Cutting Point

[Fisherman]

Thanks for the response, Christer.

Maria L has intrigued me for some time, so I would have liked to see more about her in the biog. section. Personally I feel that the stark contrast between her upbringing and where she brought up her son may be of more relevance to how he turned out than the details of his father’s ancestry.

I tend to think that both of these factors may well have worked in combination with each other. The family´s descent into the East End abyss coupled with an insight on Charles´behalf that he was descended from people used to spending their days in the polar opposite of society, may have been a recipe for disaster. If we add a possible narcissism, a common enough ingredient within the serial killers ranks, it´s not as if we have any shortage of disturbing elements when looking at Charles Lechmeres early years. But all of this is speculation, and so I opted not to expand on it in the book.

The idea that the Pinchin Street case contains elements of both series struck me some time ago. As did as the personal relevance of the location to Lechmere. I would add to that that the building of the railway viaduct in question required not only the demolition of the south side of Pinchin(Thomas) Street but also of Frederick Street*. While the ‘Cross’s’ were living in Thomas Street, Frederick Street, the next street to the south, was one of the notorious thoroughfares that earned itself and the general area the title of Tiger Bay.

Maria’s ‘husband’, Thomas Cross, an H Div. PC, patrolled those streets and no doubt encountered the area’s ‘Tigresses’ on a frequent basis. One can only imagine what Maria thought of her much younger ‘husband’ dealing with prostitutes as part of his day-to-day routine. And how/if she communicated her feelings towards those women to her adolescent son.

That is of course an intriguing possibility, and one that I have thought a whole deal about. However, there is an element involved in the killings that needs another explanation if you ask me.
If we were to work from the assumption that Maria Louisa kindled a hatred against prostitutes within Charles that made him go out an kill unfortunates when he grew older, then the generical picture of the Kelly deed fits that kind of scenario neatly. But as you know, I do not buy into the idea that Kellys murder was an example of a frenzied, uncontrolled attack. Her organs were plucked out, one by one and seemingly undamaged (we do not have Bond describing half a liver, chopped up kidneys and a sliced uterus) and placed neatly around the body in the bed. The uterus, a breast and a kidney were tucked in under her head as a makeshift pillow and thigh flesh and abdominal flaps were placed on the bedside table.
If it had all been about annihilation, I would have expected the organs to be left inside the body, chopped and mauled, and the flesh and flaps to be thrown on the floor. Something like that. But instead, we have a bizarre but orderly scene in many ways.
I therefore think that we have a fascination with taking apart the female body on display, to a significant degree. And I think much of what happened to the other victims is in line with this; the neat cutting in the torso series, the laid out colon beside Eddowes, the meticulously cut away face and scalp in 1873.
There is more going on than just a wish to destroy prostitutes (working from the assumption that the victims were all prostitutes). And I cannot see this part of the deeds as something Maria Louisa led on.
Of course, this does not mean that your hunch must be wrong. On the contrary, it may well be part of the deal. But it is not the whole deal, the way I see it.
These things too could have been touched upon in the book, but I left most of it out for the same reason as before - it rests too much on speculation, and I wanted the bare bones first and foremost.

I’ve read the book once and when I’d finished I was left with the impression of the Charles Lechmere I was familiar with having receded somewhat into the background.


* Some time ago I discovered a press report concerning boys maiming (stabbing) pigs that were kept beneath a Pinchin/Frederick Street railway arch. I can’t recall the date, but I think it may have been in the 1860s. I believe I posted the details either on here or on JTRF, but I’m buggered if I can find it now.

I must have missed the maiming thing when you posted it - interesting stuff. It is equally interesting to hear that my book - at least to a degree - has made you reconsider elements of your former picture of Charles Lechmere. I look forward to future discussions about these matters.

[MrBarnett]

Since there has been no fistfighting about Cutting Point so far, I thought I would take the opportunity to thank those who have said many nice things about it. Tom, Herlock, Gary, Abby, many thanks for your kind words about the book!
A few remarks have been made about matters that two of you would have liked to see but been deprived of, and I may as well comment on that too.

