Charles Lechmere: Prototypical Life of a Serial Killer

[Herlock Sholmes]

I’ll ask a simple question.

What makes Cross a likelier ripper than Bury?

[FrankO]

I cannot be sure what applies, Frank, as you must be aware. But when he said that Lechmere did not say anything about any murder or suicide, it seems clear to me that he reasoned that he had been deprived of information, intentionally or unintentionally.
It must be remembered in this context that as far as Mizen was aware at the stage when he spoke to Lechmere, there was another PC in Bucks Row. To Mizen, this PC was the finder of the body, and Lechmere was a mere messenger boy, sent on by the other PC. Mizen knew nothing about the examination of the body that Lechmere had been part of, and he would have predisposed that the other PC must have made an examination himself, thereby finding out that Nichols was dead. As far as Mizen would have known - or thought he knew - the other PC was therefore the person who sat on the knowledge about a possible murder or suicide, and it would have been the character of the information he passed on to Lechmere that governed to what degree the carman knew about the seriousness of the errand.

If the other PC was able to keep the information about Nichols ´death to himself, Mizen would not have had any reason for a grudge against Lechmere in that department, because then the carman would not have been able to speak of a possible murder or suicide. If Mizen believed that the carman must have been told about the seriousness, then it would be the other way around.

Of course, and perhaps also more important as such, what Mizen says tells us that he either was not informed by Lechmere that the carman thought that the woman was dead, or he WAS informed, and either forgot it or decided to lie about it.

Did I leave out any possibilities on that score? I hope not. You shall have to tell me. And I will probably answer tomorrow - but not before.

What I was really just asking you, Christer, is whether you were suggesting that Mizen asked Lechmere any other questions than "What's the matter?" when they spoke on the night of the murder. Or that you, instead, were referring to when Mizen had found out that the woman was actually murdered or had committed suicide. But it's now clear to me that you meant the latter and that we at least agree on that . So, thanks for clearing that up. And I don't think you left out any possibilities.

[The Rookie Detective]

While waiting for R J to appear on this thread, I'll give you an answer, Rookie Detective! How many of these people (and horses), said that they saw an unidentified man walking along Berner Street? Let's see:

Mrs Mortimer spoke of seeing a man, but he was later identified as Leon Goldstein, a member of the socialist club. The police were able to verify where he came from and where he was headed. He was coming from the Spectacle Café in Spectacle Alley as he entered and passed through Berner Street.

Charles Letchford passed through Berner Street at 12.30 and his sister was at the door of their lodgings at ten to one. Charles did not see anything out of the ordinary, and specified that his sister saw noone in the street.

PC Smith saw a man with Stride in the street.

James Brown saw a man with a woman at 12.45, in neighboring Fairclough Street.

The sweetheart couple walked up and down the street between 12.00 and 12.30. There are no comments from their side about seeing anybody in the street.

Morris Eagle did not remember seeing anybody in Berner Street as he returned there at 12.35.

Louis Diemschutz said nothing about having seen anybody around as he arrived to the yard.

William Marshall said that he saw Stride with a man at around 11.45, but that he was unable to see the mans face clearly.

Joseph Lave said that at 12.40, as he was in Berner Street, there was noone around to awake any suspicion.

Matthew Packer said he sold grapes to a man and woman (who may have been Stride) at around 12.00.

Israel Schwartz said that he, at 12.45, saw a broad shouldered man have an altercation with a woman, likely Stride, outside the yard, whilst another man was in the street.

You seem to be saying that the fact that nobody specifically says that they saw Charles Lechmere in the street, tells us that he was not there...? If so, that is a very odd thing to say, because not only would the absolute bulk (with the likely exception of William Marshall) not have known and been able to point Lechmere out, but it also allies that Brown, Packer and Schwartz all mention having seen an unidentified man (in Schwartz's case two unidentified men) in Berner Street. And Marshall said that he did not get a clear view of the face of the man he saw, adding another man to the four mentioned above.

Now, why could not either of these men have been Charles Lechmere? To me, that possibility renders your list useless in trying to exonerate the carman - if that is what you are trying to do.

Excellent response Fisherman.

I would say that some of your timings are a bit off, but for the most part; you're fairly accurate in terms of your timings for the witnesses.

In terms of intention for the post; I was highlighting the obstacles faced by the idea that Lechmere could have been there.

