PDA

View Full Version : The Times report


Normy
07-12-2008, 02:11 PM
Hi all
I've taken this from JACK THE RIPPER …PERSON OR PERSONS UNKNOWN?
by
Garry Wroe

Is the report from the Times accepted as being jazzed up for the newspaper or accurate details of his account?

According to a report carried by The Times on 13 November, he didn’t simply tire of his Dorset Street vigil and wander away as has been previously supposed. Rather, a little before 3:00am, he entered Miller’s Court and stood outside Kelly’s room – which, he insisted, was quiet and in darkness. Forgetting for a moment the more obvious implications of this disclosure, one can but wonder why, as with the alleged conversation with a policeman in Petticoat Lane, he made no reference to it during the Abberline interview.

“When I left the corner of Miller’s Court,” he goes on, “the clock struck three o’clock ... After I left the court I walked about all night, as the place where I usually sleep was closed. I came in as soon as it opened in the morning.” This establishment was the Victoria Home, a common lodging house designated 39-41 Commercial Street and situated on the south-west corner of the Commercial/Wentworth Streets intersection.

Cheers all

Ben
07-12-2008, 03:33 PM
Hi Normy,

Here's the relevent sentence attributed to Hutchinson by The Times of 14th November:

"I went up the court and stayed there a couple of minutes, but did not see any light in the house or hear any noise"

There is clear discrepency here, since there's no mention of Hutchinson entering Miller's Court in the initial police report. The question is whether Hutchinson himself was responsible for "jazzing up" his account when speaking to the press the next day, or whether an enterprising journalist was to blame. Now, I can envisage a journalist chucking in the odd "red stone seal" for added spice, but I doubt he'd invent both the "went up the court" detail and the Petticoat Lane/policeman encounter, so it seems a safer bet that they were Hutch-generated.

Hope this helps,

Ben

Sam Flynn
07-12-2008, 03:42 PM
Hi Normy,

Here's the relevent sentence attributed to Hutchinson by The Times of 14th November:

"I went up the court and stayed there a couple of minutes, but did not see any light in the house or hear any noise"

There is clear discrepency here, since there's no mention of Hutchinson entering Miller's Court in the initial police report. There's no real discrepancy, Ben. From his police statement: "I went to the court to see if I could see them, but could not".

Ben
07-12-2008, 03:51 PM
Hi Gareth,

The Times report has him standing in two seperate locations; for "three quarters of an hour" he claims to have been standing in a position where he could "look up the court", but then after that he goes "up the court" (i.e. into it) where he stands for "a couple of minutes". Two locations are clearly mentioned, which wasn't the case in the police report.

All the best,
Ben

Normy
07-12-2008, 04:13 PM
Hi Ben, Sam

Yes, saying he went to the court might have been him meaning, to the door, but it isn't really clearly stated.
I'm just looking for discrepencies in what he told the police and what he said afterwards.


Cheers all

Sam Flynn
07-12-2008, 04:43 PM
Hello Norm,Yes, saying he went to the court might have been him meaning, to the door, but it isn't really clearly stated.However he does clearly state, in his police interview, that his purpose in "going to the court" was to "see if he could see them [i.e. Kelly and Mr Astrakhan]". Short of perching on a high building and looking down, he wouldn't have been able to "see if he could see them" from anywhere other than inside Miller's Court itself. The detail may be more clearly-worded in the press report, but - at this point at least - it is not at odds with, and certainly doesn't contradict, what he told the police.

Observer
07-12-2008, 04:54 PM
Hi Normy

If it existed it's lost to us now but I reckon Hutchinson told the police more than was written down in his statement. I somehow get the impression he was the talkative type, and I wonder what transpired in the way of conversation as he walked around Spitalfileds accompaniedby by those two detectives?

all the best

Observer

Dan Norder
07-12-2008, 04:55 PM
Just a minor correction for those who want to look these things up. Hutchinson did have an early statement in the Times of Nov. 13, but the majority of the details, including the mention of having went up the court, were not published until Nov. 14.

