Charles Lechmere: Prototypical Life of a Serial Killer

[wigngown]

Hi Trevor,
After Bury was sentenced to hang, two Scotland Yard Detectives were sent to Scotland. I'm unsure if those Officers were ever identified. Abberline could, as you say, have been one of them.
Best regards.

[harry]

Fisherman,
We know he named himself both as Lechmere and as Cross.As you indicate ,a person is more likely to answer to a name that he had recently been using,hence his using of Cross.He used it because that was his normal and recent way of presenting himself.You have made a good point that explains his use of the name,and he used it no less in his dealings with authority.Not the police,because before the inquest,the only policeman we have on record as speaking to him,,didn't ask for a name.

W ell you are wrong on road conditions.I speak from e xperience of such thoroughfares.Why is it important to know? Oblviously the police believed the killer had gone that way,as Paul speaks of seeing no one.The footsteps Cross heard.Pauls's or someone elses?

[Trevor Marriott]

Hi Trevor,
After Bury was sentenced to hang, two Scotland Yard Detectives were sent to Scotland. I'm unsure if those Officers were ever identified. Abberline could, as you say, have been one of them.
Best regards.

Well whoever went they clearly didn't suspect him of the Whitechapel murders so another suspect bites the dust !

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Fisherman]

harry: Fisherman,
We know he named himself both as Lechmere and as Cross.

We only know he used the name Cross in combination with having been found alone at a murder spot with a freshly killed victim, Harry. It´s not as if we have it on record that he used that name on any other occasion. And that is the exact reason why it is something that should raise the red flag.

As you indicate ,a person is more likely to answer to a name that he had recently been using,hence his using of Cross. He used it because that was his normal and recent way of presenting himself.

Absolute nonsense. You have no idea that he used the Cross name at all, apart from in combination with the murder case.

You have made a good point that explains his use of the name,and he used it no less in his dealings with authority.

More nonsense - and more positing of wayward speculation passed off as fact.

Not the police,because before the inquest,the only policeman we have on record as speaking to him,,didn't ask for a name.

Totally uninteresting.

W ell you are wrong on road conditions.I speak from e xperience of such thoroughfares.

I´ve been in dark streets too, Harry. But I was not in Bucks Row on the 31:st of August 1888. So I freely admit that, and I admit that I do not know what the exact lighting condoitions were. I suggest you join me.

Why is it important to know? Oblviously the police believed the killer had gone that way,as Paul speaks of seeing no one.The footsteps Cross heard.Pauls's or someone elses?

The only footsteps Lechmere claimed to have heard were Pauls. And the police never knew which way the killer took.
You are wasting time here.

[harry]

Fisherman,
You make a proposition why a person would use a name,I use it,and you claim it as nonsense.Ah well!.
We have no evidence that Cross always used the name Lechmere either.
Uninteresting. Well you make a song and dance over police involvement.
Bucks row differed in no great way from other roads.Doesn't matter whether you or I were there,there is a great deal of information handed down from person's who were.More than enough in fact to make a sound judgement.
Cross heard footsteps.He never claimed who they belonged to.
The police never knew which way the killer took.Cannot then apply to Cross,who's movements are well recorded
No,it's you who is wasting time. You who's spouting nonsense.

[Fisherman]

harry: Fisherman,
You make a proposition why a person would use a name,I use it,and you claim it as nonsense.Ah well!.

You are trying to be clever, Harry! A shame i does not work. What I wrote was "Oh yes, it is extremely clearly indicative of this. Once somebody gives his name, no matter what the context is, the supposition must be that he will give the same name the next time, no matter what the context is."

We only know of Lechmere using one name before the inquest, and that name is Lechmere.
The suggestion that he would have used the name Cross at work is sheer conjecture and nothing else. And - once more, and forever if I have to - he was NOT at work when giving the name Cross to the authorities. He was consciously making the choice to hide his real name and use an alias.

We have no evidence that Cross always used the name Lechmere either.

Kafkaesque, I´m afraid.

Uninteresting. Well you make a song and dance over police involvement.

No, I simply stick with what we know.

Bucks row differed in no great way from other roads. Doesn't matter whether you or I were there,there is a great deal of information handed down from person's who were. More than enough in fact to make a sound judgement.

Guess what - our definitions of "sound" may vary. So there goes that methodology. It was dark, end of story. Exactly how dark, we don´t know.

Cross heard footsteps.He never claimed who they belonged to.

He heard APPROACHING footsteps. And they proved to belong to Paul. I don´t know just how weird we can make things, but let me tell you that you are way past the limit.

The police never knew which way the killer took. Cannot then apply to Cross,who's movements are well recorded.

Not worth answering. Ridiculous. And in line with the rest of the ramblings.

No, it's you who is wasting time.

That´s easily remedied. Goodbye.

[John Wheat]

[QUOTE=Fisherman;376627]

If somebody else had written on his door and murdered his wife in a fashion that bore half a resemblance to a Ripper killing, would he ALSO be the Ripper in such a case? Mr Brown, who cut his wifes neck on the night of the double event - was HE the Ripper or a copycat? He used the hallmark element of neck-cutting that Bury missed out on.

The Ripper case is riddled with people who went to the police and said they were the Ripper, of people who bragged about being the Ripper in crowds (and who put themeselves at risk to get lynched), of people who wrote letters to the police, taking on the Ripper role. Dozens, probably hundreds, of people did this.
How is Bury any different from them? The point about the chalking is moot.

