Who was the first clothes-puller?

[Jon Guy]

Hi Lechmere

If you take all the witnesses – including Mizen and Llewellyn – you will see that the person who was out in his timing (2.45) was almost certainly Neil.

PC Thain corroborates PN Neils timing:
He passed the end every thirty minutes on the Thursday night, and nothing attracted his attention until 3.45 a.m., when he was signalled by the flash of the lantern of another constable

Also in some reports he is said to have left at 2.20. There is a discrepancy which we will never get to the bottom of.

I can only find the Times report stating 3.20am (the same report gives Mizen meeting Cross and Paul at 4.15am) All other reports state 3.30am.

The body had been very freshly slain – as indicated by the possible twitching, murmur felt by Paul and the warmth found on parts of the body (living people often have cold hands by the way)

Robert Paul: The woman was so cold that she must have been dead some time, and either she had been lying there, left to die, or she must have been murdered somewhere else and carried there. If she had been lying there long enough to get so cold as she was when I saw her, it shows that no policeman on the test had been down there for a long time.

[Ben]

Yes, as Jon and Harry point out, there is no "missing" time.

It would have taken approximately six or seven minutes to walk from Doveton Street to Buck's Row. Thus, if Cross left home at about 3:30am as he suggested, it isn’t remotely unlikely – less still suspicious – that he arrived at the Buck’s Row location at about 3:40am. Could he have lied about leaving at that time? Yes. Is there any good reason to think that he did lie? No.

Equally unsuspicious is Cross' family history, which would not have been remotely unusual for the district. We're talking about the working class poor of the East End here, and departing father figures would not have been a rare occurrence. Many men would fit this mould, and most of them did not become serial killers. Having a base that "traversed" the murder area counts for very little if his actual base made for an unlikely ripper's lair, according to expert opinion. He lived east of the easternmost murder, which would have made him a "commuter" serial killer and thus a "very rare" entity. I'd be more interested if he lived within the region circumscribed by the crime scenes.

There was nothing remotely unusual about Cross "missing the culprit", which, after all, is what the overwhelmingly vast majority of commentators on the subject accept occurred. Had he left immediately, crossed straight into Old Montague Street and headed back into the heart of the murder district, he would have missed both the nightwatchmen and the nearby policemen on beat. The pulling down of the dress is doubtless something the killer would have done on later victims had they not been so extensively mutilated (thus rendering concealment pointless, and certainly not something that implicates Cross.

Regards,
Ben

[Fisherman]

Jon Guy:

"PC Thain corroborates PN Neils timing:
He passed the end every thirty minutes on the Thursday night, and nothing attracted his attention until 3.45 a.m., when he was signalled by the flash of the lantern of another constable"

I just checked the clocks in my house, Jon. They made the calls 13.01, 13.02, 13.03, 13.03, 13.04 and 13.05, respectively. With the kind of scenario we are dealing with in Buck´s Row, a thing like that would influence the picture very much. I really don´t think we can establish to what extent they got their times right, and I also think that if Neils clock showed 3.44, Thains may have shown 3.46, both men saying 3.45 afterwards.
The only thing to do is to estimate a rough timeline, and check the whereabouts of the diffent actors in the drama. Then it becomes logical.

"Robert Paul: The woman was so cold that she must have been dead some time, and either she had been lying there, left to die, or she must have been murdered somewhere else and carried there."

If that was correct, then one must say that it was remarklable how Polly warmed up in time for Llewellyn´s arrival! Just like Lechmere says, some people - I´m one of them - have problems keeping their hands warm in chilly temperatures. And this morning was a chilly one.

The best,
Fisherman

[Robert]

If Cross was such a clever fellow, why did he not give a time schedule that would positively rule out his having any window of opportunity to waylay and murder Nichols? Remember, he is supposed to be able to think on his feet, hands, ears, nose and teeth.

[Jon Guy]

Hi Fisherman

"He left home at 3.30am ..."

But how do we KNOW this, Jon. Who is the source? How can we check it?

We know because he testified at the Inquest. The inquest was crammed with J-Div policemen who knew how long his route would take. Cross`s wife and children would know what time he left home, and his colleagues at Pickfords would know what time he regularly arrived at work.

Is it not true that IF he was the killer, it would make sense to start out at, say, 3.15, and then tell the inquest that you started out at 3.30?