Suzi
07-12-2008, 04:57 PM
There's no real discrepancy, Ben. From his police statement: "I went to the court to see if I could see them, but could not".

Exactly Sam- Where did all that other toot come from...This could throw Sarah's evidence tits up (!)here- IF Hutch took a wander up and down the Court....Hmmmmm- The 'Went to the Court' suggests that he lurked opposite in Dorset Street- and had a quick look...let's face it-not a long look- OK he may have had a little look into the alley...but didn't head into the court proper and pull the coat/curtain aside to check.....for many reasons.... Can you imagine the cry of 'What The **** Do You Want 'Uthchinson?' from the bed!!!! (Sorry a slightly :) thought!!)

The thought is so amusing it doesn't really work...he didn't do that - just had a quick listening 'dip' into the court and then lurked outside opposite in the rain,probably in the doorway- till 3.00 am ish and the thought 'sod that' (for whatever reason) and shambled off into the night and obscurity (ish)

Suz x

OK Dan- Thanks- but lets face it -'Into the Court'- which aint that far- didn't involve listening at a door or pulling aside a window covering....well not in Hutch's statement!!.(or did it??? and not mentioned??- unlikely!) ) He probably just went down the alley just a few steps and listened.....Mind you if he had gone down and tried open a door./listened at a door/ or pulled aside a curtain/coat....things may have taken a totally different turn maybe........... apart from the possible response from the room!!! LOL great image there!!

Ben
07-12-2008, 05:03 PM
However he does clearly state, in his police interview, that his purpose in "going to the court" was to "see if he could see them [i.e. Kelly and Mr Astrakhan]".

That would still be a contradiction, Gareth.

Let's assume his intended meaning (in the police report) was that he was directly outside Kelly's room for a whole 45 minutes. That would contradict the police report in which Hutchinson claimed to have stood at that location for "a couple of minutes". Either he stood there for 45 minutes or only two; he couldn't do both simultaneously in the same location.

Or we could assume he meant that he was outside the court looking into for 45 minutes. This would also condradict the police report in which he claimed to enter the court afterwards and wait there for a couple of minutes. Or if not a "contradiction", it could only have been an omission from a police report or an addition to the press account.

The bottom line is that two locations are mentioned in the press accounts from the 14th, but only one in the police report.

Best regards,
Ben

Edit: You're right there, Dan. The press accounts from 13th were much more in keeping with the original police statement.

Sam Flynn
07-12-2008, 05:12 PM
That would still be a contradiction, Gareth.

Let's assume his intended meaning (in the police report) was that he was directly outside Kelly's room for a whole 45 minutes. That would contradict the police report in which Hutchinson claimed to have stood at that location for "a couple of minutes". It's only a matter of detail, Ben. The police statement is clearly more pithy than the press report, or normal speech for that matter. In taking the statement, Sgt Badham would have summarised as he went along - it's not a verbatim transcript of every word Hutchinson said. Lack of detail, whether it was Badham's or Hutchinson's "fault", is not the same as contradiction. And, as I said, the press report doesn't contradict the police statement anyway - it's just more specific.

Ben
07-12-2008, 05:14 PM
Thinking on, the accounts that appeared on 13th November probably came directly from the police, whereas the later versions may have been the result of Hutchinson communicating directly with the press.

Suzi
07-12-2008, 05:15 PM
The Bapho's in the detail Sam!... Hmmmm can't be bothered to reiterate the above post but I do have a prob with Hutch snooping around Millers Court. My money's on the fact that he had a quick trot down the alley maybe listened for a bit-for whatever reason-perhaps he was in cahoots with Sarah saying...'You cover for me and I'll go in and give mi' statement on Monday' etc etc....aaagh!-

-and then buggerred off to the other side of the road-for whatever reason until the Monday when he had some sort of 'Must go to the Old Bill' moment.................

