Charles Cross

[Fisherman]

I think it would be fair to say that if the police had had knowledge about the name swop, the implications of the scam and how Lechmere´s route to job corresponded with the murder places, they would not need much ingenuity at any rate. Going by the book only would have ensured an overwhelming interest in our carman.

But books you don´t have, you can´t open.

The best,
Fisherman

[Sally]

Oh Absolutely. And if only they'd known that Cross was discovered 'crouching over the body' - even the hapless cops couldn't have failed to be suspicious.... Could they?

If only things had been different, eh?

[Fisherman]

Did you notice, Sally, that the papers have our man down as "Latchmere"?

What does that tell you? Nothing at all, I suppose?

Did you notice that they also have all the victims dying on his route to work?

Does that tell you anything? No.

As for the distance inbetween Nichols and Lechmere it is of very small importance, as long as we know that it was a short one - and that we know.

Now, go do something useful for a change. For example, read the above and try - TRY! - to understand the implications of it.

The best,
Fisherman

[Lechmere]

The East London Advertiser story is quite accurate

[Sally]

Fisherman - I take the 'Latchmere' to be a simple spelling error.

As to the rest, I know what I think about that - I mean, it's hardly the first time we've seen such exaggerated claims, is it?

Go on, ask me to find the relevant posts.

[Fisherman]

Sally:

"As to the rest, I know what I think about that - I mean, it's hardly the first time we've seen such exaggerated claims, is it? "

To begin with, the claims that the major part of the murders took place along the two thoroughfares between Doveton Street and Broad Street are anything but exaggerated. They are exact, precise and to the point - established facts. Like it or not!

But you fail to see what I am trying to convey here. If the papers had presented the WHOLE picture they were given, then they would also have presented that NOT ONLY did the major part of the slaying fall along his work route - but the Stride killing actually fell en route to his mothers house, AND at a time corresponding with a Saturday evening encounter.
This detail strengthens the Lechmere theory immensely, since it completes the geographical alignment - and the chronological one.

Now, you may perhaps understand that none of us, Edward or me, would favour giving the papers a scenario that is LESS convincing, and that contains LESS incriminating elements - and that is factually wrong, to boot? The killings did not all happen along his route to work.

So why would we tell the papers this? It would lessen the power of the theory and people on Casebook - even you! - would be able to point it out as wrong.

THAT is what you need to give som long hard afterthought. THAT is what you should try and honour with some clever deductions. And THEN you can come back with your useless criticism. I am not hoping too much, see.

Over and out, Sally - you´re on your own now.

Fisherman

[Simon Wood]

Hi Fisherman,

Please remind me.

Where did Crossmere's mother live?

Regards,

Simon

[Fisherman]

147 Cable Street, Simon - with his daughter. It´s in the immediate vicinity of the railway arch where the Pinchin Street torso was found; just south of it. And Lechmere himself had experience of having lived in that exact area, since he had lived in both Maryann Street and James Street. It was his old back yard, more or less.

The best,
Fisherman

[Monty]

PC Pearce live in Mitre Square during Eddowes murder, also in the Peabody building off Glasshouse Street during Coles murder, as did Pennett.

Hmmmm

Monty

[Lechmere]

In December 1889 Charles Lechmere's mother lived at 147 Cable Street.
At the time of the 1881 census his mother lived at 23 Pinchin Street.

In 1881 and until 11th June 1888, Charles Lechmere lived at 20 James Street (now Burslem Street) which is a couple of hundred yards east from the site of Liz Strides murder on Berner Street and the location where the Pinchin Street Torso was found, and from where his mother lived.

In 1861 Charles Lechmere lived at 143 Thomas Street - which was later renamed Pinchin Street.

[Simon Wood]

Hi Fisherman,

Thank you.

On the morning of 30th September 1888 was Crossmere going to his mother's address in Cable Street having just finished a late shift at the Broad Street Pickfords depot, or was he paying her a nocturnal visit from his home in Doveton Street?

Regards,

Simon

[Fisherman]

Simon:

"On the morning of 30th September 1888 was Crossmere going to his mother's address in Cable Street having just finished a late shift at the Broad Street Pickfords depot, or was he paying her a nocturnal visit from his home in Doveton Street?"

I wish I knew, Simon. Stride died at close to one o´clock. My best guess is that Lechmere had left his mother´s house before that, and - perhaps - fuelled up at a local pub. He would have been very familiar with the surroundings.
But we can only offer guesswork here. These were Charles Lechmere´s old hunting grounds, and he may have known quite a lot of people around here - and visited them, perhaps. Just as he may have called on his mother, he may equally have spent time with somebody else he knew there. He had many years experience of the neighbourhood.

All the best,
Fisherman

[Lechmere]

I would suggest the most likely scenario would be that he went home after work - changed, freshened up and went to visit his mother and daughter. Striking on the way home - perhaps after a pint in a local pub.

[Glenn Lauritz Andersson]

Hi Fisherman,

I agree, Paul Cross is indeed an interesting suspect and I believe one of the better that has come across in a long time although the idea is not new.

Now, I have been away from the Ripper scene for quite a while, so bear with me - new material may have come up since I last buried myself into the case - but I am a bit puzzled by a couple of Edward Stowes cited claims in The Telegraph:

"He was seen crouching over Polly Nichols and he was trying to cover up some of the wounds."
[...]
"Paul claimed he had seen Cross standing by the body of Nichols when he had arrived but Cross later told police he had been standing away from the body in the road."

Where is the source for this?
I can't find anything about what is claimed to be Robert Paul's first version, where he is supposed to have said at first that he saw Cross leaning over or standing by the body. Where does this come from?
Can't anything in either of the reports from the inquests by The Times or The Telegraph that supports this or in the police summary reports.

As far as Paul's witness testimony from the inquest, reported by The Times on September 18 and in The Telegraph (which both are quite similar in content), it says:

"...as he was passing up Bucks-row he saw a man standing in the middle of the road. As witness [Robert Paul] approached him, he walked towards the pavement, and witness stepped on to the roadway in order to pass him by."

Albeit, according to this, Cross was standing in the middle of the road and I haven't found anything that says otherwise.
But as I said, I am a bit dusty and may have missed it, if it's a new piece of information.

All the best
/Glenn

[Mr Lucky]

"He was seen crouching over Polly Nichols and he was trying to cover up some of the wounds."
[...]
"Paul claimed he had seen Cross standing by the body of Nichols when he had arrived but Cross later told police he had been standing away from the body in the road."

Where is the source for this?

Hi Glenn

It's from Paul's 'Remarkable Statement' first published in Lloyd's Weekly News 2nd Sept. 1888 - 'It was dark. and I was hurrying along when i saw a man standing where the woman was'.

Paul gave the statement to a Lloyd's representative on friday night.