Not if his wife and possibly the kids were aware he regularly left home at 3.30. Perhaps Cross was woken by a Policeman knocking him up at 3.30, or woke to the chimes of quarter past the hour.

Michael Connor estimated the route from 22 Doveton street to Browns Stable Yards as taking five minutes to walk. Five minutes after 3.30, the time is 3.35.

An excellent article, and I agree with his findings, although I would have said 7 or 8 mins, and as pointed out in a previous thread, Robert Paul was out by 5 mins - the police had found the body at 3.45.

If Lechmere left home at 3.30, he would have passed Browns Stable yards at 3.35. He certainly would not have been in Buck´s Row at 3.40-3.45!

Agreed.

Moreover, some sources have Lechmere stasting 3.30, others have him saying 3.20.

I can only find the one stating 3.20 -The Times. Same report gives Mizen as meeting Paul and Cross at "quarter past four". All other reports, that I can find, state 3.30 am.

And then we have me, saying that we may be loooking at a quite different time, since Lechmere, if he was the killer, would be completely free to give whatever time he felt would benefit his cause.

Not necessarily, Cross didn`t live alone. His wife may have spoken to Detectives whilst he was still at work.

[Fisherman]

Jon:

"We know because he testified at the Inquest."

And of course, he would not lie, would he?

"The inquest was crammed with J-Div policemen who knew how long his route would take. Cross`s wife and children would know what time he left home, and his colleagues at Pickfords would know what time he regularly arrived at work."

So you think his wife got up and wawed goodbye together with the children in the middle of the night - at 3.20-3.30..?

"Not if his wife and possibly the kids were aware he regularly left home at 3.30. Perhaps Cross was woken by a Policeman knocking him up at 3.30, or woke to the chimes of quarter past the hour. "

...and perhaps he didn´t. And just like I said, why would his wife get up?

"An excellent article, and I agree with his findings, although I would have said 7 or 8 mins, and as pointed out in a previous thread, Robert Paul was out by 5 mins - the police had found the body at 3.45. "

Even if Paul WAS out by 5 minutes, Cross still would not have been in Buck´s Row when he was - if he left when he said. He would have been halfway up Hanbury Street. And Connor writes that the stretch takes six minutes today, but would only have taken five in 1888. But we can chew on this forever without agreeing, methinks!

"Not necessarily, Cross didn`t live alone. His wife may have spoken to Detectives whilst he was still at work."

You must realize that I think there is a good chance that Lechmere was the killer, Jon. And even if his wife WAS awake on that ungodly time, then he may well have dabbled with the time in one of many ways. If he had a timepiece of his own, it would be the simplest time in the world, for example.
My contention is - to Robert´s great fascination! - that this man was a very clever guy, who knew exactly how to plan and execute his deeds - and get away with them, not least. I still say he made sure that he had the time he needed.

The best,
Fisherman

[Jon Guy]

Hi Fisherman

So you think his wife got up and wawed goodbye together with the children in the middle of the night - at 3.20-3.30..?

And just like I said, why would his wife get up?

A 3.00am start would be regarded, like now, as a morning shift and not as middle of the night.

It`s not unreasonable to assume that the woman would have woke at the same time to make sure he got up on time and to make him a cup of tea whilst he put his boots on and had a slash. Not out of any particular kind of devotion but due to the family`s total reliance upon the money the job generates, hence Cross and Paul deciding to look for a policeman on their way to work.

[harry]

'We are dealing with a clever killer here Harry'.Quite correct Fisherman.What could be cleverer than Paul,arriving earlier(the killer would lie,you say so)turns back in the direction of Cross,becomes aware of Cross approaching,hides,then follows Cross.This would overcome the problem of Lechmere wondering why the killer was not seen by the persons he mentioned.When dealing in possibilities it is all too easy to stray from the evident.Cross and Paul were workmen on their way to work,they testified to this,and there is absolutely nothing to indicate their intentions were set on anything else.Jon and Ben and others have been very clear in pointing this out.

[Bridewell]

Harry:

"Ok Fisherman,so why did Cross begin killing.Still has to be some reason.Nearly everyone in the east end had problems,and 20 years in the same business might have been drudgery,and caused resentment,but it was pretty common at that time to be in that position.Again, hardly a valid reason to turn him into a killer."

Are you truly expecting me to have the answer? Wow, that´s some confidence! I´m sorry to say I don´t have it. I only know that something turned somebody into a serial killer - and Cross can be the guy.