The Police/Press statements are of course quite amusing.............

Ben
07-12-2008, 05:21 PM
Hi Gareth,

Surely there's some signifiance to be attached to the discrepency between Hutchinson loitering right outside Kelly's window for a full 45 minutes versus Hutchinson waiting there for only "a couple" of minutes? I can't see Badham or anyone else allowing any uncertainty there to prevail only for the press to pick up the pieces and explain the situation properly. Some details may be trivial and thus only appear in press renderings, I appreciate that, but here we're talking about a rather more significant addition/omission.

Best regards,
Ben

Suzi
07-12-2008, 05:31 PM
Ben! Surely Hutch did'nt lurk outside Kelly's window (or doorstep!) This is ridiculous- where did this come from?? East End News of The Screws??:sad3:

Sam Flynn
07-12-2008, 05:37 PM
Surely there's some signifiance to be attached to the discrepency between Hutchinson loitering right outside Kelly's window for a full 45 minutes versus Hutchinson waiting there for only a couple of minutes? If no discrepancy exists, Ben, how can any significance be attached to it? I'd have thought it enough that he placed himself in close proximity to the murder scene for 45 minutes in both statements.

The fact that the police statement wasn't clear on the amount of time he spent there doesn't materially alter the substance of his story, which can be summed up as: "Hutchinson expressed an interest in Kelly and Astrakhan, to the extent that he entered Miller's Court to see if he could see them; he remained in the vicinity for 45 minutes". Whichever source one cares to read, this element of the story - barring inconsequential details - is consistent in all of them.

Ben
07-12-2008, 05:37 PM
Hi Suzi,

Just to recap: The police report has Hutchinson going "to the court" and waiting there for 45 minutes (and nowhere else) before leaving. The press report has him going to "look up the court" for 45 minutes before going up the court itself and waiting there for a couple of minutes...before leaving.

I'm not sure which version, if any, if the correct one, but they don't mesh up very well together.

Best regards,
Ben

Ben
07-12-2008, 05:46 PM
Hi Gareth,

All sources agree that he loitered in the general vicinity for at least 45 minutes, I accept that, but I don't think "general vicinity" is quite sufficient for the purposes of a police report on a murder. If he loitered directly outside her home for a full 45 minutes, that's far more significant than waiting outside the court for a comparable length of time and then popping in for a casual "couple of minutes" before departing.

Unfortunately, there is no congruity on this detail - which I can't agree is inconsequential - between the press and police accounts.

Best regards,
Ben

Sam Flynn
07-12-2008, 05:58 PM
Hi Gareth,

All sources agree that he loitered in the general vicinity for at least 45 minutes, I accept that, but I don't think "general vicinity" is quite sufficient for the purposes of a police report on a murder.Even if he'd pressed himself up against Crossinghams' wall for the duration, he'd only have been some ten yards away from the entrance to Miller's Court anyway. The fact that he'd practically admitted to having the place under surveillance for such a long time was damning enough.If he loitered directly outside her home for a full 45 minutes, that's far more significant than waiting outside the court for a comparable length of time and then popping in for a casual "couple of minutes" before departing.Nowhere in the police report does he say he was there for "a couple of minutes". On the contrary, its ambiguity lies in the very direction that you perceive as the most damning: "I went to the court to see if I could see them, but could not. I stood there for three quarters of an hour". In other words, it is Hutchinson's police statement, rather than the press versions, that places him in the court for the longest time, if one takes it literally.

Ben
07-12-2008, 06:17 PM
Even if he'd pressed himself up against Crossinghams' wall for the duration, he'd only have been some ten yards away from the entrance to Miller's Court anyway. The fact that he'd practically admitted to having the place under surveillance for such a long time was damning enough.

Agreed.

Nowhere in the police report does he say he was there for "a couple of minutes" - quite the contrary.

