Charles Lechmere: Prototypical Life of a Serial Killer

[Fiver]

Sorry to digress, but it does not exactly sound like Aaron Kosminski - does it?

Of course Kosminski doesn't sound like the common fictional portrayal of serial killers. Real humans don't.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

Of course Kosminski doesn't sound like the common fictional portrayal of serial killers. Real humans don't.

Kosminski doesn't sound like a serial killer at all - real or fictional.

[Lewis C]

why does Lechmere have to leave home for work early in order to murder Mary Kelly but not need to leave early in order to murder Mary Nichols?

Also, I believe it's the case that Lechmere leaving home early to murder Kelly wouldn't enable him to arrive at work on time unless Kelly died earlier than is usually believed.

[Dickere]

Also, I believe it's the case that Lechmere leaving home early to murder Kelly wouldn't enable him to arrive at work on time unless Kelly died earlier than is usually believed.

Or he wasn't working that day due to the holiday.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

Or he wasn't working that day due to the holiday.

I put that point to Edward Stow and he replied that only ignorant people claim that it was a holiday and, furthermore, that there is no reason to suppose that Lechmere would have been given that day off.

Curiously, his collaborator, Christer Holmgren, suggested to me that Lechmere may have been off work that day.

[Mark J D]

Another one for the newbies and lurkers, if I may: Lechmere is gaining such traction in social media these days that there will be folks coming here to investigate the state of play, and there's stuff in this thread that is highly problematic.

The question is how someone working 14-18 hours per day and having between five and nine hours per day to sleep as well as spend time with his wife and nine children could also find time to wander the streets looking for women to murder.

Forget the 'doting husband and father' daydream, and look at that last bit. A man whose journey to work requires him to cross a particular locality within a seemingly fixed and limited time frame is in fact doing *the very opposite* of 'wandering the streets looking for women to murder'. If he's expected over in the west by a certain time, he isn't going to be diverting far to the north or south, and he isn't going to be doubling back on himself. The verb 'wander', then, is completely inappropriate, and yet another example of straw-manning in a sneery tone.

Another question is how someone working 14-18 hours per day and having between five and nine hours per day to sleep as well as spend time with his wife and nine children could also find the time and premises to dismember human bodies and the means to transport the torsos to dump them where they were found.

Again, this is a worthless argument. If the body count was seven torsos every week, the question would very reasonably arise as to how a working man with an oppressive schedule and a family at home could find the time and premises. But what we actually have is four canonical torsos spread across 28 months, and a few more that stretch all the way from 1873 to 1902. To suggest that Lechmere couldn't have had that small number of opportunities in a 29-year period is ridiculous. As for the nonsense about 'means of transport', we are once again being treated to straw-manning. A killer working in logistics is literally the least likely person to have difficulty moving large body parts around.

I hope this clarifies a few things for the newbies, both factually and in terms of anti-Lechmerian psychology.

M.

[FISHY1118]

Another one for the newbies and lurkers, if I may: Lechmere is gaining such traction in social media these days that there will be folks coming here to investigate the state of play, and there's stuff in this thread that is highly problematic.



Forget the 'doting husband and father' daydream, and look at that last bit. A man whose journey to work requires him to cross a particular locality within a seemingly fixed and limited time frame is in fact doing *the very opposite* of 'wandering the streets looking for women to murder'. If he's expected over in the west by a certain time, he isn't going to be diverting far to the north or south, and he isn't going to be doubling back on himself. The verb 'wander', then, is completely inappropriate, and yet another example of straw-manning in a sneery tone.



Again, this is a worthless argument. If the body count was seven torsos every week, the question would very reasonably arise as to how a working man with an oppressive schedule and a family at home could find the time and premises. But what we actually have is four canonical torsos spread across 28 months, and a few more that stretch all the way from 1873 to 1902. To suggest that Lechmere couldn't have had that small number of opportunities in a 29-year period is ridiculous. As for the nonsense about 'means of transport', we are once again being treated to straw-manning in a sneery voice. A killer working in logistics is literally the least likely person to have difficulty moving large body parts around.

I hope this clarifies a few things for the newbies, both factually and in terms of anti-Lechmerian psychology.

M.

So then Mark, was Charles lechmere JTR ? ?

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

Another one for the newbies and lurkers, if I may: Lechmere is gaining such traction in social media these days that there will be folks coming here to investigate the state of play, and there's stuff in this thread that is highly problematic.



