PDA

View Full Version : George or Jack


Roy Corduroy
04-24-2014, 05:57 PM
Please cast your vote - Roy

GUT
04-24-2014, 06:17 PM
Well I'll be first, I vote no. It just doesn't add up to me.

But as usual I'm probably wrong.

Hatchett
04-24-2014, 06:26 PM
I agree.

It doesnt rest well.

John Wheat
04-25-2014, 02:35 AM
I think it's highly unlikely that Hutchinson was the Ripper.

Observer
04-25-2014, 03:53 AM
Well I'll be first, I vote no. It just doesn't add up to me.

But as usual I'm probably wrong.

On this occasion you're most decidedly 100 per cent, make no bones about it correct Gut.

Regards

Obserever

Abby Normal
04-25-2014, 05:09 AM
As much as I seem to argue against the anti hutchinsonians I vote no. Probably a just a liar about Aman to gain a little fame and fortune. That option would have been a relevant choice for this poll-as it would be interesting to see how many people beleive at the very least he was not truthfull about his sighting. I also think fish's idea he was mistaken on the day should be included.

That being said I Beleive he is still one of the better candidates as a suspect for the ripper. One of the least weak of a very weak lot.

Cogidubnus
04-25-2014, 11:31 AM
I too vote no

All the best

Dave

Fisherman
04-25-2014, 11:39 AM
Well I'll be first, I vote no. It just doesn't add up to me.

But as usual I'm probably wrong.

No, you are wrong in surmising that you are wrong. Which makes you wrong on the right thing and right on the wrong thing.

Fisherman

GUT
04-25-2014, 04:31 PM
G'day Fish

That's pretty normal for me.

harry
04-25-2014, 07:40 PM
Yes,I believe Hutchinson was the ripper.

babybird67
05-24-2014, 02:44 PM
I think there should be another option, which would read, worthy of further investigation.

I don't think there is enough evidence to say he definitely did it, but I believe he is our best suspect, so I can neither answer yes or no definitively.

bolo
05-24-2014, 03:07 PM
Voted no. I think Hutch just wanted to have his 15 minutes of fame.

pinkmoon
05-24-2014, 03:55 PM
Our killer? no a pimp possible or maybe a look out for our killer one thing we seem to forget Mr abberline took his statement seriously.

GUT
05-24-2014, 04:12 PM
Now a Pimp I'd buy.

Personally I think he just wanted to get lucky.

Roy Corduroy
05-24-2014, 06:55 PM
Good evening GUT,

Now a Pimp I'd buy.


A pimp to the Unfortunates of Whitechapel should be easy to trace in the old records - a man who died of starvation.

Roy

GUT
05-24-2014, 07:01 PM
G'day Roy

I won't argue except to say that a couple of farthing here and there is better than nothing.

pinkmoon
05-25-2014, 01:01 AM
Could George have waited till Kelly's client had left her then gone to her room to rob her and found her dead?

pinkmoon
05-25-2014, 01:07 AM
Good evening GUT,



A pimp to the Unfortunates of Whitechapel should be easy to trace in the old records - a man who died of starvation.

Roy

Hi Roy,surely with Kelly been younger and more attractive then the other victims and having her own place she would have charged a lot more than the other victims thus making it worth while for a pimp to show interest in her?

Sally
05-26-2014, 01:49 PM
I think we should have one of these for Barnett. I bet there'd be some takers.

Bridewell
05-26-2014, 01:59 PM
Voted 'No'. Hutchinson is a possible like many others, but no more.

Bridewell
05-26-2014, 02:00 PM
I think we should have one of these for Barnett. I bet there'd be some takers.

I'd still have to vote 'No', but he's a better candidate for the Kelly murder than Hutchinson IMHO.

pinkmoon
05-26-2014, 02:03 PM
I think it's very hard to imagine whoever killed poor Mary Kelly went away and lived a very ordinary and non violent life.

GUT
05-26-2014, 02:06 PM
G'day Pinkmoon

I think it's very hard to imagine whoever killed poor Mary Kelly went away and lived a very ordinary and non violent life.

So reasoned MM.

pinkmoon
05-26-2014, 02:22 PM
G'day Pinkmoon



So reasoned MM.

Hi gut,very good reasoning indeed when people propose a suspect for these vile crimes they should really try and think why their suspect stopped killing I think death or the asylum are the only solutions.

