Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

What was Kosminski is now Lechmere: how relevant is Scobie?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Surely the entire Scobie issue could be firmly put to bed (one way or the other) if the complete, unredacted bundle that was presented to him, and upon which he reached his conclusions, was to be published in its entirety. I have suggested this here before but it hasn't happened.

    I would have thought that Fisherman would do so without question if it would put an end to the constant challenges and doubt about Scobie's conclusions.

    Comment


    • #17
      Heaven knows I am not a Lechmerian, but I would have thought that if Scobie, a top barrister with a reputation to maintain, felt that his views had been misrepresented in some way, then he'd have complained by now.

      Comment


      • #18
        It's not difficult to figure out the data that Scobie must have used to make his judgement. Simply watch the documentary.

        Just prior to Scobie's appearance, the narrator states:

        "Wearing blood-stained clothing, [Lechmere's] job placed him at 4 of the 5 killings at the time they occurred. Another happened by his mother's house. Yet another on his old route to work. But will the case against Lechmere stand up in a modern court?" (Emphasis added).

        After the commercial break, the camera goes straight to Scobie, who, in reviewing this evidence states that these "timings really hurt him," and that it's these "geographical details" that have convinced him that the case could go before a jury. 'One coincidence too many," or something along those lines.

        We aren't shown the booklet he is reviewing, but the information within must be something along the lines of Michael Connor's article in Ripperologist #72 (see link below) that argues that Lechmere's journeys to and from work would place him at the scenes of the murders, and at the appropriate times. The "blood-stained clothing" evidently comes from the suggestion that Lechmere's job at Pickford's had him hauling for the knackers.

        This appears to be the brunt of the case, though, of course, there could have been other factors, particularly the events in Buck's Row, plus any refinements added by Fisherman, etc.

        https://www.casebook.org/dissertatio...les-cross.html

        Even after reading the article, I'm not quite sure how Mr. Connor has concluded that Lechmere would have passed all of the crime scenes at the appropriate times, considering that, based on one's interpretation, the murders could span everything from 8 a.m in the morning all the way up to 1.45 a.m, 3.30 a.m, etc.

        Lechmere seems to have had a rather rigorous workload. Adding his times of walking to and from work, he has a 21-22 hour per day work schedule. He leaves Doveton at 3.30 a.m., but is walking home from Pickford's at 1.30 a.m.? Am I missing something, Fish, or is Connor suggesting that Lechmere is working 20 hour shifts with less than two hours sleep between, along with a longish commute on foot thrown in? No wonder he was experiencing psychosis and running over street urchins!

        If I was Scobie, I would defend the client on the grounds of "diminished capacity." Also known as the "Blinky Defense." The man was a
        somnambulist.

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by rjpalmer View Post
          It's not difficult to figure out the data that Scobie must have used to make his judgement. Simply watch the documentary.

          Just prior to Scobie's appearance, the narrator states:

          "Wearing blood-stained clothing, [Lechmere's] job placed him at 4 of the 5 killings at the time they occurred. Another happened by his mother's house. Yet another on his old route to work. But will the case against Lechmere stand up in a modern court?" (Emphasis added).

          After the commercial break, the camera goes straight to Scobie, who, in reviewing this evidence states that these "timings really hurt him," and that it's these "geographical details" that have convinced him that the case could go before a jury. 'One coincidence too many," or something along those lines.

          We aren't shown the booklet he is reviewing, but the information within must be something along the lines of Michael Connor's article in Ripperologist #72 (see link below) that argues that Lechmere's journeys to and from work would place him at the scenes of the murders, and at the appropriate times. The "blood-stained clothing" evidently comes from the suggestion that Lechmere's job at Pickford's had him hauling for the knackers.

          This appears to be the brunt of the case, though, of course, there could have been other factors, particularly the events in Buck's Row, plus any refinements added by Fisherman, etc.

          https://www.casebook.org/dissertatio...les-cross.html

          Even after reading the article, I'm not quite sure how Mr. Connor has concluded that Lechmere would have passed all of the crime scenes at the appropriate times, considering that, based on one's interpretation, the murders could span everything from 8 a.m in the morning all the way up to 1.45 a.m, 3.30 a.m, etc.

          Lechmere seems to have had a rather rigorous workload. Adding his times of walking to and from work, he has a 21-22 hour per day work schedule. He leaves Doveton at 3.30 a.m., but is walking home from Pickford's at 1.30 a.m.? Am I missing something, Fish, or is Connor suggesting that Lechmere is working 20 hour shifts with less than two hours sleep between, along with a longish commute on foot thrown in? No wonder he was experiencing psychosis and running over street urchins!

          If I was Scobie, I would defend the client on the grounds of "diminished capacity." Also known as the "Blinky Defense." The man was a
          somnambulist.
          Hi Roger,

          By killing in Buck’s Row it appears that Lechmere wasn’t at all bothered about potentially incriminating himself. If, for example, he’d have been questioned for whatever reason after the murder of Eddowes then the police might have looked at him more closely and discovered that Nichols was murdered at a spot that he passed six days a week at roughly the same time on the way to work.
          Regards

          Herlock






          "Crime is common. Logic is rare. Therefore it is upon the logic rather than upon the crime that you should dwell.”

          Comment


          • #20
            Sadly Christer refuses to stop hi-jacking the Kosminski thread despite given the opportunity to continue his posts in a more relevant thread.

            As normal, to justify his actions, he simply lies, to wit, his post #249 on the Kosminski thread,

            "The thread set up by Dr Strange was an unnecessary one (although claiming that I have ignored it is not true, ..."


            Yet here in post #9 of this thread, Christer wrote,

            "... I see little reason to encourage this manure production line by answering them any further."

            An explicit declaration of an intention to ignore!

            Simple solution, don't say you will not reply then continue to reply. If you don't have the self control to follow your own claimed convictions, at least to it in the proper place.

            Last edited by drstrange169; 07-08-2019, 04:48 AM.
            dustymiller
            aka drstrange

            Comment


            • #21
              Wearing blood stained overalls his job placed him at four of the killings at the time they occurred.
              Has anyone ever found evidence that he wore bloodstained overalls for work or is this just a convenient assumption? After all Lechmere turned up at the Inquest in his work clothes, a course sacking apron, which no one mentioned being marked or stained with blood.
              Regards

              Herlock






              "Crime is common. Logic is rare. Therefore it is upon the logic rather than upon the crime that you should dwell.”

              Comment


              • #22
                I believe "overalls" were invented in the 1890's in America, so if Lechmere was wearing blood stained ones, he would have stood out like a hippopotamus in an igloo.

                Amendment!

                Whoops ... just did a bit more research and overalls date back further than I thought.
                Last edited by drstrange169; 07-16-2019, 02:12 AM.
                dustymiller
                aka drstrange

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by drstrange169 View Post
                  he would have stood out like a hippopotamus in an igloo.
                  Fabulous analogy!
                  Kind regards, Sam Flynn

                  "Suche Nullen" (Nietzsche, Götzendämmerung, 1888)

                  Comment


                  • #24

                    https://www.google.com/search?q=hipp...vg-mVMEOCpeTM:
                    Regards

                    Herlock






                    "Crime is common. Logic is rare. Therefore it is upon the logic rather than upon the crime that you should dwell.”

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X