Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Proposed modification to Lechmere's route to work

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #91
    Originally posted by Abby Normal View Post

    I would think after a few weeks of traversing those streets daily, and also having lived in the immediate area for a long time, he would have got to know them well in short order.
    the move also entailed leaving one of his children at his moms correct? would stress me out. and also be another reason to visit his mom alot.
    It seems his daughter had been living with her grandmother for some time, although when he was living in James Street she was only a few minutes away.

    I may be wrong in this, but I suspect many of the old Eastenders were very parochial. Several generations might live their lives within a very small area. Lechmere had been a SGE man for most of his life, so how familiar he would have been with the streets between Doveton Street and Spitalfields is questionable. Spitalfields itself, because of the markets, he probably knew, but visiting busy markets there to do some shopping is very different from wandering through the back streets in the early hours.

    Comment


    • #92
      Originally posted by Abby Normal View Post

      good point. was the move, or stress of the move the trigger perhaps?
      If you ask me, no - as you know, I am confident that he was also the Torso killer, so whatever trigger there may have been that turned him into a murderer would have been pulled way before. What happens after the move is that he takes his buiness to the streets.
      "In these matters it is the little things that tell the tales" - Coroner Wynne Baxter during the Nichols inquest.

      Comment


      • #93
        I think the post June walk opened possibilities to him that may not have occured to him before. Or the distance from his mother acted on his psychology or both.
        I don't think it was stress related.

        Old Ma continued to live with his daughter to her dying days, even after her Granddaughter had got married - to a Goodson. I've often wondered if they were related to that other Goodson family.

        Comment


        • #94
          Originally posted by Edward Stow View Post
          I think the post June walk opened possibilities to him that may not have occured to him before.
          Perhaps the old route from James Street had too few unfortunates, too many other people around, and too much street lighting? Plus, it was a significantly shorter walk, so he was closer to home and closer to work for a greater part of the journey.

          Also: a killer who drops body parts in canals and rivers is deprived of the chance to create a precisely organised spectacle for people to find and be horrified by; indeed, there is a chance that parts put into watercourses will not be discovered at all. I find it plausible to view the Autumn of Terror as a brief project within a decades-long series: an attempt to increase the element of control (over victim and discoverer alike) by way of adding a conscious element of display -- the ultimate demonstration of which could be said to be the way he turned Kelly's destroyed face towards the window/door through which she would first be seen.

          M.

          Comment


          • #95
            My own thoughts have often revolved aroound how the Ripper murders had to do, at least partly, with an intent on the killers behalf to get more press coverage (or, if you will, recognition). The lack of a useful evisceration blade in the Tabram murder implicates to me that it was either a spur of the moment deed by the killer or a strike by somebody else than our man. Regardless what applies, it was a murder that got a lot more attention in the papers than the Torso murders, and that, I believe, was what caught the killers eye and encouraged him to take his business to the streets.
            "In these matters it is the little things that tell the tales" - Coroner Wynne Baxter during the Nichols inquest.

            Comment


            • #96
              Originally posted by Gary Barnett View Post

              Hi Caz,

              How could he have been sure that Paul wouldn’t have suspected that the woman had been attacked, having seen a man walk/run/saunter away from the body?

              Gary
              How could he have been sure that Paul wasn't a PC with a lantern, who would see that the woman had not only been attacked but nearly decapitated?

              If he'd walked briskly away, it would still have taken a few seconds for anyone to reach the woman, suspect this was a very recent attack and then give chase or raise the alarm, by which time he could have dumped the knife and been a couple of streets away. If he was stopped, how could anyone then prove he was the same man they had seen or heard from a distance, making his way from the scene in darkness?

              If Lechmere was confident enough that there was no fresh blood visible on him, when at the actual scene and again when talking to PC Mizen, he'd have been even more confident two or three streets on from Buck's Row, sans weapon.

              Love,

              Caz
              X
              I wish I were two puppies then I could play together - Storm Petersen

              Comment


              • #97
                Originally posted by Caroline Brown View Post

                How could he have been sure that Paul wasn't a PC with a lantern, who would see that the woman had not only been attacked but nearly decapitated?

                Love,

                Caz
                X
                Either by having kept track of John Neil and knowing his beat, or - more likely - by noticing that the man approaching did so hurriedly and with no bulls eye lamp shining.

                "In these matters it is the little things that tell the tales" - Coroner Wynne Baxter during the Nichols inquest.

                Comment


                • #98
                  Originally posted by Edward Stow View Post
                  Serial killers pick vulnerable targets for a reason.
                  This oft repeated suggestion that they would turn on a pursuer with their sharp knife misses this reality.
                  Right, so what would this serial killer have done if Robert Paul had suspected what he'd just done and confronted him? "It's a fair cop"? Or would he have legged it at that point, knowing he had made a potentially fatal mistake?

                  And what if Robert Paul had suspected Lechmere, but pretended otherwise and went along with it in case the man turned nasty, only to deliver him up to PC Mizen?

                  Just trying to look at all the options, as the ripper might have seen them.

