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:
Mary Jane Kelly: Oh, murder! - by David Orsam 2 hours ago.
Mary Jane Kelly: Oh, murder! - by David Orsam 2 hours ago.
Mary Jane Kelly: Oh, murder! - by Pierre 2 hours ago.
Mary Jane Kelly: Oh, murder! - by David Orsam 3 hours ago.
Mary Jane Kelly: Oh, murder! - by Pierre 3 hours ago.
Mary Jane Kelly: Oh, murder! - by David Orsam 4 hours ago.

Most Popular Threads:
Cutbush, Superintendent Charles Henry: The Curtis Bennett Inquiry - (13 posts)
Neil, P.C. John: PC Neil's Route - (7 posts)
Mary Jane Kelly: Oh, murder! - (7 posts)
Shades of Whitechapel: Centenaries - whole and half - (4 posts)
General Discussion: Spies And General Secret Squirrels - (3 posts)
General Discussion: "Servant Girl Annihilator" Terrorized 1880s Austin, Texas - (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 > Motive, Method and Madness

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #71  
Old 10-11-2016, 04:50 AM
Premium Member
caz caz is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 4,989
Default

I've just had another thought. Let's suppose Hutch was never there, but made up his story directly on the back of Lewis's, which he heard about by whatever means. He'd have been expecting the police to make the connection for him and therefore accept that he was there. That would surely have been the point. But what if they had called Lewis in for confirmation and she had said Hutch was nothing like the man she saw? Hutch and his story would have been - er - discredited, with no witnesses to put him anywhere near Miller's Court that night. But I suppose he might still have taken the risk, as an out-of-work opportunist, hoping to make a bit of easy money. So could something like this have happened with nobody informing the press of the details?

What I have the most difficulty with is the idea of the ripper knowing he had been seen loitering, and coming forward to admit it, fully anticipating that the police would realise he was the man Lewis saw, without him having to mention it. He'd have come forward totally unnecessarily if it didn't even occur to the police that he could be Lewis's loiterer, which it apparently never did. So why would he then have drawn even more attention to himself and his presence close to the murder scene by going to the papers with an embellished account? Why would he not have kept as low a profile as possible until his undoubted return to total obscurity, after the search for his suspect proved fruitless? The argument is usually that some serial killers enjoy putting themselves in the spotlight like this, while at the same time desperate to deflect suspicion. But does this fit with someone who never again courted police or press attention, despite having so little to fear from doing so?

Love,

Caz
X
__________________
"Comedy is simply a funny way of being serious." Peter Ustinov


Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #72  
Old 10-11-2016, 05:18 AM
Abby Normal Abby Normal is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 4,298
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by caz View Post
Hi Abby,

Well we know, don't we, that Mary Kelly and Joe Barnett met on one day and shacked up with each other the next, as was quite common with unmarried lower class couples in the LVP. If she could do that once, I daresay she could have done it again, especially now she was badly in arrears with the rent and Barnett had moved out, leaving her to sleep alone, and therefore more vulnerable. If Blotchy was generous with the drinks and good company, and they hit it off well, she may have seen him as the next Joe, in which case why waste time?

Love,

Caz
X
absolutely possible. and as you frame it like that then I would actually tend to agree. Ive said many times it does not seem like she was actively prostituting-but perhaps looking for her next boyfriend/sugar daddy.

they might of just met that night sure, but as Mary was young, attractive, had her own place, and apparently knew a lot of men, I would imagine someone like Mary would have a boat load of suiters lined up. meaning obviously that she probably knew Blotchy, even casually as a pub acquaintance, from before that night.

but perhaps not-but even if they just met that night, I strongly doubt she was out actively prostituting.
__________________
"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
  #73  
Old 10-11-2016, 05:23 AM
Abby Normal Abby Normal is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 4,298
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by caz View Post
Agree totally, Jon.

It's all too easy for people with hindsight to link Hutch's appearance at the police station directly with what Sarah Lewis had just said at the inquest. They have to explain why he never mentioned Lewis in that case, which would have added valuable support to his account. She could even have been asked to identify him as her (innocent) watcher. Why not, considering that was precisely what he was claiming to be? They argue that drawing attention to Lewis would only have led to the suspicion that it was her testimony that had compelled him forward. It's a circular argument.

It's much more likely that, just like the police, the press and the public, Hutch made no connection with Lewis, because in his case he may have seen 'a' woman, fleetingly, while his attention was on Kelly and her unusually flashy client, and not given her another thought, much less discovered her identity and made it his business to find out what she might reveal about him. There is also nothing to suggest Lewis ever piped up after Hutch's story was published to say "that was the man I saw". Why not?

The coincidental timings of Lewis's testimony and Hutch's appearance were probably just that, coincidental. They were both responding to a recent event, in the capacity of a witness. One did it more promptly and discreetly than the other, that's all. If the authorities at the time had no reason to think that Hutch would/could have accessed and come armed with Lewis's inquest testimony when he told his own story, why should we do so today?

Love,

Caz
X
he seemed to remember the events of that evening like reading a script. were going to accept his incredible memory but not his seeing Sarah Lewis?
they obviously saw each other.

Why didn't he mention her?
__________________
"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

Last edited by Abby Normal : 10-11-2016 at 05:29 AM.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #74  
Old 10-11-2016, 05:29 AM
Abby Normal Abby Normal is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 4,298
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by caz View Post
I've just had another thought. Let's suppose Hutch was never there, but made up his story directly on the back of Lewis's, which he heard about by whatever means. He'd have been expecting the police to make the connection for him and therefore accept that he was there. That would surely have been the point. But what if they had called Lewis in for confirmation and she had said Hutch was nothing like the man she saw? Hutch and his story would have been - er - discredited, with no witnesses to put him anywhere near Miller's Court that night. But I suppose he might still have taken the risk, as an out-of-work opportunist, hoping to make a bit of easy money. So could something like this have happened with nobody informing the press of the details?

What I have the most difficulty with is the idea of the ripper knowing he had been seen loitering, and coming forward to admit it, fully anticipating that the police would realise he was the man Lewis saw, without him having to mention it. He'd have come forward totally unnecessarily if it didn't even occur to the police that he could be Lewis's loiterer, which it apparently never did. So why would he then have drawn even more attention to himself and his presence close to the murder scene by going to the papers with an embellished account? Why would he not have kept as low a profile as possible until his undoubted return to total obscurity, after the search for his suspect proved fruitless? The argument is usually that some serial killers enjoy putting themselves in the spotlight like this, while at the same time desperate to deflect suspicion. But does this fit with someone who never again courted police or press attention, despite having so little to fear from doing so?

Love,

Caz
X
well if hutch was never there and wasn't the man she saw then he would merely be a lying attention seeker.

But he was there, they saw each other. and I agree with you-him coming forward voluntarily is a tick mark against him as a suspect IMHO, but not enough with all the other red flags to eliminate him-not by a long shot.
__________________
"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 04:45 PM.


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