Charles Lechmere: Prototypical Life of a Serial Killer

[Herlock Sholmes]

You and I had briefly discussed Cross refusing to ‘prop up’ Nichols, which neither of us find in the least suspicious, but I thought that it’s worth mentioning here the two sources (I believe that you said two) who said that it was Paul that refused. One was The Telegraph.

[Herlock Sholmes]

We? Last I checked you weren't royalty. Or are you so deluded that you can't separate your opinions from reality?

We do know you've been caught out admitting you haven't even read Steve' whole book. And you haven't refuted Steve, or Dr Whatsit, or Herlock, or anyone else - you've dodged questions, presented speculation as fact, and then declared victory.



So far, the only one making things up is you. You've attacked positions no one ever held. You've claimed people supported your positions that didn't. You tried to rewrite the dictionary. You misrepresented the sources, the statements of the forensic professors, the posts of people that disagreed with you, and the period witness accounts.

Well said Fiver.

[Elamarna]

Didn’t Fish try and claim that Cross had pulled down her skirts before Paul had arrived so that the wounds were hidden Steve? Or am I misremembering this? It would appear to be yet another baseless claim.

Then we have “ In his opinion deceased looked as if she had been outraged.”

I’d have thought that this would imply that the skirts were lifted at least up to her thighs.

Thighs would appear to be a perfectly reasonable suggestion.
Between her knees and waist.

[Elamarna]

You and I had briefly discussed Cross refusing to ‘prop up’ Nichols, which neither of us find in the least suspicious, but I thought that it’s worth mentioning here the two sources (I believe that you said two) who said that it was Paul that refused. One was The Telegraph.

Yes, and Lloyds Weekly, on 9th.

Steve

[Fiver]

Didn’t Fish try and claim that Cross had pulled down her skirts before Paul had arrived so that the wounds were hidden Steve? Or am I misremembering this? It would appear to be yet another baseless claim.

It's another baseless claim that requires ignoring the actual evidence.

Tenets of the Cult of Lechmere are:
* Lechmere must have resented the single mom that raised him, not the alcoholic, bankrupt, deadbeat Dad who abandoned the family to shack up with a teenager.
* Lechmere's mom, who waited the legally required 7 years before remarrying, was a bigamist. Lechmere's dad wasn't a bigamist because he never actually married the other woman.
* Lechmere's mom was a rigid moralist and/or completely promiscuous, which is why he hated prostitutes.
* Lechmere deliberately ran over a child with his van in 1876.
* Lechmere was a meat cart driver. This would provide him with an excuse for fresh bloodstains acquired on his walk to work,
* Lechmere worked as a cats meat man. This would provide him with a good knowledge of anatomy.
* The murders started right after Lechmere moved to the area.
* The Ripper tried to hide Nichols injuries.
* Bleed out times mean only Lechmere could have been the Ripper.
* It's more credible for the Ripper to try to bluff Robert Paul and PC Mizen than to fade away into the darkness.
* Lechmere's refusal to prop up Nichols body proves that he is the Ripper.
* Lechmere's acting like an innocent man is proof that he is the Ripper.
* Robert Paul's time estimate is right. PC Mizen, PC Thain, PC Neil were wrong.
* Lechmere lied about when he left home.
* Lechmere lied to PC Mizen.
* Lechmere didn't give his home address at the inquest.
* Lechmere wearing his work uniform to the inquest is proof that he is the Ripper.
* Three eyewitnesses lied about Chapman's time of death.
* Lechmere left his van unattended and took tea a half hour into his 14+ hour shift so he could get murdery on Chapman.
* Lechmere had no problem getting up 3 hours early on his only day off or staying up 23 hours straight to murder Stride and Eddowes.
* The torn piece of Eddowes apron lies on a direct line between Eddowes body and Lechmere's home.
* The Ripper was the same person as the Torso Killer.
* Lechmere would have had no problem hiding trophy organs or even whole decomposing bodies rom his large family.
* A bloody rag found near the London Hospital the day after the Pinchin Street Torso was found is tied to that crime and proves that Lechmere was the Ripper.
* Lechmere's great great grandchildren not knowing he attended the Nichols inquest is proof that Lechmere lied to them.

