The two books mentioned in the video are:-
Inside Buck’s Row – By Steven E. Blomer, which can be bought from his Facebook page
https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100042074305598
Cutting Point – By Christer Holmgren, which is available from Amazon.
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Cutting-Point-Solving-Ripper-Murders/dp/9187611368/ref=sr_1_3?crid=WD2TJV0W59GB&keywords=cutting+point&qid=1668263223&sprefix=cutting+point%2Caps%2C79&sr=8-3
If anyone is named as a major suspect in the eternal quest to find the identity of Jack the Ripper, then the most important factor in assessing them as a viable candidate is putting them at the scene of the at the time when the murders were taking place. The case against any suspect falls apart if this cannot be done.
In recent years, one person, who most certainly was at the scene of a Jack the Ripper crime at around the time that it took place is Charles Allen Lechmere.
But look for him in any contemporary accounts of the Whitechapel murders and you will find that he is conspicuous by his absence. There is no mention of Charles Lechmere in any newspaper reports or official documents on the case.
But he is there, albeit he has been better known to students of the Ripper murders, as Charles Cross, the Pickfords carman who found the body of the first of the canonical five victims – Mary Nichols.
Cross was, in fact, the surname of his stepfather, a police constable by the name of Thomas Cross, and, for some reason, Lechmere gave his name as Charles Cross when he testified at the inquest into the death of Mary Nichols.
However, this has raised a red flag with some researchers, and they have used this apparent deceit to suggest that Charles Allen Lechmere was not the finder of the body of Mary Nichols, but was, in fact, but that he was, in fact, her murderer. They then go on to put him in the frame for the wider series of Whitechapel murders, and as the perpetrator of another series of crimes that took place around the same time – the Thames Torso murders.
In this video, Steve Blomer – author of “Inside Buck’s Row” – and Richard Jones weigh up the evidence against Charles Allen Lechmere, and assess the viability of the case against him based on the few facts that we know about him.
source
Christer Holgrem and Richard Jones are conversing in the video comments! RJ dogged CH in this video. CH has invited a conversation here and now. I really hope RJ agrees!
The Coronation Street Actor who played Les Batttersby found a Yorkshire Ripper victim If the Yorkshire Ripper had not been caught He too would no doubt be a considered a serious suspect in later years.
Paul should have seen him. Look at the maps and the times and what they both say re finding the body. This is criminally misreprestented here, they give the impression that Paul missed lethcmere because ' you don't notice anyone when you're "getting on the tube on the way to work". There was no one else around, no motorcars and all was quiet on a long narrow street. Personally i think that the Polish Jew Kaminsky has to be the top named suspect but I struggle to imagine Mary Kelly taking a raving mad foreigner known to hate women back to her house at the height of ripper anxiety. The FBI and police profiles point to someone just like Letchmere, down to the details. This interview makes a black or white argument out of the conjecture around Letchmere but its slightly more complex than that. For example, no.. its true, we don't know that his mother was domineering. But…. what you expect to see with a woman hating serial killer is a) father leaves home early b) mother has other men in her life c) son living with mother beyond normal age d) disruptions or trigger events regarding the mother ( he moved away from her a couple of months prior to the first murder) . We don't KNOW that Letchmere killed them on his way to work or at work but we know that serial killers of Jacks type at least start by killing in familiar territory and the murders all take place either just off his route to work, right near his old house / mothers house or slightly off his route to work by where Robert Paul worked ( and that was coincidentally after Letchmere had just walked that way with Paul). We know that in these cases the guilty party is very often known to the police or associated with the victims, doesn't mean he's guilty of course…. ( dahmer, gacy, Sutcliffe, zodiak are just a few that spring to mind)
Lethcmere walked to work every day past these unfortunate women, they would have known each other by sight. Letchmere was English and familiar. It seems clear to me that Jack was seen as non threatening. In fact ( this is speculation on my part based on eveidence) … the one he had an issue with, Liz Stride, was not English and may well have been wary of him ( he was most likely seen throwing her to the ground under protest and didn't finish his work). I could go on but you get the point, just because one 'red flag' as Edward Stow calls them , does not mean guilt doesn't mean that you then dismiss the piece of circumstantial evidence. Although Kaminsky is probably the best known specific suspect if we were being objective then modern science and 100 years of experience with serial killers tells us that we are looking for someone EXACTLY like Letchmere. Critically for his case though there is nothing to stop it being him, every time you dig deeper it just builds a more solid case, unlike other suspects who seem flimsy when you really analyse them. Further from this point – those who dismiss Letchmere are clearly the ones with the bias and the lack of objectivity, he has to remain the best known, real life suspect, until he can be cleared of the myriad of details pointing at him.
