Lechmere Continuation Thread

[Billiou]

The issue is Christer is claiming the Echo report is the most accurate and therefore is to be believed more than multiple newspapers different account.
[/I]

Well, I am sorry but I have to agree that the Echo report seems, to me, to have more information that looks more likely to be more accurate than other newspapers in relating Mizen's Inquest statement.

eg Compare:
The Daily Telegraph:
Police-constable Mizen said that at a quarter to four o'clock on Friday morning he was at the crossing, Hanbury-street, Baker's-row, when a carman who passed in company with another man informed him that he was wanted by a policeman in Buck's-row, where a woman was lying. When he arrived there Constable Neil sent him for the ambulance. At that time nobody but Neil was with the body.

The Morning Advertiser:
Police constable George Maizen (sic), 55 H, said - On Friday morning last, at 20 minutes past four, I was at the end of Hanbury street, Baker's row, when someone who was passing said, "You're wanted down there" (pointing to Buck's row). The man appeared to be a carman. (The man, whose name is George Cross, was brought in and witness identified him as the man who spoke to him on the morning in question). I went up Buck's row and saw a policeman shining his light on the pavement. He said, "Go for an ambulance," and I at once went to the station and returned with it. I assisted to remove the body. The blood appeared fresh, and was still running from the neck of the woman.

with The Echo:

Police-constable George Myzen, 55 H, said that on Friday morning, at twenty minutes past four, he was at the corner of Hanbury-street, Baker's-row, when a man, who looked like a carman, said, "You are wanted in Buck's-row." Witness now knew the man to be named Cross, and he was a carman. Witness asked him what was the matter, and Cross replied, "A policeman wants you; there is a woman lying there." Witness went there, and saw Constable Neil, who sent him to the station for the ambulance.
The Coroner - Was there anyone else there then? - No one at all, Sir. There was blood running from the throat towards the gutter.
By the Coroner - There was another man in company of Cross when the latter spoke to witness. The other man, who went down Hanbury-street, appeared to be working with Cross.
By the Jury - Witness went to the spot directly Cross told him, and did not stop to knock any one up.

That, to me, looks like a more comprehensive and accurate account of what took place at the Inquest during Mizen's testimony that day.
I think it is important to take into account all the newspapers and try to put together a single account of the Inquest statements.

[Columbo]

I think it is important to take into account all the newspapers and try to put together a single account of the Inquest statements.

Hi Billiou,

I think so as well, as long as it can be done objectively. I would encourage people to verify the sources when someone does it, and if someone does decide to do a reconstruction to provide accurate sources to be verified.

Columbo

[Columbo]

Hello Columbo,


>> As Fisherman pointed out it would be foolish to do so since we have the information at hand but nonetheless it'll be educational to read.<<

Not just foolish, but bizarre and yet he still does, go figure?

Hi DrStrange,

No comment yet

Columbo

[Columbo]

Well, I am sorry but I have to agree that the Echo report seems, to me, to have more information that looks more likely to be more accurate than other newspapers in relating Mizen's Inquest statement.

eg Compare:
The Daily Telegraph:
Police-constable Mizen said that at a quarter to four o'clock on Friday morning he was at the crossing, Hanbury-street, Baker's-row, when a carman who passed in company with another man informed him that he was wanted by a policeman in Buck's-row, where a woman was lying. When he arrived there Constable Neil sent him for the ambulance. At that time nobody but Neil was with the body.

The Morning Advertiser:
Police constable George Maizen (sic), 55 H, said - On Friday morning last, at 20 minutes past four, I was at the end of Hanbury street, Baker's row, when someone who was passing said, "You're wanted down there" (pointing to Buck's row). The man appeared to be a carman. (The man, whose name is George Cross, was brought in and witness identified him as the man who spoke to him on the morning in question). I went up Buck's row and saw a policeman shining his light on the pavement. He said, "Go for an ambulance," and I at once went to the station and returned with it. I assisted to remove the body. The blood appeared fresh, and was still running from the neck of the woman.

with The Echo:

Police-constable George Myzen, 55 H, said that on Friday morning, at twenty minutes past four, he was at the corner of Hanbury-street, Baker's-row, when a man, who looked like a carman, said, "You are wanted in Buck's-row." Witness now knew the man to be named Cross, and he was a carman. Witness asked him what was the matter, and Cross replied, "A policeman wants you; there is a woman lying there." Witness went there, and saw Constable Neil, who sent him to the station for the ambulance.
The Coroner - Was there anyone else there then? - No one at all, Sir. There was blood running from the throat towards the gutter.
By the Coroner - There was another man in company of Cross when the latter spoke to witness. The other man, who went down Hanbury-street, appeared to be working with Cross.
By the Jury - Witness went to the spot directly Cross told him, and did not stop to knock any one up.