Why not? You seem pretty confident you know the reason why he stopped.

Regards, Bridewell.

[Cogidubnus]

Two on the trot...blimey...

Yes, as Jon and Harry point out, there is no "missing" time.

It would have taken approximately six or seven minutes to walk from Doveton Street to Buck's Row. Thus, if Cross left home at about 3:30am as he suggested, it isn’t remotely unlikely – less still suspicious – that he arrived at the Buck’s Row location at about 3:40am. Could he have lied about leaving at that time? Yes. Is there any good reason to think that he did lie? No.

Equally unsuspicious is Cross' family history, which would not have been remotely unusual for the district. We're talking about the working class poor of the East End here, and departing father figures would not have been a rare occurrence. Many men would fit this mould, and most of them did not become serial killers. Having a base that "traversed" the murder area counts for very little if his actual base made for an unlikely ripper's lair, according to expert opinion. He lived east of the easternmost murder, which would have made him a "commuter" serial killer and thus a "very rare" entity. I'd be more interested if he lived within the region circumscribed by the crime scenes.

There was nothing remotely unusual about Cross "missing the culprit", which, after all, is what the overwhelmingly vast majority of commentators on the subject accept occurred. Had he left immediately, crossed straight into Old Montague Street and headed back into the heart of the murder district, he would have missed both the nightwatchmen and the nearby policemen on beat. The pulling down of the dress is doubtless something the killer would have done on later victims had they not been so extensively mutilated (thus rendering concealment pointless, and certainly not something that implicates Cross.

Excellent post Ben!

Dave

[Bridewell]

Clever and Stupid

If Cross was such a clever fellow, why did he not give a time schedule that would positively rule out his having any window of opportunity to waylay and murder Nichols? Remember, he is supposed to be able to think on his feet, hands, ears, nose and teeth.

Hi Robert,

Nicely put!

You must remember that Cross is not only so fiendishly clever and observant that, despite being bent over a body, he can see Paul before Paul sees him, then form a cunning plan in the blink of an eye, to take account of Paul's "impossible to predict" arrival, but also so incredibly stupid and unobservant that he had never noticed, on close to a hundred previous journeys, how many people also traversed Bucks Row at that time of the morning.

Regards, Bridewell

[Robert]

Hi Bridewell

I think we can resolve these contradictions if we remember that Lechmere was the clever one, while Cross was the stupid one. Lechmere did the planning and improvisation, and Cross did the walking. Lechmere's plan was to rob the Bank of England, but somehow Cross misunderstood and thought he had to murder prostitutes. Lechmere left early in the direction of the Bank, but Cross took over and headed for Buck's Row instead. And it was only good fortune that Cross noticed Paul - he was actually looking out for Spiney Norman, because Cross had had a bit of trouble with him lately. Hence Cross's desire to get away from the area - in case Norman showed up. Hence his determination to stay with Paul for as long as possible - as protection against Norman.

[lynn cates]

Dimmesdale!

Hello Robert. Dual personality? I like it!

Cheers.
LC

[Cogidubnus]

Still falling about, nearly half an hour after....

Dave

[Bridewell]

Spiny Norman

Hi Bridewell

I think we can resolve these contradictions if we remember that Lechmere was the clever one, while Cross was the stupid one. Lechmere did the planning and improvisation, and Cross did the walking. Lechmere's plan was to rob the Bank of England, but somehow Cross misunderstood and thought he had to murder prostitutes. Lechmere left early in the direction of the Bank, but Cross took over and headed for Buck's Row instead. And it was only good fortune that Cross noticed Paul - he was actually looking out for Spiney Norman, because Cross had had a bit of trouble with him lately. Hence Cross's desire to get away from the area - in case Norman showed up. Hence his determination to stay with Paul for as long as possible - as protection against Norman.

And we know that Spiny Norman frequented the East End (Bethnal Green) so that already puts him ahead of several other suspects!

On a more serious note (the "first clothes puller"). Paul says, in his evidence,

"Her clothes were pulled almost up to her stomach".



If Paul meant stomach, rather than abdomen (& stomach is the word he uses) there is no reason to suppose that there was a clothes puller prior to Paul himself. I shall now be informed that "of course" Paul meant abdomen because he didn't have any anatomical knowledge.

Regards, Bridewell.