Just a bit more speculation….. letchmeres mother may have been one of the many women who prostituted herself in East London when times were tough, which was common well in to the 20th century. She didn't always have a man around so we know that there would have been periods where she struggled to feed her children, yet she afforded a house… This woul dhave lead to a resentment of prostition and women in a son of teenage years. Its textbook serial killer.
More speculation…. walking past fallen women selling their bodies, drunk and not dissimilar in age to his mother may have, over the years, cemented in a furious desire to destroy in the killer. Now this is conjecture but I think its safe to assume that the killer was local, had issues with his mother and hated women in some way, with a passion. He would be on the streets at the times when they were most desperate and vulnerable and he was sober and could get away with it.
Love the channel always believed that Joseph Barnett Mary Kelly's live in lover killed her in a fit of rage while someone else killed the others and that Dorset street/Flower and dean street is the epicentre and where you should star looking for a suspect Would love to see a video on Joseph Barnett. PLEASE
Many thanks for this 🙂 An excellent discussion indeed! 🙂
Hi Richard, Great video! I've always found Robert Paul the more suspicious out of the two carmen.
Robert Paul states he's running late for work, I don't believe him. I've done a bing maps test on their website to show both the carman's walking times.
In Charles Lechmere's case his times times are completely accurate with the times he gave (which is also corroborated by ALL of the other policemen, including the walking alarm clock that night, P.C. Mizen). He leaves at 3.30 a.m. (remember he doesn't need to be "hurrying along" as Steven mentions in your video he only begins to start running late because of the discovery of the body). He arrives at 3.37 – 3.38 a.m. at the body. He then spends two minutes with Paul and the body. So he leaves the body at 3.39 a.m. – 3.40 a.m. Robert Paul says it takes 4 minutes to find P.c. Mizen after they leave the body, so let's say they meet P.C. Mizen at roughly 3.43 a.m. – 3.44 a.m. (the bing maps shows that from the spot at Bucks Row to where they found P.C. Mizen does actually take roughly 4-5 minutes.) So we can be safe to say they're with P.C Mizen at 3.43 a.m. – 3.45 a.m, So I'm going to go with P.C Mizen's time of 3.45 a.m. Now after they leave P.C. mizen it takes 7 – 8 minutes for Robert Paul to arrive at work, meaning he arrives at roughly 3.52 a.m. (so to me Robert Paul is around 8 minutes EARLY according to Bing maps (and that doesn't take into account the fact he's "hurrying along", which means he could well have shaved a minute or two off that. As for Charles Lechmere, he leaves Robert Paul at 3.52 a.m., according to Bing Maps he has a further 7 -8 minutes left to arrive at his work entrance in Eldon Street. Which matches his arrival at 3.59 a.m. – 4 a.m. like he said he did, not taking into account that he could have picked up his pace after leaving Polly Nichols' body.
Also the most daring murder I believe was that of Annie Chapman. Whoever did that had to have a safe haven near by. That Would be Robert Paul. He took the largest organ part of any other victim with Chapman. What's more likely? For Lechmere to carry the organ part 7- 8 minutes in what was almost daylight, or for Robert Paul to carry it under two minutes away? Also the murderer would have needed to blend in on Hanbury Street. Who would have blended in better? Charles Cross who would have at best only recently started using that route and would have passed it at best likely twice a day, or Robert Paul who would be going along Hanbury Street all day with every delivery he made having to go up and down Hanbury Street?
I asked if you could do a story on Lechmere earlier,and you deliver more than expected.My no.1 suspect,and so pleased to watch your take on this one.Brilliant as all your uploads pal.Greatly appriciated,and thanx alot for all your superb work.
What timing. A grey cold drizzly day out there. I'll get a cuppa and sit back with a great ripper channel. He's my main suspect but I am open to any points you make . Let's see.
What a great video !
Everything well said, this presentation is awesome
Great interview, Rich. Very insightful. When will you interview me about Jack the Ripper films? I’m sure we both have a lot to say about that!
Very interesting as always Mr. Jones, particularly since Lechmere/Cross is, or should I say, has been my favorite suspect up until now. It’s always good to get one’s bias views contested with facts.
