Robert Paul Time Issues

[Newbie]

Here's the path I used from Ed Stowe's map:

Step I: 22Doveton to 212OldMontague: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1DFE...DYIGAoG-N/view

Step II: 212OldMontague to A10: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1K9b...ot2OSfYS3/view

Step III: A10 to Broad street entrance: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1y-B...47y5rU_vH/view

[Newbie]

hey newbie
not sure if youre aware of this, but Fisherman and Fishy are two different posters.

Hey Abby Normal: Fishy is Christer & Fisherman I do not know. What happened to 'Lechmere'?

[Newbie]

Leaving the cart unattended was illegal, plus it would would generally result in a carman being fired. Even if not immediately caught, there was a significant risk that something would have been pilfered from it, which would not just result in being fired, but have a significant risk of being charged for the theft.

But even in the probable event that he had a van boy, this would have been a rather stupid thing for a serial killer to do. Chapman's killer had reached into her mutilated abdomen, pulled out her intestines, and placed them over her right shoulder. It's impossible for the killer to avoid being liberally coated with blood and less nameable fluids. And then you have this killer walk into Spitalfield's market, in full view of not just a vanboy and the people receiving goods, but in front of dozens of vendors and hundreds of shoppers without a single person noting that the killer is covered in blood and gore.

Your theory makes no sense.

Again, any psychopath carman would take off his apron before strangulating a prostitute ... its hard to eviscerate some woman with your apron dangling over the body when you kneel. With Annie Chapman, there was a lot of her blood sprayed on the wall .... was she strangled? I forget quite frankly. However, doesn't matter; the apron comes off before the murder, and then goes back on after, and you can cover up those nasty little red spots with your nice, clean apron.

Covered in blood & gore? Don't be so dramatic ... that would be a huge problem for anyone fleeing.
Is there any witness who saw someone wandering coated in blood and gore around the time of the murders?

Anyhow little van boys are easy to push around and intimidate if you are a clever homicidal maniac the age of the kid's father.

[Newbie]

Murdering Eddowes and Stride would require Cross staying up for at least 23 hours. While not impossible, it is wildly unlikely, especially for a man whose infant might have just started sleeping through the night.

I take it you are not from Buenos Aires.

[Newbie]

You provide a mix of assumptions, speculation, and double standards.

1. He called himself Charles Allen Cross of 22 Doveton Street, a carman who had worked for Pickford's for about 20 years and who shift started at 4am at the Broad Street Station. Who could ever have guessed that he might have been Charles Allen Lechmere, the stepson of Thomas Cross, who lived at 22 Doveton Street, a carman who had worked for Pickford's for about 20 years and who shift started at 4am at the Broad Street Station?

Cross was not the only Ripper witness to not mention all the names they went by at the inquest, yet you don't accuse the others of deliberate deception. Your double standard is noted.

2. Charles Allen Cross publicly gave his home address at the inquest. He had the right to not give it publicly, yet he chose to do so. The newspapers were full of omissions and errors, yet you assume malice on Cross' part. Your double standard is noted.

3. How is a carman showing up at the inquest dressed as a carman evidence of deception?

4. Charles Allen Cross' descendants didn't know anything about him. You treat the inquest if it was the only thing they didn't know and assume malice on his part. Your double standard is noted.

So far, I've provided a challenge that no one has taken up.

I've provided one item of speculation, of course: that Lechmere was trying to hide his appearance at the inquest from his wife, because of the time issue. Speculation is the nature of this site - otherwise they might as well shut the place down.

I've provided 4 facts involving Charles Lechmere's behavior, with the assumption that we should accept the majority representation of a matter, should there be conflict: the 3:30 am vs. 3:20 am (by one paper) departure time, and the lack of Lechmere's address vs. the 22 Doveton street (by one paper. That controversy only involves the address, everything else is indisputable.

I've challenged anyone to come up with a better explanation of mine, that ties together these 4 facts: so far crickets, as I expected.

