Casebook: Jack the Ripper - Main
   

Introduction
Victims
Suspects
Witnesses
Ripper Letters
Police Officials
Official Documents
Press Reports
Victorian London
Message Boards
Ripper Media
Authors
Dissertations
Timelines
Games & Diversions
Photo Archive
Ripper Wiki
Casebook Examiner
Ripper Podcast
About the Casebook

Most Recent Posts:
Motive, Method and Madness: Same motive = same killer - by Fisherman 3 minutes ago.
Motive, Method and Madness: Same motive = same killer - by Harry D 11 minutes ago.
Motive, Method and Madness: Same motive = same killer - by Fisherman 23 minutes ago.
Motive, Method and Madness: Same motive = same killer - by Fisherman 25 minutes ago.
Motive, Method and Madness: Same motive = same killer - by Fisherman 29 minutes ago.
Motive, Method and Madness: Same motive = same killer - by Fisherman 45 minutes ago.

Most Popular Threads:
Motive, Method and Madness: Same motive = same killer - (22 posts)
Maybrick, James: Acquiring A 20th Century Word Processor - (8 posts)
Maybrick, James: Acquiring a Life - (7 posts)
Maybrick, James: Acquiring A Victorian Diary - (4 posts)
Maybrick, James: One Incontrovertible, Unequivocal, Undeniable Fact Which Refutes the Diary - (3 posts)
A6 Murders: A6 Rebooted - (2 posts)

Wiki Updates:
Robert Sagar
Edit: Chris
May 9, 2015, 12:32 am
Online newspaper archives
Edit: Chris
Nov 26, 2014, 10:25 am
Joseph Lawende
Edit: Chris
Mar 9, 2014, 10:12 am
Miscellaneous research resources
Edit: Chris
Feb 13, 2014, 9:28 am
Charles Cross
Edit: John Bennett
Sep 4, 2013, 8:20 pm

Most Recent Blogs:
Mike Covell: A DECADE IN THE MAKING.
February 19, 2016, 11:12 am.
Chris George: RipperCon in Baltimore, April 8-10, 2016
February 10, 2016, 2:55 pm.
Mike Covell: Hull Prison Visit
October 10, 2015, 8:04 am.
Mike Covell: NEW ADVENTURES IN RESEARCH
August 9, 2015, 3:10 am.
Mike Covell: UPDDATES FOR THE PAST 11 MONTHS
November 14, 2014, 10:02 am.
Mike Covell: Mike’s Book Releases
March 17, 2014, 3:18 am.

Go Back   Casebook Forums > Ripper Discussions > Suspects > Hutchinson, George

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #211  
Old 12-17-2017, 02:24 PM
Sam Flynn Sam Flynn is online now
Casebook Supporter
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Wales
Posts: 9,468
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wickerman View Post
Hi Joshua.

I don't have a link, I have the copy downloaded from JTRForums, but here is a quote with the relevant paragraphs:

[i]...Bowyer, the young man in Mr. McCarthy's employ was out at different times up Miller's-court on the Thursday night for the purpose of getting water from a tap there-the only available supply.
Bowyer was no young man at the time. I wonder if newspaper reports like these were the source of Walter Dew's incorrect belief that Bowyer was a "youth"?
__________________
Kind regards, Sam Flynn

"Suche Nullen" (Nietzsche, Götzendämmerung, 1888)
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #212  
Old 12-17-2017, 02:41 PM
Wickerman Wickerman is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 9,027
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam Flynn View Post
The good news is that I don't subscribe to that view, CD. One doesn't need to be incompetent to be taken in by a plausible liar - I'm sure that an experienced detective like George Oldfield wasn't incompetent at all, but he and some of his colleagues were well taken in by the "Wearside Jack" hoax letters and tape recording.
I think the point that several of us have been at pains to hi-lite is, that these personal suspicions like "you think" he lied, are nothing more than guesswork.
As with any investigation, whether it be ancient historical analysis or more recent murder investigations, the only credible arguments come from the evidence - not from idle speculation.
Let the evidence speak for itself, do not replace the evidence with conjecture - but that is precisely what the 'anti-Hutchinson' crowd are and have been doing from day one!

There is not, nor has there ever been, any indication Hutchinson lied, or made anything up. This is idle speculation. What exists in the court records & press testimony from the inquest, plus witness statements in the press is all we have by way of evidence.