All of these are either provably false or unsupported speculation. And not every Sect of the Cult of Lechmere holds to all of these Tenets. The two main Sects, the Fishies and the Von Stows, probably don't agree on all points. And neither Fishy nor Von Stow created the theory. Plenty of people disavow the Misogynist Sect, the Ley Line Sect, and/or the TorsoRipper Sect.

And there are more reasonable people who think Lechmere is decent suspect, but they get drowned out by the True Believers.

[John Wheat]

Says the poster who one day says that the Lechmere theory has no leaps of faith, only to then the next day claim that it is a bundle of flagrant lies, more or less. And who then goes on to first say that the good review was an attempt to be nice, only to then instead state that you missed out on the flaws on account of not having given the book a proper read.

As I said, publish these things, and your credibility suffers badly. Now you know.

Just for the record I have always thought your book was terrible. The documentary on Lechmere a load of bias crap. And Lechmere is a rubbish suspect.

[The Rookie Detective]

So just to clarify, the likeliest position that Nichol's skirt was found was between her knees and waist, probably her thighs?

Lechmere and Paul never noticed her lower torso injuries.

But one of them claims they believed she had been outraged.

Paul wants to move the body, but Lechmere refuses and wants to get a policeman

Paul initially thinks she's still alive but when subsequently speaking to the press, he changes his mind and concurs with the idea that he actually thought she was dead.

Both men go to find a policeman but the policeman's reaction lacks any urgency.

PC Neil finds Nichols skirt is at the level of her knees

Lechmere and Paul explain how her skirt didn't seem to want to come down, implying that they at least tried to move it, but it didn't come down... even though they never touched the body due to Lechmere not wanting to prop her up.

Neither men noticed her injuries...

And so who moved her skirt from her thighs down to her knees?

PC Neil said knees, Lechmere and Paul never noticed her injuries, didn't want to move her, and tried to pull her skirt lower to give her a little dignity, because they thought she had been outraged, but it didn't seem to want to come down.

So they moved her clothing but not her body physically?

If they moved her skirt, how did they not see any injuries?

If they didn't move her skirt, how did it move from her thighs to her knees when PC Neil saw her clothing?


Either I'm missing something here, or someone isn't being truthful.


Ironically, Lechmere seems to act more innocent than Paul, Neil and Mizen.


If noone saw her injuries, then her skirt must have been near her knees, which tallies with PC Neil.

If you think someone has been outraged, it would imply her skirt was exposing her private area, or her skirt was hitched up to her waist.

They didn't want to touch her, but someone must have moved her skirt and so how is that possible?


Something just doesn't add up here.

In reality, I think that Paul and Lechmere knew she was dead and moved her skirt down to give her a bit of dignity, but I also think they noticed her injuries as one of them moved her skirt and they realized that it was a more serious situation than they thought. They then were worried that they would be seen as suspects and because they knew she was dead, they casually walked off and found Mizen, who wasn't given the correct information by the pair of them because they would be detained by Mizen. Either that or Mizen was incompetent and couldn't be bothered to react with any urgency. Or maybe he was the killer and knew she was already dead.
Paul and Lechmere were more concerned about being late for work than they were for Nichols.

Any person with typical empathetic morals would have run and physically dragged the policeman to come to the scene, or at least have told him there was a murder victim laying in the road. They didn't want to be seen as suspects, they didn't want to hang around the scene or help the police in the first instance because they would be late for work and they lacked any urgency in their efforts get help to Nichols quickly. Of course, if they did tell Mizen the correct information with the correct amount of urgency, then Mizen would have run to the scene immediately.

I think Paul and Lechmere were cowards in the moment.

Interestingly, Paul reacts more suspiciously than Lechmere.


Something doesn't add up with the way that Paul, Lechmere and Mizen behaved, in terms of what they said they did and didn't do, and how they reacted to the situation.


Thoughts and clarification please?

[Abby Normal]

So just to clarify, the likeliest position that Nichol's skirt was found was between her knees and waist, probably her thighs?

Lechmere and Paul never noticed her lower torso injuries.

But one of them claims they believed she had been outraged.

Paul wants to move the body, but Lechmere refuses and wants to get a policeman

Paul initially thinks she's still alive but when subsequently speaking to the press, he changes his mind and concurs with the idea that he actually thought she was dead.

