Blood on Charles Lechmere

[MrBarnett]

Hi Miss M
thank you for the info. I had forgotten about the union/trade assoc. angle.
of course my company/workers that I used as an example were not involved in that.

Some records of the London Carmens' Trade Union still exist.

http://archiveshub.ac.uk/data/gb96-ms1195

[dixon9]

Yes he was, Dixon. No doubt about that!

What we should not do is to ask ourselves "How would I have acted, what would I have done?". That will lead us wrong. We would not have killed people in the open street to start with, would we?

This is why I say that we need to accept that he was a psychopath if he was the killer. And psychopaths are not easily scared. They are the ones who collect medals in wars by walking straight into the bullet rain and killing their enemies. We celebrate them for their courage, but we should instead celebrate them for their inability to panick. If, that is, we should celebrate them at all. But such is the human creature!

but then why did he flee the scene of the stride killing?

[Pcdunn]

Sigh...

Not sure what you are trying to say, Miss Marple. Or well, I know what you are saying as such, but I was more kind of wondering that point you are making...?

Possibly the point that a carman didn't load the cart, just drove it.

Also possibly the point that had Cross entered the stables with blood on his person, the horses might well have reacted to the smell of it-- and others might have noticed.

[Fisherman]

Well, that was easy enough: Chelsea-PSG 1-2, and Chelsea is out of Champions League, courtesy of Zlatan Ibrahimovic.

He is like a good bottle of wine, Ibra, always improving and putting his talent and football intelligence to the best use possible. Ten more of him, and weīd have a decent national team!

[Fisherman]

Abby NormaI
Charles Booth gives a quite detailed account of carman. 19th Working class men were often in unions or trade associations and there was quite strong demarcation on what you could and could not do. Men did not like other men muscling in in on their jobs. Apart from driving, the care of their horses was the most important part of their job and the descriptions of the constant hanging about waiting for goods does not suggest engagement with the lifting and moving of goods.Pickfords would not want their drivers wearing blood soaked clothes, thry would have to look respectible. The blood soaked clothes suggested by Fisherman seems to be very imaginative. Pickfords also moved furniture and other goods.

Miss Marple

"Blood soaked"? Really?

For the life of me, I cannot remember having suggested that. I seem to remember having said that Lechmere may not even have had a speck of blood on his person, but if he did, a carman freighting meat may well have had some blood on him.

But "blood soaked"...? Wow. Itīs fascinating where a little exaggeration will take you, Miss Marple! Not to mention a lot of the stuff....

[Fisherman]

Sam Flynn: Indeed, tricky without being in contact with any real blood to speak of.

But you donīt know how much blood he came in contact with, do you? You are proposing what you think is an informed guess, and that guess may or may not be a good one.

Just because Pickford delivered furniture, would one expect a carman's clothes to be soaked in varnish?

Look there - even the varnish vanished.

[Fisherman]

but then why did he flee the scene of the stride killing?

Reasonably because he preferred not being seen to being seen and ID:d as the carman who "found" Polly Nichols dead body.
Like I said, there is no second pulling that stunt.

[Fisherman]

Possibly the point that a carman didn't load the cart, just drove it.

Also possibly the point that had Cross entered the stables with blood on his person, the horses might well have reacted to the smell of it-- and others might have noticed.

I donīt know about the loading bit, but I do know that horses that are subjected to the smell of blood on a daily basis - as meat delivery horses would arguably be - would not panick about a speck of blood on the clothes of their drivers.
And thatīs not because horses are psychopaths, no.

[Errata]

I donīt know about the loading bit, but I do know that horses that are subjected to the smell of blood on a daily basis - as meat delivery horses would arguably be - would not panick about a speck of blood on the clothes of their drivers.
And thatīs not because horses are psychopaths, no.

I've bled around a lot of horses, and as best I can tell, old blood makes them more alert, and fresh blood makes them afraid. Maybe something about an immediate presence of a predator vs. a possibility of a predator. When I tore open my hand in the barn, the horses got very nervous, bunched up in a corner far away from me. When I wandered back in an hour later, they flagged their tails an twitched their ears, but didn't avoid me. And that seemed to be the case every time someone hurt themselves.

The cart horse came to a dead stop, which he would not have done if he didn't care. But I don't think it was the blood so much as the blood was fresh. Jack was free to pop up under some other horses nose probably within 30 minutes of the murder. Maybe less.

[drstrange169]

Post #44

>>Note to myself: Experts on different establishments have no idea what they are talking about - Dusty is by far the better source.<<


Never claimed to be an expert on anything, but my approach to research is to cross check where I can.

You refused to cross check Ingrams last time this came up and apparently still refuse to.

Here’s the thing, show me evidence that Ingrams was right and I’ll shut up about it.

Simple.

>>Straddling the body, lifting the skirt and stabbing and cutting at the abdomen is entirely possible. End of story.<<

Since the abdomen cuts were “running downwards” the killer must have been facing the Brady Street end of Bucks Row, rending the skirt as a shield useless. Plus, no blood splatter was recorded on the front of the dress.
I guess that more realistically would be the "end of story".