The 'anti-Hutchinson' crowd, dismiss what doesn't support their theories in favor of idle speculation, but criticize bonafide arguments based on the existing evidence. That is the topsy-turvy world of Casebook, and one of the significant reasons the more knowledgeable authors no longer frequent Casebook.
__________________
Regards, Jon S.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #213  
Old 12-17-2017, 02:49 PM
Wickerman Wickerman is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 9,027
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam Flynn View Post
Bowyer was no young man at the time. I wonder if newspaper reports like these were the source of Walter Dew's incorrect belief that Bowyer was a "youth"?
I know the term "errand boy" was used for anyone who did the runaround jobs like Bowyer, the label does not reflect the age of the person so named.
__________________
Regards, Jon S.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #214  
Old 12-17-2017, 03:01 PM
Sam Flynn Sam Flynn is online now
Casebook Supporter
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Wales
Posts: 9,468
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wickerman View Post
I think the point that several of us have been at pains to hi-lite is, that these personal suspicions like "you think" he lied, are nothing more than guesswork.
It is emphatically not guesswork or "idle speculation", Jon. Hutchinson's actions, as he recounts them, are bizarre, his story is incredibly (as in "unbelievably") detailed and some of it has parallels with what had been circulating in the press - and on the streets - throughout the Autumn of Terror.

For the record, I do not "guess", nor do I "idly speculate". If I believe something, then it's usually because I've given it years and years of thought. I also resent the implication that I am somehow partly responsible for "one of the significant reasons [why] the more knowledgeable authors no longer frequent Casebook". The latter is probably because of the sometimes adversarial nature of the postings of some of the otherwise knowledgeable authors who DO post here, but it's more likely due to the fact that the more knowledgeable authors have other things to do.
__________________
Kind regards, Sam Flynn

"Suche Nullen" (Nietzsche, Götzendämmerung, 1888)
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #215  
Old 12-17-2017, 03:58 PM
Bridewell Bridewell is offline
Assistant Commissioner
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Bottesford, Leicestershire
Posts: 3,633
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam Flynn View Post
It is emphatically not guesswork or "idle speculation", Jon. Hutchinson's actions, as he recounts them, are bizarre, his story is incredibly (as in "unbelievably") detailed and some of it has parallels with what had been circulating in the press - and on the streets - throughout the Autumn of Terror.
However unbelievable Hutchinson's account may be to the modern reader, the fact is that Abberline recorded, in writing, that he was 'of opinion his (Hutchinson's) story is true'. It may have been true or it may not. When first given however - to a police officer who knew the ground as well as anyone - the account was believed. It may have been false, and the belief may or may not have persisted. Clearly though, as it was believed when given, it was not 'unbelievable'.
__________________
Regards, Bridewell.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #216  
Old 12-17-2017, 04:01 PM
Abby Normal Abby Normal is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 5,891
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wickerman View Post
I think the point that several of us have been at pains to hi-lite is, that these personal suspicions like "you think" he lied, are nothing more than guesswork.
As with any investigation, whether it be ancient historical analysis or more recent murder investigations, the only credible arguments come from the evidence - not from idle speculation.
Let the evidence speak for itself, do not replace the evidence with conjecture - but that is precisely what the 'anti-Hutchinson' crowd are and have been doing from day one!

There is not, nor has there ever been, any indication Hutchinson lied, or made anything up. This is idle speculation. What exists in the court records & press testimony from the inquest, plus witness statements in the press is all we have by way of evidence.

The 'anti-Hutchinson' crowd, dismiss what doesn't support their theories in favor of idle speculation, but criticize bonafide arguments based on the existing evidence. That is the topsy-turvy world of Casebook, and one of the significant reasons the more knowledgeable authors no longer frequent Casebook.
Not only is that a Weasley cheap shot that isn’t even true, but rich coming from you who cherry pick news reports, no matter how ridiculously obvious that they are erroneous, to fit into your well dressed man legendarium and then constantly spout this misleading nonsense ad nauseum as if it were fact.
__________________
"Is all that we see or seem
but a dream within a dream?"

-Edgar Allan Poe


"...the man and the peaked cap he is said to have worn
quite tallies with the descriptions I got of him."

-Frederick G. Abberline
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #217  
Old 12-17-2017, 04:09 PM
Abby Normal Abby Normal is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 5,891
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bridewell View Post
However unbelievable Hutchinson's account may be to the modern reader, the fact is that Abberline recorded, in writing, that he was 'of opinion his (Hutchinson's) story is true'. It may have been true or it may not. When first given however - to a police officer who knew the ground as well as anyone - the account was believed. It may have been false, and the belief may or may not have persisted. Clearly though, as it was believed when given, it was not 'unbelievable'.
Hi bridewell
That’s true but many things are originally believed until further info or circumstances come into play. One has to take into account everything like the later news accounts that discount his story, dews later recollection that hutch was mistaken and most telling to me any way, Aberlines later recollections that are devoid of anything hutch/ Aman and balance it with the later things that point to hutches truthfulness, like later accounts of the police still looking for a man, the toppling story etc, and try to come to a sensible conclusion.
__________________
"Is all that we see or seem
but a dream within a dream?"