That, to me, looks like a more comprehensive and accurate account of what took place at the Inquest during Mizen's testimony that day.
I think it is important to take into account all the newspapers and try to put together a single account of the Inquest statements.

You just did exactly what we should all do. Verify the sources and make an informed opinion. I applaud your research.

Columbo

[drstrange169]

>>Yep, there was blood on the ground, no mention of any flow from the body when they moved it. Thanks for pointing that out.<<

Point one: The position of the blood is different (at odds) with descriptions given by P.C. Neil and Dr. Llewellyn ergo Thain is describing blood movement that occurred post their description.

Point two: P.C. Thain is the only other person to mention the blood had started to coagulate.

I can't remember where, but I also recall some reporting about blood stains being left on the pavement from the body being moved.

[drstrange169]

>>I think it is important to take into account all the newspapers and try to put together a single account of the Inquest statements.<<

A good system to work by.

And on this particular subject, we have three categories of accounts;

Newspapers that don't mention it. (several)

Newspapers that specifically place it in a certain time frame. (several)

Newspapers that refer to a portion of it only and omit a specific time frame. (one)

What does logic dictate?

[Columbo]

>>I think it is important to take into account all the newspapers and try to put together a single account of the Inquest statements.<<

A good system to work by.

And on this particular subject, we have three categories of accounts;

Newspapers that don't mention it. (several)

Newspapers that specifically place it in a certain time frame. (several)

Newspapers that refer to a portion of it only and omit a specific time frame. (one)

What does logic dictate?

Good question. You have to do a comparison of the available info and bring the common elements together. The problem you face in a situation such as this scenario is objectivity. Pre-disposition towards a certain suspect will make your conclusions suspect unless you get a neutral party to review your data.

That would make for a very interesting thread, which I think your proposed earlier in the week.

Columbo

[John G]

Well, I am sorry but I have to agree that the Echo report seems, to me, to have more information that looks more likely to be more accurate than other newspapers in relating Mizen's Inquest statement.

eg Compare:
The Daily Telegraph:
Police-constable Mizen said that at a quarter to four o'clock on Friday morning he was at the crossing, Hanbury-street, Baker's-row, when a carman who passed in company with another man informed him that he was wanted by a policeman in Buck's-row, where a woman was lying. When he arrived there Constable Neil sent him for the ambulance. At that time nobody but Neil was with the body.

The Morning Advertiser:
Police constable George Maizen (sic), 55 H, said - On Friday morning last, at 20 minutes past four, I was at the end of Hanbury street, Baker's row, when someone who was passing said, "You're wanted down there" (pointing to Buck's row). The man appeared to be a carman. (The man, whose name is George Cross, was brought in and witness identified him as the man who spoke to him on the morning in question). I went up Buck's row and saw a policeman shining his light on the pavement. He said, "Go for an ambulance," and I at once went to the station and returned with it. I assisted to remove the body. The blood appeared fresh, and was still running from the neck of the woman.

with The Echo:

Police-constable George Myzen, 55 H, said that on Friday morning, at twenty minutes past four, he was at the corner of Hanbury-street, Baker's-row, when a man, who looked like a carman, said, "You are wanted in Buck's-row." Witness now knew the man to be named Cross, and he was a carman. Witness asked him what was the matter, and Cross replied, "A policeman wants you; there is a woman lying there." Witness went there, and saw Constable Neil, who sent him to the station for the ambulance.
The Coroner - Was there anyone else there then? - No one at all, Sir. There was blood running from the throat towards the gutter.
By the Coroner - There was another man in company of Cross when the latter spoke to witness. The other man, who went down Hanbury-street, appeared to be working with Cross.
By the Jury - Witness went to the spot directly Cross told him, and did not stop to knock any one up.

That, to me, looks like a more comprehensive and accurate account of what took place at the Inquest during Mizen's testimony that day.
I think it is important to take into account all the newspapers and try to put together a single account of the Inquest statements.

