Casebook: Jack the Ripper - Main
   

Introduction
Victims
Suspects
Witnesses
Ripper Letters
Police Officials
Official Documents
Press Reports
Victorian London
Message Boards
Ripper Media
Authors
Dissertations
Timelines
Games & Diversions
Photo Archive
Ripper Wiki
Casebook Examiner
Ripper Podcast
About the Casebook

Most Recent Posts:
A6 Murders: A6 Rebooted - by Spitfire 2 hours ago.
A6 Murders: A6 Rebooted - by Spitfire 3 hours ago.
General Discussion: Do you think it will be solved? - by Mayerling 3 hours ago.
A6 Murders: A6 Rebooted - by Sherlock Houses 5 hours ago.
A6 Murders: A6 Rebooted - by OneRound 7 hours ago.
Hutchinson, George: Any updates, or opinions on this witness. - by Sam Flynn 8 hours ago.

Most Popular Threads:
Hutchinson, George: Any updates, or opinions on this witness. - (27 posts)
A6 Murders: A6 Rebooted - (7 posts)
Motive, Method and Madness: JtR was Law Enforcement Hypothesis - (6 posts)
Elizabeth Stride: For what reason do we include Stride? - (4 posts)
General Discussion: Do you think it will be solved? - (3 posts)
Non-Fiction: the victims werent prostitutes - (2 posts)

Wiki Updates:
Robert Sagar
Edit: Chris
May 9, 2015, 12:32 am
Online newspaper archives
Edit: Chris
Nov 26, 2014, 10:25 am
Joseph Lawende
Edit: Chris
Mar 9, 2014, 10:12 am
Miscellaneous research resources
Edit: Chris
Feb 13, 2014, 9:28 am
Charles Cross
Edit: John Bennett
Sep 4, 2013, 8:20 pm

Most Recent Blogs:
Mike Covell: A DECADE IN THE MAKING.
February 19, 2016, 11:12 am.
Chris George: RipperCon in Baltimore, April 8-10, 2016
February 10, 2016, 2:55 pm.
Mike Covell: Hull Prison Visit
October 10, 2015, 8:04 am.
Mike Covell: NEW ADVENTURES IN RESEARCH
August 9, 2015, 3:10 am.
Mike Covell: UPDDATES FOR THE PAST 11 MONTHS
November 14, 2014, 10:02 am.
Mike Covell: Mike’s Book Releases
March 17, 2014, 3:18 am.

Go Back   Casebook Forums > Ripper Discussions > Suspects > Lechmere/Cross, Charles

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #131  
Old 08-14-2018, 05:38 AM
Fisherman Fisherman is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 17,668
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MrBarnett View Post
What refuses to lie down and die, though, is the fact that he apparently didn't mention the name Lechmere to the police or the coroner.

He may well have been known as Cross at his workplace, but he clearly knew what his 'official' name was. Isn't it odd that he didn't mention both names?

Someone, (apologies, I can't remember who) once posted a long list of examples of people using alternative names when appearing at the Old Bailey. All sorts of reasons were given, including the informal adoption of a stepfather's surname. And the reason the poster was able to pick up on the alternative names? Because the subjects felt it was proper to reveal both names in court.

Why would Charles Allen Lechmere have not felt the same way?

Personally, I'm convinced that he would have done, but chose not to have the name Lechmere connected to the case.
Bingo!
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #132  
Old 08-14-2018, 05:41 AM
Fisherman Fisherman is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 17,668
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by caz View Post
Yeah, great advantage that, Fish. Calling yourself Cross after your stepdad and getting yourself suspected in the 21st century of several ghastly murders because this is claimed to be an 'anomaly'.

Love,

Caz
X
Maybe in your universe, the concept of hiding your true identity by using an alternative name is unheard of...? You can take my word for it - it happens.

And if it helped him stay away from the gallows in the 19:th century, I kind of suspect that he would not worry all than much about having it revealed in the 21:st.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #133  
Old 08-14-2018, 05:44 AM
Premium Member
caz caz is offline
Premium Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: East Devon UK
Posts: 6,307
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post
Well put Caz,

It really not very likely is it? Especially when we consider that he could have avoided all of this with ease by simply walking or even running away as soon as he heard footsteps in Buck’s Row.
Ah, but if he was a psychopath, HS, he'd have been a stranger to panic and his idea of fun would have been to stick around and see just how many people he could fool without the slightest mishap.

And of course, if he was the killer, he did manage to fool everyone on the planet, right from Nichols to Coles and very possibly beyond, until he was long dead and beyond causing any more harm.

Love,

Caz
X
__________________
"Comedy is simply a funny way of being serious." Peter Ustinov


Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #134  
Old 08-14-2018, 05:53 AM
Herlock Sholmes Herlock Sholmes is offline
Superintendent
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: The West Midlands
Posts: 2,504
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fisherman View Post
Neither possibility is unlikely at all. The streets adjoining Whitechapel Road would have been where the business was done, and so prostitutes would frequent them.

Equally, if Lechmere contacted Nichols on Whitechapel Street and she suggested to go to Bucks Row, why on earth would he turn the offer down? You are the first to tell me that Bucks Row would have been traversed by myriads of workers in the early hours, so he wouldn´t run much of a risk, would he?
If Lechmere had killed Nichols and not run into Paul and Mizen what if a day later or two days later they had decided to put an officer or two patrolling the collection of streets around and including Buck’s Row in the early hours looking for possible witnesses, it would have been hard to deny that he was near the body, his quickest and regular route to work.
__________________
Regards

Herlock






"There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact!"
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #135  
Old 08-14-2018, 05:57 AM
Herlock Sholmes Herlock Sholmes is offline
Superintendent
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: The West Midlands
Posts: 2,504
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fisherman View Post
Has it dawned on you that we don´t know when he arrived in Bucks Row, Herlock? So how do we know that he made the decision to killer her 20 to four? What if he decided to do so a quarter of an hour earlier? What stands in the way for that? That he would feely lie about not killing Nichols but never about the time he arrived in Bucks Row?
Different killers will be differently equipped to control themselves. There is no definitive scale, there are only killers who differ from case to case.
If he’d have decided to kill her 15 minutes earlier at say 3.25 and the murder took 2 minutes or so why did he loiter around for 13 minutes until Paul got there?