Both men go to find a policeman but the policeman's reaction lacks any urgency.

PC Neil finds Nichols skirt is at the level of her knees

Lechmere and Paul explain how her skirt didn't seem to want to come down, implying that they at least tried to move it, but it didn't come down... even though they never touched the body due to Lechmere not wanting to prop her up.

Neither men noticed her injuries...

And so who moved her skirt from her thighs down to her knees?

PC Neil said knees, Lechmere and Paul never noticed her injuries, didn't want to move her, and tried to pull her skirt lower to give her a little dignity, because they thought she had been outraged, but it didn't seem to want to come down.

So they moved her clothing but not her body physically?

If they moved her skirt, how did they not see any injuries?

If they didn't move her skirt, how did it move from her thighs to her knees when PC Neil saw her clothing?


Either I'm missing something here, or someone isn't being truthful.


Ironically, Lechmere seems to act more innocent than Paul, Neil and Mizen.


If noone saw her injuries, then her skirt must have been near her knees, which tallies with PC Neil.

If you think someone has been outraged, it would imply her skirt was exposing her private area, or her skirt was hitched up to her waist.

They didn't want to touch her, but someone must have moved her skirt and so how is that possible?


Something just doesn't add up here.

In reality, I think that Paul and Lechmere knew she was dead and moved her skirt down to give her a bit of dignity, but I also think they noticed her injuries as one of them moved her skirt and they realized that it was a more serious situation than they thought. They then were worried that they would be seen as suspects and because they knew she was dead, they casually walked off and found Mizen, who wasn't given the correct information by the pair of them because they would be detained by Mizen. Either that or Mizen was incompetent and couldn't be bothered to react with any urgency. Or maybe he was the killer and knew she was already dead.
Paul and Lechmere were more concerned about being late for work than they were for Nichols.

Any person with typical empathetic morals would have run and physically dragged the policeman to come to the scene, or at least have told him there was a murder victim laying in the road. They didn't want to be seen as suspects, they didn't want to hang around the scene or help the police in the first instance because they would be late for work and they lacked any urgency in their efforts get help to Nichols quickly. Of course, if they did tell Mizen the correct information with the correct amount of urgency, then Mizen would have run to the scene immediately.

I think Paul and Lechmere were cowards in the moment.

Interestingly, Paul reacts more suspiciously than Lechmere.


Something doesn't add up with the way that Paul, Lechmere and Mizen behaved, in terms of what they said they did and didn't do, and how they reacted to the situation.


Thoughts and clarification please?

hi rd
all the other ripper victims either had their clothes hiked up or cut away to expose their abdominal wounds except nichols. the consensus i beleive among the lechmerians is that lech quickly pulled it down to cover the wound when he heard paul approaching. some hysterical anti lechers would say this is not impossible according to the laws of the universe, but i would say its not as improbable as that lol.

btw, ive always thought fishs book cutting point is good book, concise, fascinating, filled with lots of great research and new material and a cracking good read to boot! i highly recommend it!

cheers!

[Lewis C]

So just to clarify, the likeliest position that Nichol's skirt was found was between her knees and waist, probably her thighs?

Lechmere and Paul never noticed her lower torso injuries.

But one of them claims they believed she had been outraged.

Paul wants to move the body, but Lechmere refuses and wants to get a policeman

Paul initially thinks she's still alive but when subsequently speaking to the press, he changes his mind and concurs with the idea that he actually thought she was dead.

Both men go to find a policeman but the policeman's reaction lacks any urgency.

PC Neil finds Nichols skirt is at the level of her knees

Lechmere and Paul explain how her skirt didn't seem to want to come down, implying that they at least tried to move it, but it didn't come down... even though they never touched the body due to Lechmere not wanting to prop her up.

Neither men noticed her injuries...

And so who moved her skirt from her thighs down to her knees?

PC Neil said knees, Lechmere and Paul never noticed her injuries, didn't want to move her, and tried to pull her skirt lower to give her a little dignity, because they thought she had been outraged, but it didn't seem to want to come down.

So they moved her clothing but not her body physically?

If they moved her skirt, how did they not see any injuries?

If they didn't move her skirt, how did it move from her thighs to her knees when PC Neil saw her clothing?