GUT
05-26-2014, 02:38 PM
Hi gut,very good reasoning indeed when people propose a suspect for these vile crimes they should really try and think why their suspect stopped killing I think death or the asylum are the only solutions.

Except I would add took his murderous ways elsewhere, was arrested or became disabled.

When I was just a nipper and becoming interested in Jack I formed the conclusion that we were looking for someone who fitted that description, while know that SKs do take long breaks it just doesn't sit with the level of violence.

I'd rather accept the "No Jack" hypothesis than "he went on to live a happy settled life." But that, of course is just my opinion.

pinkmoon
05-26-2014, 02:44 PM
Except I would add took his murderous ways elsewhere, was arrested or became disabled.

When I was just a nipper and becoming interested in Jack I formed the conclusion that we were looking for someone who fitted that description, while know that SKs do take long breaks it just doesn't sit with the level of violence.

I'd rather accept the "No Jack" hypothesis than "he went on to live a happy settled life." But that, of course is just my opinion.
There's killing and there's what happend to Mary Kelly I just can't see our killer retiring putting his feet up and living happily ever after.

GUT
05-26-2014, 02:48 PM
Yes Pinkmoon

It was specifically MJK I was talking of.

Sally
05-27-2014, 04:11 AM
No poll for Barnett then? What about Druitt? We could have one for him, or how about Tumblety? :scratchchin:

I see that most people have voted ‘No’ – hardly surprising for a polar question poll. We could perform the same exercise with almost any other popular suspect and get a similar response. This is because the poll is asking respondents to commit to a certainty – to nail their colours to the mast - the majority of people are unwilling/unable to do that, simply because there is no certainty.

I ran a similar ‘Was he the Ripper?’ poll for Charles Crossmere a couple of years back and had similar results – although that poll was set up with a range of options to reflect the scale of opinion that we should expect and thus probably a more accurate measure of that opinion.

We obviously don’t know who the Ripper was – if we did, none of us would be here. My observation on the personal conviction of posters frequenting this site is that most of them like to keep an open mind about who the killer [or killers if we prefer] was [were?]

A few have a strong personal preference for a particular suspect – which is why in a poll asking the same Yes/No question for Barnett, we could expect to see a similar percentage of posters voting ‘Yes’ - in spite of the fact that Barnett was interrogated by the police at length, had an alibi for Kelly’s murder and went on to live an ordinary, utterly unremarkable life [as an aside, it’s often proposed that Barnett is a good candidate for Kelly but not the others – given the above, shouldn’t it be the other way around, if at all??]

There’s somebody for everybody, as they say.

I’m not sure what this poll tells us that we didn’t know before? [or at least should have known] What it doesn’t tell us is that Hutchinson isn’t a viable suspect – because it can’t do that. It doesn’t tell us that he isn’t a popular suspect in Ripperology either – along with a few other popular suspects, it’s usually possible to find an ongoing discussion about him on the forums and he’s the subject of more than one suspect book.

I personally don’t see why he isn’t a viable suspect – although I’m fully cognisant of other possibilities to account for his behaviour. Why not? He’s as good as several other suspects that come to mind – including Barnett, since he at least had a verifiable alibi – and better than some.

GUT
05-27-2014, 04:18 AM
G'day Sally

We could perform the same exercise with almost any other popular suspect and get a similar response.

And if that wasn't the case this site might die

Sally
05-27-2014, 04:40 AM
G'day Sally



And if that wasn't the case this site might die

Yep - exactly so, Gut - horses for courses as they say.

Sally
05-27-2014, 05:10 AM
It's worth pointing out that the last time we had a general 'Who was the Ripper?' poll the named candidate who had the most votes was Druitt; Charles le Grand came second and Hutchinson wasn't included in the options at all! :lol:

http://forum.casebook.org/showthread.php?t=6143&highlight=poll

Perhaps it's time we had a new one...

Fisherman
05-27-2014, 10:35 AM
I ran a similar ‘Was he the Ripper?’ poll for Charles Crossmere a couple of years back and had similar results – although that poll was set up with a range of options to reflect the scale of opinion that we should expect and thus probably a more accurate measure of that opinion.



