I agree they are all interesting to watch. But why did it all suddenly stop in November 1888. He did not care about being caught. Something happened, and it would be interesting to know what.
Love your video series. You are definitely the best Ripper expert that I have ever heard. Thanks for seeking and obtaining some level of justice for the victims.
As in the case of the Yorkshire Ripper and the Whitechapel murders, here we can see overwhelming and contradictory witness testimonies, made for whatever reason, clouding the issue. I thought the point about the authorities being fixated and misled by an accent was a very good one. Well done.
Your episodes keep me glued to my phone, unable to get anything else done. Keep digging for more clues, there must be school records, tax papers, or even work papers that are still waiting to be found. No matter how hard we try, there is always something that we leave behind. Excellent investigation Edward!
Brilliant as always, Edward. Your research is outstanding! Thank you so much. By the way, I bought Cutting Point some time ago after seeing it on your channel and highly recommend it to everyone watching this. 🙏👏
Hey Ed. 1872 the year of the first Thames Torso murder as well. I learned that from Ed’s videos and Christer’s book. I agree with your contention that Lechmere is a viable suspect in this case. I enjoyed the video
That was fascinating. I followed the argument carefully as you made your case and was thoroughly impressed by the thesis you put forward in the last minutes. I'll have to listen to the video again because it's precise and rich in detail. Thank you for this research.
Excellent episode Edward- and most certainly food for thought. I had not heard of the anatomy exhibition before, it may have been a catalyst for the miscreants bloodlust as you say. I noticed earlier on in the video whilst you were referring to the Mary Kelly murder and Dorset street, a black and white photo of a street scene was used. Was this photograph actually of Dorset street?
@@thehouseoflechmere9407 Thank you Edward. I have never seen that photograph before, much appreciated. I am guessing that is the lodging house on the left side of the photo and Millers court would be on the right?
I enjoy your videos. The research must take you so much time. It does seem unlikely that a vicious murderer would suddenly appear and then just stop. It makes sense for there to have been prior cases and then subsequent escalation. This was very interesting. Have a great day.
The mention of the anatomical museum strikes an interesting parallel with Peter Sutcliffe, the "Yorkshire Ripper", who on family holidays to Morecambe, used to haunt the "Madame Tussauds" waxwork museum there (which I visited before it closed). This museum included a room that contained an "antique" anatomical collection of dissected female bodies that came from exactly the same historical period as those in the Tichmore Street musem, some of which might even have come from the same source. As described in Helen Morrison's book, "My Life among the Serial Killers", he spent so much time in this room, his family dubbed it "Peter's Room".
I wonderd why any videos were coming from you... must've taken weeks to research all this. Exciting stuff, you're amazingly knowledgeable on this subject.. love it. Nice bombe chest of drawers in your house 😊
Excellent video! I’m always a little sceptical at the beginning but the forensic and thorough evidence provided makes each video more and more convincing. Thanks very much 👏👍
Fascinating. I don't know if I agree with him. Though I have no solid factual footing not to. But admire the hell out of the research, the argument, and the fact that he actually brings us an entirely different early murder to consider. I am definitely firmly in the camp that this killer killed before Mary Ann Nichols, the first of the canonical victims. And I've never been convinced that Tabram, who comes closest to fitting the bill, or Smith were those early victims. Now I have to do my own research into this victim. Is it possible he started that much earlier? If nothing else, and there is definitely so much more to this presentation, I'm very excited about that. So, thank you once again for making me think!
Fantastic amount of research and information here Ed. Excellent work, considering its not exactly a very well known case. To me at least. I enjoyed your conclusion/solution. It's definitely worth considering. I'd not heard about that gruesome wax work exhibition before. A very fitting episode to get in the Christmas festive mood, but blimey like the shops and tv you've already started in November 😂. 👍🍻
Excellent Video!! I just love how you ask the question: "Where was Lechmere's Extended family?" Excellent Question!! Excellent Research again and it looks like Lechmere started earlier again! By the way gotta say real sharp looking Brown shirt you chose for the video!!
I'm thoroughly convinced about Lechmere, by the way. He's really the only one who makes logical sense. Appreciated the clear way you've presented the evidence.@@thehouseoflechmere9407
It is very strange how you can connect Lechmere to each location in some way. These are definitely starting to become less coincidences for me. True, a lot of this can be seen as speculation, such as if he did actually visit his family etc. But as I said, its very telling that you can connect the Lechmeres to each area and they are always quite close. It can't keep being just a coincidence at this point.
If you don’t cherry pick the murders and indulge in confirmation bias of course… Lechmere is a viable suspect, but there’s a lot of things we don’t know about him. If he had an alibi for this and all the the other murders for example. All we know is that he was at the crime scene of the Mary Ann Nichol’s murder and that he used a different name at the hearing. There can be many possible reasons why he did that. Not to mention that there are other viable suspects as well.
@Legionmint7091 that's true. I've been thinking of why he gave a false name, and it could be just the simple fact he didn't want to be associated with the murder. He could of just thought that after telling Mizen, that the situation would be dealt with and he was afraid he'd be suspected either way because he knew that she had just been killed and since he was caught with the body, he may be wrongly accused. That's why he only came forward when Robert Paul mentioned him as he didn't want to look suspicious. But at that point, if it's true he was afraid of being falsely accused, why not use his real name still? He definitely didn't do himself any favours in my view. But you could then also argue why not come forward straight away if he was Innocent, if Paul didn't mention him and later he did and they realised he didn't come forward, it would definitely look worse for him. But what if he also knew how flawed the police can be from Thomas Cross, his stepfather, a police man, he could of told him of some details of his work, or overheard conversations from him that gave him insider knowledge to the flaws of the police, then there's the public perceptions as well towards police at the time that we have to take into account. This could explain his responses afterwards and perhaps he used the name not only because he knew of the police's flaws but also because he thought it might make him look more respectable as the step son of a police officer, so it would help take away some of the suspicion of the fact he was the one that was caught with the body. Overall, I still find myself siding with a lot of what Edward has said within his videos and based off of what I've seen myself from other sources. There's definitely a lot of red flags that can be attributed to Lechmere than many other suspects and as I said these start becoming less coincidences as more add up. Yes there's still a lot of speculation within these theories, but you can't deny after watching all of these videos, even if they may be biased towards Lechmere, that it is very shocking to see how connected he seems to be to a lot of the murders. Yes, we don't really have solid alibis of where he actually was and hopefully if researchers keep looking, maybe there's some records which could help pin point where he was, but, still, you can potentially place him at pretty much all of the murders and what's more weird is how he lived right next to where a torso was found as well. It honestly doesn't look good for him and Edward does back up his theories with the research and facts on his family which helps his arguments. Unfortunately the truth is we won't ever really know for sure. But I now believe he's the closest to being the Ripper given all I've seen on him, particularly on this channel and I don't know, maybe more evidence will come out that can disprove he was the Ripper but I don't see that being very likely at this point. I say to Edward, keep digging and see if you can find more on him, it will probably be difficult but if you can find some evidence that can potentially pin point where he was somehow, maybe we can get closer to finding out either way. I know that's probably impossible to do for one person, especially during that era but you never know, you've found all this info on him thus far so there's no telling what could be found in the future for any of the suspects.
@@Legionmint7091 I agree, but then again how many coincidences are too many for most people? I am well past my personal total. Even before I read "Cutting Point" Everyone has to make up his or her mind
Another aspect of this that might be interesting is Martha Tabram and Mary Jane Kelly were murdered early in the morning of bank holidays; Harriet Boswell was murdered late on the evening before one. Only Mary Nichols and Annie Chapman had the duplicated throat cuts. Ms. Boswell would be the only victim that was both killed around a holiday and had the two throat cuts. Killing on a bank holiday, considering how important family can be around holidays, could indicate CAL had some serious family problems. This could also have contributed to his excessive mutilation of MJK. Thanks for this video, Ed. It could end up being one the most important.
This is one of my favourite videos of yours. You're very funny. I love the progression of the suspect's appearance, the poor man, he gets more *hideous,* and *creature-like* by the minute! . 😂
I was fascinated to learn that in prior years the Lechmere family was landed gentry. When did the talk about Prince Eddy’s so called involvement start? Was Lechmere already known? I’m wondering whether the landed gentry element encouraged the suspicion of Prince Eddy
I see nice steps towards better editing! Good work! Maybe put like digital puicture of the map which you show and then dots and lines to the places you talk about? Just a quick tip. Very interesting video and I hope to see more of you!
Hi Edward, I've been doing a bit of catching up on your videos on TH-cam. This question relates to the Harriet Lilley and the goods train. I checked the train timetable link that you provided in your comments with Pete Clarke and found it quite difficult to follow. Am I right in saying the relevant part of the timetable is on page 183? If so, is it the train that departs New Cross at "3.08" and not "3.07" as reported? In which case this would, from my understanding of the route, would be destined for "Putney Bridge". If so, this route would NOT have passed by Buck's Row, but would have instead turned just before Buck's Row, travelling underground along Whitechapel Road, never passing by Bucks Row. There is still the vague chance that Harriet Lilley could have heard this train be it that it was much farther away, because the Stroudley locomotives had a loud distinctive sound hence they were nicknamed 'Terriers' because of this. I do agree with you in that she was a Very unreliable witness. On a Side note, if you know the answer, how far is it from Buck's Row street level down to the train track below it?