For example, I think it would be fairly reasonable to say that we can rule out Parcelman as being Lechmere because the age gap is quite substantial seeing as Lechmere was nearly 40 and Parcelman around a decade younger.
This is based on PC Smith being around the same age as Parcelman and his assessment of the relative age of Parcelman should have been fairly accurate.

I believe that Parcelman was in fact Morris Eagle who after trying to get into the club door which was closed, then went to enter the yard and Stride was standing by the gateway and he got into a conversation with her.
The parcel was full of cigarettes, which he was intending to take into the club after hours to share with his comrades..or potentially fake jewelry that both he and Diemschultz sold on the market.

But that's another topic...

So, we can essentially rule out Parcelman.


We could also rule out Pipeman, because at around 5ft 11" IO would suggest he was too tall.
Pipeman was certainly too tall to be the ripper because he would have towered over the 5ft 6" fence at Hanbury Street.

So that's Pipeman and Parcelman out the picture.

we can also rule out Diemschultz, Eagle, Lave and anyone else associated with the club, as Lechmere certainly wasn't Jewish or or Jewish appearance.

That also rules out Goldstein and Wess

That also rules out the somewhat elusive Israel Schwartz, who has become as elusive as Hutchinson to pin down.


We then have BS Man.


Now he only exists in the realms of him having thrown Stride to the floor and through the eyes of Schwartz.

His behavior of appearing intoxicated as he approached Stride would suggest he had RECENTLY come out of a public house...or the club itself...

This is based on the fact that an intoxicated man who lingers around on the street too long would draw too much attention to himself...and considering Schwartz is the only man to have seen BS man, then how does this work for BS man in relation to him possibly being Lechmere?

Here's my hypothesis..

Perhaps...BS man had previously left the Beerhouse on the corner of Berner Street and walked north towards Stride...OR...has been in the club previously and had left with the main group...but he still wants alcohol and walks towards the club...he then spots Stride who is standing in the gateway...he notices her and tries to engage with her, but she's not interested... his ego bruised he then walks past Stride, but because he can hear singing in the club, he tries to get in the club via the front door...but as we know from Eagle..it's already closed at this point..he then get annoyed and begins to walk back at the same time that Schwartz sees him...BS man then goes to walk down the side of the club but Stride is STILL standing in the gateway...she's in his way and has already rejected him..and so he grabs her and tries to throw her in the road so he can get to the side door of the club, but she resists and he then spins her around and throws her to the ground.
At the same time Pipeman, who has also been drinking in the beerhouse, observes what's going on...and BS man notices and shouts LIPSKI!, directing it at Pipeman because he is aware that Pipeman is a member of the vigilance committee...the same member of the vigilance committee that investigated the Lipski case a year earlier

Pipeman is Charles Le Grand.

BS man then goes into the club...

BS man is possibly Joseph Lave, the journeyman on the run from America via Russia.

After ensuring he's not being observed, Pipeman casually walks over to Stride as she stands up...He asks if she's okay and she's spitting mud...he then pulls out a bag of cachous from his pocket and offers one to her because her mouth and face are muddied from BS Man having thrown her down onto the floor.

She accepts and as she takes the bag, he gestures to walk to the side door of the club so he can apprehend BS man...Stride is now facing the gateway with Pipeman between her and the gateway facing her...he then walks past her to get behind her, but instead of walking to the door, he turns and then suddenly drags her violently backward by her neckerchief and pulls her to the floor.. he cuts her throat so that the blood directs straight into the drain, he severs her windpipe before she can make a sound..he then replaces his knife just as he hears Diemshcultz cart approaching...and casually walks SOUTH and then WEST... the only route he can take without being spotted...

But i digress...


BS man wasn't Lechmere because his behavior is too erratic and doesn't fit with the psychopath mold.


So where does that leave us?


Lechmere can only have been seen by either Marshall, Packer, Brown, Mortimer OR the Sweetheart Couple.


The sweetheart couple apparently left the scene too early to have seen Lechmere... but that doesn't quite sit right.

There's a chance that the couple who were "sweethearts" saw and heard more than they let on.


Brown sees a couple standing on the corner
Packer sells grapes to a couple that stand "almost opposite" ...i.e on the corner
Marshall sees a couple, but further south of the murder site.

Now IF the sweetheart couple left early, then the identification of Stride with potentially 2 or 3 different men as part of a couple then fits.

