Charles Lechmere: Prototypical Life of a Serial Killer

[Herlock Sholmes]

Originally posted by Elamarna View Post

Why do you call the idea of Lechmere being only 50 or so yards ahead of Paul a nonsense?
That's not what the evidence tells us.
While the evidence is limited, it is all we have, and is the sworn testimony of the two men involved.
At no point in that testimony is there anything to suggest it is not a truthful account from men?
While you can argue that you do not believe it, to call it nonsense simply demonstrates a mind that is set to one view only.



Lechmere only waits if you believe that Paul is not only 40-50 yards behind him. if he is only 40-50 yards ahead, then asking him to look with you , appears to be the immediate action you ask for in other places

A great exaggeration I am afraid, the report of her injuries clearly shows she was not nearly decapitated.
Chapman was the closest to that.



Her condition was clearly not obvious.

Apparently it took a lamp, that of Neil to show just how bad Mary Ann was.
Robert Paul touched her, and he was unsure if she was dead or not.



It was 3.40- 3.45, people were asleep, why would you knock on a door, when you had a man walking 50 or so yards behind you.
Especially if you were not sure of her condition. At the time he saw Paul, he had no idea of Mary Ann's condition. Of course if one starts from the position of him being the killer, one would have a different view.

Harrison, Barber was NOT across the road, it was in an entirely separate street, Winthrop , which ran parallel and to the south of Bucks Row.



Two points here,
Firstly neither Lechmere or Paul were sure of her condition. I suggest you read the statements of both men.

Second more important point, They DID head off to find a policeman, as soon as they could after checking Mary Ann.

The idea, that this was NOT done, comes from a belief that Lechmere was there minutes before Paul, such is simply speculation, based on a manufactured gap between the two men, which the evidence does NOT support.



Again, you are accepting that Lechmere is there minutes before Paul.
Footsteps at the bottom of Bucks Row?
Lechmere talks of 40 yards, which probably translates to a gap of about 50 yards before Lechmere slows down.
The bottom of Bucks Row is 130 yards away.
The evidence says that Lechmere goes for a policeman within probably a minute of so of first seeing Mary Ann Nichols.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I was a bit busy, so couldn't respond to the entirety of your post.

1. The 50 yards notion is probably an estimate by Lech on the distance just beyond visibility on that street. It doesn't work for me for three reasons:

A. Two pedestrians separated by that distance, on that street, at that time, particularly in the element they were in, should have clearly heard the other for some time.
They weren't wearing rubber souls (a few years away), and their own sounds from walking should not have negated the sound of the other - its' contrary to what neuro-scientists currently believe about processing sounds while walking.

If you really want to insist on walking having negated one hearing the others footsteps,
then just consider more of Lech's testimony: that he had stopped to observe the tarpaulin type object, didn't hear Paul, started walking again a few paces, and then finally heard Paul while in the middle of the street, and turned around to wait for him.

B. Lechmere, in my mind, clearly indicates that he was only aware of the sounds presence, while he was heading towards the body, at the point of mid street; so, he stopped and waited.

C. Lechmere, having come from the body, would have needed a reason to justify standing in the middle of the, waiting for Paul.
It was very convenient to be suddenly cognizant of Paul's footsteps at that time, when he didn't notice them beforehand. It was needed to justify his story.

Could a guilty Lech have come up with a better story, involving being cognizant of Paul's footsteps for a while. On his end, it would have worked better; but then you have the uncertainty of how Paul would have responded .... suddenly, he would start thinking more about the issue of sound and not hearing footsteps.

Lech's first awareness of Paul's presence was auditory, but not from 40 yards away, but somewhere closer to the base of Buck's row.

1.How lucky was Lech that Paul didn’t see him moving back from the body to the middle of the road? He was already standing still, in the road. Would he have claimed not to have gone near to the body when he couldn’t have been sure that Paul hadn’t seen him walk back to the centre of the road? Conclusion….. Lechmere clearly told the truth.

2. The longer you claim the period was that Lechmere was at the scene the less and less likely it is that he’d have turned down the opportunity of fleeing.

Killing on the way to work makes him unlikely……killing 20 minutes from work makes him even unlikelier…… refusing to flee puts him on the outer fringes. For me, the fact that he stayed around makes him 99% certain to have been innocent. I don’t accept any of this ‘bluffing it out,’ stuff. This was a killer on alert. One that evaded capture partly because he had a sense of self-preservation. And let’s not forget that this was probably his first murder and so he was likely to have been more easily spooked.

[Newbie]

Originally posted by Elamarna View Post

Why do you call the idea of Lechmere being only 50 or so yards ahead of Paul a nonsense?
That's not what the evidence tells us.
While the evidence is limited, it is all we have, and is the sworn testimony of the two men involved.
At no point in that testimony is there anything to suggest it is not a truthful account from men?
While you can argue that you do not believe it, to call it nonsense simply demonstrates a mind that is set to one view only.