Either I'm missing something here, or someone isn't being truthful.


Ironically, Lechmere seems to act more innocent than Paul, Neil and Mizen.


If noone saw her injuries, then her skirt must have been near her knees, which tallies with PC Neil.

If you think someone has been outraged, it would imply her skirt was exposing her private area, or her skirt was hitched up to her waist.

They didn't want to touch her, but someone must have moved her skirt and so how is that possible?


Something just doesn't add up here.

In reality, I think that Paul and Lechmere knew she was dead and moved her skirt down to give her a bit of dignity, but I also think they noticed her injuries as one of them moved her skirt and they realized that it was a more serious situation than they thought. They then were worried that they would be seen as suspects and because they knew she was dead, they casually walked off and found Mizen, who wasn't given the correct information by the pair of them because they would be detained by Mizen. Either that or Mizen was incompetent and couldn't be bothered to react with any urgency. Or maybe he was the killer and knew she was already dead.
Paul and Lechmere were more concerned about being late for work than they were for Nichols.

Any person with typical empathetic morals would have run and physically dragged the policeman to come to the scene, or at least have told him there was a murder victim laying in the road. They didn't want to be seen as suspects, they didn't want to hang around the scene or help the police in the first instance because they would be late for work and they lacked any urgency in their efforts get help to Nichols quickly. Of course, if they did tell Mizen the correct information with the correct amount of urgency, then Mizen would have run to the scene immediately.

I think Paul and Lechmere were cowards in the moment.

Interestingly, Paul reacts more suspiciously than Lechmere.


Something doesn't add up with the way that Paul, Lechmere and Mizen behaved, in terms of what they said they did and didn't do, and how they reacted to the situation.


Thoughts and clarification please?

There's a lot here, but I'll just respond to a couple of things. I don't think they saw her injuries, either because it was too dark to see them or because her clothing hadn't been raised high enough for her injuries to be exposed. So if her injuries weren't exposed before they pulled her clothing down, neither would they be exposed during or after. I agree that the part about being unable to lower the clothing doesn't jibe with her clothing being at her knees when Neil sees her. There's no problem though with moving her clothing without moving her body.

They didn't tell Mizen that they had seen a murder victim because they didn't know they had. They weren't even sure that she was dead.

Physically dragging a policeman is something that I would never do.

[Abby Normal]

There's a lot here, but I'll just respond to a couple of things. I don't think they saw her injuries, either because it was too dark to see them or because her clothing hadn't been raised high enough for her injuries to be exposed. So if her injuries weren't exposed before they pulled her clothing down, neither would they be exposed during or after. I agree that the part about being unable to lower the clothing doesn't jibe with her clothing being at her knees when Neil sees her. There's no problem though with moving her clothing without moving her body.

They didn't tell Mizen that they had seen a murder victim because they didn't know they had. They weren't even sure that she was dead.

Physically dragging a policeman is something that I would never do.

unfortunately i actually dragged a police officer once and i can assure you it is something that you should never do!

[Fiver]

If they moved her skirt, how did they not see any injuries?

If they didn't move her skirt, how did it move from her thighs to her knees when PC Neil saw her clothing?

Robert Paul pulled her clothes down.

"The clothes were disarranged, and he helped to pull them down." - Robert Paul, 18 September Daily Telegraph

"Her clothes were raised almost up to her stomach. Witness felt her hands and face, and they were cold. He knelt down to see if he could hear her breathe, but could not, and he thought she was dead. It was very dark, and he did not notice any blood. They agreed that the best thing they could do would be to tell the first policeman they met. He could not see whether the clothes were torn, and did not feel any other part of her body except the hands and face. They looked to see if there was a constable, but one was not to be seen. While he was pulling the clothes down he touched the breast, and then fancied he felt a slight movement." Rpbert Paul, 18 September Times

[The Baron]

Just for the record I have always thought your book was terrible. The documentary on Lechmere a load of bias crap. And Lechmere is a rubbish suspect.

Well said John.


The Baron

[Dickere]

Robert Paul pulled her clothes down.