However, I have a few points and questions regarding the murder of Mary Nichols.
1. I still think it’s quite suspicious Lechmere used the name Cross at the inquest due to the fact that he seemingly didn’t go by that name in his daily life. As far as we know, the only other time Lechmere himself used the name Cross (if that indeed was him) was also at a coroner’s inquest regarding the accident that resulted in a dead child. Isn’t it possible that Lechmere used his stepfather’s name because he was a policeman, and therefore lended a certain amount of credibility to Lechmere’s statements, or so he believed? Even though it was ruled as an accident, Lechmere was undoubtedly involved in the child’s death (again, provided it’s the same person).
Now, what would make Lechmere use the name Cross again at an inquest?
That is very odd to say the least. Could he have had something to hide and used the policeman’s name again to lend credence to his version of events and reliability? Could he have dropped the information that he was related to Police Constable Thomas Cross to the police and the coroner Wynne Baxter off the record, and they bought it? That could possibly explain why the coroner accepted Lechmere’s denial that he allegedly had lied to PC Mizen at face value.
It’s speculation of course, however it may be a possible explanation to Lechmere’s decision that I haven’t seen anyone else express.
2. Paul and Lechmere my not have seen each other at first due to the poorly lit street, but I imagine they would have heard each other on a completely empty street surrounded by buildings echoing hurrying footsteps of boots on cobblestone. Had Lechmere been walking only 40 yards ahead, Paul surely would have heard Lechmere at some point, which would have caught his attention due to the spot being known for robberies. But he didn’t, which means Lechmere could have been at the scene of the crime way before Paul came down the street. And that brings me to my next point.
3. Lechmere claims that he left the opposite pavement and moved to the middle of the street. But the question is which pavement he was on? Could he have backed away from the body when he became aware of Paul? The Daily News reported from the inquest that “He [Lechmere] stepped back and waited for the newcomer [Paul]”
Playing on the assumption that Lechmere did kill Nichols he couldn’t be sure how much Paul actually had seen. The statement that he left the pavement and went to the middle of the street could have been a quite clever way of technically telling the truth, that didn’t conflict with Paul’s testimony, and yet avoiding the whole truth.
4. The fact that Lechmere wasn’t seen or mentioned in connection to the other murders does not necessarily mean anything, simply because the Whitechapel murderer never was caught. Lechmere knew the area like the back of his hand and could easily have slipped away. I personally find it highly likely that the killer was someone local. A quite ordinary person who didn’t raise suspicion and knew the streets, alleyways, nooks and crannies of Whitechapel very well.
5. Mr. Blomer raised the question why Lechmere simply didn’t kill Paul if Lechmere was the killer. The answer may very well be that killing a drunk woman is one thing, but killing a fully grown sober man is a completely different thing. Lechmere may have realized that if he tried to kill Paul and failed, he would without a doubt become prime suspect in the Nichols murder as well, so instead he improvised.
6. Lechmere may not have been covered in blood. The Rippers MO was to strangle his victims which effectively stops the heart, meaning there will not be a lot of blood since there is no blood pressure. Being a delivery man he may have carried gloves that he tucked away before Paul reached the murder scene.
7. The Daily Mail also reported from Lechmere’s testimony that he should have said "I believe she's dead." Then he touched her face, which felt warm.” That of course contradicts Paul’s later statement that she was cold and had been dead for some time, but rather suggest that the murder happened just prior to the discovery of the body.
Thank you 💚👍
An interview with a pro-lechmere theorist should be next to keep it fair, and so far you have been.
The problem with this case is that there are too many theories following too few facts. A theory typically begins with the assumption that person "a" was the Ripper and then the research goes backwards to try and fit person "a" into the murders. Furthermore, even doing this, there is often zero strong evidence against "a". People in general fail to realize that if you look only for evidence "for" ANY theory, you will find it. No matter how wrong the theory is, you can always find some evidence "for" it. So the evidence that really counts is the evidence AGAINST it which is often ignored because of the inherent confirmation bias. You're trying to eliminate, not confirm. That doesn't mean Lechmere wasn't the Ripper. He could have been. So could have numerous other suspects such as Jacob Levey, David Cohen or even the gang Louis Deimschutz, Isaac Kozebrodski, and Samuel Friedman. The reason is simple; you can build a viable case against any of them with evidence that's just as plausible, if not even more plausible than Lechemere's.