>>Daily News:.He and the man examined the body,...<<


One of my favourite paintings is “The Marriage Of Arnolfini” by Jan Van Eyck. Whenever I’m in London I go to the National Gallery to look at it. Despite "examining" it dozens of times in great detail, I’ve never actually touched it.

Here’s what I actually posted. This time I’ve underlined the relevant point of my sentence as you either misunderstood or carefully avoided addressing it.

“Can you provide any quote were Paul specifically said Xmere touched the body?”

Of course the question is now rhetorical, as you will have combed through the reports and realised I’m unequivocally correct and you were woefully wrong;-)


>>And stand there as the morning drew on...? <<

No, walk away unobserved by neither police nor witnesses.

Are you suggesting it was not dark that night?

Come on Fish, a little bit of reality here.


>>It was a station filled with different rooms and corridors. Lechmere may well have been the first man in place on one of these places. If there is a fact available, then that is that we simply donīt know. Letīs be fair and admit that, shall we?<<

Really? Are you that desperate?

Because I cross check, I happen to know that, for security reasons, entrances and various areas were guarded and a large quantity of workers were in situ prior to 4 a.m. … so in answer to your question, “What if he was the first to arrive at Broad Street?”
No, it’s not possible that Xmere was the first person to arrive at Broad Street that night.


Post #54 Re: Primrose Street.

Hello Gary,

As I’m sure you already know, there is a Goods Yard ajoining Primrose on the 1894 map. Whether they had horses or nwas there in 1888 or not, I don’t know.


Post #62

>>… meat was a major commodity of the Broad Street depot. Therefore, it would be reasonable to expect the carmen there to quite frequently freight meat. Ergo, they all would risk to get blood on their clothes.<<

Facts, Christer, facts.

Was meat as major a commodity in 1888 as it was just a couple of years later when the meat supply to London trebled?

Was meat a major commodity after 4 a.m.?

Yet again, the carmen did NOT load the carts, they were assigned LOADED carts.

You seem to be struggling with what you want to be true and what really happened. That’s why you need to cross check Ingrams like the rest of us and not take things on blind faith just because he sounds good to you.



Post #96

Hello Abby,

>> ... as someone who worked in the delivery goods business, I can assure you that the driver helped, even if it wasn't his explicit job, load and unload the goods. I was a sales rep, in business casual clothes,and even I helped, on almost a daily basis. and my truck drivers helped even more the loaders do their job. and they didn't have to either.<<

I’m sure it’s quite possible that Broad Street cart men may well have handled the goods at some point during the day, but that doesn’t alter the fact that Pickfords carmen were assigned loaded carts.

That isn’t speculation. That is how the Pickfords work flow was described to the Commission of Railways Report.

Broad Street handled, literally, thousands of carts a day. The trains were run by the railways; the porters were employed by the railways. Pickfords only had the cartage rights.

As others have pointed out, Ingrams as an expert of Broad Street in 1888 is HIGHLY questionable. Fisherman is keen to accept unchallenged what he says, because it’s what he wants to hear. The facts however suggest otherwise and aren’t the facts that we are interested in?

[drstrange169]

>>Why should you have to defend the indefensible, Fish? Just ignore them!<<

Because the more confusion there about Xmere, I suspect, the easier it is to distract from the fact that he comes across as innocent.

[Fisherman]

I've bled around a lot of horses, and as best I can tell, old blood makes them more alert, and fresh blood makes them afraid. Maybe something about an immediate presence of a predator vs. a possibility of a predator. When I tore open my hand in the barn, the horses got very nervous, bunched up in a corner far away from me. When I wandered back in an hour later, they flagged their tails an twitched their ears, but didn't avoid me. And that seemed to be the case every time someone hurt themselves.

The cart horse came to a dead stop, which he would not have done if he didn't care. But I don't think it was the blood so much as the blood was fresh. Jack was free to pop up under some other horses nose probably within 30 minutes of the murder. Maybe less.

The point I am making, Errata, is that horses can grow accustomed to smells, sounds etcetera, and learn to tolerate things they were originally upset by. Horses accustomed to the smell of blood will not be worried about it. This is why war horses master the art of staying calm in gunfire and among wounded and dead, very much bleeding, people.

Otherwise, horses are very sensitive animals, I know that full well having spent the last fifteen years together with them.

[Fisherman]

drstrange169:

>>Note to myself: Experts on different establishments have no idea what they are talking about - Dusty is by far the better source.<<


Never claimed to be an expert on anything, but my approach to research is to cross check where I can.

You refused to cross check Ingrams last time this came up and apparently still refuse to.

Here’s the thing, show me evidence that Ingrams was right and I’ll shut up about it.