Side note : I know the column I'm looking at says 3.08 aft (afternoon), but I can't see any morning times. This is probably because it's a commuter/passenger timetable and not a goods one.
I thought about Charles Lechmere growing up next to German immigrants for a bit. In the From Hell letter, there's a word that was always weird to me, he calls Mister Lusk "Mishter" Lusk. Germans pronounce S before T as a Sh. Like Standard is pronounced Shtandard, Stop is often Shtop etc. The writer, whoever it is, seems to be trying to mimic a German accent in the letter.
Or else, following the principles of logical minimalism (AKA, Occam’s Razor), the author of that letter was himself a German or an Ashkenazi Jew, barely literate in English, and was writing more or less phonetically.
@@alexgustavsson5955I’m not a forensic expert, mind, but if I were to judge: the spelling and grammar is at about the same level as that of your average 10 or 11 year old child. “Barely literate” simply means “struggles to read and write”; it is not synonymous with “completely illiterate” and therefore unable to write. So, yes, a barely literate person should be expected to be capable of writing a letter that reads like it was written by someone who is (was) - wait for it - barely literate.
@@feliscorax Yes, and package it with a kidney and send it to a person actively looking for you while also making your natural accent more suspicious. You're hiding your assumptions and biases behind minimalism, as if they're objectively so. By your own account the most likely explanation, by Occam's razor, is that the killer is actually named Jack, known as the Ripper from early childhood, and not the far more likely explanation that he just faked it, just like he's faking the accent in the letter. P.S. Ashkenazi Jew likely won't work, as most of them were form the Russian Empire, even a Yiddish speaker won't work since they don't have the St->Sht sound change, from my limited research. Only an actual German speaker would do. Further reducing the probability of your theory, as fewer people match that description.
@@alexgustavsson5955 Those are fair and valid observations - except for my biases and assumptions, which I’m aware of and already accounted for. What my comment was driving at was that the language aspects are interpretable in another direction. Beyond this, however, there’s the whole question of authenticity with the letter and kidney since the provenance of the latter is impossible to prove. For my part, I lean towards this possibly being the only authentic JtR letter, but in truth, we will never know for sure. On the assumption it is, however, there are some interesting clues in the letter that can be read in numerous ways. For example, just as you cite the use of “Mishter” as indicative that the writer was trying to mask their true identity by appearing to be German, so too might the mis-spelling of “preserved” as “prasarved” be understood as a phonetic spelling of an Irish pronunciation. Let us both speak plainly and honestly for a moment here: the only thing certain here is its uncertainty.
@@thehouseoflechmere9407 Thank you! I don't always see eye to eye with you, but you do excellent videos which are, obviously, well researched and have a 'down to earth' approach to your presentation.
It would be interesting to know if there was a forward blood spatter in this case, or if the victim died by strangulation to stop the heart, thus avoiding the blood spatter when the jugular vein, quite redundantly, was cut (which was the modus operandi of the Whitechapel murderer). I agree that the Whitechapel murderer most likely didn’t start by mutilating women, but almost certainly had killed before, however not necessarily with a knife.
Impeccable research as always. I have to ask a question regarding serial killers: how young is too young to start killing? I am referring to the murder of Emma Jackson at 4 George Street, St Giles in 1863. I believe Lechmere would have been about 14 at the time. Putting our modern sensibilities aside for a moment and remembering just how brutally short childhood was back then do you think his age would disqualify him, or anyone else for that matter. The effort you put into this channel is incredible and much appreciated, thank you.
Fourteen would not be too young. There r people who kill at that age today and as you said childhood was even shorter then. Fourteen was definitely considered a man. Physically he would have had the strength too.
Loads of serial killers allegedly start of by torturing animals when they are young kids so I think 14 is definitely not too young for someone to start killing people. There's a theory that Ted Bundy killed an 8 year old girl (Ann-Marie Burr) in his neighbourhood when he was 14 - her street was a part of his paper round. She was kidnapped from her bedroom but her body was never found and it was never proven that he had anything to do with it. However, when a kidnap victim turns out to have lived just streets away from someone who went on to become a prolific serial killer, I don't think it's a massive leap to suspect him - especially when it's known that he went on to attack some of his other victims in their beds.
That was good info on Ted Bundy I did not know any of this about him. reminded me of Joe Bennet Ramsey, the little girl murdered. But in her case, there was a letter written in a supposedly adult hand. It also shows killers M O.( modus operandi ) so some have similarities and others do not.@@TK-ux5du
Great video Edward, very interesting facts, it all makes sense in your videos and ties in well with the facts. Also interesting about the wax works. CA Lechmere isthe only person who has connections with all these murders, location or people. Keep up the great work.
Excellent analysis as usual. One of the key points for me was that he was able to kill women in in a silent way in close proximity to other people. This is most definitely part of his M.O. and i was thinking about the mimicking of the accent right before you said it. The moving away from his mother due to her new relationship, as well as the relationship itself, could well have acted as triggers to his actions. It would suggest some obsessive connection to his mother, possibly sexually confused in its nature, which may have originated in him witnessing things as a child which connected and intertwined his own sexual identity awakening with that of his mother's sexual behaviour. His 1st experiences of sex could well have been witnessing her in the act, in cramped housing conditions, which would definitely have led to some emotional response on his part, whether it be a sense of abandonment, anger, curiosity, desire, or disgust and rejection. It's hard to know, but the new marriage, his show of possible attention seeking by moving away, followed by the murder, which could be seen as him lashing out at any woman he got the chance to lash out against, all point to this unhealthy connection to his mother in my opinion. Serial killers often have a pattern of killing when triggered, usually by some event which pushes them over the edge that they usually inhabit and hold onto. Loss of a job, end of a relationship,personal upheaval causing insecurity and stress, or some other impactful emotional event, all are triggers that push people who habitually exist on the edge, over that edge and into that dark state in which they then go on to seek relief and expression of all their darkest fantasies and desires partly to avoid and escape the real life emotional upheaval that is triggering them.
I agree that it is highly likely that the Whitechapel killer left a criminal footprint that predates the canonical five, but this one goes a bit too far back for my liking. Now if I am wrong and this was the work of the same man, it would cast significant doubt on Martha Tabram being a Ripper victim. It would suggest that the killer developed a more clinical approach to subduing his victims, a long time before the canonical five.
There always seems to be confusion about what is being said, I note from some of the comments. To be clear, Mr Stow is not claiming hard evidence for everything he is saying, for example Lechmere visiting extended family at Christmas time. Mr Stow is stating the plausibility of this (and other points) using logic and reasoning - such as the rationale that it is “normal” and traditional to visit family at Christmas time. I am stating the obvious, but for reasons I can’t fathom, this is sometimes clearly required. As a side comment, I’d like to take a moment to publicly show my admiration and appreciation of the chest of drawers (or dresser perhaps) in the background of Mr Stow 😂 what a beautiful piece!
Offers for the chest of drawers will be accepted. The table is worth more... probably. I always like to qualify my statements as you have noticed, even if others choose not to.
@@thehouseoflechmere9407 I really lost my temper at the pretence of misunderstanding your points and dishonest arguments against them at silly o'clock this morning! It's relentless absurdities.
Interesting, from what I understand of serial killers they are active often for decades possibly with multi year pauses. I wonder if there are other Ripper type murders in the vicinity of Lechmere through out his life.