Absolutely, and yet "couple of minutes" did appear in the press. We seem to have Hutchinson remaing in one location in the police report, and two in the 14th November press reports. He seemed to differentiate between "to the court" and "up the court", the latter meaning into it, the former presumably meaning outside it. If so, it would lend weight to Hutchinson having initially watched and waited outside the court for 45 minutes (during which time, Lewis passed and saw someone doing precisely that - watching and waiting).

It would also mean that the actual "entering" of Miller's Court was introduced for the first time on 14th November. Why this was mentioned for the first time to the press and who was responsible is anyone's guess, though I'd be fibbing outrageously if I said I wasn't a teeny bit swayed by Wroe's suggestion that:

Uppermost in his mind was the possibility that he might unknowingly have been observed when entering the interconnecting passage, or indeed as he lurked outside Kelly’s room. (Mary Ann Cox, it should be noted, returned to the court at around three o’clock and may have been seen by Hutchinson.) Since any such revelation would have compromised both his story and his credibility, thereby inviting suspicion, he introduced a number of variants when subsequently speaking to the press. Whilst undoubtedly risky, this was an approach that at least provided an element of insurance in context of the unknown witness factor.

All the best,
Ben

Suzi
07-12-2008, 06:17 PM
Hi Gareth and Ben-

Just thinking about it....I reckon Hutch OK followed Mary and chummy down Dorset St and then (for whatever reason-positioned himself outside Crossinghams to observe....again for whatever reason... There was no reason to go into the court to see anyone coming out was there -there was one way in and one way out (Unless there was a sneaky way through the upstairs through the windows and a potential alleyway/stairway...a la Oliver!!! - unlikely!!!) Oooooooooh Mrs Prater may have to put a word in here!!!:) -and...now if Hutch had gone into the court and door listened etc etc then ....:anxious: ......NO!! that didn't happen!

Suz x

Ben
07-12-2008, 06:23 PM
Hi Suzi,

It may well have happened (I sneakily suspect it may have done), but my argument is that no mention of this was made until after the police interview.

Best!
Ben

Sam Flynn
07-12-2008, 06:43 PM
Absolutely, and yet "couple of minutes" did appear in the press. We seem to have Hutchinson remaing in one location in the police report, and two in the 14th November press reports.The fact that Badham's transcript, unlike the press statement, doesn't seem to differentiate between inside and outside the court is only a matter of trivial detail. It just doesn't add up that the police statement is somehow "lighter" on incriminating detail at this point - in fact, the opposite is true. Hutchinson's police statement, if read literally, places him even longer in the more incriminating position of being inside Miller's Court than do the versions in the press. He seemed to differentiate between "to the court" and "up the court", the latter meaning into it, the former presumably meaning outside it.As I said earlier, his stated purpose - as recorded in his police statement - was to "see if he could see them". He could not have done so if he'd been stationed outside the court, therefore his "to the court" is synonymous with his going into the court. He wouldn't have been able to "see if he could see them" otherwise.

There are, in my view, significant discrepancies between Hutchinson's police and press statements, but this ain't one of them.

Suzi
07-12-2008, 06:49 PM
Ben sssssssssssssssssssssssssh

Normy
07-13-2008, 03:08 PM
Hi all
I'd like to thank everyone for their input and comments.
Cheers.
Being new to this it seems that when comparing two statements can bring forth such strong feeling and conviction. I look at the rest of the material and feel like I'm a ping pong ball on the surface of the ocean, being carried in every direction.

Ah well.

Suzi
07-13-2008, 04:20 PM
Hi Normy- It's fun when you get into the tide isn't it!!!! (apart from the ocassional RIP!)

Hi Gareth- It's the 'to the court' and 'into the court' that worries me- You have to think following Hutch's way of thinking/speaking whether he meant ...in the vernacular...'Oi went dahn the Court' meaning he went somewhere in the vicinity or just Dahn to it (the Court entrance)-probably opposite though- but maybe lurking around the edges of the archway-but close enough to 'Ave a look' and 'stand guard' [for whatever reason]-oddly for that amount of time! ('When all night long a chap remains ' lurking dangerously here in the brain!!)