This has been my favored suspect for a while.
I thoroughly enjoyed that. Thank you for this video sir!
Brilliant documentary. Objective and clearly argued by both Men. Perhaps Charles Lechmere and his Family can be vindicated now.
Great video. Personally I don't think we'll ever know for sure if Lechmere/Cross is JTR. The key things for me are the actual time of the murder compared to when Lechmere/Cross was stated to be at the murder site. And it does appear as if the murderer concealed what he had done that time, compared to later murders. So I think its quite possible he was disturbed at some point that night. For those reasons I think Lechmere/Cross is a person of great interest in the case, but without the definitive proof of guilt.
"Base on Source and not speculation" The problem is that speculation is applied to all suspects in this case. I would also add that naming any suspect damages their reputation. Mr Blomer, whilst no doubt clearly very knowledgable makes a lot of assumptions himself regarding professionals (who were there) behaviours and procedures. Ther simple truth is Lechmere is the strongest suspect, nobody can verify the time he left for work that day and he was out and about in the early hours a lot of the time. If Charles Cross who accidently killed the boy in Islington is the same Charles Cross/Lechmere being discussed here then I think he could well be the Thames Torso Killer also. Looking at that picture of Lechmere, I wouldnt believe a thing that man told me, especially what time he left home for work before finding a body. There are too many connnections, the cat meat business, the routes he could have taken to work, as a carman and a local he would have had exceptional knowledge of the area.
Lechmere was the Ripper.
I am not of the opinion that Lechmere was the ripper. I have however recently watched a lot of content proposing him. Some of it is very well researched and I cannot fault the scholarship. A big part of the argument seems to be the proximity of some of the murder sites to places Lechmere knew well because of where he worked, the nature of his work and where his relatives lived. I think that argument is double edged. If he was that familiar with these places then that surely would have increased his chances of being identified in the first place.
Serial killers don't stop killing, unless they are dead, have emigrated or are imprisoned. Lechmere does not fit into any of those categories: he went on to live a relatively long life. Are we really supposed to think that after the Miller's Court murder he suddenly decided to give up the murdering lark? This is my main problem with the Lechmere theory. It doesn't work at all.
I also read that Paul said he was approached from the middle of the street and he thought he was going to be attacked by lechmere by the look on his face. I would like to know if he did think that. I have not seen it everywhere. Is it true??
Great interview. We will never know for sure, however, I think he is the best suspect considering he was with the body!!
So I feel like from being told everything cross said was a lie it's gone through to everyone else is lying or mistaken. I do find some good points though.
The Bradford Yorkshire ripper killed on his way to work.he was a modern day cart man and local I grew up a couple of miles from him.. Paul has some good points but when he says it's all supposition against lechmere that's what it's been with every suspect. There's been some ridiculous ideas for suspects. I think lechmere is so popular because he fits the reality we have found from the study of modern serial killers. Not always foreign and not running screaming through the streets. He may not be the ripper at all but he's a more sensible suspect than all up to date.
Thanks for the great video Richard. Lechmere theorists commenting like moths to the flame 😂👏🏻
Thanks to Mr Blomer and Rich, I enjoyed listening to a good discussion. I respectfully disagree. Mr Blomer contends that accusing Lechmere is an act of pure speculation. Wrong. It may lead down a trail of speculation but it’s based in facts. 3 Facts: He spent an unknown amount of time with a victim that JUST died and he lied about his name to the police. And 3, Polly’s dress was pulled down, covering her abdominal wounds. WHY?? Why would the killer do that?? If all the other victims had been left out on display? Because the killer was trying to hide the wounds! Because he had been nearly caught in the act. This isn’t mere speculation, Mr Blomer. It’s critical thinking. Common sense!
If Mr Blomer is correct, it would meant that Polly was attacked and killed and the killer pulled down her dress in less than ten minutes!
Remember, NOBODY saw or heard anything! Right? No one running away, no struggle, and yet PC Neil can hear Thain down at the other end of Buck row.
Cmon man! Pure speculation?? How about a 70 year old, stroke riddled doctor? Or a it’s a poor schizophrenic young man or an American quack doctor or a depressed teacher. That’s pure speculation!
They didn’t mention it, but The hole I’ve always seen in the case against Lechmere is that so few serial killers stop unless caught, killed, etc. and yet the cases stop.
Personally, I think that these and the torso murders are just 2 different to be the same person.
I think that any large event in his life like that would be documented.