Hi Edward - this is Paul Sutton. Many thanks for your video, on my points! Can I reply to your rebuttals somewhere - happy to do to by email. I was banned from the absurd Casebook for having a sense of humour and mocking the nutjobs there! But I'm a Ripper obsessive and welcome your previous video, whilst finding it unconvincing in places. I'll details those, if this gets read! My post was full of praise for the Lechmere work, whilst raising points that worried me. I think it's important to realise that raising objections to a theory is vital, not some form of attack. True, many on the appalling Casebook are dismissive and near-hysterical in their objections to Lechmere. As said, I got banned for slagging them all off - not least by saying that at least the Lechmerites had been both creative and interesting, unlike most of them who nit-pick over minute details but refuse to theorise, under the delusion that everything they do is 'evidence based'. But nobody can expect blind worship of a theory. I think it would be good if you/Christer - both of whom I applaud - were less defensive and seemingly outraged by perfectly valid points. I'd like to respond in depth, but a general observation. I'm VERY familiar with the point: 'But serial killers are just like that - accept it' - used as a trump card. The problem is people combine it with their own detailed logic, then say 'you can't get inside these people's heads', which is a magic wand that can banish anything. It's also an incoherent line of argument - how come you DO seem to be capable of getting inside their heads? What gave you that special insight? In fact - to be pretentious - it's the fallacy of relativism, i.e. claiming all other views are 'relative/subjective not absolute', whilst claiming yours as an absolute one (or alternately, that your own statement is subjective). best, Paul
You can respond here! I don't claim to know absolutely what was going on in his head. I am offering a suggestion as I am kind of expected to do. The suggestions I offer, I would suggest, are within the broad range of possibility. Without being outlandish. The 'you can't get inside these people's heads' retort is valid as you often see naysayers say things like 'it is impossible for someone to respond to such-and-such a situation in that manner'. When they are arguing from their own standpoint as, presumably, a non psychopath. I'm not a world expert on psychopathic behavioural traits but I have looked into the subject at some length, and attended various seminars etc, and I fancy I have a better understanding of the subject than 99.9% of my detractors... if not 100%. Although many are incoherently blindsided by their illogical hatred for the Lechmere theory. One in particular simultaneously argued that anything, in terms of erratic behaviour, was possible for Druitt (eg playing cricket in the west country on 30th August and 1st September and travelling up to London and back in between to murder Nichols). Anyway - do not mistake a robust defence of the Lechmere theory from criticism from any quarter with hyper sensitivity.
Thanks Edward, As said, I admire both your and Christer's work on this - whereas most on the Casebook are just bores who go round in circles, only interested in point scoring and terrified of making bold leaps. The answer of yours I've further questions on is Lechmere NOT claiming to have heard anyone else. I don't think it's at all obvious that, if he'd said he thought he heard vanishing footsteps, it would have entangled him more in the case: 1) He was at the inquest anyway - he was already a focus. 2) How would his claim - if expressed hesitantly - have somehow made him a focus? WHAT was there to focus on, if he said 'I think I heard footsteps, but cannot tell from where. I was so overcome with surprise at finding the body; I was focussed on that.' I can't see why that's risky, but I can see clear advantages in saying it. I know this can be turned round - he didn't' hear footsteps, since he did it. But this would surely occur to any sentient being. Not saying it strongly suggests he heard nothing but didn't need to claim he had. In some ways, Lechmere is my favoured candidate. I'm partly persuaded by your enlargement of the fight/flight dilemma. best, Paul @@thehouseoflechmere9407
@user-ci6mu6sb7t It would probably be more sensible to ask these on the relevant film, but... In my view, Lechmere felt compelled to come forward to exonerate himself after the release of Paul's newspaper interview implicated him. As a consequence he had to attend the inquest. He would not want to magnify his involvement I any way whatsoever after this. His testimony was bland, he adopted a servile humble attitude. Not one newspaper bothered to dwell on any aspect of his testimony. Until the advent of the Lechmere theory no Ripperologist in 120 odd years had given his testimony the slightest attention. In my opinion had he blurted out some unnecessary detail such as hearing footsteps this would not be the case. He was not in ficus. It would have put him in focus. You may choose to believe he was already in focus and a footstep story would have made no difference, but I very strongly beg to differ and I doubt many disinterested people would disagree with my analysis.
I posted here as that's where you said to post! If he'd said he heard footsteps it would hardly be an 'unnecessary detail'; you then say it would have 'put him in focus.' But anyone who finds a body is going to be a focus. You're quite right that Ripperologists have ignored him - and I've endlessly praised Lechmerites for addressing this omission. The important point is: what focus could that really be? It's difficult to see how it would lead anywhere - and very difficult to see how it could cast suspicion on him. If someone claims to have - with some uncertainty - heard footsteps, what more could be probed? What more is there to say? The point is he didn't say this. One explanation is that he found the body and didn't hear them, since there weren't any to hear. Yes, that argues against your theory. But it can't just be dismissed because it does so. Lechmere may not be the killer. I'm one of the 'disinterested people' - I've no preferred candidate. But the Lechmere theory has problems - it would strengthen your position to accept them. I don't see how you can claim it all fits (which doesn't mean it can be dismissed, as too many do). I hope you're not too completely invested in him, to accept any points against? That weakens your overall position. Sure, not amongst people who just say 'you're right'. But there are many who can see that there are some good points for Lech, but not without problems. Notwithstanding, I'd say it's the most complete theory. That's praise - but not unqualified. I'd also say that I'm happier with your reasoning behind him not running. To my mind, you've addressed most of my points, but not really this one. If you're up for further discussion, the other one I'm not satisfied with is: how we cannot know what additional scrutiny the police paid to Lechmere. It doesn't answer that point to just say 'police made lots of mistakes - always do. They may have here.' Yes, they may have - but you're just guessing. As am I, in saying they would have paid him attention. @@thehouseoflechmere9407
@user-ci6mu6sb7t By 'here' I meant on this channel rather than privately by email but I should have been more explicit. If Lechmere had added hearing footsteps, it would have been an unnecessary detail to add to his testimony. And also one that would unessessarily put him in focus. Whether the focus might lead anywhere is irrelevant. It might spike the coroners interest. The press might want to ask him about it. It would lead to more vigorous questioning from the police - all things he would (I presume) want to avoid. People who do naughty things and concoct a cover story are advised to Keep It Simple Stupid. KISS. Do not add details that can lead to extra questions and which may sound like you are trying to alibi yourself... because that just makes you sound potentially guilty. 'I heard footsteps disappearing ahead as I approached Brown's Stable Yard, possibly.' 'Did you or didn't you?' 'I might have done, I'm not sure.' Can you see how ridiculous that sounds? By the way you are anything but disinterested. You are the person who made a series of criticisms of the Lechmere theory. You may have been polite and reasonable in making these criticisms and you may have revised some of them. Not having a preferred suspect doesn't make you disinterested either. What are the 'obvious problems' with the Lechmere theory? Which bits 'don't fit'?
Hope U will delve further into any murders of prostitutes in London and the Inner Boroughs around the Area between 1872 and 1888, Edward....If this was the first murder in 1872, Charles Lechmere was At Large for a very long time and even into the early 1900's....Cheers fm Damo😲👐
@@thehouseoflechmere9407 Awesome Stuff, Edward....Looking Forward to seeing your House Of Lechmere Future Episodes and seeing what U can uncover...Cheers fm Damo😊🙌
Amazing Stuff Edward, though unlikely that JTR was responsible, but U never know....Similar Mystery about the killer leaving few clues for Investigators🤔🤲
Meticulous research. How can anyone can doubt that Lechmere was the Ripper, especially after watching your videos? Some are too wedded to the fanciful stories of foreigners and toffs.He ticks every box of the way a serial killer operates as understood in modern investigations. Interesting physical descriptions that fit Lechmere, including quite handsome, if the de-aged photo is correct. He was younger and may have had acne. It is very likely that he would visit his west end relatives on Christmas Eve and spend Christmas day in the bosom of his family. We also have his signature on his mother's marriage certificate. Wonder how this compares to the letters ,or one of them, although he may have disguised his writing
like all sceptics i need to see the evidence myself and that hasnt been the case. one can and should not say that he was the killer while all the evidence is circumstantial at best and assumption at worst. thats not how this works. do i think Lechmere is the best suspect we will ever have?: yes certainly no1 comes close. does it mean i dont have doubts? no. these are humans we are talking about. Lechmere was and the victims were as well. i think people tend to forget that they are accusing someone of horrible crimes and that should carry a big burden of proof to say with any certainty he was the killer.
These are excellent videos with great information, but I would try to avoid jump cuts within the video. The jarring cuts make it more “amateur”. The presentations are clearly not but som added polish from an editing perspective would help the overall video. Regards!
I doubt whether Lechmere was the culprit of this murder, although it is certainly possible that he was. The consensus among eyewitnesses that the last man with which Harriet Buswell was seen had a German accent and a foreign look undermines the case against Lechmere.
Question for you mate = do you find it hard to pull yourself away from the Jack the Ripper case as you’ve put so much personal investment in it? I would personally be more interested in seeing your thoughts on other unsolved murders that’s all, apart from just JTR alone..feels like a limitation of your investigation skills 👍..maybe zodiac etc. You have any interest in other cases or just this one?
I'm not that much into crime as a genre to be honest - more history - but there are othercsetial killing crimes that interest me as there are stark parallels.
Hello Edward, so all of Lechmere's kids were baptized at St Georges in the east and he was married at Christ church Spitalfields. Make me believe he was a religious fanatic. Take a look at Leviticus 5-7. Cheers!
Interesting i see CL was using his full correct name as a witness on the Marriage certificate 29:19 way back then and he is literate unlike his wife , I am familiar with that "X her mark " i've seen it on my Uncles WW1 army papers he was illiterate too no shame in them days school was not compulsory , when you cannot write your own name It naturally implies the you are stupid but that's not the case . I did not think CL using the surname Cross at the Inquest was much of a hot potato but i do now after seeing his name written by his own hand . Good detective work on this bigamous union btw and linking previous murders.
