Jack The Ripper Forums  - Ripperology For The 21st Century  

Go Back   Jack The Ripper Forums - Ripperology For The 21st Century > The Victims > The Pinchin Street Torso

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old April 12th, 2013, 04:40 AM   #1
Christer Holmgren
Researcher
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 3,306
Default Charles Lechmere and the Pinchin Street torso

Brought over from another thread, hereīs a post that explores the possible links between the carman Charles Lechmere and the body found in a railway arch on Pinchin Street in September 1889:

If one speculates that Charles Lechmere was the Ripper, then the Pinchin Street torso is a case one cannot dismiss out of hand as having been a deed of Lechmereīs. That is not to say that there can be any certainty that this was so.

Keeping it as short as possible:

-The torso was found at a very short distance from Lechmereīs motherīs dwellings in Cable Street.
-Phillips said that there were great similarities (or something to that effect) in how the neck had been cut, comparing it to Kelly.
-The police worked from the assumption that the killer had come from the south (the Cable Street side), since there was fencing about that made it less credible that he had come from the north.
-Lechmereīs mother ran a catīs meat business in 1891. When she started out in the business has not been established. But she would have had access to tools useful in dismembering a corpse.
-At the approximate time of the murder, I believe Lechmereīs motherīs husband, Joseph Forsdyke, was very ill and hospitalized, thus she was perhaps tending him in the hospital, leaving her flat uninhabited.
-The Pinchin Street torso killing deviates from the other torso slayings, in that there was no distributing of body parts all over town discovered. It was therefore perhaps never performed in this manner.
-It was thought by the police that the torso had been carried manually to where it was found in a sack, and not by means of transporting it on a horse-drawn carriage. No such carriage was heard or noticed (there were three men sleeping in the arch adjacent to where the torso was found), and there were marks on the body that seemed to tally with have being set off by the coarse cloth in a sack. And if the body was carried there manually, then one would not expect the transport distance to have been anything but short. And the distance from 147 Cable Street to the arch was very short.
-There was a gash in the abdomen of the victim.

Now, I may have gotten something wrong here, since I am working from the top of my head. And - as I said - I am not at all certain that she belongs to the Ripperīs tally. I feel she MAY have, and I would include her if I must guess. But God knows there are many, many differences that are hard to explain. Had it not been for the Pinchin Street case (and my stance that Lechmere makes a good bid for the Ripperīs role), there would be nothing much to cling on to to couple the two series.

All the best,
Christer
Christer Holmgren is online now   Reply With Quote
Old April 12th, 2013, 04:53 AM   #2
Christer Holmgren
Researcher
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 3,306
Default

From another thread, a post by Tom Wescott:

I'm curious as to Ed's suggestion that Lech alone out of all the suspects meets the criteria of the torso killer. Presumably he's looked at some of the other torso cases as well.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott


I think we must leave it to Edward to elaborate on this. As I have already said, to my mind the possible connection lies in the Pinchin Street deed, whereas the other torso killings do not readily lend themselves to an interpretation of being the Ripperīs.

Of course, if one accepts the chain of thought I speak of, that Lechmere may have been the killer and that there are obvious reasons to look at the Pinchin Street case in this context, then it becomes apparent that one must also take a renewed look at all the torso cases.
There is also the fact that Lechmere was a carman, presumably bouncing between Pickfords depots. And there was a depot not far from Rainham, for exemple. And there was a uterus missing in the Whitehall case.

But all in all, the details that may couple the other torso cases, apart from the Pinchin Street one, to Lechmere are faint, as far as I have been able to conclude. I donīt know how deep Edward has delved into the matter, and if he has more to add in this errand.

All the best,
Christer
Christer Holmgren is online now   Reply With Quote
Old April 12th, 2013, 10:21 AM   #3
Rob Clack
Author/Researcher
 
Rob Clack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,242
Default

Hi Christer,

I had done a bit of research into Whitehall and Pinchin Street about a year or so back, but going from memory:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Christer Holmgren View Post
-The police worked from the assumption that the killer had come from the south (the Cable Street side), since there was fencing about that made it less credible that he had come from the north.
I don't believe they did make that assumption, unless I've forgotten it, but from research I have done(looking at maps and walking the area), it's impossible to say which way he came to dump the torso. I will say that it is my opinion that it is very unlikely he came from the southern end of Back Church Lane.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Christer Holmgren View Post
-The Pinchin Street torso killing deviates from the other torso slayings, in that there was no distributing of body parts all over town discovered. It was therefore perhaps never performed in this manner.
Well obviously the other parts were dumped somewhere, they have just never been found.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Christer Holmgren View Post
-It was thought by the police that the torso had been carried manually to where it was found in a sack, and not by means of transporting it on a horse-drawn carriage. No such carriage was heard or noticed (there were three men sleeping in the arch adjacent to where the torso was found), and there were marks on the body that seemed to tally with have being set off by the coarse cloth in a sack. And if the body was carried there manually, then one would not expect the transport distance to have been anything but short. And the distance from 147 Cable Street to the arch was very short.
It's possible that a cart was used to the entrance of the arch and the body was carried from there.

Regards

Rob
Rob Clack is online now   Reply With Quote
Old April 12th, 2013, 11:15 AM   #4
Chris G.
Registered User
 
Chris G.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Baltimore, Maryland
Posts: 12,633
Default

Hi Christer

I would think that my reaction to the idea that Lechmere could have been the killer of the woman who was the Pinchin Street Torso victim might be similar to how others will feel about the notion -- like a body rejecting a transplanted organ. Also, while the acts of serial killers are clearly bizarre and twisted, the idea that the killer might deposit his victim's remains near his mother's front door seems particularly twisted and unlikely. Just my gut reaction.

