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 20 minutes ago.
Motive, Method and Madness: Same motive = same killer - by Fisherman 22 minutes ago.
General Letters or Communications: Two authentic comms from the Ripper? - by Darryl Kenyon 27 minutes ago.
General Letters or Communications: Two authentic comms from the Ripper? - by cnr 2 hours ago.
General Letters or Communications: Two authentic comms from the Ripper? - by Damaso Marte 2 hours ago.
General Letters or Communications: Two authentic comms from the Ripper? - by Abby Normal 3 hours ago.

Most Popular Threads:
Motive, Method and Madness: Same motive = same killer - (23 posts)
General Letters or Communications: Two authentic comms from the Ripper? - (15 posts)
Maybrick, James: One Incontrovertible, Unequivocal, Undeniable Fact Which Refutes the Diary - (12 posts)
A6 Murders: A6 Rebooted - (2 posts)
Conferences and Meetings: American Jack the Ripper - True Crime Conference, Baltimore, April 7-8, 2018 - (2 posts)
General Police Discussion: Death From The Frog’s March - (1 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
  #1  
Old 12-26-2015, 05:11 PM
Premium Member
SirJohnFalstaff SirJohnFalstaff is offline
Premium Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Abzurdistan or Canada, depends
Posts: 565
Default An hypothesis about Hutchinson that could discard him as a suspect

Something hit me recently, and I'm probably not the first to come with the idea.

I've been reading The Darkest Streets and The Worst Street in London, just to get some context about pauperism in late Victorian London.

A few things jumped in front of my eyes (unfortunately, I can't remember to which of the two books they relate)
- Garotting: There were several cases where prostitutes would lure men only for them to be welcomed by muggers who would take their money, jewelry and clothes.
- Spitalfields: There was even more resentment in Spitalfields against the Jewish community, mostly because many buildings were bought in the Southern part to be torned down, and housing for Jewish families built instead.
- Dorset Street: people were very suspicious of rich/higher class people on Dorset Street.

Now, let's imagine that Hutchinson did say the truth. Would it be far fetched to think that the reason he described the man so well, and waited in front of Miller's Court was because he had the intention of robbing him?

Which also makes him reluctant to talk to police until he hears that someone spotted him and gave description at the inquest.

Not saying he was a recurring criminal.
__________________
Is it progress when a cannibal uses a fork?
- Stanislaw Jerzy Lee
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 12-26-2015, 05:25 PM
MysterySinger MysterySinger is offline
Detective
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 422
Default

I'm not sure that a meaningful motive has been established for Hutch in killing MJK. He could have been a vagrant - he certainly seemed to have a tendency to walk the streets at night and maybe was just looking for some shelter. Accomplice - who knows?
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 12-26-2015, 06:01 PM
Wickerman Wickerman is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 9,027
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SirJohnFalstaff View Post
Now, let's imagine that Hutchinson did say the truth. Would it be far fetched to think that the reason he described the man so well, and waited in front of Miller's Court was because he had the intention of robbing him?
That interpretation has been put forward before. Which cannot be ruled out if Hutch had simply lost patience after nearly an hour and then left to seek his fortune elsewhere.
That possibility does not make him the killer of Mary Kelly though.

The suggestion also assumes robbery was his motive, and Mary had nothing worth stealing, unless we are supposed to entertain the idea he killed her for the 6d(?) she may have earned by servicing Astrachan?

Quote:
Which also makes him reluctant to talk to police until he hears that someone spotted him and gave description at the inquest.
Not really, the description given of the loiterer is not sufficiently unique to identify anyone in particular.
__________________
Regards, Jon S.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 12-26-2015, 07:15 PM
Ben Ben is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,652
Default

Hi SirJohn,

Quote:
Would it be far fetched to think that the reason he described the man so well, and waited in front of Miller's Court was because he had the intention of robbing him?
Yes, it would be deeply far-fetched because it would require extreme stupidity on the part of both Hutchinson and Astrakhan. If the former wished to conceal his secret "robbing" motive, why risk creating suspicion by drawing attention to such expensive clothes and accessories? Such was the reputation of that part of Spitalfields during that period in history, it would require a level of imprudence as yet unknown to civilisation to wander into that environment bedecked in a "thick gold watch chain" that somehow managed to reveal itself under two coats in the darkness of a London Street at night.

Hutchinson's statement was very quickly discredited following further "investigations" by the police, and the Astrakhan suspect was evidently not considered a potential "ripper".

None of which addresses the question of Hutchinson's own potential culpability, and I'm afraid I'm at a loss as to understand why the proposal is supposed to "discard him as a suspect". Obviously, if any one of the proposed candidates was engaging in some form of activity other than brutal murder at a time when the murders in question were supposed to have been committed, they are innocent pf those murders. If Druitt was sound asleep in Dorset in the small hours of 31st August, he didn't kill Nichols. If Tumblety was spending time with a young man in Kensington on 7th September, he didn't kill Chapman. And yes, if Hutchinson was loitering outside Kelly's flat with the intent of robbing her secretly murderous pretend-client in the small hours of the 9th November, then he didn't kill Kelly.

You'll note, though, that only the last mentioned was in the right place at the right time.

All the best,
Ben

Last edited by Ben : 12-26-2015 at 07:18 PM.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 12-26-2015, 08:09 PM
Ben Ben is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,652
Default

Quote:
Not really, the description given of the loiterer is not sufficiently unique to identify anyone in particular.
It doesn't need to have been.

The fact that you can't describe someone very well doesn't mean you're incapable of recognising him or her again.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 12-26-2015, 09:14 PM
Wickerman Wickerman is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 9,027
Default

To recognise his features she would have to have seen his features. Lewis said she couldn't describe him, no age, facial hair, height, complexion, nothing to assist in recognition.
__________________
Regards, Jon S.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 12-27-2015, 05:23 AM
Ben Ben is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,652
Default

Once again (in fact, probably many more times), she told police that she could not describe him, not that she didn't see his face. In addition, Lawende's description had been deliberately suppressed at the Eddowes inquest. If Hutchinson was aware of this ploy from following inquest press coverage, he might have assumed that Lewis' seemingly vague description was another example of it.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 12-27-2015, 07:12 AM
Wickerman Wickerman is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 9,027
Default

Ah, so now she saw his face but couldn't describe what she saw.....?
Oh what a tangled web we weave...

Lawende's description was requested to be suppressed, Lewis's was not.
__________________
Regards, Jon S.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 12-27-2015, 07:28 AM
Ben Ben is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,652
Default

Quote:
Ah, so now she saw his face but couldn't describe what she saw.....?
Either that or she sensibly decided that "bloke with moustache" would not have helped the police much.
Quote:
Lawende's description was requested to be suppressed, Lewis's was not.
Which, from the perspective of an avid follower of the inquest proceedings, could just as easily imply that the police decided not to advertised the "suppression" on the latter occasion.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 12-27-2015, 09:15 AM
Wickerman Wickerman is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 9,027
Default

Or maybe the more likely solution is a modern theorist, who makes it up as he goes....
__________________
Regards, Jon S.
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 10:28 PM.


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