8:01 Harriet Buswell: “My dear, will you buy me some grapes? I should like some …” “German gentleman”: “Nein, Nein, Nein, Nein, Nein!” (Sorry, had to make my little joke. It’s a pity Hitler wasn’t born until 1889. I can’t think of an alibi more airtight than that.)
Julius streicher was born feb 12th 1885 Charlie chaplin was born april 16th 1889 Adolf hitler was born april 20th 1889 and Oliver hardy jan 18th 1892. Fritz sauckel was born oct 27th 1894. Four different countries same moustache
I wonder whether he used that name knowing it would ally him (as it were) to the right side; the Police? Excellent piece of detective work. Subscribed.
I think I need a little more proof before labelling this as a 'ripper' killing. The evidence is circumstantial at best in my opinion. I do however believe that Lechmere is a damned good candidate for being the perpetrator of the canonical five!
There is absolutely no evidence to link Lechmere with the actual crime. Everything is circumstantial. A Prosecuting Attorney wouldn't seek to bring charges based on the known facts. There has to be something more tangible than a strong gut feeling of suspicion in order to execute a successful outcome.@@crose7412
"The juwes are the men who will not be blamed for nothing". Graffiti that was found near the site where one of the bodies of one of the Rippers victims was found. A Detective had that vital bit of evidence instantly washed off?
Good video hats off for ur research ed.the possiblilty of lechmere gaining anotomical knowledge over the years is one thing but surgical skill- the reason i say this is,well take eddowes for eg. The mobilosation of the small intestine,making a slit in the root of the mesentery(behind the bowels) not pertorating the small intestine.removing a section of the descending colon to access the kidney and invaginating the signoid flexure into the rectum ( like a surgical proceedure). Anyway it looks like more than just a smash and grab. He did this to eddowes in under 9 minutes. I think dr brown said about 5 minutes. Thank you.
He actually did perforate her colon. Somewhere along the line. That piece of apron he cut away, had traces of feces on it. But you make a good point, he knew what he was doing.
Is it possible not only his mother bigamist, but also involved in murders of the wife who died and she moved in within 3 months and murder of past me she had, but were never classed as murder, so go away with it, maybe Charles knew what mum was doing, or just murder was just in his genetic make up, the mothers behaviour and her men, even one of them being a police officer, to give respectability to herself, maybe she a d her son were both murderers but in differant ways
It's a bit way out but think how many killers and deaths, weren't down as murder simply because it didn't look like murder at the time, poisonings especially, what were considered natural deaths at the time
love the video's but i do think we shouldnt forget that Lechmere is innocent untill proven guilty without a doubt. and while i do think its more likely then not that he is responsible for all those horrific murders i do think we should treat the man as if he was innocent like everyone would be untill proven guilty. i feel like we are losing the human connection with the case and tend to forget that all of these people lived at one point and are like you and me a human being with feelings and rights..
I have listened to many documentaries about jack the ripper. What has never been talked about, is that it all ended suddenly in November 1888. Why. This has never been investigated. For example did he die. If he was german did he have to return to Germany, because his passport ran out, or papers what ever they used in those days. Was he forced to live in another part of England. Did he go to an asylum, meaning was he caught and found that he was mad, but nobody realised he was jack the ripper. This was never investigated by police. Welcome your comments on this. He was not worried what he was doing, but the fact it suddenly ended, something happend, and was never investigated properly.
@@walkawaycat431 yes but was he. So many suspects have been given. The point is that it suddenly stopped in November 1888, why. Nobody looked into why. The ripper was not going to stop, something happened in November. Had I been a senior in the police, I would being looking to see who in the Whitechapel area in November suddenly went to asylum, left the country, arrested for something who fitted the discription. Checks were never done.
@philippayne4951 I don't think it stopped. If it did, there are numerous serial killers that took a long break or stopped altogether. Gary Ridgeway, Dennis Rader, Joseph D'Angelo, and the numerous other serial killings across America that are unsolved. Sometimes, these killers age or are incarcerated, medical problems, etc.
@@walkawaycat431 There were no more murders in Whitechapel after November. Something happened, why this stopped happening. There are many scenarios as to why. As said, so many criminology people have all said so people, but who ever it was it suddenly all stopped in November, and nobody knows why.
Sorry, but IMO Jack didn’t live to old age.. In fact, I think he probably died shortly after the Kelly Murder.. And it’s pretty clear Paul originally saw Lechmere in the middle of the street, not in close proximity to the body.. I think it’s a dead end, personally..
something very strange happened after the very last murder he committed. There are so many scenarios that could of accured as to why it all suddenly stopped. There might even been more then one doing these murders, but we will never know, because he was never caught, or was he on a completely different charge, and he was put in an asylum not knowing they had in fact got the ripper. Myself I think there was big cover up, which one day may be exposed.
That’s a lot of detail for something that happened in 1873. There isn’t much detail in cases that happened last week. It’s all a bit of a stretch if you ask me. I think Lechmere is good for the Thames Torso murders, Martha Tabrem, and the canonical five.
A question to ALL: I want to buy a fairly large high quality detailed replica of a map from 1888, or thereabout, showing the contemporary street names in Whitechapel (and neighboring areas if possible). Do you have any suggestions and recommendations where to turn to?
The work that must go into these videos is incredible. I always look forward to them, thank you.
Thank you very much! And next time you are down, come on another tour of the dark side.
I agree they are all interesting to watch. But why did it all suddenly stop in November 1888. He did not care about being caught. Something happened, and it would be interesting to know what.
Love your video series. You are definitely the best Ripper expert that I have ever heard. Thanks for seeking and obtaining some level of justice for the victims.
Thank you Edward once again for your excellent detective work and deductions. Bravo 🎉
Thank you kindly
Thank you for another detailed and well thought out presentation. You bring history to life.
Thank you
As in the case of the Yorkshire Ripper and the Whitechapel murders, here we can see overwhelming and contradictory witness testimonies, made for whatever reason, clouding the issue.
I thought the point about the authorities being fixated and misled by an accent was a very good one. Well done.
Thanks
Let’s say the perp in 1872 was 22 years old. He would then have been 38 in 1888. It works.
Your episodes keep me glued to my phone, unable to get anything else done. Keep digging for more clues, there must be school records, tax papers, or even work papers that are still waiting to be found. No matter how hard we try, there is always something that we leave behind. Excellent investigation Edward!
Thanks
Who do you keep calling about these videos?
Brilliant as always, Edward. Your research is outstanding! Thank you so much. By the way, I bought Cutting Point some time ago after seeing it on your channel and highly recommend it to everyone watching this. 🙏👏
Yes!
Always watching here in NY love this channel thanks for all the hard work
Hey Ed. 1872 the year of the first Thames Torso murder as well. I learned that from Ed’s videos and Christer’s book. I agree with your contention that Lechmere is a viable suspect in this case. I enjoyed the video
No that was 1873... stay tuned...
I sure will. Thanks
Yay, another brilliant video, thank you Edward, so much detail and much more to link together.
Glad you enjoyed it
Fantastic video Edward. So amazing the way you can put these facts together. Enjoy your videos so much.
Glad you like them!
That was fascinating. I followed the argument carefully as you made your case and was thoroughly impressed by the thesis you put forward in the last minutes. I'll have to listen to the video again because it's precise and rich in detail. Thank you for this research.
Thank you
Agreed! Well done Ed!
Excellent episode Edward- and most certainly food for thought. I had not heard of the anatomy exhibition before, it may have been a catalyst for the miscreants bloodlust as you say. I noticed earlier on in the video whilst you were referring to the Mary Kelly murder and Dorset street, a black and white photo of a street scene was used. Was this photograph actually of Dorset street?
Yes it was Dorset Street
@@thehouseoflechmere9407 Thank you Edward. I have never seen that photograph before, much appreciated. I am guessing that is the lodging house on the left side of the photo and Millers court would be on the right?
I enjoy your videos. The research must take you so much time. It does seem unlikely that a vicious murderer would suddenly appear and then just stop. It makes sense for there to have been prior cases and then subsequent escalation. This was very interesting.
Have a great day.
Thank you
Absolute certainty that lechmere started killing earlier
Another brilliant and fascinating video Edward.
Glad you enjoyed it
Almost all serial killers start small. They build up their confidence. Then they do things everybody notices.
Attention to detail is brilliant 👏
The mention of the anatomical museum strikes an interesting parallel with Peter Sutcliffe, the "Yorkshire Ripper", who on family holidays to Morecambe, used to haunt the "Madame Tussauds" waxwork museum there (which I visited before it closed). This museum included a room that contained an "antique" anatomical collection of dissected female bodies that came from exactly the same historical period as those in the Tichmore Street musem, some of which might even have come from the same source. As described in Helen Morrison's book, "My Life among the Serial Killers", he spent so much time in this room, his family dubbed it "Peter's Room".
Oh no I used to go there too. I only lived a couple of miles from Sutcliffe. People from this area often went to Morecambe on holiday.