Lechmere only waits if you believe that Paul is not only 40-50 yards behind him. if he is only 40-50 yards ahead, then asking him to look with you , appears to be the immediate action you ask for in other places

A great exaggeration I am afraid, the report of her injuries clearly shows she was not nearly decapitated.
Chapman was the closest to that.



Her condition was clearly not obvious.

Apparently it took a lamp, that of Neil to show just how bad Mary Ann was.
Robert Paul touched her, and he was unsure if she was dead or not.



It was 3.40- 3.45, people were asleep, why would you knock on a door, when you had a man walking 50 or so yards behind you.
Especially if you were not sure of her condition. At the time he saw Paul, he had no idea of Mary Ann's condition. Of course if one starts from the position of him being the killer, one would have a different view.

Harrison, Barber was NOT across the road, it was in an entirely separate street, Winthrop , which ran parallel and to the south of Bucks Row.



Two points here,
Firstly neither Lechmere or Paul were sure of her condition. I suggest you read the statements of both men.

Second more important point, They DID head off to find a policeman, as soon as they could after checking Mary Ann.

The idea, that this was NOT done, comes from a belief that Lechmere was there minutes before Paul, such is simply speculation, based on a manufactured gap between the two men, which the evidence does NOT support.



Again, you are accepting that Lechmere is there minutes before Paul.
Footsteps at the bottom of Bucks Row?
Lechmere talks of 40 yards, which probably translates to a gap of about 50 yards before Lechmere slows down.
The bottom of Bucks Row is 130 yards away.
The evidence says that Lechmere goes for a policeman within probably a minute of so of first seeing Mary Ann Nichols.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It's important to draw a line in the sand about Lech marching steadily in front of Paul for a few minutes before finding the body.
Because, if it was a fabrication, then that opens up a whole new can of worms ..... hence, the desperation and screeches.

I no longer think there is any justification in this position.

I don't think I said anything about Lech arriving 3 - 4 minutes before Paul. I just said he undoubtedly arrived well beforehand.
Was it only 1 1/2 minutes, or 4 minutes? We have no information to go by, only speculation; but we should consider our two options.

Let's say that Lech was innocent, and arrived earlier by only 90 seconds, that certainly should have given him time to ascertain that a woman (with a huge gash in her neck and belly) was unresponsive and in serious trouble. Otherwise, we have a thoroughly stupid and incompetent individual on hand, who delayed getting help by going through a charade of an investigation with Paul.

Again, his actions would be inconsistent with first discovers of other murder victims circling our story. Lech's apologists go to great lengths to normalize every oddity about his known behaviours. Surprisingly, people were shocked and frightened about murder and encountering dead bodies back in Victorian England. The first person to discover Martha Tabrum's body, panicked and immediately ran to the police; the discoverers of Mary Kelly's, Annie Chapman's, & Catherine Eddowes, did the same thing: Annie Chapman's going to the police after notifying neighbors. Catherine Eddowes body was in an even darker location than Polly Nichols. Their sense of urgency was not only out of common decency, but probably out of fear of being accused as the perpetrator.

With Lech, again weirdness prevails, even if you take his testimony at face value: he sees a fallen body of a woman; says that he hears Paul coming; ignores the body for some 25 seconds, waiting for Paul to arrive; and then proceeds in a seemingly calm fashion, informing Paul about the body, and then stumbling through an incomplete examination. There is no indication of stress or urgency on his part ever - except when refusing to prop up the body; he seems more resigned to sadness than anything else.

But then, innocent Lech wasn't there just 20 seconds ahead of Paul, but a good deal longer (let's say 80 seconds at minimum - the time it takes to go up Buck's row). When, he heard Paul's footsteps at the bottom of Buck's row, while examining the body - why didn't he run off and get the police, or knock up residences? Didn't he have any concern about being alone with the body?

If Jack the Ripper surely would have fled, why would innocent Lech, who had less balls than JtR, have stuck around and done essentially nothing?

And why did innocent Lech, returning to the murder scene that afternoon when returning home, not engage the police or reporters who were clearly seeking witness?

Of course, he could very well have returned home along White Chapel road.

[Newbie]

If I was Robert Paul, who expressed fear about the situation, I would have examined Polly Nichol's body with one eye trained on Lechmere.
It wasn't uncommon then & there for someone to be recumbent & feign being injured, while an accomplice clobbers you with a blunt instrument and robs you.

[Fiver]

absolute insanity.
we have posters on here on the one hand saying lechmere is a horrible, bonkers paradoxical suspect and on the other hand proposing others as better..the likes of hardiman, mann, endacot (lol who even is that?) mulshaw and another lechmere even!!