                  Love,

                  Caz
                  X
                  I wish I were two puppies then I could play together - Storm Petersen

                  Comment


                  • #99
                    Originally posted by Christer Holmgren View Post
                    My own thoughts have often revolved around how the Ripper murders had to do, at least partly, with an intent on the killers behalf to get more press coverage (or, if you will, recognition)...
                    Indeed. David Wilson in that lousy BBC documentary talks about the killer 'exploring' as he mutilates Kelly; the idea, clearly, is that this is his first time with a corpse and a knife indoors and in private for an extended period. But, of course, as the torso killer, our man has had numerous indoor butchering opportunities going back 15 years. Thus what was done to Kelly's body was more performance and demonstration than 'exploration' as such -- unless there will be an element of exploration involved in dismantling a body that, for once, you don't then have to bag up and take to its various dumping spots.

                    M.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Christer Holmgren View Post

                      Either by having kept track of John Neil and knowing his beat, or - more likely - by noticing that the man approaching did so hurriedly and with no bulls eye lamp shining.
                      Wasn't PC Neil a bit late that morning? Or am I thinking of someone else?

                      The man who was approaching, whoever he was, could have had a box of matches on him and insisted on using them to examine the woman more closely. Lechmere simply couldn't have predicted the man's reactions or character, and we are reliably informed that he was a coward who only went for soft targets, so he would not have tackled Robert Paul physically if he had made any trouble, or decided to take control of the situation himself.

                      Serial killers can be very manipulative, but they still have to pick on people who are easy to manipulate, as Myra Hindley found with Lord Longford. Many men in Robert Paul's situation, and PC Mizen's, would not have been easy to run rings round, and Lechmere knew nothing about either of them.

                      Love,

                      Caz
                      X
                      I wish I were two puppies then I could play together - Storm Petersen

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Caroline Brown View Post

                        Wasn't PC Neil a bit late that morning? Or am I thinking of someone else?

                        He said he had been around half an hour before, so going on that, he seems to have been on schedule. Regardless, if the carman kept track of his movements and noticed him pass at 3.15, he would know how much time he was likely to have. It is a suggeston that involves many variables, but since you asked how Lechmere could have known that the oncoming stranger was not a PC, this is a possible answer, which I trust you will agree about.

                        The man who was approaching, whoever he was, could have had a box of matches on him and insisted on using them to examine the woman more closely. Lechmere simply couldn't have predicted the man's reactions or character, and we are reliably informed that he was a coward who only went for soft targets, so he would not have tackled Robert Paul physically if he had made any trouble, or decided to take control of the situation himself.

                        A few errors there, Caz. First, it is not as if the possibility that the oncomer carried tinderwood, kerosene and a match on his person would have meant that Lechmere could not have chosen to bluff it out. If that was so, you would have proof for your repeated assertions of flight.
                        Of course, you have no such thing or anything resembling proof. As I have pointed out, you are parrotting a suggestion that can never find traction enough to have any impact on my suggestion of a bluff. It is an utter waste of time, therefore.
                        Second, what Edward - who is not as one-eyed as you are - said was that serial killers of women prefer not to take the risk of taking on a man. That does not mean that ALL serial killers are alike in this respect. When DeAngelo was jeered for attacking defenseless women only, he changed tactics and made sure that there was a man involved when he raped.
                        A little openness of mind never hurt.

                        Serial killers can be very manipulative, but they still have to pick on people who are easy to manipulate, as Myra Hindley found with Lord Longford. Many men in Robert Paul's situation, and PC Mizen's, would not have been easy to run rings round, and Lechmere knew nothing about either of them.

                        Love,

                        Caz
                        X
                        A narcissistic psychopath cannot be outsmarted, Caz. Not, that is, according to themselves. Therefore, they do not see things like these as risks. Or calculated risks.
                        They see them as battles won before they are started.
                        "In these matters it is the little things that tell the tales" - Coroner Wynne Baxter during the Nichols inquest.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Mark J D View Post

                          Indeed. David Wilson in that lousy BBC documentary talks about the killer 'exploring' as he mutilates Kelly; the idea, clearly, is that this is his first time with a corpse and a knife indoors and in private for an extended period. But, of course, as the torso killer, our man has had numerous indoor butchering opportunities going back 15 years. Thus what was done to Kelly's body was more performance and demonstration than 'exploration' as such -- unless there will be an element of exploration involved in dismantling a body that, for once, you don't then have to bag up and take to its various dumping spots.

                          M.
                          Exactly. A wish to make the papers and get recognition equals a signed confession to narcissism. And narcissism looks very much like the underlying reason for the staging of Mary Kelly.
                          "In these matters it is the little things that tell the tales" - Coroner Wynne Baxter during the Nichols inquest.

                          Comment


                          • Surely Mrs Brown knows that serial killers are capable of all manner of inexplicable behaviour - inexplicable to mere mortals, but not to themselves.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Edward Stow View Post
                              Surely Mrs Brown knows that serial killers are capable of all manner of inexplicable behaviour - inexplicable to mere mortals, but not to themselves.
                              Some times she professes to such insights, while on other occasions they seem to have illuded her. Interestingly, I can more often than not predict which way it is going to take.
                              "In these matters it is the little things that tell the tales" - Coroner Wynne Baxter during the Nichols inquest.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Gary Barnett View Post
                                Did he feel vulnerable traversing those streets for the first time? Or did a sense of anonymity embolden him?
                                I'd say anonymity -- of precisely the kind that would have evaporated the moment he went into Berner Street. Stride's murder was always going to be anomalous...

                                M.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X