Yes!
I wonderd why any videos were coming from you... must've taken weeks to research all this. Exciting stuff, you're amazingly knowledgeable on this subject.. love it.
Nice bombe chest of drawers in your house 😊
Another great explanation ,i really enjoy your production's.
Glad you like them!
Excellent video! I’m always a little sceptical at the beginning but the forensic and thorough evidence provided makes each video more and more convincing. Thanks very much 👏👍
Glad you enjoyed it!
Thank you!
Fascinating. I don't know if I agree with him. Though I have no solid factual footing not to. But admire the hell out of the research, the argument, and the fact that he actually brings us an entirely different early murder to consider. I am definitely firmly in the camp that this killer killed before Mary Ann Nichols, the first of the canonical victims. And I've never been convinced that Tabram, who comes closest to fitting the bill, or Smith were those early victims. Now I have to do my own research into this victim. Is it possible he started that much earlier? If nothing else, and there is definitely so much more to this presentation, I'm very excited about that. So, thank you once again for making me think!
Remember Ed said he was 23 at the time. That’s about the age serial killers graduate to attacking people.
Fantastic amount of research and information here Ed. Excellent work, considering its not exactly a very well known case. To me at least. I enjoyed your conclusion/solution. It's definitely worth considering. I'd not heard about that gruesome wax work exhibition before.
A very fitting episode to get in the Christmas festive mood, but blimey like the shops and tv you've already started in November 😂.
👍🍻
Ha yes
Excellent Video!! I just love how you ask the question: "Where was Lechmere's Extended family?" Excellent Question!! Excellent Research again and it looks like Lechmere started earlier again! By the way gotta say real sharp looking Brown shirt you chose for the video!!
It was more blue/green in most of it
Very interesting as always.
Glad you think so!
I'm thoroughly convinced about Lechmere, by the way. He's really the only one who makes logical sense. Appreciated the clear way you've presented the evidence.@@thehouseoflechmere9407
It is very strange how you can connect Lechmere to each location in some way. These are definitely starting to become less coincidences for me. True, a lot of this can be seen as speculation, such as if he did actually visit his family etc. But as I said, its very telling that you can connect the Lechmeres to each area and they are always quite close. It can't keep being just a coincidence at this point.
Exactly!
exactly!
If you don’t cherry pick the murders and indulge in confirmation bias of course…
Lechmere is a viable suspect, but there’s a lot of things we don’t know about him. If he had an alibi for this and all the the other murders for example. All we know is that he was at the crime scene of the Mary Ann Nichol’s murder and that he used a different name at the hearing. There can be many possible reasons why he did that.
Not to mention that there are other viable suspects as well.
@Legionmint7091 that's true. I've been thinking of why he gave a false name, and it could be just the simple fact he didn't want to be associated with the murder. He could of just thought that after telling Mizen, that the situation would be dealt with and he was afraid he'd be suspected either way because he knew that she had just been killed and since he was caught with the body, he may be wrongly accused. That's why he only came forward when Robert Paul mentioned him as he didn't want to look suspicious. But at that point, if it's true he was afraid of being falsely accused, why not use his real name still? He definitely didn't do himself any favours in my view. But you could then also argue why not come forward straight away if he was Innocent, if Paul didn't mention him and later he did and they realised he didn't come forward, it would definitely look worse for him. But what if he also knew how flawed the police can be from Thomas Cross, his stepfather, a police man, he could of told him of some details of his work, or overheard conversations from him that gave him insider knowledge to the flaws of the police, then there's the public perceptions as well towards police at the time that we have to take into account. This could explain his responses afterwards and perhaps he used the name not only because he knew of the police's flaws but also because he thought it might make him look more respectable as the step son of a police officer, so it would help take away some of the suspicion of the fact he was the one that was caught with the body.
Overall, I still find myself siding with a lot of what Edward has said within his videos and based off of what I've seen myself from other sources. There's definitely a lot of red flags that can be attributed to Lechmere than many other suspects and as I said these start becoming less coincidences as more add up. Yes there's still a lot of speculation within these theories, but you can't deny after watching all of these videos, even if they may be biased towards Lechmere, that it is very shocking to see how connected he seems to be to a lot of the murders. Yes, we don't really have solid alibis of where he actually was and hopefully if researchers keep looking, maybe there's some records which could help pin point where he was, but, still, you can potentially place him at pretty much all of the murders and what's more weird is how he lived right next to where a torso was found as well. It honestly doesn't look good for him and Edward does back up his theories with the research and facts on his family which helps his arguments.
Unfortunately the truth is we won't ever really know for sure. But I now believe he's the closest to being the Ripper given all I've seen on him, particularly on this channel and I don't know, maybe more evidence will come out that can disprove he was the Ripper but I don't see that being very likely at this point. I say to Edward, keep digging and see if you can find more on him, it will probably be difficult but if you can find some evidence that can potentially pin point where he was somehow, maybe we can get closer to finding out either way. I know that's probably impossible to do for one person, especially during that era but you never know, you've found all this info on him thus far so there's no telling what could be found in the future for any of the suspects.
@@Legionmint7091 I agree, but then again how many coincidences are too many for most people? I am well past my personal total. Even before I read "Cutting Point" Everyone has to make up his or her mind
Another aspect of this that might be interesting is Martha Tabram and Mary Jane Kelly were murdered early in the morning of bank holidays; Harriet Boswell was murdered late on the evening before one. Only Mary Nichols and Annie Chapman had the duplicated throat cuts. Ms. Boswell would be the only victim that was both killed around a holiday and had the two throat cuts.
Killing on a bank holiday, considering how important family can be around holidays, could indicate CAL had some serious family problems. This could also have contributed to his excessive mutilation of MJK.
Thanks for this video, Ed. It could end up being one the most important.
This is one of my favourite videos of yours. You're very funny.
I love the progression of the suspect's appearance, the poor man, he gets more *hideous,* and *creature-like* by the minute! . 😂
I've suspected for a long time that whoever was Jack the Ripper committed other murders but the link was never made
I was fascinated to learn that in prior years the Lechmere family was landed gentry. When did the talk about Prince Eddy’s so called involvement start? Was Lechmere already known? I’m wondering whether the landed gentry element encouraged the suspicion of Prince Eddy
You are a walking encyclopaedia. Have to say I am impressed.
Enjoyable film. Charles von Lechmere was amongst us!
I see nice steps towards better editing! Good work! Maybe put like digital puicture of the map which you show and then dots and lines to the places you talk about? Just a quick tip. Very interesting video and I hope to see more of you!
Hi Edward,
I've been doing a bit of catching up on your videos on TH-cam.
This question relates to the Harriet Lilley and the goods train. I checked the train timetable link that you provided in your comments with Pete Clarke and found it quite difficult to follow. Am I right in saying the relevant part of the timetable is on page 183? If so, is it the train that departs New Cross at "3.08" and not "3.07" as reported? In which case this would, from my understanding of the route, would be destined for "Putney Bridge". If so, this route would NOT have passed by Buck's Row, but would have instead turned just before Buck's Row, travelling underground along Whitechapel Road, never passing by Bucks Row. There is still the vague chance that Harriet Lilley could have heard this train be it that it was much farther away, because the Stroudley locomotives had a loud distinctive sound hence they were nicknamed 'Terriers' because of this.
I do agree with you in that she was a Very unreliable witness.
On a Side note, if you know the answer, how far is it from Buck's Row street level down to the train track below it?
Side note : I know the column I'm looking at says 3.08 aft (afternoon), but I can't see any morning times. This is probably because it's a commuter/passenger timetable and not a goods one.
Very interesting! Thank you
Another very (or should that be Verey?) interesting video.
When’s the Maria episode due?
Sometime...
The gnashing of teeth on JTR over this film is most amusing
I am hugely impressed by your research Mr Stow. Well done.
I thought about Charles Lechmere growing up next to German immigrants for a bit. In the From Hell letter, there's a word that was always weird to me, he calls Mister Lusk "Mishter" Lusk. Germans pronounce S before T as a Sh. Like Standard is pronounced Shtandard, Stop is often Shtop etc. The writer, whoever it is, seems to be trying to mimic a German accent in the letter.
Or else, following the principles of logical minimalism (AKA, Occam’s Razor), the author of that letter was himself a German or an Ashkenazi Jew, barely literate in English, and was writing more or less phonetically.
@@feliscorax Logical minimalism in your mind is a barely literate person writing a letter?
@@alexgustavsson5955I’m not a forensic expert, mind, but if I were to judge: the spelling and grammar is at about the same level as that of your average 10 or 11 year old child. “Barely literate” simply means “struggles to read and write”; it is not synonymous with “completely illiterate” and therefore unable to write. So, yes, a barely literate person should be expected to be capable of writing a letter that reads like it was written by someone who is (was) - wait for it - barely literate.