Hello Billiou,

Well this is interesting. Reporting on the inquest The Echo refers to "blood running from the throat" and the Morning Advertiser mentions "blood running from the neck.' However, in respect of an extensive neck wound, such as the one suffered by Nichols, and a victim lying motionless on the ground, Dr Biggs opined that, "a slow trickle go go on for many minutes after death. (Marriott, 2013, the emphasis is mine) .

It therefore seems to me that "running" implies that the blood was existing the wound at a much faster rate than a "slow trickle", which would seem to suggest the victim had only very recently been killed.

[Billiou]

Hi Billiou,

I think so as well, as long as it can be done objectively. I would encourage people to verify the sources when someone does it, and if someone does decide to do a reconstruction to provide accurate sources to be verified.

Columbo

Agree.

[Billiou]

>>Yep, there was blood on the ground, no mention of any flow from the body when they moved it. Thanks for pointing that out.<<

Point one: The position of the blood is different (at odds) with descriptions given by P.C. Neil and Dr. Llewellyn ergo Thain is describing blood movement that occurred post their description.

Point two: P.C. Thain is the only other person to mention the blood had started to coagulate.

I can't remember where, but I also recall some reporting about blood stains being left on the pavement from the body being moved.

So? Blood stains on the ground and blood flow from the body are two different things.

[Billiou]

Hello Billiou,

Well this is interesting. Reporting on the inquest The Echo refers to "blood running from the throat" and the Morning Advertiser mentions "blood running from the neck.' However, in respect of an extensive neck wound, such as the one suffered by Nichols, and a victim lying motionless on the ground, Dr Biggs opined that, "a slow trickle go go on for many minutes after death. (Marriott, 2013, the emphasis is mine) .

It therefore seems to me that "running" implies that the blood was existing the wound at a much faster rate than a "slow trickle", which would seem to suggest the victim had only very recently been killed.

It can be interesting for some. Note that Mizen actually said what he said only once, but the different reporters report it as two things - "throat" and "neck"! Oh for an official transcription or a recording!!

I try not to enter into a debate into any conclusions drawn from what was said at the Inquest, I am more interested in trying to understand what was actually said.

[Billiou]

>>I think it is important to take into account all the newspapers and try to put together a single account of the Inquest statements.<<

A good system to work by.

And on this particular subject, we have three categories of accounts;

Newspapers that don't mention it. (several)

Newspapers that specifically place it in a certain time frame. (several)

Newspapers that refer to a portion of it only and omit a specific time frame. (one)

What does logic dictate?

Please clarify your argument.

[John G]

It can be interesting for some. Note that Mizen actually said what he said only once, but the different reporters report it as two things - "throat" and "neck"! Oh for an official transcription or a recording!!

I try not to enter into a debate into any conclusions drawn from what was said at the Inquest, I am more interested in trying to understand what was actually said.

Yes, the contradictory reports are very frustrating. Of course, there is also a report of blood "oozing" from the neck/throat, which does suggest a slow trickle. And, if the blood was "running" from the throat or neck, surely this would indicate that the victim had been killed within the last few minutes, in which case even if Lechmere was the killer how could there have beensufficient time to carry out the abdominal mutilations?

[drstrange169]

>>So? Blood stains on the ground and blood flow from the body are two different things.<<

One indisputably causes the other unless you are suggesting the blood was there before the murder took place?

The question here is when one caused the other not whether one caused the other.

"There was very little blood around the neck."
Dr Llewellyn

Dr. Llewellyn makes no mention of a pool of blood by the wall or running to the gutter. In fact, it was Llewellyn's comment on the very lack of blood that gave raise the story that she must have been killed elsewhere.

If there was a large pool of blood by the wall and blood running to the gutter when he arrived, presumably Dr. Llewellyn would not have made the observation he did.

There is a cumulative amount of information that points in one direction and as you quite rightly pointed out, it is cumulatively information we need to form a coherent picture.

[harry]

There is only one item of evidence that can implicate Cross in the murder of Nichols,and I'll repeat it.Cross must be placed in the company of Nichols while she was alive.Cross was a witness whos testimony places him(Cross) at the place of death after she had been killed.Nothing that has been claimed alters that fact,He cannot,under English law,be considered a suspect,and he never was.There is no Prima Facia evidence of guilt whatsoever.It should be left at that.