But IF the sweetheart couple were still there, then it's likely that Stride wasn't seen in a couple and the witnesses only saw a man with his girlfriend and was unconnected to Stride.


The clue relates to the involvement of Le Grand.

It's clear that he got to Packer.

But why? What's his angle here?

Well, Le Grand wanted the police to believe that Stride was with a man who ought grapes.

But again...why Grapes?

It's because Le Grand made a mistake...he gave the Cachous to Stride as a ruse to kill her...but he wasn't anticipating the neurological reaction that can occur with the brain being shocked and Stride's automated relfex meant she gripped the cachous and he couldn't retrieve them in time because of Diemshcultz.


He then ensured that the grapes story was added to the case in an attempt to saturate and distract from the fact that he had left the cachous, which he had carried on his person to sweeten his own breath from the smoking he had been doing shortly before.


There were 2 other women who Le Grand got to and they came up with the story of finding the grape stalk in the mud.

The coroner was adamant that there were NO grapes found and only cachous in her left hand.

I would suggest that because we can prove that Le Grand got to at least 3 people to give false statements, he is likely to have got to various members of the club and potentially other witnesses, including Mortimer who concocted the story of the man walking hurriedly down Berner Street.

That never happened.

But in order to seal the deal, Le Grand also got to Wess, who then had to back up Mortimer's story by using Goldstein as the scapegoat and then you have the perfect double cover story.

The way to know WHO Le Grand got to, is to LIST ALL THOSE WITNESSES who claimed to have seen grapes in Strides hand...

That was Le Grand's mistake and was his "smoking gun..."



But how dies this relate to Lechmere?...well it doesn't.


The only individual that I would suggest comes anywhere close to being Lechmere, would have been the man seen leaving the Bricklayers Arms with her.. around 2 hours prior to her murder.

Lechmere wouldn't have been allowed access to the club


But MAY have been drinking with Stride in the Nelson beer house...

But did he stand with her for ages in the rain?

Well Le Grand wanted us to believe that her killer bought grapes and then stood in the rain with her for over half an hour before killing her.


That's nonsense.

Ironically, the only accounts I believe are true...are PC Smith..who saw Stride with the innocent Morris Eagle just before he went back into the club.

And Schwartz...who saw a drunken and frustrated BS man (LAVE?) assault Stride...and a man lighting his pipe.

Pipeman followed Schwartz briefly to make sure he had gone but then went back to Stride.


I believe that Le Grand hadn't been watching the club...he had been watching Stride.

In my opinion, he led her into a trap.

I believe that the man who was in the Bricklayer's arms was connected with Le Grand. Perhaps a man who worked in the cigar trade.

He lured her to Berner Street on the pretense that she needed to wait for him by the gateway to the yard, which happened to be outside the club. I don't believe she was waiting for someone in the club, I believe she was told to wait for someone in the flats who was a cigar maker...

This hypothesis is based on the WVC being involved in the orchestration of the murder of Stride, in order to vindicate their forging of the letter for the double event with the end game being to extort substantial reward money from the government by perpetuating the myth of Jack the Ripper.


The WVC was made up of a man who restored/built/owned theatres, an actor involved in the criminal underworld, a man who wrote fake letters to himself claiming to be from the killer, and a few unsavory local tradesmen.

The WVC were nothing more than an extravagant and theatrical extortion racket that needed the murders to justify demanding huge monetary rewards.


Stride was lured to Berner Street under false pretenses and the club was used as the perfect distraction from the real killer's intentions. Stride was murdered to help prove the double event would take place.

There is also a scenario in which Pipeman (Le Grand) paid Bs Man to assault Stride in order to create misdirection. BS man then waited for Pipeman to light his cigarette as a signal to go into the club...and then...

Le Grand just picked his moment to move in on Stride...but he didn't account for not being able to retrieve the cachous.


Sloppy.



In summary...only Brickayers Arms man could have been Lechmere...but he isn't confirmed as being seen in Berner Street and 2 hours had passed since that time.


But I appreciate your response, comments and feedback




RD

[Fiver]

Again, you are mistaken, just as you were about the threads yoou referred to as being the sole work of Lechmereians.

John never said that.

Hi Abby. We don't need any threads on Lechmere other than a witness thread. The threads were all started by Lechmerians though I believe.

Cheers John

In what bizarro world does "started by" mean the same thing as "the sole work of"?

Lets look at the threads.

