Concerns with Robert Paul

[Lechmere]

Mr Lucky - yes I am clearly ean eccentric.

Lynn
If what I said was correct?
Well I suppose there's a chance that someone might find an untapped source where Charles Lechmere recorded his name as Cross but I doubt it.
As I said, we only know what we know.
If you want to imagine to yourself that he may have called himself Cross to his mates and used Lechmere with officialdom, yet then used Cross with the police (isn't that officialdom?) then who am I to gainsay you.
And if you unable to think of a good reason for a criminal to prefer to go under a fake name, and clearly keep their real name secret unlike Long - when unlike Long they were found very close to a dead body before raising the alarm, and when they then got into a dispute with a policeman over who said what to whom, and when that person only came forward after being mentioned in a newspaper story...
Sorry I'm being eccentric again.

[lynn cates]

allowances

Hello Edward. Thanks.

"yet then used Cross with the police (isn't that officialdom?) . . ."

Not if you are merely identifying yourself.

"then who am I to gainsay you."

Whom, indeed?

"And if you are unable to think of a good reason for a criminal to prefer to go under a fake name . . ."

Yes, to subsequently disappear and not be questioned further. IF that was the intent, it did not work.

"Sorry I'm being eccentric again."

Indeed. But I have learned to make allowances for you.

Cheers.
LC

[Lechmere]

Lynn
I didn't realise that Lechmere just went to the police to identify himself. I had presumed he went also to give his account of events.
But then if he went there to identify himself he did a less than perfect job.
The only reason you can think of for giving a false name is to disappear so as never to be found again? Well I can thin of more.
But in the case of Lechmere after his appearance at the inquest he does seem to have effectively disappeared from the enquiry, seemingly without his real name being discovered. And he doesn't seem to have been questioned further.

[curious]

Lynn
I didn't realise that Lechmere just went to the police to identify himself. I had presumed he went also to give his account of events.

And I don't believe the evidence indicates that Lechmere went to the police at all.

Everything I see -- the apparel at the inquest and the name -- indicates that the authorities located him on his way to work and detoured him to the inquest.

curious

[Lechmere]

So you think he didn't come forward at all, but was involuntarily apprehended in some way? I can live with that interpretation.
Yet why did they look for him?
They issued a statement the night before depreciating Robert Paul's account.
Also, if you are correct, this dragnet seems to have found Lechmere and missed Paul.

[lynn cates]

good reason

Hello Edward. Thanks.

"But in the case of Lechmere after his appearance at the inquest he does seem to have effectively disappeared from the enquiry, seemingly without his real name being discovered. And he doesn't seem to have been questioned further."

And, for good reason, I might add.

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

accessible

Hello Velma. Thanks.

Well, he was rather accessible. If he were trying to hide, he did a rum job of it.

Cheers.
LC

[curious]

So you think he didn't come forward at all, but was involuntarily apprehended in some way? I can live with that interpretation. Yet why did they look for him? They issued a statement the night before depreciating Robert Paul's account. Also, if you are correct, this dragnet seems to have found Lechmere and missed Paul.

Hi, Lechmere,
Once the possibility had been raised -- and publicaly, in the newspaper -- what choice did the authorities have but to check it out?

When they depreciated Paul's account, they were simply going on the knowledge they had at the time.

Hello Velma. Thanks.

Well, he was rather accessible. If he were trying to hide, he did a rum job of it.

Cheers.
LC

Hi, Lynn,
Exactly, probably same route to work on Monday morning, gave his address and where he had worked for more than 20 years --- but it worked, no one suspected him of a thing.

Lechmere, one thing I am intrigued about is whether or not any of the later murders, such as Coles, are anywhere near the time of a new baby in the Lechmere family? Have you looked at that?

Best,

Velma

[drstrange169]

Hello Lechmere,

"... he may have called himself Cross to his mates and used Lechmere with officialdom, yet then used Cross with the police (isn't that officialdom?)"

Interesting point. Could there be a reason that "Cross" resonated with the police, rather than "Lechmere"? And could that reason be his (step) father?

[Barnaby]

Suppose Lechmere was the murderer. How, then, do we perceive Paul? Even if he was originally duped, he certainly was there when Lechmere deceived Mizen and did nothing to correct this either at the crime scene or at the inquest. Should he be judged harshly for this?

Given the global attention surrounding these murders, at some point don't you think Paul might have had a "hey, what if that guy..." moment? Does anyone know what happened of Paul? I wonder if he made any statements later in life.

[Lechmere]

Curious
Given the relations between the press and the police I don't think it is by any means certain, or even likely, that the police would have followed up every press story. Given their evident sensitivity to the Paul story and the fact that they went out of their way to publicly deny it, I rather doubt they would have then gone out of their way to prove themselves wrong next morning.
The only time they had further information - with which to doubt Paul's story was when Lechmere gave his version of the story.

As for children - his last was Harriet Emma, born on 7th March 1891,.
Coles was murdered on 13th February 1891.
I am sceptical about including Coles as a Ripper murder - Lechmere or not.

The reason Lechmere chose to call himself Cross may have been connected to the fact that his step father Thomas Cross had been a policeman - but I don't think that is not exactly a sign of innocence.

Burnaby
Paul like most others disappeared afterwards. Given his reluctance to come forward to help officialdom this is not very surprising.
I think Paul was given a slightly rough time of it by he police, which would have increased his reluctance to help out. Plus he seems to have been anti police from the outset.
There is some evidence to suggest that Paul did not stick close to Lechmere while he spoke to Mizen. If that as indeed was the case then he may well not have heard what transpired between the two.
Alternatively, while they were walking off from Bucks Row, given that they both claimed to be late for work, Lechmere may have said that he would get them past any policeman with the minimum fuss.

[Barnaby]

Good points, Lechmere. In the absence of additional information, I guess we have to give Paul a pass here. Having said that, I just have to believe that at some point in time (maybe too long after for it to make any difference) the possibility must have dawned on him that the man he encountered standing by the recently murdered woman just might have been the killer.

[Lechmere]

If Lechmere was the killer then he must have been a psychopath. They tend to be very plausible liars and are taken at face value, because they do not give away their lies by their body language. The are good at mirroring and drawing the person they are with into believing they are alike.
Paul was in Lechmere's company that morning and they will have spoken and Lechmere will have had plenty of time to assuage any qualms Paul may have had.
No one in nearly 120 years took any notice of Lechmere - accounts of the initial finding of Nichols body are routinely misrepresented in books published to this day.
Lechmere came across as a nobody - part of the woodwork.

[miss marple]

Letchmere was a nobody. All the efforts of pro ripper lobby cannot turn this hard working cabman, with a family, into a psychopath serial killer.

For both Letchmere and Paul finding the body could have repercussions on their work. Pay would be docked for being late, involvement in a murder could cause complications, again with being absent from work, at the worst case he could lose his job. It was an unwarranted interruption to the daily round.
Names were very flexible in the 19th century. My great grandfather changed his first name, to one He liked better, but his real name is on birth and death certs. Census records show many variations in names.
Perhaps he just wanted to be unnoticed, so the name Cross would appear in newspapers but not Letchmere. so he would not be bothered with stupid questions by workmates and neighbours.

Miss Marple

[Lechmere]

Yes that must be it, he just wanted a quiet life.