Gary, you would have liked to see more about Ma Lechmere and her potential role in the business, plus I believe you before the book came out expressed a wish to see the psychology commented upon. Of course, these are connected matters.
One of my aims with the book was to keep it simple, and to write not so much for ripperologists as for a broader audience, the way journalists normally do. Another aim of mine was to concentrate on making as clear and concise as possible a case for Lechmere being the combined killer - and accordingly leave a lot of material aside that has no real bearing on that issue, things that neither detract from nor add to the case. To that end, I did not want to submerge myself to deepy into the psychology. I find that generally speaking, psychology has done much less to explain the case than to muddle it. And that spans over the whole spectre of time. A medico like Hebbert was very skilled in his work and was able to clarify in a very exact manner how the damage done to the torso victims looked and how it would have come about. But when he enters the realms of psychology, everything goes horribly wrong. It is, I find, the exact same today - people lock themselves into positions, based on their convictions about how psychology would have ruled what the killer did or not. "He would have run, because my take on psychology tells me so". "He would not kill en route to work becasue psychologically, that does not sit well with me". "The Ripper and the Torso killer were very different men, psychologically speaking". And so on.

Psychology, I feel, will never help us solve the case. Only factual matters can do that. And so, I base my case on factual matters and avoid most of the psychological reasoning, although I have a chapter discussing these matters - with a statement acknowledging that my own take on the psychology may be totally wrong.
This is why I never ventured into the finer points of motherhood, dominance, horsecutting and stepfathers versus stepsons. It is a field abundant in interesting implications but devoid of substance when it comes to factually proveable points.

Abby, you would have liked for me to hammer home the matter that Lechmere was found close to the body without having raised the alarm, the matter that the Tottenham torso and Eddowes seemingly bore resemblances and the detail that Lechmere had a police stepfather, which is interesting in light of how a torso was found in the New Scotland Yard building.

My answer to Gary answers that last point of yours, I believe. As for the commonalities between the Tottenham torso and Eddowes, I briefly mention it in the chapter about the victims. The reason that I did not press it further is that I chose what I think is by far the best pair (Chapman/Jackson) when it comes to pointing to similarities. Going deep into Eddowes/Tottenham torso comparisons would not only be based on less clear material (the Tottenham material is not very clear in many ways), and it would also represent a less good case and so overall, I think it would take away from the clarity of the case I chose. The clearer, the better! As for raising the alarm, that point has been made before and it generally results in how people say that Lechmere DID raise the alarm by contacting Paul and seeking out a PC. This is why I left that point out - it is to a degree unclear.
I was very happy about your statement that the points I make do n ot require any leaps of faith. I strived to get there in as high a degree as possible, and so I liked that passage of yours very much, Abby!

I am looking forward to a discussion about the book - I cannot imagine that everybody is in agreement with me about everything I say in the book - and I will likely be starting threads relating to various parts of my presentation. One of them will in all probability be called "Framing Charles" and another "Every minute counts".

Thanks for the response, Christer.

Maria L has intrigued me for some time, so I would have liked to see more about her in the biog. section. Personally I feel that the stark contrast between her upbringing and where she brought up her son may be of more relevance to how he turned out than the details of his father’s ancestry.

The idea that the Pinchin Street case contains elements of both series struck me some time ago. As did as the personal relevance of the location to Lechmere. I would add to that that the building of the railway viaduct in question required not only the demolition of the south side of Pinchin(Thomas) Street but also of Frederick Street*. While the ‘Cross’s’ were living in Thomas Street, Frederick Street, the next street to the south, was one of the notorious thoroughfares that earned itself and the general area the title of Tiger Bay.

Maria’s ‘husband’, Thomas Cross, an H Div. PC, patrolled those streets and no doubt encountered the area’s ‘Tigresses’ on a frequent basis. One can only imagine what Maria thought of her much younger ‘husband’ dealing with prostitutes as part of his day-to-day routine. And how/if she communicated her feelings towards those women to her adolescent son.

I’ve read the book once and when I’d finished I was left with the impression of the Charles Lechmere I was familiar with having receded somewhat into the background.


* Some time ago I discovered a press report concerning boys maiming (stabbing) pigs that were kept beneath a Pinchin/Frederick Street railway arch. I can’t recall the date, but I think it may have been in the 1860s. I believe I posted the details either on here or on JTRF, but I’m buggered if I can find it now.

[Fisherman]

Wow it’s been a while since I was here! I look forward to reading this. Congrats Fisherman!

...and Thank You, Columbo. Welcome back!

[Fisherman]

Since there has been no fistfighting about Cutting Point so far, I thought I would take the opportunity to thank those who have said many nice things about it. Tom, Herlock, Gary, Abby, many thanks for your kind words about the book!
A few remarks have been made about matters that two of you would have liked to see but been deprived of, and I may as well comment on that too.