@@feliscorax Yes, and package it with a kidney and send it to a person actively looking for you while also making your natural accent more suspicious. You're hiding your assumptions and biases behind minimalism, as if they're objectively so. By your own account the most likely explanation, by Occam's razor, is that the killer is actually named Jack, known as the Ripper from early childhood, and not the far more likely explanation that he just faked it, just like he's faking the accent in the letter.
P.S. Ashkenazi Jew likely won't work, as most of them were form the Russian Empire, even a Yiddish speaker won't work since they don't have the St->Sht sound change, from my limited research. Only an actual German speaker would do. Further reducing the probability of your theory, as fewer people match that description.
@@alexgustavsson5955 Those are fair and valid observations - except for my biases and assumptions, which I’m aware of and already accounted for. What my comment was driving at was that the language aspects are interpretable in another direction. Beyond this, however, there’s the whole question of authenticity with the letter and kidney since the provenance of the latter is impossible to prove. For my part, I lean towards this possibly being the only authentic JtR letter, but in truth, we will never know for sure. On the assumption it is, however, there are some interesting clues in the letter that can be read in numerous ways. For example, just as you cite the use of “Mishter” as indicative that the writer was trying to mask their true identity by appearing to be German, so too might the mis-spelling of “preserved” as “prasarved” be understood as a phonetic spelling of an Irish pronunciation. Let us both speak plainly and honestly for a moment here: the only thing certain here is its uncertainty.
You really have it in for Charles Lechmere. No wonder he was Cross!
Ha
@@thehouseoflechmere9407 Thank you! I don't always see eye to eye with you, but you do excellent videos which are, obviously, well researched and have a 'down to earth' approach to your presentation.
@@MelanieRuck-dq5uo
Keep watching!
So I just got this today as a new video notification.
Good old TH-cam
Hope you enjoyed it!
Another great video,thank you.!🎩👍
It would be interesting to know if there was a forward blood spatter in this case, or if the victim died by strangulation to stop the heart, thus avoiding the blood spatter when the jugular vein, quite redundantly, was cut (which was the modus operandi of the Whitechapel murderer).
I agree that the Whitechapel murderer most likely didn’t start by mutilating women, but almost certainly had killed before, however not necessarily with a knife.
Huge fan thank you! 🙏🏾
Impeccable research as always. I have to ask a question regarding serial killers: how young is too young to start killing? I am referring to the murder of Emma Jackson at 4 George Street, St Giles in 1863. I believe Lechmere would have been about 14 at the time. Putting our modern sensibilities aside for a moment and remembering just how brutally short childhood was back then do you think his age would disqualify him, or anyone else for that matter. The effort you put into this channel is incredible and much appreciated, thank you.
Fourteen would not be too young. There r people who kill at that age today and as you said childhood was even shorter then. Fourteen was definitely considered a man. Physically he would have had the strength too.
I will look at that one!
Loads of serial killers allegedly start of by torturing animals when they are young kids so I think 14 is definitely not too young for someone to start killing people. There's a theory that Ted Bundy killed an 8 year old girl (Ann-Marie Burr) in his neighbourhood when he was 14 - her street was a part of his paper round. She was kidnapped from her bedroom but her body was never found and it was never proven that he had anything to do with it. However, when a kidnap victim turns out to have lived just streets away from someone who went on to become a prolific serial killer, I don't think it's a massive leap to suspect him - especially when it's known that he went on to attack some of his other victims in their beds.
@@thehouseoflechmere9407 Looking forward to finding out what you uncover and hearing your thoughts on the matter.
That was good info on Ted Bundy I did not know any of this about him. reminded me of Joe Bennet Ramsey, the little girl murdered. But in her case, there was a letter written in a supposedly adult hand. It also shows killers M O.( modus operandi ) so some have similarities and others do not.@@TK-ux5du
Great video Edward, very interesting facts, it all makes sense in your videos and ties in well with the facts. Also interesting about the wax works. CA Lechmere isthe only person who has connections with all these murders, location or people. Keep up the great work.
Thanks
Excellent analysis as usual. One of the key points for me was that he was able to kill women in in a silent way in close proximity to other people. This is most definitely part of his M.O. and i was thinking about the mimicking of the accent right before you said it. The moving away from his mother due to her new relationship, as well as the relationship itself, could well have acted as triggers to his actions. It would suggest some obsessive connection to his mother, possibly sexually confused in its nature, which may have originated in him witnessing things as a child which connected and intertwined his own sexual identity awakening with that of his mother's sexual behaviour. His 1st experiences of sex could well have been witnessing her in the act, in cramped housing conditions, which would definitely have led to some emotional response on his part, whether it be a sense of abandonment, anger, curiosity, desire, or disgust and rejection. It's hard to know, but the new marriage, his show of possible attention seeking by moving away, followed by the murder, which could be seen as him lashing out at any woman he got the chance to lash out against, all point to this unhealthy connection to his mother in my opinion. Serial killers often have a pattern of killing when triggered, usually by some event which pushes them over the edge that they usually inhabit and hold onto. Loss of a job, end of a relationship,personal upheaval causing insecurity and stress, or some other impactful emotional event, all are triggers that push people who habitually exist on the edge, over that edge and into that dark state in which they then go on to seek relief and expression of all their darkest fantasies and desires partly to avoid and escape the real life emotional upheaval that is triggering them.
A lot of very good points there...
I agree that it is highly likely that the Whitechapel killer left a criminal footprint that predates the canonical five, but this one goes a bit too far back for my liking. Now if I am wrong and this was the work of the same man, it would cast significant doubt on Martha Tabram being a Ripper victim. It would suggest that the killer developed a more clinical approach to subduing his victims, a long time before the canonical five.
Super , will watch later 👍
There always seems to be confusion about what is being said, I note from some of the comments. To be clear, Mr Stow is not claiming hard evidence for everything he is saying, for example Lechmere visiting extended family at Christmas time. Mr Stow is stating the plausibility of this (and other points) using logic and reasoning - such as the rationale that it is “normal” and traditional to visit family at Christmas time. I am stating the obvious, but for reasons I can’t fathom, this is sometimes clearly required.
As a side comment, I’d like to take a moment to publicly show my admiration and appreciation of the chest of drawers (or dresser perhaps) in the background of Mr Stow 😂 what a beautiful piece!
Offers for the chest of drawers will be accepted. The table is worth more... probably. I always like to qualify my statements as you have noticed, even if others choose not to.
@@thehouseoflechmere9407 I really lost my temper at the pretence of misunderstanding your points and dishonest arguments against them at silly o'clock this morning! It's relentless absurdities.
@@LyraMicki
These things are sent to try us!
she was being sarcastic when she called him handsome. That's classic period working girl humor
6 shillings sounds very expensive for a bag of oranges and some nuts.
If Harriet Buswell was an earlier victim of JtR, why did he murder Martha Tabram by stubbing the body, rather than slitting the throat (twice)?
Serial killers rarely operate by exact determinants
Interesting, from what I understand of serial killers they are active often for decades possibly with multi year pauses. I wonder if there are other Ripper type murders in the vicinity of Lechmere through out his life.
Yes there are
Loved the trocadero as a teen. Free shots inside the entrance, it wasn’t alcohol though. Early 2000’s.
What was it? I'm from Texas. Your comment made me laugh 😅😂
Oh, you're talking about drugs. Swoosh. 😂
Hi Edward - this is Paul Sutton. Many thanks for your video, on my points! Can I reply to your rebuttals somewhere - happy to do to by email. I was banned from the absurd Casebook for having a sense of humour and mocking the nutjobs there!
But I'm a Ripper obsessive and welcome your previous video, whilst finding it unconvincing in places. I'll details those, if this gets read! My post was full of praise for the Lechmere work, whilst raising points that worried me.
I think it's important to realise that raising objections to a theory is vital, not some form of attack. True, many on the appalling Casebook are dismissive and near-hysterical in their objections to Lechmere. As said, I got banned for slagging them all off - not least by saying that at least the Lechmerites had been both creative and interesting, unlike most of them who nit-pick over minute details but refuse to theorise, under the delusion that everything they do is 'evidence based'.
But nobody can expect blind worship of a theory. I think it would be good if you/Christer - both of whom I applaud - were less defensive and seemingly outraged by perfectly valid points.
I'd like to respond in depth, but a general observation. I'm VERY familiar with the point: 'But serial killers are just like that - accept it' - used as a trump card. The problem is people combine it with their own detailed logic, then say 'you can't get inside these people's heads', which is a magic wand that can banish anything. It's also an incoherent line of argument - how come you DO seem to be capable of getting inside their heads? What gave you that special insight?
In fact - to be pretentious - it's the fallacy of relativism, i.e. claiming all other views are 'relative/subjective not absolute', whilst claiming yours as an absolute one (or alternately, that your own statement is subjective).
best,
Paul
You can respond here!
I don't claim to know absolutely what was going on in his head. I am offering a suggestion as I am kind of expected to do. The suggestions I offer, I would suggest, are within the broad range of possibility. Without being outlandish.