I donīt have to. Whenever an expert says something that bolsters the Lechmere theory, it is not my task to disprove him, it is yours. It would be a very odd thing for me to do to first have an expert supporting me, and then try to prove that he is right.
Surely you realize this?

>>Straddling the body, lifting the skirt and stabbing and cutting at the abdomen is entirely possible. End of story.<<

Since the abdomen cuts were “running downwards” the killer must have been facing the Brady Street end of Bucks Row, rending the skirt as a shield useless. Plus, no blood splatter was recorded on the front of the dress.
I guess that more realistically would be the "end of story".

If you can only cut in one direction, then yes. And if Llewellyn was correct, of course - you want desperately to disbelieve him on other matters, I believe. But there we are - we sometimes only cut things in one direction...


>>Daily News:.He and the man examined the body,...<<


One of my favourite paintings is “The Marriage Of Arnolfini” by Jan Van Eyck. Whenever I’m in London I go to the National Gallery to look at it. Despite "examining" it dozens of times in great detail, I’ve never actually touched it.

Here’s what I actually posted. This time I’ve underlined the relevant point of my sentence as you either misunderstood or carefully avoided addressing it.

“Can you provide any quote were Paul specifically said Xmere touched the body?”

Of course the question is now rhetorical, as you will have combed through the reports and realised I’m unequivocally correct and you were woefully wrong;-)

Ah! So when Paul said they both examined her, he meant that he did so physically when Lechmere only looked at her? And then Lechmere lied about it at the inquest? Slippery, Dusty - really slippery!
By the way, I think the full name of the picture you speak of is "The Marriage of Giovanni Arnolfini". Try not to leave important bits out, will you?



>>And stand there as the morning drew on...? <<

No, walk away unobserved by neither police nor witnesses.

Are you suggesting it was not dark that night?

Come on Fish, a little bit of reality here.

All nights are more or less dark, Dusty, so I donīt think this one would have been an exception to the rule (apparently, of course, it was not too dark to disenable Lechmere to examine Nichols by eyesight... ). But that does not change the layout of Bucks Row. He had to move away around the corner of the School building before he could, eh, vanish. And once he rounded the School building, surprise, surprise, he knew not who he would run into.

But suggest away, by all means! He had a minute, nigh on: maybe he went down on his palms and knees and crept silently down Queen Anne Street?


>>It was a station filled with different rooms and corridors. Lechmere may well have been the first man in place on one of these places. If there is a fact available, then that is that we simply donīt know. Letīs be fair and admit that, shall we?<<

Really? Are you that desperate?

Because I cross check, I happen to know that, for security reasons, entrances and various areas were guarded and a large quantity of workers were in situ prior to 4 a.m. … so in answer to your question, “What if he was the first to arrive at Broad Street?”
No, it’s not possible that Xmere was the first person to arrive at Broad Street that night.

You are welcome to post that part about a large quantity of workers guarding the entrances and different areas, Dusty. I have not seen it before. And I still say that Lechmere may have opened up some form of the business as he arrived at Pickfords.
If you can show me how there were a large quantity of workers who will have stopped him and checked him for blood on a daily basis, I am interested to see it. My guess would be that the army of watchmen you speak of were there to look out for unininvited guests, and not to check the ones who had twenty years expereience of working at Pickfors.
But you may have a slippery answer to that one to?


Post #54 Re: Primrose Street.


>>… meat was a major commodity of the Broad Street depot. Therefore, it would be reasonable to expect the carmen there to quite frequently freight meat. Ergo, they all would risk to get blood on their clothes.<<

Facts, Christer, facts.

Was meat as major a commodity in 1888 as it was just a couple of years later when the meat supply to London trebled?

Was meat a major commodity after 4 a.m.?

Yet again, the carmen did NOT load the carts, they were assigned LOADED carts.

You seem to be struggling with what you want to be true and what really happened. That’s why you need to cross check Ingrams like the rest of us and not take things on blind faith just because he sounds good to you.

Itīs for YOU to disprove what an expert says, Dusty, itīs not for me to prove it. I think I made that point already?



As others have pointed out, Ingrams as an expert of Broad Street in 1888 is HIGHLY questionable. Fisherman is keen to accept unchallenged what he says, because it’s what he wants to hear. The facts however suggest otherwise and aren’t the facts that we are interested in?

Dusty, if you have facts to disprove Ingram, then what he says is not "highy questionable", it is wrong. So please present the facts, and prove him wrong, so we can be done with him!
If you donīt have these facts, you are flat out lying.

Which is it?

[jerryd]

Otherwise, hores are very sensitive animals, I know that full well having spent the last fifteen years together with them.

No offense Christer,

But I did have to laugh at this one.

[Fisherman]

Hahaha!!

Donīt tell the Mrs!

I hastened to add an s, and took GREAT care not to make that a "w" in the wrong place altogether.

Then again, the Mrs is used to these things. I once texted her on her mobile to tell her that I was going to spend the day with Bilbo, who is actually a horse. And the mobile autocorrected Bilbo into "bimbo"...