Forget the 'doting husband and father' daydream, and look at that last bit. A man whose journey to work requires him to cross a particular locality within a seemingly fixed and limited time frame is in fact doing *the very opposite* of 'wandering the streets looking for women to murder'. If he's expected over in the west by a certain time, he isn't going to be diverting far to the north or south, and he isn't going to be doubling back on himself. The verb 'wander', then, is completely inappropriate, and yet another example of straw-manning in a sneery tone.



Again, this is a worthless argument. If the body count was seven torsos every week, the question would very reasonably arise as to how a working man with an oppressive schedule and a family at home could find the time and premises. But what we actually have is four canonical torsos spread across 28 months, and a few more that stretch all the way from 1873 to 1902. To suggest that Lechmere couldn't have had that small number of opportunities in a 29-year period is ridiculous. As for the nonsense about 'means of transport', we are once again being treated to straw-manning. A killer working in logistics is literally the least likely person to have difficulty moving large body parts around.

I hope this clarifies a few things for the newbies, both factually and in terms of anti-Lechmerian psychology.

M.

Newbies may take note that you have accused me of adopting a sneery tone and a sneery voice, of using a completely inappropriate verb, of making a ridiculous suggestion, of writing nonsense, and of presenting a worthless argument.

Why?

Because I pointed out that Lechmere worked 14 to 18 hours a day, lived with a wife and nine children, had no transport of his own, and had no premises in which to store and cut up human bodies.

Readers may wonder how it can be ridiculous to say that it is ridiculous to suggest that such a man murdered women while on his way to work, during working hours, and on his way home from his mother's house, as well as occasionally cutting up people and dumping them, while working 14-18 hours per day six days per week and supporting a wife and nine children.

[FISHY1118]

Not to mention the fact that Charles Lechmere live to the ripe old age of 71 ,he was 39 years old during the Autumn of Terror. After the last ripper murder on the 9th Nov 1888 CL went on to live another 32 years without so much as a fine for spitting on the pavement.

Do people really think that after one of the most brutal, unimaginable, most horrific murders ever committed in human history, that one Charles Lechmere just decided to hang up his knife and call it quits and blend back into family life as if nothing ever happen!!!!! ?

Newbies take note

"No" Charles Lechmere was not Jack the Ripper.

[Aethelwulf]

Lechmere running over that boy was obviously no accident. Special agent Lech probs had a post Christmas delivery to make in Bradford.

[Mark J D]

So then Mark, was Charles lechmere JTR ? ?

Deffies.

M.

[Mark J D]

Newbies may take note that you have accused me of adopting a sneery tone and a sneery voice, of using a completely inappropriate verb, of making a ridiculous suggestion, of writing nonsense, and of presenting a worthless argument.

Why?

Because I pointed out that Lechmere worked 14 to 18 hours a day, lived with a wife and nine children, had no transport of his own, and had no premises in which to store and cut up human bodies.

Readers may wonder how it can be ridiculous to say that it is ridiculous to suggest that such a man murdered women while on his way to work, during working hours, and on his way home from his mother's house, as well as occasionally cutting up people and dumping them, while working 14-18 hours per day six days per week and supporting a wife and nine children.

So you type it all out again?

This is not worth an adult's time.

M.

[Mark J D]

Lechmere running over that boy was obviously no accident. Special agent Lech probs had a post Christmas delivery to make in Bradford.

Nor is this.

M.

[Abby Normal]

Not to mention the fact that Charles Lechmere live to the ripe old age of 71 ,he was 39 years old during the Autumn of Terror. After the last ripper murder on the 9th Nov 1888 CL went on to live another 32 years without so much as a fine for spitting on the pavement.

Do people really think that after one of the most brutal, unimaginable, most horrific murders ever committed in human history, that one Charles Lechmere just decided to hang up his knife and call it quits and blend back into family life as if nothing ever happen!!!!! ?

Newbies take note

"No" Charles Lechmere was not Jack the Ripper.

guess youve never heard of joseph deAngelo.

[Abby Normal]

Newbies may take note that you have accused me of adopting a sneery tone and a sneery voice, of using a completely inappropriate verb, of making a ridiculous suggestion, of writing nonsense, and of presenting a worthless argument.

Why?

Because I pointed out that Lechmere worked 14 to 18 hours a day, lived with a wife and nine children, had no transport of his own, and had no premises in which to store and cut up human bodies.

Readers may wonder how it can be ridiculous to say that it is ridiculous to suggest that such a man murdered women while on his way to work, during working hours, and on his way home from his mother's house, as well as occasionally cutting up people and dumping them, while working 14-18 hours per day six days per week and supporting a wife and nine children.

the family working man argument is so weak. the history of serial killers tells us that many have been.