"The clothes were disarranged, and he helped to pull them down." - Robert Paul, 18 September Daily Telegraph

"Her clothes were raised almost up to her stomach. Witness felt her hands and face, and they were cold. He knelt down to see if he could hear her breathe, but could not, and he thought she was dead. It was very dark, and he did not notice any blood. They agreed that the best thing they could do would be to tell the first policeman they met. He could not see whether the clothes were torn, and did not feel any other part of her body except the hands and face. They looked to see if there was a constable, but one was not to be seen. While he was pulling the clothes down he touched the breast, and then fancied he felt a slight movement." Rpbert Paul, 18 September Times

Ooh matron !

[Aethelwulf]

It's another baseless claim that requires ignoring the actual evidence.

Tenets of the Cult of Lechmere are:
* Lechmere must have resented the single mom that raised him, not the alcoholic, bankrupt, deadbeat Dad who abandoned the family to shack up with a teenager.
* Lechmere's mom, who waited the legally required 7 years before remarrying, was a bigamist. Lechmere's dad wasn't a bigamist because he never actually married the other woman.
* Lechmere's mom was a rigid moralist and/or completely promiscuous, which is why he hated prostitutes.
* Lechmere deliberately ran over a child with his van in 1876.
* Lechmere was a meat cart driver. This would provide him with an excuse for fresh bloodstains acquired on his walk to work,
* Lechmere worked as a cats meat man. This would provide him with a good knowledge of anatomy.
* The murders started right after Lechmere moved to the area.
* The Ripper tried to hide Nichols injuries.
* Bleed out times mean only Lechmere could have been the Ripper.
* It's more credible for the Ripper to try to bluff Robert Paul and PC Mizen than to fade away into the darkness.
* Lechmere's refusal to prop up Nichols body proves that he is the Ripper.
* Lechmere's acting like an innocent man is proof that he is the Ripper.
* Robert Paul's time estimate is right. PC Mizen, PC Thain, PC Neil were wrong.
* Lechmere lied about when he left home.
* Lechmere lied to PC Mizen.
* Lechmere didn't give his home address at the inquest.
* Lechmere wearing his work uniform to the inquest is proof that he is the Ripper.
* Three eyewitnesses lied about Chapman's time of death.
* Lechmere left his van unattended and took tea a half hour into his 14+ hour shift so he could get murdery on Chapman.
* Lechmere had no problem getting up 3 hours early on his only day off or staying up 23 hours straight to murder Stride and Eddowes.
* The torn piece of Eddowes apron lies on a direct line between Eddowes body and Lechmere's home.
* The Ripper was the same person as the Torso Killer.
* Lechmere would have had no problem hiding trophy organs or even whole decomposing bodies rom his large family.
* A bloody rag found near the London Hospital the day after the Pinchin Street Torso was found is tied to that crime and proves that Lechmere was the Ripper.
* Lechmere's great great grandchildren not knowing he attended the Nichols inquest is proof that Lechmere lied to them.

All of these are either provably false or unsupported speculation. And not every Sect of the Cult of Lechmere holds to all of these Tenets. The two main Sects, the Fishies and the Von Stows, probably don't agree on all points. And neither Fishy nor Von Stow created the theory. Plenty of people disavow the Misogynist Sect, the Ley Line Sect, and/or the TorsoRipper Sect.

And there are more reasonable people who think Lechmere is decent suspect, but they get drowned out by the True Believers.

It is bizzare how much is made of so little. I can't believe I almost fell for this rubbish. He deserves a look but in reality the circumstantial case against lech is about as sinister as a new born lamb playing in flower filled meadow on a late spring evening as the may blossom wafts down on a warm, gentle breeze.

[Sam Flynn]

Tenets of the Cult of Lechmere are:
* Lechmere must have resented the single mom that raised him, not the alcoholic, bankrupt, deadbeat Dad who abandoned the family to shack up with a teenager.
* Lechmere's mom, who waited the legally required 7 years before remarrying, was a bigamist. Lechmere's dad wasn't a bigamist because he never actually married the other woman.
* Lechmere's mom was a rigid moralist and/or completely promiscuous, which is why he hated prostitutes.
* Lechmere deliberately ran over a child with his van in 1876.
* etc [...]

Good list, Fiver, although I think it missed out one of the key (false) tenets, namely:
* Paul found Lechmere standing/crouching over the body of Polly Nichols

I've lost count of the times I've see this nugget of distorted evidence regurgitated.