.....Mind you ,as I said earlier there was only one way out of MC (as far as we know)- so a lurk would make some sort of sense...IF we knew why he lurked for so long.. and why......of course if we did.................:rolleyes2:

Suz xx

Normy
07-13-2008, 05:08 PM
Hi Suzi, all
Wasn't it pouring with rain? The entrance to the court had an archway, would have been good shelter.
It's where I would choose to stand, either that or he'd have to rely on his hat!

Sam Flynn
07-13-2008, 07:43 PM
Hi SuziIt's the 'to the court' and 'into the court' that worries meAs I've suggested, it's tricky to imagine that he'd have been able to "see if he could see them" from anywhere other than the court(yard) itself. The Dorset Street entrance to the passageway could hardly be considered "the court", and neither could the tunnel leading from it, and Hutchinson would have to have passed through both in "going to the court". It's worth remembering that Hutchinson refers separately to "the court" and "the corner of Miller's Court" in his press statement, therefore, seen in this light, his "going to the court" may have been precisely equivalent to his "going to the court-yard".

Suzi
07-13-2008, 07:53 PM
Hi Sam!!!
Yep at the end of the day- [as opposed to the end of The Court]...I reckon if the lodging house opposite had a doorway to shelter in that would have been fine and would tie in with Sarah's statement. Personally I wouldn't be lurking in the entrance/archway to Millers Court- apart from the obvious 'traffic' and getting in the way that seems a daft thing to do when there's a perfectly good 'observation' point opposite where you can just 'slide ' away from if needs be!!

He couldn't have been lurking IN the Court (By the Pump) etc because he'd have been seen without a doubt...unless he did it on a regular basis..Ooooooh it's only "George the Pump "(!!!) again and ignored him

Anyway......... Maybe he hoped to just
avoid detection.....Oooops...darned people coming and going after arguing with partners!!! !)

Suz x
I still think it's all in the language- 'Going dahn the court ' etc etc
Meaning going Dahn to the entrance or where he knew the entrance of it to be - Like 'Going Dahn the road' etc
- or maybe going dahn Romford

he he just been boring hubby senseless with this- If-I said 'I'm goin' dahn Southsea' I dont specify where but he gets the gist.... Now if Hutch said he was 'Going dahn the Court' the same thing applies........doesn't it.... :)
xx

DVV
07-13-2008, 08:01 PM
So Hutch walked into the yard, but unlike Mary Cox, who stated that there was no light nor noise in MK's room, he is very elusive about what he saw or did not see there.
A definitely puzzling witness.

Amitiés
DVV

Suzi
07-13-2008, 08:15 PM
So Hutch walked into the yard, but unlike Mary Cox, who stated that there was no light nor noise in MK's room, he is very elusive about what he saw or did not see there.
A definitely puzzling witness.

Amitiés
DVV

Who says Hutch walked INTO the yard?
Mary Cox's statement is fine and so is Elizabeth Praters' trouble is nobody took the trouble to lurk long enough to hear the bit between the singin' and the silence!!! (If that was relevant of course!!)

DVV
07-13-2008, 08:41 PM
Hello Suzi,
according to Hutch himself (The Times and more clearly The Star, 14 nov), who apparently said: "I went up the court and stayed there a couple of minutes."
Clear enough, I believe.
But I made a mistake stating that Hutch did not say anything about the situation there, because he also said, like Mrs Cox, that there was no light nor noise.
Apologies.
DVV

DVV
07-13-2008, 08:50 PM
Hello Suzi,
according to Hutch himself (The Times and more clearly The Star, 14 nov), who apparently said: "I went up the court and stayed there a couple of minutes."
Clear enough, I believe.
But I made a mistake stating that Hutch did not say anything about the situation there, because he also said, like Mrs Cox, that there was no light nor noise.
Apologies.
DVV