The 'you can't get inside these people's heads' retort is valid as you often see naysayers say things like 'it is impossible for someone to respond to such-and-such a situation in that manner'. When they are arguing from their own standpoint as, presumably, a non psychopath.
I'm not a world expert on psychopathic behavioural traits but I have looked into the subject at some length, and attended various seminars etc, and I fancy I have a better understanding of the subject than 99.9% of my detractors... if not 100%. Although many are incoherently blindsided by their illogical hatred for the Lechmere theory. One in particular simultaneously argued that anything, in terms of erratic behaviour, was possible for Druitt (eg playing cricket in the west country on 30th August and 1st September and travelling up to London and back in between to murder Nichols).
Anyway - do not mistake a robust defence of the Lechmere theory from criticism from any quarter with hyper sensitivity.
Thanks Edward,
As said, I admire both your and Christer's work on this - whereas most on the Casebook are just bores who go round in circles, only interested in point scoring and terrified of making bold leaps.
The answer of yours I've further questions on is Lechmere NOT claiming to have heard anyone else. I don't think it's at all obvious that, if he'd said he thought he heard vanishing footsteps, it would have entangled him more in the case:
1) He was at the inquest anyway - he was already a focus.
2) How would his claim - if expressed hesitantly - have somehow made him a focus? WHAT was there to focus on, if he said 'I think I heard footsteps, but cannot tell from where. I was so overcome with surprise at finding the body; I was focussed on that.' I can't see why that's risky, but I can see clear advantages in saying it.
I know this can be turned round - he didn't' hear footsteps, since he did it. But this would surely occur to any sentient being. Not saying it strongly suggests he heard nothing but didn't need to claim he had.
In some ways, Lechmere is my favoured candidate. I'm partly persuaded by your enlargement of the fight/flight dilemma.
best,
Paul
@@thehouseoflechmere9407
@user-ci6mu6sb7t
It would probably be more sensible to ask these on the relevant film, but...
In my view, Lechmere felt compelled to come forward to exonerate himself after the release of Paul's newspaper interview implicated him.
As a consequence he had to attend the inquest. He would not want to magnify his involvement I any way whatsoever after this. His testimony was bland, he adopted a servile humble attitude. Not one newspaper bothered to dwell on any aspect of his testimony. Until the advent of the Lechmere theory no Ripperologist in 120 odd years had given his testimony the slightest attention.
In my opinion had he blurted out some unnecessary detail such as hearing footsteps this would not be the case. He was not in ficus. It would have put him in focus.
You may choose to believe he was already in focus and a footstep story would have made no difference, but I very strongly beg to differ and I doubt many disinterested people would disagree with my analysis.
I posted here as that's where you said to post!
If he'd said he heard footsteps it would hardly be an 'unnecessary detail'; you then say it would have 'put him in focus.' But anyone who finds a body is going to be a focus. You're quite right that Ripperologists have ignored him - and I've endlessly praised Lechmerites for addressing this omission.
The important point is: what focus could that really be? It's difficult to see how it would lead anywhere - and very difficult to see how it could cast suspicion on him. If someone claims to have - with some uncertainty - heard footsteps, what more could be probed? What more is there to say?
The point is he didn't say this. One explanation is that he found the body and didn't hear them, since there weren't any to hear. Yes, that argues against your theory. But it can't just be dismissed because it does so. Lechmere may not be the killer.
I'm one of the 'disinterested people' - I've no preferred candidate. But the Lechmere theory has problems - it would strengthen your position to accept them. I don't see how you can claim it all fits (which doesn't mean it can be dismissed, as too many do).
I hope you're not too completely invested in him, to accept any points against? That weakens your overall position. Sure, not amongst people who just say 'you're right'. But there are many who can see that there are some good points for Lech, but not without problems. Notwithstanding, I'd say it's the most complete theory. That's praise - but not unqualified. I'd also say that I'm happier with your reasoning behind him not running.
To my mind, you've addressed most of my points, but not really this one.
If you're up for further discussion, the other one I'm not satisfied with is: how we cannot know what additional scrutiny the police paid to Lechmere. It doesn't answer that point to just say 'police made lots of mistakes - always do. They may have here.' Yes, they may have - but you're just guessing. As am I, in saying they would have paid him attention.
@@thehouseoflechmere9407
@user-ci6mu6sb7t
By 'here' I meant on this channel rather than privately by email but I should have been more explicit.
If Lechmere had added hearing footsteps, it would have been an unnecessary detail to add to his testimony. And also one that would unessessarily put him in focus.
Whether the focus might lead anywhere is irrelevant. It might spike the coroners interest. The press might want to ask him about it. It would lead to more vigorous questioning from the police - all things he would (I presume) want to avoid.
People who do naughty things and concoct a cover story are advised to Keep It Simple Stupid. KISS. Do not add details that can lead to extra questions and which may sound like you are trying to alibi yourself... because that just makes you sound potentially guilty.
'I heard footsteps disappearing ahead as I approached Brown's Stable Yard, possibly.'
'Did you or didn't you?'
'I might have done, I'm not sure.'
Can you see how ridiculous that sounds?
By the way you are anything but disinterested. You are the person who made a series of criticisms of the Lechmere theory. You may have been polite and reasonable in making these criticisms and you may have revised some of them. Not having a preferred suspect doesn't make you disinterested either.
What are the 'obvious problems' with the Lechmere theory?
Which bits 'don't fit'?
Hope U will delve further into any murders of prostitutes in London and the Inner Boroughs around the Area between 1872 and 1888, Edward....If this was the first murder in 1872, Charles Lechmere was At Large for a very long time and even into the early 1900's....Cheers fm Damo😲👐
Much more still to come...
@@thehouseoflechmere9407 Awesome Stuff, Edward....Looking Forward to seeing your House Of Lechmere Future Episodes and seeing what U can uncover...Cheers fm Damo😊🙌
@@thehouseoflechmere9407 Can't wait Ed.
thank you.
Dear Edward
Just said Harriet is buried in Brompton Cemetery. Do you have any idea were in Brompton Cemetery her grave is please
No idea I'm afraid
Amazing Stuff Edward, though unlikely that JTR was responsible, but U never know....Similar Mystery about the killer leaving few clues for Investigators🤔🤲
Very interesting.
The mos of the other non canonical murders just isn't there.
Meticulous stuff again from Ed 🙏
Meticulous research. How can anyone can doubt that Lechmere was the Ripper, especially after watching your videos? Some are too wedded to the fanciful stories of foreigners and toffs.He ticks every box of the way a serial killer operates as understood in modern investigations. Interesting physical descriptions that fit Lechmere, including quite handsome, if the de-aged photo is correct. He was younger and may have had acne. It is very likely that he would visit his west end relatives on Christmas Eve and spend Christmas day in the bosom of his family. We also have his signature on his mother's marriage certificate. Wonder how this compares to the letters ,or one of them, although he may have disguised his writing
like all sceptics i need to see the evidence myself and that hasnt been the case. one can and should not say that he was the killer while all the evidence is circumstantial at best and assumption at worst. thats not how this works.
do i think Lechmere is the best suspect we will ever have?: yes certainly no1 comes close. does it mean i dont have doubts? no.
these are humans we are talking about. Lechmere was and the victims were as well. i think people tend to forget that they are accusing someone of horrible crimes and that should carry a big burden of proof to say with any certainty he was the killer.
@@TheIsemgrim The huge amount of circumstantial evidence against Lechmere would be most likely to convict him if caught.
Completely agree. I was wondering about the signature matching.
Very interesting Documentary. I did enjoy looking at your half sovereign. Do you own the coin, as it's all part of Victorian history. ?
These are excellent videos with great information, but I would try to avoid jump cuts within the video. The jarring cuts make it more “amateur”. The presentations are clearly not but som added polish from an editing perspective would help the overall video. Regards!
Where do you get your flat caps?
Charity shops
Let those ads roll!
First time I have heard of the dissected Venuses in a Waxworks Museum. Were there lots of places like that in London?
Christer Holmgren talks about it in his book, ‘Cutting Point’. Well worth a read.
Interesting
I doubt whether Lechmere was the culprit of this murder, although it is certainly possible that he was. The consensus among eyewitnesses that the last man with which Harriet Buswell was seen had a German accent and a foreign look undermines the case against Lechmere.
But the police certainly initially suspected several English people
"foreign look" can be faked. So can a bad accent
Carl feigenbaum ??
tenuous points
Question for you mate = do you find it hard to pull yourself away from the Jack the Ripper case as you’ve put so much personal investment in it? I would personally be more interested in seeing your thoughts on other unsolved murders that’s all, apart from just JTR alone..feels like a limitation of your investigation skills 👍..maybe zodiac etc. You have any interest in other cases or just this one?
I'm not that much into crime as a genre to be honest - more history - but there are othercsetial killing crimes that interest me as there are stark parallels.
