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:
Shades of Whitechapel: Centenaries - whole and half - by sdreid 1 minute ago.
Maybrick, James: Acquiring A Victorian Diary - by caz 3 hours ago.
Maybrick, James: Acquiring A Victorian Diary - by Kaz 4 hours ago.
Maybrick, James: 25 YEARS OF THE DIARY OF JACK THE RIPPER: THE TRUE FACTS by Robert Smith - by Kaz 4 hours ago.
Hutchinson, George: Possible reason for Hutch coming forward - by Varqm 4 hours ago.
General Police Discussion: J Division Fixed Point Whitechapel Station? - by The Station Cat 7 hours ago.

Most Popular Threads:
Hutchinson, George: Possible reason for Hutch coming forward - (21 posts)
Maybrick, James: Acquiring A Victorian Diary - (2 posts)
General Police Discussion: J Division Fixed Point Whitechapel Station? - (1 posts)
Maybrick, James: 25 YEARS OF THE DIARY OF JACK THE RIPPER: THE TRUE FACTS by Robert Smith - (1 posts)
Shades of Whitechapel: Centenaries - whole and half - (1 posts)
Hutchinson, George: The Enigma That Is Richard Blake - (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 11-13-2017, 01:55 PM
Varqm Varqm is offline
Detective
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 370
Default Possible reason for Hutch coming forward

The inquest on Kelly ended at ,for arguments sake, Monday 2-4 pm,based on the number of questions asked of witnesses and
depending on how long the witness recited his/her testimony,Hutch came at 6:00 pm.


It's safe to assume the reason Hutch came forward was because the inquest ended abruptly.there were no more inquests.

He then did not have to face the jury,coroner,etc in an inquest court where his testimony was under oath,and was liable
for contempt/fine if caught lying.
In the police station he was not in the same oath and could retract his statement,for ex.
mixing up the days and end up released like witnesses who reported suspicious men who could be the ripper.Besides
Astrakhan man was not present and Hutch was not "accusing/perjuring" somebody which,I assume ,was another/or additional offense.
All he had to know was in a court, as opposed to a police station,testimonies were formal,subject to fine/contempt if lying.
Before 1911 Perjury Act, perjury was confined to the courts (Perjury Act 1728).

Coroners act 1887

The coroner, being guided by
the information he has received, usually sends a message
to those witnesses whom he thinks material. Should
they neglect or refuse to attend, the coroner, as incident
to his office of judge of a court of record, has authority
to issue a summons to compel their appearance where
he has been credibly informed that they are able to give
evidence, and he may if necessary issue a summons to
the constable to bring them into court. If a witness
refuses without sufficient reason to obey this summons,
the coroner may fine him 2 under section 19 ; and if a
witness refuses to give evidence when sworn, or otherwise
misconducts himself in court, the coroner has power to
commit him for contempt. The coroner has also power
to issue a warrant against a witness for contempt of the
summons, under which the constable may bring up the
witness in custody.


Above, to me, the reason Hutch came forward.
__________________
Clearly the first human laws spawned organized religion's morality - from which it only copied,ex. you cannot kill,
steal (forced, otherwise people run back to the hills).
M. Pacana

Last edited by Varqm : 11-13-2017 at 02:09 PM.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 11-13-2017, 02:07 PM
Abby Normal Abby Normal is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 5,438
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Varqm View Post
The inquest on Kelly ended at ,for arguments sake, Monday 2-4 pm,based on the number of questions asked of witnesses and
depending on how long the witness recited his/her testimony,Hutch came at 6:00 pm.


It's safe to assume the reason Hutch came forward was because the inquest ended abruptly.there were no more inquests.

He then did not have to face the jury,coroner,etc in an inquest court where his testimony was under oath,and was liable
for contempt/fine if caught lying.In the police station he was not in the same oath and could retract his statement,for ex.
mixing up the days and end up released like witnesses who reported suspicious men who could be the ripper.besides
Astrakhan man was not present and Hutch was not "accusing/perjuring" somebody which,I assume ,was another/or additional offense.
All he had to know was in a court, as opposed to a police station,testimonies were formal,subject to fine/contempt if lying.
Before 1911 Perjury Act,perjury was confined to the courts.

Coroners act 1887

The coroner, being guided by
the information he has received, usually sends a message
to those witnesses whom he thinks material. Should
they neglect or refuse to attend, the coroner, as incident
to his office of judge of a court of record, has authority
to issue a summons to compel their appearance where
he has been credibly informed that they are able to give
evidence, and he may if necessary issue a summons to
the constable to bring them into court. If a witness
refuses without sufficient reason to obey this summons,
the coroner may fine him 2 under section 19 ; and if a
witness refuses to give evidence when sworn, or otherwise
misconducts himself in court, the coroner has power to
commit him for contempt. The coroner has also power
to issue a warrant against a witness for contempt of the
summons, under which the constable may bring up the
witness in custody.