No one has said that Mann, Endacott, or Mulshaw was a better suspect.

James Hardiman and GCS Lechmere are better suspects than Charles Allen Lechmere. Both died a few years after the murders ended. Hardiman might have had a motive for hating prostitutes. GCS Lechmere tried to slit his own wife's throat.

... whos physical proximity, location and geographic circs are the best of any other suspect hands down...

That's not even close to being true. Mulshaw was given as an example of how easy it is to find suspects with closer location ties than Charles Lechmere. I suspect I could do the same for Joseph Lawende, who like CAL used a different name in court than he did in official documents.

...and who had a major discrepency in testimony with a police officer there. lol only in ripper world!

Robert Paul had the same disagreement with PC Mizen and supported Charles Lechmere's testimony.

[Newbie]

I think, right now, maybe my only major problem with Lechmere's guilt,
on this ocassion,
is that 3:38 am, at that spot on Buck's row,
is pretty much precisely the location you would expect him to be at,
if he was not JtR and just heading to work.

That works both for and against him; however, I doubt he had a private watch, and after slicing and dicing, looks at it and says huh? It's 3:37 am. I'll just hang out here.

[Lewis C]

That's not even close to being true. Mulshaw was given as an example of how easy it is to find suspects with closer location ties than Charles Lechmere. I suspect I could do the same for Joseph Lawende, who like CAL used a different name in court than he did in official documents.

Hi Fiver,

Agreed. I believe that all of the following lived closer to the heart of where the murders occurred than Lechmere did: George Chapman, Jacob Levy, George Hutchinson, David Cohen, Aaron Kosminsky, Hyam Hyams, John Richardson, Francis Thompson, Joseph Barnett, and Robert Mann (a weak suspect, but not as weak as everyone is saying that he is, IMO). And I probably left out a few. I believe that living where the murders occurred is a stronger geographic indicator than walking through it on the way to work, though I don't dismiss the latter.

[Herlock Sholmes]

I think, right now, maybe my only major problem with Lechmere's guilt,
on this ocassion,
is that 3:38 am, at that spot on Buck's row,
is pretty much precisely the location you would expect him to be at,
if he was not JtR and just heading to work.

That works both for and against him; however, I doubt he had a private watch, and after slicing and dicing, looks at it and says huh? It's 3:37 am. I'll just hang out here.

The ‘only’ problem? The fact alone that he stood and waited for Paul to arrive makes his innocence close to certain. Add the location and the time re-clocking in time. Add the fact that he couldn’t have lied to Mizen because he had a complete stranger standing next to him. Add the fact that he’d have been at work when Chapman was killed (what did he do with the organs? Take them back to the depot?). Add to the fact that we have no evidence of him being violent (if it can be applied to Druitt and others it can be applied to Lech too)

If he hadn’t been ‘disturbed’ would he have taken organs? If so, where would he have taken them 15 minutes or so before being due at work?

[Herlock Sholmes]

What is the relevance of ‘location ties?’

[Lewis C]

What is the relevance of ‘location ties?’

A man who lived in the area would tend to know the area better than someone who doesn't, would generally be in the area more and so would have more opportunities to commit the murders, and it would be easier for someone who lived in the area to escape after a murder.

[Lewis C]

But then, innocent Lech wasn't there just 20 seconds ahead of Paul, but a good deal longer (let's say 80 seconds at minimum - the time it takes to go up Buck's row). When, he heard Paul's footsteps at the bottom of Buck's row, while examining the body - why didn't he run off and get the police, or knock up residences? Didn't he have any concern about being alone with the body?

If Jack the Ripper surely would have fled, why would innocent Lech, who had less balls than JtR, have stuck around and done essentially nothing?

And why did innocent Lech, returning to the murder scene that afternoon when returning home, not engage the police or reporters who were clearly seeking witness?

Your 1st question is based on the premise that Lechmere was alone with the body at least 80 seconds, a premise that hasn't been proven.

If Lechmere was innocent, he would have had no reason to flee.

I think we already established that he returned home that night, not during the afternoon. Lechmere had already engaged with the police, so it was unnecessary to do it again.

[Aethelwulf]

A man who lived in the area would tend to know the area better than someone who doesn't, would generally be in the area more and so would have more opportunities to commit the murders, and it would be easier for someone who lived in the area to escape after a murder.

