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:
General Suspect Discussion: Only one suspect can be shown to have carried a knife. - by Abby Normal 21 minutes ago.
Motive, Method and Madness: Same motive = same killer - by Abby Normal 24 minutes ago.
Martha Tabram: Probibility of Martha Tabram Being a JtR Victim - by Abby Normal 26 minutes ago.
General Suspect Discussion: Only one suspect can be shown to have carried a knife. - by Sam Flynn 38 minutes ago.
Motive, Method and Madness: Same motive = same killer - by Sam Flynn 39 minutes ago.
General Suspect Discussion: Only one suspect can be shown to have carried a knife. - by Harry D 42 minutes ago.

Most Popular Threads:
Motive, Method and Madness: Same motive = same killer - (60 posts)
Maybrick, James: 25 YEARS OF THE DIARY OF JACK THE RIPPER: THE TRUE FACTS by Robert Smith - (8 posts)
Martha Tabram: Probibility of Martha Tabram Being a JtR Victim - (7 posts)
General Suspect Discussion: Only one suspect can be shown to have carried a knife. - (5 posts)
Kosminski, Aaron: My theory on Kosminski - (4 posts)
Visual Media: New play about Jack the Ripper (Denver, CO) - (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
  #1181  
Old 06-24-2017, 04:25 AM
Wickerman Wickerman is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 8,786
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by andy1867 View Post
Hi Wickerman
Simply because ,vague as the description was he had actually been standing there outside Millers Court .
We don't know Hutchinsons character or what he might have thought ,why he might have thought it.
It's simply an idea ,hardly a theory
Cheers
Andy
Ok Andy, I wasn't sure what your position was on that. I might not have read every post here. There are some posters who do not think the 'loiterer' was Hutchinson, so we do agree on that point - he was there that night.

However, given the popularity of the wideawake hat, there was no cause for him to assume he was identified on the basis of that detail alone.

I'm more in favor of him coming forward when he did, for two reasons:
1 - Hutch, along with the rest of the public, were being told that Kelly died after 9:00 that Friday morning, due to press coverage offering that idea Friday evening and all day Saturday.

2 - Hutch learned, following the conclusion of the inquest, that one witness (Cox) was being credited with seeing Kelly with her killer about midnight. Hutch knew this to be wrong.

Both those conclusions only surfaced after the inquest, this is why he went to police to tell his story. It had nothing to do with being seen that night, likewise nothing to do with any suggested culpability in this crime.
__________________
Regards, Jon S.

Last edited by Wickerman : 06-24-2017 at 04:27 AM.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #1182  
Old 09-27-2017, 11:10 AM
Garry Wroe Garry Wroe is offline
Chief Inspector
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,572
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wickerman View Post
Hutch learned, following the conclusion of the inquest, that one witness (Cox) was being credited with seeing Kelly with her killer about midnight. Hutch knew this to be wrong.

Both those conclusions only surfaced after the inquest, this is why he went to police to tell his story. It had nothing to do with being seen that night, likewise nothing to do with any suggested culpability in this crime.
Out of interest, Jon, how and when did Hutchinson learn about Mrs Cox's inquest evidence?
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #1183  
Old 09-27-2017, 02:42 PM
Wickerman Wickerman is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 8,786
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Garry Wroe View Post
Out of interest, Jon, how and when did Hutchinson learn about Mrs Cox's inquest evidence?
It was in the Star, early edition, subtitled - THE MURDERER DESCRIBED.
So, either he found it in the 'reading room' or someone else read it and let him know?
__________________
Regards, Jon S.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #1184  
Old 09-27-2017, 02:46 PM
Sam Flynn Sam Flynn is offline
Casebook Supporter
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Wales
Posts: 8,581
Default

Hello Jon
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wickerman View Post
It was in the Star, early edition, subtitled - THE MURDERER DESCRIBED. So, either he found it in the 'reading room' or someone else read it and let him know?
Why the quotation marks around "reading room"?
__________________
Kind regards, Sam Flynn

"Suche Nullen" (Nietzsche, Götzendämmerung, 1888)
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #1185  
Old 09-27-2017, 03:48 PM
Wickerman Wickerman is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 8,786
Default

It was a term promoted as a source for Hutchinson to learn about Kelly's inquest. Apparently, the Victoria Home had a reading room.
__________________
Regards, Jon S.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #1186  
Old 09-27-2017, 04:49 PM
Abby Normal Abby Normal is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 5,033
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wickerman View Post
Ok Andy, I wasn't sure what your position was on that. I might not have read every post here. There are some posters who do not think the 'loiterer' was Hutchinson, so we do agree on that point - he was there that night.