Best regards

Chris
__________________
Christopher T. George
Organizer, RipperCon 2018 in Baltimore
http://blog.casebook.org/chrisgeorge
For info about RipperCon in Baltimore, MD,
April 7-8, 2018, go to http://rippercon.com/
Chris G. is online now   Reply With Quote
Old April 12th, 2013, 03:09 PM   #5
Tom_Wescott
Researcher and Award Winning Author
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Tulsa, Ok. USA
Posts: 5,182
Default

Hi Christer. I appreciate the research you've put into this, particularly the bits about Lechmere's mother and stepfather. I personally don't think that all the torso cases could be related. Some go back to 1874 and I believe there were cases far beyond 1890. And I don't believe there's a 'canon' to go by as a guide. But I do think we're compelled to conclude that at least a few cases were perpetrated by the same man/men. This person was very keen on making sure the women were not identified. He was in no rush in his 'operation' on the victims and in no danger of discovery, so clearly he had rooms. He had a dark sense of humor and put himself at greater risk than necessary, in some cases, in disposing of the body parts.

All in all I see some strong similarities between the Torso man and JTR, but I also see stark difference. JTR took great risk in committing his murders, but he wanted them found, and couldn't care less if the women were identified. This means one of two things: 1) We're looking at different killers with different motives, or 2) we're looking at the same killer(s) operating from different motives.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott
Tom_Wescott is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 12th, 2013, 06:56 PM   #6
Trevor Marriott
Author & Researcher
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,995
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom_Wescott View Post
Hi Christer. I appreciate the research you've put into this, particularly the bits about Lechmere's mother and stepfather. I personally don't think that all the torso cases could be related. Some go back to 1874 and I believe there were cases far beyond 1890. And I don't believe there's a 'canon' to go by as a guide. But I do think we're compelled to conclude that at least a few cases were perpetrated by the same man/men. This person was very keen on making sure the women were not identified. He was in no rush in his 'operation' on the victims and in no danger of discovery, so clearly he had rooms. He had a dark sense of humor and put himself at greater risk than necessary, in some cases, in disposing of the body parts.

All in all I see some strong similarities between the Torso man and JTR, but I also see stark difference. JTR took great risk in committing his murders, but he wanted them found, and couldn't care less if the women were identified. This means one of two things: 1) We're looking at different killers with different motives, or 2) we're looking at the same killer(s) operating from different motives.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott
Before you get too carried away talking about murders I think you should first establish that the torsos were the subject of murders and not something else less sinister.
Trevor Marriott is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 12th, 2013, 06:58 PM   #7
Monty
Author, Researcher, God.
 
Monty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 3,364
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Trevor Marriott View Post
Before you get too carried away talking about murders I think you should first establish that the torsos were the subject of murders and not something else less sinister.
Less sinister?

That's one hell of a slip of a knife Trev. Or were they dismembered at the mortuary?

Monty
__________________
Author of Capturing Jack the Ripper

http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/aw/d/1445621622


Co-Author of Sir Howard Vincent's Police Code 1889

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Howard-Vince.../dp/0993180604
Monty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 12th, 2013, 07:12 PM   #8
Debra Arif
Sausage brain
 
Debra Arif's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 8,271
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Trevor Marriott View Post
Before you get too carried away talking about murders I think you should first establish that the torsos were the subject of murders and not something else less sinister.
It was established legally in the case of two of them at their inquests.
Debra Arif is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 12th, 2013, 07:22 PM   #9
Debra Arif
Sausage brain
 
Debra Arif's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 8,271
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom_Wescott View Post
Hi Christer. I appreciate the research you've put into this, particularly the bits about Lechmere's mother and stepfather. I personally don't think that all the torso cases could be related. Some go back to 1874 and I believe there were cases far beyond 1890. And I don't believe there's a 'canon' to go by as a guide. But I do think we're compelled to conclude that at least a few cases were perpetrated by the same man/men. This person was very keen on making sure the women were not identified. He was in no rush in his 'operation' on the victims and in no danger of discovery, so clearly he had rooms. He had a dark sense of humor and put himself at greater risk than necessary, in some cases, in disposing of the body parts.

All in all I see some strong similarities between the Torso man and JTR, but I also see stark difference. JTR took great risk in committing his murders, but he wanted them found, and couldn't care less if the women were identified. This means one of two things: 1) We're looking at different killers with different motives, or 2) we're looking at the same killer(s) operating from different motives.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott
Drs. Bond and Hebbert linked the Rainham, Whitehall,Jackson and Pinchin Street cases specifically (Bond worked on earlier cases) by the two implements used , a sharp knife and fine toothed saw, the fact that all the joints were neatly disarticulated and not hacked open with an axe as in previous cases, the remains were dismembered shortly after death and none of the remains in these four cases had been burned or boiled prior to dumping.
If one compares the description of Jackson's mutilations as described by Hebbert and Bond, with MJk's they are strikingly similar-more so than the neck injuries between MJK and the Pinchin Street victim.

Bond and Hebbert did put the expertise shown down to a butcher or knacker as a medical man never gets to practice opening joints and removing limbs very often and this guy looked practised.

Pickford's didn't have a depot at Chelsea though where Jackson's killer supposedly had a place.
Debra Arif is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 13th, 2013, 12:24 AM   #10
Tom_Wescott
Researcher and Award Winning Author
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Tulsa, Ok. USA
Posts: 5,182
Default

Thanks, Debs. Very informative and good food for thought.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott
Tom_Wescott is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:19 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.10 Beta 2
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright @ Howard & Nina Brown 2015-2022