Yeah - you used the four options "Very likely" (5 takers, 9.26%), "Possible" (15 votes, 27.78%), "Improbable", 13 disciples, 24.07%) and "Highly unlikely" 21 takers, 38,89 %).
If we split this in positive and negative groupings, we get 37,04 per cent for and 62,96 per cent against, as opposed to Hutchinsons 4-25, or 80 per cent plus against.
Then again - CAN we divide it into a positive and a negative group ni the Lechmere case? No, we cannot, since all the groups except "very likely"/"highly unlikely" and "highly likely/improbable" float into each other. The outcome is therefore a very hard one to interpret.
I said back then and I say now that there was never anything wrong with a scale ranging from 1-10, representing "almost certain he was" down to "almost certain he was not".

That can be good to keep in mind the next time we poll away. And there is also how we ask things to consider: the question "Was XX the Ripper?" will inevitably be regarded as something most people won´t buy into, whereas the question "How big is the chance that XX was the Ripper?" or "Could XX have been the Ripper?" will attract more positivism.

Polls are unpredictable beasts if you walk them in the wrong kind of leash.

The best,
Fisherman

Fisherman
05-27-2014, 10:39 AM
It's worth pointing out that the last time we had a general 'Who was the Ripper?' poll the named candidate who had the most votes was Druitt; Charles le Grand came second and Hutchinson wasn't included in the options at all! :lol:

http://forum.casebook.org/showthread.php?t=6143&highlight=poll

Perhaps it's time we had a new one...

TWO people voted for Feigenbaum ...? :scratchchin:

The best,
Fisherman

Sally
05-27-2014, 11:29 AM
TWO people voted for Feigenbaum ...? :scratchchin:

The best,
Fisherman

Apparently so, Fish - and six for Druitt. Who are all these closet Druittists??

I'd like to see a new general suspect poll as a successor to the first - just out of interest - a more inclusive poll, perhaps.

bolo
05-27-2014, 11:33 AM
In a yes-or-no poll, I would always vote no for every suspect that has been named in the past years. There is none that I find really convincing.

Wickerman
05-27-2014, 05:35 PM
The question posed in the poll is really too pointed. Hutchinson could have been a lot of things without being 'Jack' himself.

Is the question aimed at Hutchinson's character, or is it aimed at identifying JtR?

Similar poll's could have asked, "Was Hutchinson guilty of anything?"
Or, "Did Hutchinson lie about anything?".
I'm sure the results would be markedly different from what we have at present.

And no, I haven't even voted on this poll yet.

... There is none that I find really convincing.

Agreed.
Though I might add that the killer may have been mentioned in passing, in the press. Some unnamed character arrested for suspicious behavior, then let go...

Roy Corduroy
05-27-2014, 06:41 PM
Good evening Wickerman,

The question posed in the poll is really too pointed. Is the question aimed at Hutchinson's character, or is it aimed at identifying JtR?

I don't think its pointed at all for a SUSPECT Thread. The question is obviously aimed at whether George Hutchinson was Jack the Ripper. Because this is a George Hutchinson Suspect Thread. You are aware that George Hutchinson was proposed as a Ripper suspect, aren't you?

Hutchinson could have been a lot of things without being 'Jack' himself.

Absolutely. And all of those things, in fact, everything under the sun the moon and the stars, the planets, the universe, the pillars of graphology and all the rest can be discussed in a thread under

Witnesses

Its' easy to make a George Hutchinson Witness thread on Casebook Message Boards. I've done it several times. Simply go to the Witness section, and IGNORE the name George Hutchinson with an arrow at the TOP, because that will automatically re-direct your thread to be a George Hutchinson Suspect Thread. :anxious:

15952

Instead, go the very BOTTOM and choose New Thread. :scholar:

Roy

Sally
05-28-2014, 02:18 AM
The question posed in the poll is really too pointed. Hutchinson could have been a lot of things without being 'Jack' himself.

Is the question aimed at Hutchinson's character, or is it aimed at identifying JtR?

Similar poll's could have asked, "Was Hutchinson guilty of anything?"
Or, "Did Hutchinson lie about anything?".
I'm sure the results would be markedly different from what we have at present.

And no, I haven't even voted on this poll yet.

I might add that the killer may have been mentioned in passing, in the press. Some unnamed character arrested for suspicious behavior, then let go...

Great post, Jon. For once, we're in agreement :)

Fisherman
05-28-2014, 02:31 AM
Great post, Jon. For once, we're in agreement :)

Can I join in too...?

I must make a reservation for the soundness of DRoys argument, though - in a suspect thread, the question alternatives do suffice to some extent!

As a tool to grasp the full extent of what people think of Hutchinson as a suspect, the alternatives are not enough, though.