-Edgar Allan Poe


"...the man and the peaked cap he is said to have worn
quite tallies with the descriptions I got of him."

-Frederick G. Abberline
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #218  
Old 12-17-2017, 04:30 PM
Wickerman Wickerman is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 9,027
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam Flynn View Post
It is emphatically not guesswork or "idle speculation", Jon. Hutchinson's actions, as he recounts them, are bizarre, his story is incredibly (as in "unbelievably") detailed and some of it has parallels with what had been circulating in the press - and on the streets - throughout the Autumn of Terror.
But Gareth, that is exactly what speculation is.
Your interpretation is subjective because it is based on nothing tangible - just your gut feeling.
You admitted yourself that you think he made the whole thing up. In spite of the fact Lewis saw the same couple, at the same time, walk up the court while this loiterer was present. That is evidence, but you reject it, and in favor of what?
Conjecture.
This is exactly what I am talking about.

Quote:
For the record, I do not "guess", nor do I "idly speculate". If I believe something, then it's usually because I've given it years and years of thought.
You may deny to your hearts content, but as you have just admitted that you think he made it all up, contrary to Lewis's evidence, and that of Bowyer, then your position is very clear regardless of any denial.

Gareth, giving this issue years of thought doesn't mean your conclusion cannot be speculation.
You do not believe him because you have no firsthand knowledge of the nightlife and what class of people came and went throughout any given night, or what attire they wore.
Yet, you reject the opinion of someone who did have this firsthand knowledge (Abberline). And the best justification you can offer is that "people make mistakes"?
You think your lack of knowledge is superior to someone with proven knowledge. How does that make any sense?


Quote:
I also resent the implication that I am somehow partly responsible for "one of the significant reasons [why] the more knowledgeable authors no longer frequent Casebook".
No Gareth, not you personally. I'm talking about this type of superior attitude from those who think they know better, while rejecting the meager evidence which has survived, and in favor of what? - speculation.

This has been going on for well over a decade, yet none of these 'anti-Hutchinson' proponents can even agree on what he is supposed to have lied about, or what he is supposed to have done wrong.
Disorganized nit-picking is probably the best summary of the complaints against Hutchinson.
__________________
Regards, Jon S.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #219  
Old 12-17-2017, 04:51 PM
Robert St Devil Robert St Devil is offline
Sergeant
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: North Kilttown, Scotland
Posts: 795
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wickerman View Post
Hi Robert.

My apologies, on reflection it might be fair to admit I unjustly focused on that one question of yours.

It's just that we've been down that road before, the time of Hutch's sighting at "two o'clock", a "respectably dressed man", who "approached the victim", plus a few other minor details can be read in the Saturday press. Which convinced one member that she had solved the problem - Hutchinson compiled his story from bits & pieces he gleaned from the Saturday press.

A right load of codswallop, to put it bluntly. Your remark just struck a cord, if you get what I mean.
Sorry about that.

Gotcha. Nothing really sticks out to me against Hutchinson, and it seems like it was the police who put George in the spotlight when they forwarded his statement up the chain of command post haste. It seems to me like he was just offering the piece of information that he knew to the police station; next thing he knows, he's talking with Abberline and his name's in the press a few days later. One thing, The Times have him stating that he identified Mary at the Shoreditch mortuary. Would he have had to offer some proof of acquaintance (ie general description) before he gained that type of access from the authorities?
__________________
there,s nothing new, only the unexplored
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #220  
Old 12-17-2017, 05:28 PM
Sam Flynn Sam Flynn is online now
Casebook Supporter
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Wales
Posts: 9,468
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wickerman View Post
But Gareth, that is exactly what speculation is.
Your interpretation is subjective because it is based on nothing tangible - just your gut feeling.
Not "gut feeling" at all. I studied experimental method for three years as part of my degree course. I know the difference between empiricism and subjectivity. That's not to say that I'm right, but I am at least capable of distinguishing subjectivity from objectivity.
__________________
Kind regards, Sam Flynn

"Suche Nullen" (Nietzsche, Götzendämmerung, 1888)
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
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

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:14 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.