Gary, you would have liked to see more about Ma Lechmere and her potential role in the business, plus I believe you before the book came out expressed a wish to see the psychology commented upon. Of course, these are connected matters.
One of my aims with the book was to keep it simple, and to write not so much for ripperologists as for a broader audience, the way journalists normally do. Another aim of mine was to concentrate on making as clear and concise as possible a case for Lechmere being the combined killer - and accordingly leave a lot of material aside that has no real bearing on that issue, things that neither detract from nor add to the case. To that end, I did not want to submerge myself to deepy into the psychology. I find that generally speaking, psychology has done much less to explain the case than to muddle it. And that spans over the whole spectre of time. A medico like Hebbert was very skilled in his work and was able to clarify in a very exact manner how the damage done to the torso victims looked and how it would have come about. But when he enters the realms of psychology, everything goes horribly wrong. It is, I find, the exact same today - people lock themselves into positions, based on their convictions about how psychology would have ruled what the killer did or not. "He would have run, because my take on psychology tells me so". "He would not kill en route to work becasue psychologically, that does not sit well with me". "The Ripper and the Torso killer were very different men, psychologically speaking". And so on.

Psychology, I feel, will never help us solve the case. Only factual matters can do that. And so, I base my case on factual matters and avoid most of the psychological reasoning, although I have a chapter discussing these matters - with a statement acknowledging that my own take on the psychology may be totally wrong.
This is why I never ventured into the finer points of motherhood, dominance, horsecutting and stepfathers versus stepsons. It is a field abundant in interesting implications but devoid of substance when it comes to factually proveable points.

Abby, you would have liked for me to hammer home the matter that Lechmere was found close to the body without having raised the alarm, the matter that the Tottenham torso and Eddowes seemingly bore resemblances and the detail that Lechmere had a police stepfather, which is interesting in light of how a torso was found in the New Scotland Yard building.

My answer to Gary answers that last point of yours, I believe. As for the commonalities between the Tottenham torso and Eddowes, I briefly mention it in the chapter about the victims. The reason that I did not press it further is that I chose what I think is by far the best pair (Chapman/Jackson) when it comes to pointing to similarities. Going deep into Eddowes/Tottenham torso comparisons would not only be based on less clear material (the Tottenham material is not very clear in many ways), and it would also represent a less good case and so overall, I think it would take away from the clarity of the case I chose. The clearer, the better! As for raising the alarm, that point has been made before and it generally results in how people say that Lechmere DID raise the alarm by contacting Paul and seeking out a PC. This is why I left that point out - it is to a degree unclear.
I was very happy about your statement that the points I make do n ot require any leaps of faith. I strived to get there in as high a degree as possible, and so I liked that passage of yours very much, Abby!

I am looking forward to a discussion about the book - I cannot imagine that everybody is in agreement with me about everything I say in the book - and I will likely be starting threads relating to various parts of my presentation. One of them will in all probability be called "Framing Charles" and another "Every minute counts".

[Columbo]

Wow it’s been a while since I was here! I look forward to reading this. Congrats Fisherman!

[Abby Normal]

Allright. Just finished reading it again.

again congrats fish-i think you did a great job and its a good read!

I think the geographical arguments for lech being not only the ripper but also the torsokiller are very strong.
The "bridging the Gap" sections are great-especially the similarities in mutilations pointed out between the two series. And the inspiration in the anatomical venus models and museum is particularily fascinating, and grounded by giving real life examples of SKs who were known to visit them.
I like the emphasis and explanation on pinchin as a culmination of a combination of the series.
Ma lechs place in all this, and as possible bolt hole, in explaining some things is very interesting.
The several new and or not generally known tidbits fish throws in there are intriguing, but ill leave specifics of those to the reader.go get the book.
The general flow of the book, and conciseness of the arguments and how fish builds the case not only for lechmere but a combined torsoripper was well done.

And I now know why fish thinks the arms were were sawn off at the shoulder instead of disarticulated.; )

a few (very minor)quibbles- I would have emphasized the fact that lech was seen hovering near a freshly killed victim before raising any kind of alarm alot more.in the history of serial murder i dont beleive there has ever been an innocent "witness" that was seen in this type of situation-the chances alone! This is the biggest factor for me in pointing to lechmeres guilt. I would have really hammered this home more-but thats just me.

I would have like to see more and more detail on the similarity between the damage on tottenham head face and eddowes face. I think there might have been two sets of twins Fish!

Mackenzie, who I think is almost certainly a ripper victim (and therefore a torsoripper victim) is left out.

Not so much a quibble, but a question(and maybe a suggestion) fish:
you emphasize pinchin street having special sig for lech re the pinchin torso, and also other reasons for dumping where he did-but not sure if you mentioned the following or i just missed it- perhaps he dumped one of the torsos in the basement of Scotland Yard because stepdad lech was a copper? food for thought.


