was stationary? Cross would have only had to move a few steps into the middle of the street - not difficult to do silently if that was the purpose. A possibility that I have considered is that Cross strangled Polly and while mutilating her he heard Paul enter Bucks Row and decided to leave, but as he was leaving he heard Polly stir and returned to cut her throat. He was then unsure how close Cross was to him and decided to bluff his way out of the situation.

I'm not a Lechmerian, but I do find some of the contradictions to be interesting.

[Elamarna]

Neil heard Thain in Brady St, so why wouldn't Cross have heard Paul shortly after he entered Bucks Row, if Cross was stationary? Cross would have only had to move a few steps into the middle of the street - not difficult to do silently if that was the purpose. A possibility that I have considered is that Cross strangled Polly and while mutilating her he heard Paul enter Bucks Row and decided to leave, but as he was leaving he heard Polly stir and returned to cut her throat. He was then unsure how close Cross was to him and decided to bluff his way out of the situation.

I'm not a Lechmerian, but I do find some of the contradictions to be interesting.

Hi George, several possible explanations .

1. Neil knew Thain was due to pass the end of Bucks Row and was actively listening for him. It appears their beats crossed at the junction of Bucks Row and Brady on a regular basis, and it's very probable I suggest that the other officer who took Thain's cape to Harrison, Barber was Neil.


2. Linked to above. Paul may not have been actively listening when he walked to work.

3. Paul is never asked when he is aware of someone ahead of him, or if he had heard someone, it's just an assumption we all make.

With regards to cutting her throat after the mutilations, this is something I looked at in depth in Inside Bucks Row, while it is impossible to be sure of the order, the suggestion that the throat cuts were after the other cuts is more unlikely than the other way round.
The medical evidence does not actually say the throat was cut 2nd, this impression is due to the interpretation of some poorly worded press reports.
Llewellyn does not help matters with his less than pricise testimony.

Again I cover this in great detail in my work, looking at blood flow and loss from various blood vessels.
The amount of blood which was absorbed by the clothing around Polly's shoulders and neck, and clotts between the layers of clothing ( issues often overlooked) lean towards the neck wounds being first.

Steve

[Elamarna]

Neil heard Thain in Brady St, so why wouldn't Cross have heard Paul shortly after he entered Bucks Row, if Cross was stationary? Cross would have only had to move a few steps into the middle of the street - not difficult to do silently if that was the purpose. A possibility that I have considered is that Cross strangled Polly and while mutilating her he heard Paul enter Bucks Row and decided to leave, but as he was leaving he heard Polly stir and returned to cut her throat. He was then unsure how close Cross was to him and decided to bluff his way out of the situation.

I'm not a Lechmerian, but I do find some of the contradictions to be interesting.

Following on, Llewellyn was trying to explain the lack of blood.
His first suggestion that the body was killed elsewhere and then moved, was quickly rejected.
He then came up with the suggestion that the blood had been somewhat miraculous absorbed by the tissues of the body. Again suggesting that he was struggling to find the volume of blood he expected.

It seems that at no time did he take the amount of blood in the clothing around the neck and shoulders into account.
This may because he almost certainly was not present when said clothing was removed. We have to use Helson's testimony to understand the condition of that clothing.

As I said in the previous post, while it's not impossible that the throat Cuts were last, it's the least likely scenero.

Steve

[GBinOz]

With regards to cutting her throat after the mutilations, this is something I looked at in depth in Inside Bucks Row, while it is impossible to be sure of the order, the suggestion that the throat cuts were after the other cuts is more unlikely than the other way round.
The medical evidence does not actually say the throat was cut 2nd, this impression is due to the interpretation of some poorly worded press reports.
Llewellyn does not help matters with his less than pricise testimony.

Again I cover this in great detail in my work, looking at blood flow and loss from various blood vessels.
The amount of blood which was absorbed by the clothing around Polly's shoulders and neck, and clotts between the layers of clothing ( issues often overlooked) lean towards the neck wounds being first.

Steve

Hi Steve,

Thanks for the information. I was working on the Coroner's statement at the Chapman inquest:

The Coroner: There is a difference in this respect, at all events, that the medical expert is of opinion that, in the case of Nicholls, the mutilations were made first.

Cheers, George

[Elamarna]

Hi Steve,

Thanks for the information. I was working on the Coroner's statement at the Chapman inquest:

The Coroner: There is a difference in this respect, at all events, that the medical expert is of opinion that, in the case of Nicholls, the mutilations were made first.

Cheers, George

Posts crossed George, the relevant point is that it was Llewllens opinion, the actual evidence, such as it was was inconclusive.

I guess much depends on how we rate the good Doctor, personally I consider him the poorest of any involved in the murders.

Happy New Year btw George

Steve