I'll address each of your points backwards:
#4: It's questionable whether his descendant didn't know anything about him: I've heard otherwise. What they didn't know was that Charles Cross in the Ripper legend
was Charles Lechmere: no descendant making that correction. In probably most every East End family, that little story would get passed down.

#3: You are asking me a question with which I've already furnished an answer. Reread it and come up with a contrary explanation that covers all 4 items that I listed.
If Lechmere was Alfie Doolittle, he'd come in with his dustman's coat and not give a fig; Lechmere had petty bourgeiois aspirations and wealthy relatives: one
would very much expect him to come dressed to such an event as if he was going to church.

#2: Every newspaper, save one, failed to list Charles Lechmere's home address (22 Doveton street). The only paper that did (The Echo) was an evening paper,
so the reporter would have had time to go get the address from authorities. Most people gave an address .... except for police officers, doctors, etc...

#1. The other's are not suspects up to this point. If you want to nominate one of the few other persons at the inquest who failed to provide their home address, then
go ahead ... and then we'll take it from there. This is a lot like proposing Diemshutz as a suspect, because he was also the first to find a body ... again, go ahead,
but I would need a lot more to get animated about the guy.

With Lechmere, there is more than just:
A. He was first to the body
B. He used the name Cross

You need to add in
C. He was not forthcoming with his wife that he was a key witness in a famous local event,
D. He was not noticed by Paul visually or audibly, on a street that acted like a sound wave guide

And here's another problem that I'll post on my next message

[Newbie]

When Lechmere left Poly Nichol's body after such a brief interaction, it was explained that he was running late and had to abandon the body to get to work on time.

Okay, I'll accept that.

Then, given his lateness, why did he not follow the quickest way to work, which would have him choosing Old Montague street instead of Hanbury?

Can anyone explain this apparent contradiction to me?

[Newbie]

The newspapers do not disagree on #2. One mentions Cross' home address, the others don't mention it.

Most newspapers don't mention Cross wearing an apron, so by your reasoning he didn't wear one.

Only one newspaper mentioned the apron: you think the reporter made it up?
Few instances period in which a newspaper mentioned the article of clothing of a witness at inquests - only victims.

All newspapers mentioned the addresses of most of the inquests witnesses who were not PCs, doctors or watchmen.
The one newspaper that did mention Lechmere's address was an evening newspaper: so the reporter had time to check it out before submitting his article to the editor.

The only thing those two things share is that they are unusual, like Lech's sudden usage of Cross: which are some reasons why people are making a big deal about Lechmere

[Newbie]

BTW, it takes someone 31 minutes and 48 seconds to go 1.7 miles at the 'moderate' walking speed of 3.2 mph.

And that is for people walking straight line paths, not venturing forth veering side to side down a path, looking over pieces of tarpaulin, etc.

[Newbie]

A quick check on Lech's Hanbury route to work using google map and I got roughly 2.1 miles.
Very different from the 1.55 mile version.

Anyways, its about a half mile longer than the Old Montague route to work

[Geddy2112]

And you took the longer route along Hanbury street.
You used what measuring tool again? With that sort of measuring tool Paul's walk must have been 5 minutes.

I'll show you in detail what I did, and then you'll be a bit more specific with how you came up with your distance.

Quite frankly, I'm a suspicious, untrusting bloke.

The route along Hanbury Street vs Old Monty Street are only different by a matter of seconds at 3.1mph. The measuring tool is included in the maps. Untrusting, seems so I even gave you the evidence in 'black and white' so to speak and you still refute it.

You used Google Maps. That is your first mistake. I'm fairly sure Sainsbury's did not have a huge supermarket at the end of Durward Street back in 1888.

Regardless Cross left home about 3:30 am on the 31st Aug 1888 and we have absolutely no evidence to doubt this.

[Geddy2112]

Hey Abby Normal: Fishy is Christer & Fisherman I do not know. What happened to 'Lechmere'?

Fishy is Fishy. Fisherman is Christer and Lechmere is Ed Stow who is permanently banned.