Above, to me, the reason Hutch came forward.
well that's the reason I too believe he didn't attend the inquest-absolutely. But the reason why he actually came forward is another matter.
__________________
"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
  #3  
Old 11-13-2017, 02:35 PM
MysterySinger MysterySinger is offline
Detective
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 420
Default

He probably wanted an association with the crimes. Some people do.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 11-13-2017, 03:34 PM
Wickerman Wickerman is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 8,901
Default

Well, Varqm, I don't see any reason to believe in deception on the part of Hutchinson.

Why didn't Hutchinson come forward?
It can be easily established by researching the local papers over that weekend following the murder that the most widespread account was that of Maxwell, and the majority of press speculation promoted Kelly's death about, or after, 9:00 am Friday morning.
The reason Hutchinson would not feel compelled to come forward was simply that he met her a good 6-7 hours before she was believed to have been murdered. So what could he possibly know that would help the police - nothing.

So why did he eventually come forward?
The inquest terminated sometime in the afternoon, the Star newspaper was among the first to hit the streets, and it did so before 6:00 pm, 4 or 5 o'clock I think.
In the Star account of the Kelly inquest they provide a subtitle to a paragraph on the testimony of Mary Cox.
"The Murderer Described".
The timeline in her account is 11:45 - 12:00, when she returned at 3:00 am all was quiet.
In my view....Hutchinson knew this to be wrong, he saw Kelly out after 12:00, so he went to tell the police the Cox suspect couldn't have been the murderer.
__________________
Regards, Jon S.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 11-13-2017, 09:19 PM
DJA DJA is offline
Inspector
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Some Australian Mountain Range.
Posts: 1,307
Default

Reckon sailor man Hutchinson was a lookout for a blackmail pay off gone wrong,not a murder.

He has waited until after the inquest to tell his tale of Astrakhan man.

Phillips had a good idea what was really going on and arranged the possible reward of a pardon.
__________________
My name is Dave.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 11-14-2017, 02:15 AM
richardnunweek richardnunweek is offline
Superintendent
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 2,216
Default

Hi,
Always has to be some kind of conspiracy.
Topping always maintained to his sons, and to everyone else, that he knew one of the victims, gave a statement to the police, and assisted them in looking for the man he saw , but to no avail.
Its really that simple.
He maintained he received Five pounds for his efforts.. a princely sum, however, we don't know how long he kept up the search, and may have been paid for a lengthy period.even if it was circulated that he was not involved .
I have never doubted his account, its not a question whether or not he saw Mr A, but was he the killer?
Regards Richard.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 11-29-2017, 03:46 AM
Varqm Varqm is offline
Detective
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 370
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Abby Normal View Post
well that's the reason I too believe he didn't attend the inquest-absolutely. But the reason why he actually came forward is another matter.
What was the reason?
__________________
Clearly the first human laws spawned organized religion's morality - from which it only copied,ex. you cannot kill,
steal (forced, otherwise people run back to the hills).
M. Pacana
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 11-29-2017, 03:52 AM
Varqm Varqm is offline
Detective
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 370
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wickerman View Post
Well, Varqm, I don't see any reason to believe in deception on the part of Hutchinson.

Why didn't Hutchinson come forward?
It can be easily established by researching the local papers over that weekend following the murder that the most widespread account was that of Maxwell, and the majority of press speculation promoted Kelly's death about, or after, 9:00 am Friday morning.
The reason Hutchinson would not feel compelled to come forward was simply that he met her a good 6-7 hours before she was believed to have been murdered. So what could he possibly know that would help the police - nothing.

So why did he eventually come forward?
The inquest terminated sometime in the afternoon, the Star newspaper was among the first to hit the streets, and it did so before 6:00 pm, 4 or 5 o'clock I think.
In the Star account of the Kelly inquest they provide a subtitle to a paragraph on the testimony of Mary Cox.
"The Murderer Described".
The timeline in her account is 11:45 - 12:00, when she returned at 3:00 am all was quiet.
In my view....Hutchinson knew this to be wrong, he saw Kelly out after 12:00, so he went to tell the police the Cox suspect couldn't have been the murderer.

Simply he had info that could help,also as posters say he was a friend of Kelly,no analysis required.
__________________
Clearly the first human laws spawned organized religion's morality - from which it only copied,ex. you cannot kill,
steal (forced, otherwise people run back to the hills).
M. Pacana
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 11-29-2017, 12:32 PM
Abby Normal Abby Normal is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 5,438
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Varqm View Post
What was the reason?
Hi Varqm
because if he was the killer he was worried he had been spotted and recognized and felt it was better to come forward as a witness than be found as a suspect.

if not the killer because he wanted to profit off it somehow.
__________________
"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
  #10  
Old 11-29-2017, 01:29 PM
Wickerman Wickerman is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 8,901
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Varqm View Post
Simply he had info that could help,also as posters say he was a friend of Kelly,no analysis required.
In what way could it help?
__________________
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 02:35 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.