However, given the popularity of the wideawake hat, there was no cause for him to assume he was identified on the basis of that detail alone.

I'm more in favor of him coming forward when he did, for two reasons:
1 - Hutch, along with the rest of the public, were being told that Kelly died after 9:00 that Friday morning, due to press coverage offering that idea Friday evening and all day Saturday.

2 - Hutch learned, following the conclusion of the inquest, that one witness (Cox) was being credited with seeing Kelly with her killer about midnight. Hutch knew this to be wrong.

Both those conclusions only surfaced after the inquest, this is why he went to police to tell his story. It had nothing to do with being seen that night, likewise nothing to do with any suggested culpability in this crime.
How did hutch know that cox sighting was wrong?
__________________
"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
  #1187  
Old 09-27-2017, 05:18 PM
Wickerman Wickerman is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 8,786
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Abby Normal View Post
How did hutch know that cox sighting was wrong?
Most of the public obtained their information from the press. So if the press conclude from the inquest that Blotchy was the murderer, and Hutchinson witnessed Kelly out after Cox's sighting, and after Cox last heard Kelly singing (around 1:00 am), then he might safely assume the press had got it wrong.
The man Hutch saw, and at a later time, was very different from the man described by Cox. So why wouldn't he assume the latter stranger was more likely to be the murderer?

There is sufficient cause for him to go to the police.
__________________
Regards, Jon S.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #1188  
Old 09-27-2017, 06:14 PM
Abby Normal Abby Normal is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 5,033
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wickerman View Post
Most of the public obtained their information from the press. So if the press conclude from the inquest that Blotchy was the murderer, and Hutchinson witnessed Kelly out after Cox's sighting, and after Cox last heard Kelly singing (around 1:00 am), then he might safely assume the press had got it wrong.
The man Hutch saw, and at a later time, was very different from the man described by Cox. So why wouldn't he assume the latter stranger was more likely to be the murderer?

There is sufficient cause for him to go to the police.
So the sighting by cox isn't wrong, it's just the blotchy couldn't be her murderer.
__________________
"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
  #1189  
Old 09-27-2017, 07:14 PM
Wickerman Wickerman is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 8,786
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Abby Normal View Post
So the sighting by cox isn't wrong, it's just the blotchy couldn't be her murderer.
In Hutchinson's opinion, yes.

I'm aware there is a theory that Blotchy could have left and returned later.
All we were looking for in this question is to find justification for Hutchinson deciding to go to police, not whether he might consider Blotchy returning after Astrachan left, so I leave the returning Blotchy out of the equation
__________________
Regards, Jon S.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #1190  
Old 09-28-2017, 05:21 AM
Abby Normal Abby Normal is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 5,033
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wickerman View Post
In Hutchinson's opinion, yes.

I'm aware there is a theory that Blotchy could have left and returned later.
All we were looking for in this question is to find justification for Hutchinson deciding to go to police, not whether he might consider Blotchy returning after Astrachan left, so I leave the returning Blotchy out of the equation
Hi Wick
ok thanks for clarifying. I thought you meant cox sighting of Blotchy was false in some way-like she was lying or mistaken.

Yeah, I don't put much in the Blotchy returning theory-for may reasons.


hutch didn't need to hear about cox sighting to come forward if he wanted to help. If his story was true and he wanted to help police his sighting was important enough of itself.

also, if he had heard about cox sighting he could have heard about lewis sighting (of himself-as wide awake man) and come forward because of that.
__________________
"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
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 06:02 AM.


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