Cutting Point: Solving the Jack the Ripper and the Thames Torso Murders

by Christer Holmgren, Nicolas Krizan (Cover Art)

In Victorian London, long before the term serial killer was coined, two series of murders played out that have captured the imagination of the whole world. The Jack the Ripper murders and the Thames Torso murders, so similar to each other, took place during the same period in London and have never been solved. In this book, journalist and researcher Christer Holmgren explains why the murders were never cleared up and names the East End carman Charles Lechmere as the culprit behind both series of murders. He was a man who claimed he found Jack the Ripper's first victim, but avoided to give his true name to the police. In the 2014 TV documentary The Missing Evidence -- Jack the Ripper, the case for Charles Lechmere as the Ripper was outlined. In it, a prominent barrister stated that the case would have been good enough to take to court. This makes Lechmere stand out amongst the many suspects named over the his is a case where it can be practically demonstrated how he is linked to the murders. More recent research suggests that Charles Lechmere also needs to be held responsible for the Thames Torso murder series, spanning the years 1873-1889. Guided by the help of experts, Holmgren links the cases together, establishes the underlying inspiration behind them, and beckons the originator of the murders out into the light, a century after his death.

Genres: True Crime

206 pages, Hardcover

Published February 7, 2023

Reviews

[Tdonahue · Rating 5 out of 5]

Holmgren ruffled feathers in the Ripperology Community. Extensive research paid dividends as he proved two things: 1) Mr. Charles Lechmere, first to “discover” JTR’s first canonical victim, was the likely killer, and 2) Lechmere’s route to work and Whitechapel history made him viable suspect for all JTR victims.

Outstanding work !

[Steve · Rating 5 out of 5]

Christer Holmgren builds a convincing case linking Charles Lechmere to the Whitechapel murders of the late 1880's. Whether or not Holmgren is right, Lechmere makes for a far better suspect than the vast majority of suspects ever considered.

[Deborah · Rating 5 out of 5]

I think he has a compelling argument. We will never know for sure who committed these crimes since they happened almost 133 years ago; however, I think this author makes a strong case in this book.

[Simon Zohhadi · Rating 3 out of 5]

Just finished reading Cutting Point. Its quality really depends on whether or not the author’s Jack the Ripper candidate is him or not. Linking the Jack the Ripper murders with the torso killings takes some convincing, and in my opinion, Holmgren fails in this respect. The powers that be dismissed a link and the author relies upon partial similarities in the modus operandi. Okay, two serial killers on the go at the same time in London would be unusual but no less convincing than the idea that one killer was responsible for both series of murders. The best piece of evidence is the fact that it is known Lechmere was present as a witness just after a Ripper attack (or as argued) at the time of the killing as he was the killer himself; this all comes down to the blood flow and coagulation from Polly Nichols sustained from having her throat and abdomen cut. The timing suggest that Lechmere was likely to have been with the victim at the time. Either Lechmere was the infamous Jack the Ripper or an innocent witness and good citizen who was unlucky to have found her body, just after her attacker had fled, and notified the next witness at the scene and the policeman on the beat. The bulk of the other evidence has to do with the fact that Lechmere lived and worked in the area and his two main routes to work coincided with the locations of several victims. This location proximity theory does not convince me as there are many people who live and work in the same area. Yes, criminal profilers and the police often look at this to zone in on likely suspects but doesn’t it make more sense to kill victims away from home to avoid the likelihood of being identified? What I would say is that Lechmere is as likely a suspect as any other and the fact that he was definitely present at one of the murder sites when the victim was still bleeding gives him a unique place in ripperology. My own view is that the real Jack the Ripper has never been named or considered by the police at the time or one of several hundred suspects put forward over the last 140 years or so. Worth reading.

[Nicky Warwick · Rating 5 out of 5]

I have long been fascinated by the Jack the Ripper crimes probably, as everyone else who is interested in them is, because they were never solved. Had they been they would most likely have disappeared from our consciousness as every other Victorian solved crime has.
I have probably read upwards of a dozen books by different authors all of whom promote their own favoured suspect. Some are relatively sensible, & some are just ridiculous, but none present any credible ‘evidence’ to support their claims.
Mr Holmgren does. Albeit circumstantial (as it can only be at this remove in time) the evidence he presents lead to only one conclusion. This is that the man found by Polly Nichols body by a passer-by is the most credible person to be the Ripper.
That man is Charles Allen Lechmere. A carman for Pickfords & investigation into him leads to an overwhelming amount of circumstantial evidence.
In fact there are over 20 coincidences’ that would have to be overcome to prove he was NOT the Ripper.
For me the case is now most definitely closed.

[Thom · Rating 3 out of 5]

Sorry to say I am with the naysayers here. I was greatly impressed with the Jack the Ripper documentary episode of Missing Evidence back in 2015 and have watched it quite a few times. Although there were obvious holes in his theory, he was right - the whole Charles Lechmere incident would today warrant considerable interest by the police.

I had hope one day he might flesh out this with information more fully linking CL with the other crimes. I mostly don't see that here.

I also agree that linking CL with the Thames Torso Murders weakens his argument. The book smacks of being in need of filler in order to gain publication - fair enough, but it's not the right sort of filler.

Shame. Nevertheless I still think he may be onto something where Charles Lechmere is concerned.

[Sue Burden · Rating 4 out of 5]

I have been waiting for this book to be written since the documentary 'The Missing Evidence.' Both book and documentary put across a very good evidence based investigation of Charles Lechmere being Jack The Ripper.
The books goes a step further trying to argue that the Ripper and Thames Torso Killer were the same person. There are a few leaps that are purely hear say, but as we are 130 years on from these cold cases and they were committed in a time of no forensics and phycology was in it's infancy. Definitely the strongest evidence for an individual being identified as the Ripper and it is crazy the Victorian police did not even flag any interest in Charles Lechmere.
Definitely worth reading if the Ripper murders intrigue you and a introduction to the Thames Torso Murders.

[Jace Killjoy · Rating 5 out of 5]

Over 20 years ago in college I was researching the case for many papers and always had the same question, "why wasn't Charles Cross questioned further after the inquest? " Mr Holmgren pursued that same question with more resources than I had as a young college student trying to balance school and full time jobs. Holmgren uncovers enough circumstantial evidence that I'm sure if Charles Lechmere was arrested today, we would have caught our Ripper and Torso killer.

[Macka · Rating 4 out of 5]

I really enjoyed this. There was some over explaining to get points across, which I understand given the number of theories and diehards out there, but it made it a little heavy for the casual reader.

The math was the more convincing part for me, looking at the chances of all the ripper murders being on routes that he frequented, then also the chances of two serial killers working the same area (although this is not impossible and has happened several times).

I would've liked to have seen this split a little better, into:

1. ripper murders, who did it, timeline, evidence etc.
2. Then why the murders are connected to the torso murders.
3. Then repeat step one for torso murders. - but this is where it fell short for me, and I guess its because the location of the torso murders was never found. A great argument was made for the suspected murder house, but the layering of maps etc. that was done for the Ripper murders was not there.

Other than these points it was well argued and made for a good read if you are interested in the subject.