But also operating in such a compact area, and potentially being born/raised there with family ties, knows lots of people, would be at high risk of being recognised. the ripper didn't know how things would play out each time. In the case of a botched job or disturbance he could've been in big trouble. killing near mother's house would be a massive risk if things went wrong or he was seen. Killing Chapman in daylight while on an espresso break would be suicide. Long might have said oh yes chapman saw her talking to wot not lives up the road. I think in this case, where the murder area is so compact, someone who knows the area well but is slightly removed has a big advantage. All those door to doors don't work because he isn't there. Unless you think it was koz. But then how secure is a positive ID even in the 21st century? 17 year stretch for being totally innocent.... [/QUOTE]

[Herlock Sholmes]

A man who lived in the area would tend to know the area better than someone who doesn't, would generally be in the area more and so would have more opportunities to commit the murders, and it would be easier for someone who lived in the area to escape after a murder.

I’ve never seen this as relevant tbh Lewis. Basically it’s saying that because Lechmere was a local man it increases his suspect rating. And as Wulf has said, there’s an increased chance of him actually being recognised. The difference between someone giving a general description and someone saying “well, it looked a bit like Mrs Lechmere’s son.”

I reckon that if we could have sat down any number of local men at the time and questioned them in detail we would find that many of them had similar ‘links’ to these locations (“uncle Bill lives 2 streets from Mitre Square,” “used to work not far from Bucks Row,” “best friend used to own a shop near to Dorset Street,” etc) It smacks of just trying to find things that can be added as a tick in the Lechmere box.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Killing Chapman in daylight while on an espresso break would be suicide.....

[Herlock Sholmes]

Let's say that Lech was innocent,

Yes, let’s.

[Fiver]

It's important to draw a line in the sand about Lech marching steadily in front of Paul for a few minutes before finding the body.
Because, if it was a fabrication, then that opens up a whole new can of worms ..... hence, the desperation and screeches.

You once again show that you have not read other people's posts. As has been mentioned repeatedly, at a distance of 50 yards, Robert Paul had no chance of seeing Charles Lechmere until he entered Buck's Row. Another point brought up, but ignored by you, is that it is unlikely the two men walked at the same pace.

I don't think I said anything about Lech arriving 3 - 4 minutes before Paul. I just said he undoubtedly arrived well beforehand.

We're still waiting for you to provide any evidence that make's your conclusion "undoubtable". Or even likely.

The first person to discover Martha Tabrum's body, panicked and immediately ran to the police; the discoverers of Mary Kelly's, Annie Chapman's, & Catherine Eddowes, did the same thing: Annie Chapman's going to the police after notifying neighbors. Catherine Eddowes body was in an even darker location than Polly Nichols. Their sense of urgency was not only out of common decency, but probably out of fear of being accused as the perpetrator.

This nonsense of yours has been refuted before.
* Albert Crow ignored Martha Tabram's body and went to bed.
* John Reeves saw Tabram's body and went directly to the police. That's one of the few points you get right.
* Charles Lechmere hailed the first person he saw, Robert Paul, showed him Nichols body, and they went to the police.
* John Davis hailed the first people he saw, showed them Chapman's body, and then went to the police.
* Louis Diemschutz went inside the club, checked his wife, then told the other club members. They went outside, examined Stride's body, and went to the police.
* PC Watkins went to the nearest person, George Morris, showed him Eddowes' body, and then sent Morris to get more police.
* Thomas Bowyer, got the landlord McCarthy, showed him Keely's body, and then went to the police.

Your attempt at portraying Lechmere's actions as an anomaly is still disproven by the actual facts.

Went directly to the police - Reeves.
Sought ought a second person or persons and showing them the body before seeking police - Lechmere, Davis, Diemschutz, Watkins, Bower.
Just walked past the victim - Crow and probably Paul if Lechmere hadn't stopped him. Possibly Goldstein for the Stride murder, if the reporter didn't embellish Mrs Mortimer's account.

But then, innocent Lech wasn't there just 20 seconds ahead of Paul, but a good deal longer (let's say 80 seconds at minimum - the time it takes to go up Buck's row). When, he heard Paul's footsteps at the bottom of Buck's row, while examining the body - why didn't he run off and get the police, or knock up residences? Didn't he have any concern about being alone with the body?

Why would an innocent man run off to get the police, while ignoring a person he heard coming towards him?

Why would Lechmere wake people up, when waiting for the person walking towards him would be quicker and easier?

Why would anybody think that staying with the body looks guilty while running away at the first sound of noise looks innocent?

And why did innocent Lech, returning to the murder scene that afternoon when returning home, not engage the police or reporters who were clearly seeking witness?

This has been answered 2 or 3 times already.

* Pickford's shifts lasted 14 to 16 hours, so Lechmere would have been returning down Bucks Row some time between 6:20pm and 10:20pm.
* Lechmere talked to the police. Voluntarily. Probably before Robert Paul did.

You ignoring facts doesn't make them go away.

Of course, he could very well have returned home along White Chapel road.

That's the only part of your post that makes any sense. By the time he got off of work, Lechmere might have heard that the woman in Buck's Row had been murdered and chosen not to walk past that same spot.