[Herlock Sholmes]

“He was not forthcoming with his wife that he was a key witness in a famous local event,”


How can anyone know that he didn’t tell his wife, or another family member, but they just didn’t mention it. There were no ‘minor celebrities’ in those days, claiming fame for any old reason. That this piece of information should have somehow been rigorously passed from generation to generation like some piece of Native American tribal history is a complete non-point. It’s the kind of thing that Stowe thinks constitutes evidence of something.


“He was not noticed by Paul visually or audibly, on a street that acted like a sound wave guide.”


Unless you have walked along 1888 Buck’s Row at 3.40am it’s difficult to fathom how you can make accurate assumptions about the acoustics? You don’t know what footwear Cross was wearing, you don’t know how good Paul’s hearing was. Plus you can’t be sure of the visibility levels. It’s often the case, at least for a time, that x can see y before y can see x.


“Anyhow little van boys are easy to push around and intimidate if you are a clever homicidal maniac the age of the kid's father.”


Just because these van boys existed can we assume that every carmen had one? And even if he had the idea of Cross going AWOL at the time of the Chapman murder is beyond preposterous and can’t be given a minutes credence. Carmen could just vanish and expect no one to notice or to mention it. And what a surprise that Hans Christian Holmgren has come up with the ‘he might have been unloading at Spitalfields’ joke. And he might not have been. But even if he had he still couldn’t have vanished for half and hour or more while others were unloading him - for a start he didn’t have a 40 foot articulated trailer so it wouldn’t have taken more that 10 minutes to unload his entire cart (if he wasn’t due to deliver elsewhere too of course). That Cross murdered after he had begun work is a non-starter. Just like the suggestion that he killed 20 minutes away from having to clock on then hung around for a chat with a complete stranger.



Cross is a non-suspect. He was clearly, very obviously a man who found a body. The effort that has been put into trying to frame him over the years is nothing more than a joke.

[Geddy2112]

Here's the path I used from Ed Stowe's map:

Step I: 22Doveton to 212OldMontague: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1DFE...DYIGAoG-N/view

Step II: 212OldMontague to A10: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1K9b...ot2OSfYS3/view

Step III: A10 to Broad street entrance: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1y-B...47y5rU_vH/view

They do not work as you need to share the drive so to speak.

Even using the rather inaccurate Google Maps - we have three routes ALL saying 1.5 miles. Astonishing.

[Geddy2112]

Hans Christian Holmgren

You owe me a coffee because that made me spit it out over my computer screen. Without doubt the funniest thing I've seen written on these boards

[Geddy2112]

Again, any psychopath carman would take off his apron before strangulating a prostitute ... its hard to eviscerate some woman with your apron dangling over the body when you kneel. With Annie Chapman, there was a lot of her blood sprayed on the wall .... was she strangled? I forget quite frankly. However, doesn't matter; the apron comes off before the murder, and then goes back on after, and you can cover up those nasty little red spots with your nice, clean apron.

“And contrary to common belief, very few killers are in fact psychopaths.” - https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cgk1v20lrn2o I'd rather side with the experienced, very well qualified doctor on the matter.

"Excuse me Polly, I'm okay to do business with you but I'm rather a bit kinky and can't do the deed with my apron on, would you mind waiting a second whilst I remove it, it would also come in handy if I decide to open up your abdomen once we have started, thanks."

A carman's apron like most was tied around the waist and rather long over the knee which would not have been a hinderance to murder whilst wearing an apron. I suspect most people's recollection of a carman would include an apron and both Paul and Mizen identified Cross as a carman, surely they would not have without the apron and since we are already pushing the non-existent time gap to the limit and beyond with what Charlie would have had to do adding in putting his apron back on is really getting into fantasy land.

Anyhow little van boys are easy to push around and intimidate if you are a clever homicidal maniac the age of the kid's father.

I believe one of Cross' sons was listed as a vanguard around the time, just imagine if they were a father and son murdering machine... that's one for the history books!