* All roads lead to Lechmere. That's clearly started by a Lechmerian.
* Charles Lechmere: Prototypical Life of a Serial Killer. That's clearly started by a Lechmerian.
* The Darkness of Bakers Row by Fisherman. That's the only one where the title alone doesn't show it was started by a Lechmerian.

So when are you going to apologize for claiming John said things he never said? When are you going to admit that the facts show that John was correct?

My personal guess is some time after the heat death of the universe.

The people have spoken, John.

You're the only one saying it. You do realize you don't speak for everyone, don't you?

[Lewis C]

If you had been a tad more observant, you would be aware that the thread you are currently writing on was started by Poster Patrick S. He can be called a lot of things, but "Lechmerian" is not one of them.
Otherwise, observing that people who believe that they have identified an excellent suspect are more inclined to start threads about said suspect than the ones who are not equally convinced about the suspect value of the described person, is really keen eyed.

I think it's probably true that Patrick S. isn't a Lechmerian. In his opening post of the thread, he said that Lechmere was married when he was 20, stayed married to the same woman until he died 50 years later, and had 11 children with her. The title of the thread appears to be intentionally ironic.

[Lewis C]

Again, you are mistaken, just as you were about the threads yoou referred to as being the sole work of Lechmereians. He is an excellent suspect. That is supported by how he is right at the top of all lists of viable suspects these days. There are no other factors to go with, unless we try to flog our personal interpretations and misgivings to be presented as facts.

The people have spoken, John.

At the top of all lists of viable suspects? Obviously he's not at the top of John's list, or Herlock's. Probably not Fiver's either.

The people have spoken? If you mean the people that post in Youtube comment sections, that may be true.

[Fiver]

I think it's probably true that Patrick S. isn't a Lechmerian. In his opening post of the thread, he said that Lechmere was married when he was 20, stayed married to the same woman until he died 50 years later, and had 11 children with her. The title of the thread appears to be intentionally ironic.

My mistake. I hadn't read the start of the thread, and irony can be harder to pick up without the verbal and non-verbal cues of face to face communication.

And it looks like John is wrong in what he actually said. Only most of the threads are being started by Lechmerians.

Also, Patrick S., I apologize for calling you a Lechmerian.

[Fiver]

He is an excellent suspect. That is supported by how he is right at the top of all lists of viable suspects these days.

You don't get to the truth by taking opinion polls.

But lets look at some online opinion polls.

* Kosminski first, Lechmere second.

* An older Casebook poll goes with Unknown. Druitt is second, Le Grand third. Lechmere isn't listed.

* A recent JTr Forum poll goes with an unnamed local. Second palce is a tie between Kosminski and Lechmere.

[Lewis C]

You don't get to the truth by taking opinion polls.

But lets look at some online opinion polls.

* Kosminski first, Lechmere second.

* An older Casebook poll goes with Unknown. Druitt is second, Le Grand third. Lechmere isn't listed.

* A recent JTr Forum poll goes with an unnamed local. Second palce is a tie between Kosminski and Lechmere.

Here's another one: https://www.jack-the-ripper-tour.com...you-voted-yet/
1. Kosminski
2. Tumblety
3. Cross

[rjpalmer]

This is the only occasion where we have the 3.45 timing given by Paul, and it is from Lloyds Weekly of the 2nd of September, not from the inquest.

This is a curious statement. Multiple sources have Paul deposing at the inquest that walked through Buck's Row at 3.45 or that he left home shortly before 3.45, which for all intents and purposes means the same thing.

For instance, the PMG of 18 September.

[Fisherman]

The majority of those who ‘support’ Cross do so because the guy now has his own TV channel and social media groups. It’s a wonder that you and Von Stow don’t engage a PR company to promote him. It’s simply a bandwagon. The social media ‘followers’ are likely to be people who have spent almost no time researching the case. So, like Scobie, they have just heard the Stow/Holmgren version and assume guilt. With all of the proven manipulation of evidence, the gross exaggerations and the twisting of language we can see that this has degenerated into nothing more than a propaganda campaign. He’s not just a poor suspect, he’s a non-existent one. Take away the ‘well he was there’ desperation and we have nothing left. John Richardson is not a good suspect by any means, but he’s a better one than Cross.

A whole lot of the people who like Lechmere as a suspect have many, many years in ripperology behind themselves. I rank many of them as way better read up on the case than for example you.
It is another matter that they are averse to the idea of debating on Casebook. If there had only been quality posting and a good debating climate out here, I am sure there would have been those who would have have reasoned otherwise.