Paul said that he was standing in the road waiting for him. How long do we think that he’d have been standing there?
__________________
Regards

Herlock






"There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact!"
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #136  
Old 08-14-2018, 06:00 AM
Herlock Sholmes Herlock Sholmes is offline
Superintendent
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: The West Midlands
Posts: 2,504
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fisherman View Post
Has it dawned on you that we don´t know when he arrived in Bucks Row, Herlock? So how do we know that he made the decision to killer her 20 to four? What if he decided to do so a quarter of an hour earlier? What stands in the way for that? That he would feely lie about not killing Nichols but never about the time he arrived in Bucks Row?
Different killers will be differently equipped to control themselves. There is no definitive scale, there are only killers who differ from case to case.
So are you saying that a killer could show control one day but maybe not the next? Was the ripper a killer that couldn’t control himself or a killer that could?
__________________
Regards

Herlock






"There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact!"
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #137  
Old 08-14-2018, 06:02 AM
Herlock Sholmes Herlock Sholmes is offline
Superintendent
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: The West Midlands
Posts: 2,504
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fisherman View Post
Ant the explanation for why is...?
If he’d been arrested after the Eddowes murder for example it would have been difficult/impossible for him to claim when questioned about Nichols that he was nowhere near Buck’s Row as it was on his route to work.
__________________
Regards

Herlock






"There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact!"
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #138  
Old 08-14-2018, 06:05 AM
Premium Member
caz caz is offline
Premium Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: East Devon UK
Posts: 6,307
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fisherman View Post
Maybe in your universe, the concept of hiding your true identity by using an alternative name is unheard of...? You can take my word for it - it happens.
But Lechmere didn't hide his true identity by using the name Cross! He could have been traced by the police at any time with the information he freely gave them. He identified himself as the witness who discovered Nichols and gave his real forenames and two addresses where he could be found if and when needed.

The disadvantage would have been if the police had checked with Pickfords and drawn a big fat blank because they had nobody working for them by the name of Charles Cross. Questions would undoubtedly have followed if the police had wasted precious time establishing that his actual name was Lechmere and he went by that name on every other occasion.

Quote:
And if it helped him stay away from the gallows in the 19:th century, I kind of suspect that he would not worry all than much about having it revealed in the 21:st.
How would it have helped him 'stay away from the gallows', to use a name for the inquest, which the police would soon have discovered was not his usual name if they had ever considered him a person of interest for other reasons? He was only safe from the gallows if a) he gave them no reason to check him out, and b) if they did check him out, he had given them no false information connected with his identity.

Again, how could he possibly have stayed away from the gallows just by the use of a different surname, when all the other information he gave would have positively identified him at the time to anyone who knew him but a total cretin?

I kind of suspect he'd be livid about being fingered as the ripper in the 21st century, when there's no evidence that he was anything but a decent, public-spirited family man, who caused no deliberate harm to anyone.

Love,

Caz
X
__________________
"Comedy is simply a funny way of being serious." Peter Ustinov



Last edited by caz : 08-14-2018 at 06:12 AM.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #139  
Old 08-14-2018, 06:11 AM
Herlock Sholmes Herlock Sholmes is offline
Superintendent
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: The West Midlands
Posts: 2,504
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fisherman View Post
Bingo!
I agree with Gary (and yourself seeing your response) that a likely explaination is that he didn’t want the Lechmere name in the paper.

This however didn’t give him any advantage in escaping justice. Do we need to keep repeating that he gave the his correct Christian names, his correct address and his stepfathers surname. Not exactly ‘the man of a thousand faces’ was he?
__________________
Regards

Herlock






"There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact!"
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #140  
Old 08-14-2018, 06:37 AM
Premium Member
caz caz is offline
Premium Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: East Devon UK
Posts: 6,307
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Trevor Marriott View Post
You are also very quick to quote the MO comparisons with regards to serial killers both past and present. Perhaps you would be so kind as to provide details of any serial killer that committed a murder in the dead of night and despite having the chance to escape un noticed, and unseen, chose to stay with the victim and front it out with a passer by/police officer?

www.trevormarriott.co.uk
That's a fair question, Trevor.

But for a fairer comparison, any such serial killer should also have been active before fingerprints, DNA, CCTV or the victim's blood [they couldn't even distinguish human blood from animal blood] could put him at or near the scene if he didn't do so himself and offer an innocent explanation for being in the vicinity at that time.

Simply walking on towards his legitimate destination in 1888, after dropping the knife by the body, would have left him pretty much immune from anything the police could subsequently have tried to use to connect him directly to the victim.

If the purpose of killing Nichols in Buck's Row was so he'd have a ready made excuse for being there around that time, he had even less need to stay at the scene to 'front it out' with whoever might be coming along. Leave that person - Robert Paul as it turned out - to explain what he was doing there. If Lechmere was unlucky enough to be stopped just a street or two away, closer to his place of work, they'd have had a job to pin the murder on him, when any number of other men on the move could have done it - Robert Paul being one obvious example.

Love,

Caz
X
__________________
"Comedy is simply a funny way of being serious." Peter Ustinov


Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 08:14 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.