It sounds like Mara was a real opportunist.
great vid mr stow Have a go at Houston Texas and the sieries in mid America .The parrelel s are similar to jtrs crimes 1888 this is great vid ttfn&ty
If lechmere was JTR (I believe he was), what theories shed light on why he stopped killing?
He didn't stop for a long time
Interesting video, once again his foot prints, are not far from the trail.
Witness saying he had spots isnt explained by your flimsy " that's what they thought murderers looked like" swing and a miss on that point imo.
What sec did lechmere enter this situation
Stayed in the premier inn at St Pancras church right opposite the bus stop
bears a striking resemblance to the Camden Town Murder. Where was Lechmere then?
Hello Edward, so all of Lechmere's kids were baptized at St Georges in the east and he was married at Christ church Spitalfields. Make me believe he was a religious fanatic. Take a look at Leviticus 5-7. Cheers!
I think you’ll find he was married at Christ Church Watney Street.
Thanks for that information.
@@garybarnett583 English people were still believers in that age and time , but of course there were rotten and evil people
Interesting i see CL was using his full correct name as a witness on the Marriage certificate 29:19 way back then and he is literate unlike his wife , I am familiar with that "X her mark " i've seen it on my Uncles WW1 army papers he was illiterate too no shame in them days school was not compulsory , when you cannot write your own name It naturally implies the you are stupid but that's not the case . I did not think CL using the surname Cross at the Inquest was much of a hot potato but i do now after seeing his name written by his own hand . Good detective work on this bigamous union btw and linking previous murders.
Those are brilliant points sir!
Was he born in northampton
Lechmere was born in Central London
8:01 Harriet Buswell: “My dear, will you buy me some grapes? I should like some …”
“German gentleman”: “Nein, Nein, Nein, Nein, Nein!”
(Sorry, had to make my little joke. It’s a pity Hitler wasn’t born until 1889. I can’t think of an alibi more airtight than that.)
Julius streicher was born feb 12th 1885 Charlie chaplin was born april 16th 1889 Adolf hitler was born april 20th 1889 and Oliver hardy jan 18th 1892. Fritz sauckel was born oct 27th 1894. Four different countries same moustache
That's a thing as well, he was the son of a policeman,
Stepson...his mother married Cross bigamously after her first husband abandoned them.
I wonder whether he used that name knowing it would ally him (as it were) to the right side; the Police?
Excellent piece of detective work.
Subscribed.
Did a young Lechmere have an acne problem and a German accent?
1872?
I think I need a little more proof before labelling this as a 'ripper' killing.
The evidence is circumstantial at best in my opinion. I do however believe that Lechmere is a damned good candidate for being the perpetrator of the canonical five!
@NickPenlee What sort of proof would you like to be supplied with?
There is absolutely no evidence to link Lechmere with the actual crime. Everything is circumstantial. A Prosecuting Attorney wouldn't seek to bring charges based on the known facts. There has to be something more tangible than a strong gut feeling of suspicion in order to execute a successful outcome.@@crose7412
He mite of had a lisp
More like a German jew That had a Yiddish accent..
They only live to get radical. They don't have any real understanding of the sea, so they'll never get the spiritual side of it.
@@johngilmore697Sorry?
"The juwes are the men who will not be blamed for nothing". Graffiti that was found near the site where one of the bodies of one of the Rippers victims was found. A Detective had that vital bit of evidence instantly washed off?
@@Occident. Lechmere, or whoever the culprit was, probably wrote that in order to shift the blame on the Jewish community which lived in the area.
Certainly consistent with Sabbatean Frankist moral behaviour, a sect that was quite active in Poland/Germany during the 19th century
Good video hats off for ur research ed.the possiblilty of lechmere gaining anotomical knowledge over the years is one thing but surgical skill- the reason i say this is,well take eddowes for eg. The mobilosation of the small intestine,making a slit in the root of the mesentery(behind the bowels) not pertorating the small intestine.removing a section of the descending colon to access the kidney and invaginating the signoid flexure into the rectum ( like a surgical proceedure). Anyway it looks like more than just a smash and grab. He did this to eddowes in under 9 minutes. I think dr brown said about 5 minutes. Thank you.
“Smash and grab” ha
@@triggerskull or an 'in and out job'.
He actually did perforate her colon. Somewhere along the line. That piece of apron he cut away, had traces of feces on it.
But you make a good point, he knew what he was doing.
@@davesmith7432 thanks
Is it possible not only his mother bigamist, but also involved in murders of the wife who died and she moved in within 3 months and murder of past me she had, but were never classed as murder, so go away with it, maybe Charles knew what mum was doing, or just murder was just in his genetic make up, the mothers behaviour and her men, even one of them being a police officer, to give respectability to herself, maybe she a d her son were both murderers but in differant ways
It's a bit way out but think how many killers and deaths, weren't down as murder simply because it didn't look like murder at the time, poisonings especially, what were considered natural deaths at the time
Is there any photos of lechmeres mum?
No
Perv
love the video's but i do think we shouldnt forget that Lechmere is innocent untill proven guilty without a doubt.
and while i do think its more likely then not that he is responsible for all those horrific murders i do think we should treat the man as if he was innocent like everyone would be untill proven guilty.
i feel like we are losing the human connection with the case and tend to forget that all of these people lived at one point and are like you and me a human being with feelings and rights..
Feels like a hell of a reach, but it’s another coincidence for the already large pile, so it could be right.
I have listened to many documentaries about jack the ripper. What has never been talked about, is that it all ended suddenly in November 1888. Why. This has never been investigated. For example did he die. If he was german did he have to return to Germany, because his passport ran out, or papers what ever they used in those days. Was he forced to live in another part of England. Did he go to an asylum, meaning was he caught and found that he was mad, but nobody realised he was jack the ripper. This was never investigated by police. Welcome your comments on this. He was not worried what he was doing, but the fact it suddenly ended, something happend, and was never investigated properly.
Charles Allen Lechmere is suspected of being the Thames torso murderer as well.
@@walkawaycat431 yes but was he. So many suspects have been given. The point is that it suddenly stopped in November 1888, why. Nobody looked into why. The ripper was not going to stop, something happened in November. Had I been a senior in the police, I would being looking to see who in the Whitechapel area in November suddenly went to asylum, left the country, arrested for something who fitted the discription. Checks were never done.
@philippayne4951 I don't think it stopped. If it did, there are numerous serial killers that took a long break or stopped altogether. Gary Ridgeway, Dennis Rader, Joseph D'Angelo, and the numerous other serial killings across America that are unsolved. Sometimes, these killers age or are incarcerated, medical problems, etc.
@@walkawaycat431 There were no more murders in Whitechapel after November. Something happened, why this stopped happening. There are many scenarios as to why. As said, so many criminology people have all said so people, but who ever it was it suddenly all stopped in November, and nobody knows why.
@@walkawaycat431 yes but why did it all suddenly stop in November. He did not care about being caught, I do believe something happened but what.
Sorry, but IMO Jack didn’t live to old age.. In fact, I think he probably died shortly after the Kelly Murder.. And it’s pretty clear Paul originally saw Lechmere in the middle of the street, not in close proximity to the body..
I think it’s a dead end, personally..
something very strange happened after the very last murder he committed. There are so many scenarios that could of accured as to why it all suddenly stopped. There might even been more then one doing these murders, but we will never know, because he was never caught, or was he on a completely different charge, and he was put in an asylum not knowing they had in fact got the ripper. Myself I think there was big cover up, which one day may be exposed.
First newspaper article states Paul as saying the man up ahead (Lechmere) was "standing where the woman was".
Bucks Row is very narrow. "Where the woman was" or "in the middle of the road" wouldn't make much difference.
@@philippayne4951There is a precedent for mass murderers who stop killing. Anyway, the Thames Torso Murders continued into the nineties.
@@noahbrock349
Yes it would. I've been there. Where the woman was is in the obvious LEFT of the street, not in the middle.
It seems strange that he would go from a successful indoor murder to doing poorly-controlled outdoor murders.
They were also successful
@@thehouseoflechmere9407 have u written any books on the subject of jack the ripper?
@@thedisabledwelshman9266
In the process
@@thehouseoflechmere9407 Neither Polly or Stride were successful, judging by his... portfolio.
@@thehouseoflechmere9407 then i will definately be buying it when it comes out.
That’s a lot of detail for something that happened in 1873. There isn’t much detail in cases that happened last week. It’s all a bit of a stretch if you ask me. I think Lechmere is good for the Thames Torso murders, Martha Tabrem, and the canonical five.
A question to ALL:
I want to buy a fairly large high quality detailed replica of a map from 1888, or thereabout, showing the contemporary street names in Whitechapel (and neighboring areas if possible).
Do you have any suggestions and recommendations where to turn to?
Edward Stow.
I'm not sure about paper maps, although the Scottish Library has a selection of old O.S. maps, including an 1894 version.
@@noahbrock349 Thank you.
You could search for an actual old map, maybe AbeBooks have a section, or an internet search for dealers in these?