As for the murder of his wife, I have already gone into the differences. The Riper killed strangers, like serialists normally do, he ALWAYS cut the neck of his victims and bled them that way, he NEVER went to the police and turned himself in, he always took innards when there was time, he escalated the violence, resulting in facial mutilation from victim four.
Bury did a domestic murder, totally, totally different from the killing of strangers, he did NOT cut the neck and bleed his wife, he went to the police, he took no innards from the body, the crime was not an escalation from the violence inflicted on Kelly, though one must assume that there would have been time for it, and there was no facial mutilation.

Bury was not the Ripper, simple as.

There weren't thousands of men like Bury. Bury murdered his wife in a similar way to the Ripper. His wife who was a prostitute at one point. No one else chalked on doors purporting to be the ripper. No one else went to the police exclaiming they were afraid they would be seen as a ripper. We are now going round in circles. You are beginning to bore me, frankly any idiot can see Bury is a much better Ripper suspect than Crossmere.

[wigngown]

John,

I Agree with what you say. Bury is an excellent candidate. Personally, I think it was probably Ellen who chalked the messages. Didn't the Police search his home & find burned clothing in the fire place?

Best regards.

[Fisherman]

[QUOTE=John Wheat;376659]

There weren't thousands of men like Bury. Bury murdered his wife in a similar way to the Ripper. His wife who was a prostitute at one point. No one else chalked on doors purporting to be the ripper. No one else went to the police exclaiming they were afraid they would be seen as a ripper. We are now going round in circles. You are beginning to bore me, frankly any idiot can see Bury is a much better Ripper suspect than Crossmere.

If it takes an idiot to think that Bury is a much better suspect than Lechmere, then you may want to reconsider.

[John Wheat]

John,

I Agree with what you say. Bury is an excellent candidate. Personally, I think it was probably Ellen who chalked the messages. Didn't the Police search his home & find burned clothing in the fire place?

Best regards.

To wigngown

Yes they found women's clothing burned in the fire place. Also women's clothing was found in the box Bury had stuffed Ellen in and clothing and. jewellery were found in another box. This was likely Ellen's clothing and I bet some of the jewellery was Ellen's but it wouldn't surprise me if some of the jewellery were mementos from the C5. Pure conjecture I know but doesn't the clothing burning in the fireplace remind you of Mary Jane Kelly's murder and also isn't it a bit of a coincidence Bury's mother and eldest sister were also called Mary Jane?

Cheers John

[Columbo]

To wigngown

Yes they found women's clothing burned in the fire place. Also women's clothing was found in the box Bury had stuffed Ellen in and clothing and. jewellery were found in another box. This was likely Ellen's clothing and I bet some of the jewellery was Ellen's but it wouldn't surprise me if some of the jewellery were mementos from the C5. Pure conjecture I know but doesn't the clothing burning in the fireplace remind you of Mary Jane Kelly's murder and also isn't it a bit of a coincidence Bury's mother and eldest sister were also called Mary Jane?

Cheers John

Hi John,

So you don't think you're putting a little too much conjecture in this comparison? Not trying to be a smart a** but please don't fall into the trap where every little similarity means something. Domestic violence was commonplace and, although I can't verify it, I'm sure there were numerous slit throats by husbands, pimps, customers, robberies etc. I would even make a guess that some were inadvertently disemboweled(although probably with no parts taken)

I believe one of the victims used Mary Jane as an alias? And Chapman married someone named Annie Chapman didn't he?

So many ways to connect the pieces of this puzzle.
Columbo

[wigngown]

John,

I thought of the fire at Millers Court too. Interesting connection regarding the names & jewellery. Bury was a nasty piece of work, and Berry said he was sure he'd hanged JtR, quite what he based that on perhaps we'll never know.

Thanks for the information,

Best regards.

[John Wheat]

Hi John,

So you don't think you're putting a little too much conjecture in this comparison? Not trying to be a smart a** but please don't fall into the trap where every little similarity means something. Domestic violence was commonplace and, although I can't verify it, I'm sure there were numerous slit throats by husbands, pimps, customers, robberies etc. I would even make a guess that some were inadvertently disemboweled(although probably with no parts taken)

I believe one of the victims used Mary Jane as an alias? And Chapman married someone named Annie Chapman didn't he?

So many ways to connect the pieces of this puzzle.
Columbo

To Columbo

I'm sure domestic violence was quite commonplace. However actual murders weren't that common. I think you'll find they were very few murders in the Whitechapel area in the years before 1888 for example. I know Bill Beadle did some research into how common murder was in Whitechapel in the years before 1888 in his book Jack the Ripper Unmasked. Also there seem to be alot of coincidences with Bury or he was Jack or a copycat killer.

Cheers John

[harry]

Fisherman,
There was never any evidence linking Cross with the killing of Nichols.
There w as never any evidence that Cross lied about anything.
There was never any evidence that he tried to mislead, or conceal his identity.
He was an innocent witness to the finding of a body.That's all.
The person who is trying to be funny is you.You made a proposistion and when it backfired you try to disclaim it. That's par for the course,as is your snide remarks.
It's a poor theory that has yet to find any following.Wake up, the theory is dead.

[Templarkommando]

Fisherman,
There was never any evidence linking Cross with the killing of Nichols.
There w as never any evidence that Cross lied about anything.
There was never any evidence that he tried to mislead, or conceal his identity.
He was an innocent witness to the finding of a body.That's all.
The person who is trying to be funny is you.You made a proposistion and when it backfired you try to disclaim it. That's par for the course,as is your snide remarks.
It's a poor theory that has yet to find any following.Wake up, the theory is dead.

What do you make of Lechmere telling Mizen that a policeman was waiting for him in Buck's Row then?