There used to be a time you would be ridiculed for even suggesting the ripper and torsoman could be the same man. no more.
Fishes book goes a long way to dispelling that way of thinking, no matter what you think of Lech as a suspect and fish has done a great job IMHO in making a strong argument for both.

Highly recommended and fascinating book!

[Michael W Richards]

It arrived!!! And on a Sunday no less. I'm sure I'm going to complain about something in it;-) so before I start reading it, which won't be for a couple of days, I want to congratulate Christer on getting it done and published., no mean feat.

On what he bases his theories on?...damn right it was no mean feat.

[Observer]

hey guys just started a new thread on zodiac in other mysteries section. lets move it there

Yes, it's time to move it over

[Abby Normal]

Hi BFW

Yes it's quite a tour de force. I see your point regarding the three authors you mention, Voigt, and his ilk have it all sewn up though. Believe me their knowledge on the case is rather impressive. It's a fascinating case, witnesses, Law Enforcement officers, and indeed the victims who survived are sliding into old age. I believe it's unsure just how much LE has with regard to DNA, but, even if they have a smidgen of DNA then there's still hope that the culprit will be named.

More apologies for drifting off topic

hey guys just started a new thread on zodiac in other mysteries section. lets move it there

[Observer]

Hi Observer, thanks for this.
Yeah I'm familiar with the site, and I greatly admire his forensic dismantling of Graysmith's mistakes, and downright inventions.

It just seems to me a real pity that no respected, sober minded and analytical author like Begg, Sugden, Whittington-Egan, to name but 3,
has taken on this case while many of the individuals and witnesses surrounding the case are still alive.

The more I read about the Zodiac case the more it seems that a solution just continues drifting slowly away into the fog.

Hi BFW

Yes it's quite a tour de force. I see your point regarding the three authors you mention, Voigt, and his ilk have it all sewn up though. Believe me their knowledge on the case is rather impressive. It's a fascinating case, unfortunately, witnesses, Law Enforcement officers, and indeed the victims who survived are sliding into old age. I believe it's unsure just how much LE has with regard to DNA, but, even if they have a smidgen of DNA then there's still hope that the culprit will be named.

More apologies for drifting off topic

[barnflatwyngarde]

Apologies for drifting off thread.

I promise not to do it again, until I do it again!

[barnflatwyngarde]

Have a read of this Barnflatwyngarde

https://zodiackillerfacts.com/zodiac...th-unmasked-2/

Hi Observer, thanks for this.
Yeah I'm familiar with the site, and I greatly admire his forensic dismantling of Graysmith's mistakes, and downright inventions.

It just seems to me a real pity that no respected, sober minded and analytical author like Begg, Sugden, Whittington-Egan, to name but 3,
has taken on this case while many of the individuals and witnesses surrounding the case are still alive.

The more I read about the Zodiac case the more it seems that a solution just continues drifting slowly away into the fog.

[Observer]

hey obs
were getting off topic. but thanks for posting this. ill take a look at it when i have more time. if you want to continue with zodiac i suugest we open a new thread. another fascinating case.

fyi i belong to this zodiac forum. lots of good discussion.

http://zodiackillersite.com/index.php

Hi AN, no problem

Yes we're certainly off topic. Just a few words though to set a couple of things straight. I believe it was a little bit remiss of me to mention Tom Voigt's site, and then send a link to Mr Butterfield's site, the truth is I don't believe those two gentlemen, (putting it mildly) see eye to eye. I believe the general consensus though among devotees of the Zodiac Killer mystery are of an opinion that Graysmith's book is somewhat flawed.

Yes, I'm aware of the site you refer to, I've followed it for some time now. There doesn't seem to be much happening in their forum of late though

[Abby Normal]

Have a read of this Barnflatwyngarde

https://zodiackillerfacts.com/zodiac...th-unmasked-2/

hey obs
were getting off topic. but thanks for posting this. ill take a look at it when i have more time. if you want to continue with zodiac i suugest we open a new thread. another fascinating case.

fyi i belong to this zodiac forum. lots of good discussion.

http://zodiackillersite.com/index.php

[Observer]

Oh, look - they disagree. Nothing like the Ripper hunt, therefore...

Is there any murder mystery out there Fisherman in which devotees don't tear lumps out of each other? Graysmith's book on the Zodiac, in my opinion, is not a good grounding for those just starting out to study the Zodiac Killer mystery. You being an author, must realise if you're setting out try and convince people whether X or Y committed a series of murders, sticking to the known facts is paramount.

Apologies for derailing the thread ......again