Trying to make generalist claims like the ones you are pushing here does not work, I'm afraid.

[Fisherman]

I’ll ask a simple question.

What makes Cross a likelier ripper than Bury?

A simple answer: He is proven to have been found alone with the victim at one of the murder sites.

It really is that simple. Having been proven to have a violent streak and being capable of murder does not trump that single parameter.

If the two had been hauled in by the police, and if the knowledge of the police did not extend to more than we know today, it applies that Lechmere could be convicted of the crime of killing Nichols, whereas there would not be any case against Bury at all. And even IF there had been a case, built on, say, a confession by Bury, it would still be a question of how he could no be convicted on account of it being impossible to prove his presence at the site. Many people confessed to the crimes of the Ripper, it is a common thing in these kinds of cases.

You may personally think that Bury is a better fit for the killers role, based on how he killed his wife and cut her abdomen open. And if we are to solely go on the parameter of having a record of violent crime, then Bury would win that battle. But no such battle is based on one parameter only. It also needs to be said that there are a number of factors that speak against the idea of Bury being related to the Ripper interns of methodology:

Serial killers with a number of victims they did not know, are very, very unlikely to kill their spouses. Bundy did not kill his girlfriends, Ridgway made his wife feel she lived with the best guy in universe, Armstrong did not kill his wife, Rader did not kill his wife, De Angelo did not kill his wife, Gillis did not kill his girlfriend, Chikatilo did not kill his wife, Peter Kürten did not kill his wife ... For some weird reason, it seems the safest place to be when in close proximity to a serial killer is in his marital bed.

There may be some example of some sort of exception, I don't know - but killing your spouse is not a favorite serial killer pastime. And if you are going to tell me that the lack of examples of serial killers who stay put and bluff it out somehow proves that they won't do that, Herlock, then how about me telling you about how they will not kill their wifes!

Moreover, there were not the typical Ripper features in his domestic murder. There was a gash to the abdomen, but not the long, confident one we see in the Ripper cases. There was no cut throat. There was no organ retrieval.

What there WAS, was graffito speaking about the Ripper on his lodgings - but my personal take is that he wrote that himself. I believe that he was darkly fascinated by the Ripper deeds, and it seems he spent the time leading up to his domestic murder discussing the Ripper with a friend, or something along those lines. I cannot remember the whole picture.

Anyways, what we have on Bury seems to point away from any true connection to the Ripper. In many ways, the Beadmore case is a better likeness to the real thing, but that killer - again a spouse, a jilted lover - was caught. And was able to admit that a dark fascination with the Ripper was what made him do it.

If Bury had killed Ellen BEFORE the Ripper murders, he would have been much elevated in my view. After? Nah.

And we cat put him at a murder site or anywhere near it, whereas we CAN put Lechmere on one, and we can point to a large array of things that do not look right.

It is not in any ways a tight run, Bury would not be out of the starting blocks as Lechmere crossed the line.

And that - not deceitful propaganda, as you will have it, is the reason that loads of people say that after having looked at the Ripper case for decades, they now feel the solution has been presented.

[Herlock Sholmes]

I think it's probably true that Patrick S. isn't a Lechmerian. In his opening post of the thread, he said that Lechmere was married when he was 20, stayed married to the same woman until he died 50 years later, and had 11 children with her. The title of the thread appears to be intentionally ironic.

I’ve shared many a discussion with Patrick S and he definitely thought Cross was a very poor suspect Lewis.

[Fisherman]

What I was really just asking you, Christer, is whether you were suggesting that Mizen asked Lechmere any other questions than "What's the matter?" when they spoke on the night of the murder. Or that you, instead, were referring to when Mizen had found out that the woman was actually murdered or had committed suicide. But it's now clear to me that you meant the latter and that we at least agree on that . So, thanks for clearing that up. And I don't think you left out any possibilities.

Great, Frank, many thanks!

[Fisherman]

You don't get to the truth by taking opinion polls.

But lets look at some online opinion polls.

* Kosminski first, Lechmere second.

* An older Casebook poll goes with Unknown. Druitt is second, Le Grand third. Lechmere isn't listed.

* A recent JTr Forum poll goes with an unnamed local. Second palce is a tie between Kosminski and Lechmere.

So he is right at the top of the lists? Like I said?

Good.