... but as I´ve said, polls are hard to handle. My suggestion of a scale with ten graded but unnamed alternatives ranging from "He was almost certainly the Ripper" to "He was almost certainly not the Ripper" makes for the best alternative, methinks - but even in this case, what we ask will govern what is answered. If we ask "Is it probable that Hutchinson was the Ripper", then people will think "No, as such it is not probable, so let´s grade it a two or so", but if we instead ask "Is there a possibility that Hutchinson could have been the Ripper", then people will instead identify a possibility to allow them to speculate in a positive manner, and then the same respondents will inevitably go "Yes, of course the possibility is there, so let´s say five", or something like that.

It´s a precarious balance act, shaping a poll, and not everybody realizes this.

The best,
Fisherman

Sally
05-28-2014, 03:05 AM
Hi Fish,

I'm not sure that everybody takes polls as seriously as you appear to - at least not when they're put up on an internet message forum. That's not a criticism, by the way - just an observation.

At the end of the day, the most that can be hoped for from a poll is to guage popular opinion; and even then, the results of a poll can't be definitive. Obviously the way in which a poll is phrased can have a direct bearing on the results - as in this case. We've had our difference over polls in the past - I'm sorry that you thought my Crossmere poll was inadequate; I was trying to include a range of options [as I've said above] rather than a polar question. As I may have said, I didn't vote for 'improbable' [or whatever it was] because at the end of the day I can't entirely rule out Crossmere looking at it objectively [however unlikely I consider it to be personally]

The same for Hutch, really. As you and Jon both suggest, there are several options here. Realistically, that's how the situation stands and will probably remain, on the assumption that our current state of knowledge remains unaltered.

I hope you've seen that Crossmere is included in the latest round of suspect polls - I was going to put one up [and also would have included Crossmere] but Roy beat me to it.

Ben
05-28-2014, 08:44 AM
Hi Fisherman,

Your post #32 was reasonable, with the disappointing exception of this bit:

"Yeah - you used the four options "Very likely" (5 takers, 9.26%), "Possible" (15 votes, 27.78%), "Improbable", 13 disciples, 24.07%) and "Highly unlikely" 21 takers, 38,89 %. If we split this in positive and negative groupings, we get 37,04 per cent for and 62,96 per cent against, as opposed to Hutchinsons 4-25, or 80 per cent plus against."

You can forget that immediately, since we know that amongst the "no" voters were those who would have given what you describe as a "positive" vote had there been an option such as "possible" or "reasonable" on the Hutchinson poll. We also know there were others who didn't post at all due the lack of these options.

Regards,
Ben

babybird67
05-28-2014, 10:35 AM
I would have been a 'probable' if given the option. He is the epitome of the 'uknown local male', can be placed at a crime scene at a time germane to the commission of the crime, delayed coming forward, certainly lied about aspects of his account which doesn't make sense and in geographical location and other descriptors fits what we now know via profiling about the behaviour of serial killers.

By far, by far, the best suspect we have. :)

By the way, I am sure I once fielded a poll to try to garner opinion on whether Hutchinson was thought by modern researchers and us lay persons who aren't really allowed an opinion (;)) to be lying, and I am sure it was a resounding, yes we believe he was lying. I can remember Fish then fielding a retaliatory one asking was the other witness who saw him there lying and that was a resounding no. I can't locate them at the moment. I can't remember the other witness's name either...Sarah something...sorry I am currently experiencing a relapse of my illness and brain fog is one of the worst symptoms.

Beebs x

Fisherman
05-28-2014, 10:58 AM
Hi Fisherman,

Your post #32 was reasonable, with the disappointing exception of this bit:



You can forget that immediately, since we know that amongst the "no" voters were those who would have given what you describe as a "positive" vote had there been an option such as "possible" or "reasonable" on the Hutchinson poll. We also know there were others who didn't post at all due the lack of these options.

Regards,
Ben

The problem is - for example - that the "worst" bid (highly unlikely) shares space with the next best one (possible). It will inevitably muddle the outcome, I´m afraid.

Fisherman

pinkmoon
05-29-2014, 05:28 AM
Why didn't Mr Hutchinson pay Mary Kelly a visit? He was prepared to hang round for a long time on a cold night he would have seen her clients leave so is it possible he did visit her and found her murdered.

Wickerman
05-29-2014, 04:45 PM
Why didn't Mr Hutchinson pay Mary Kelly a visit? He was prepared to hang round for a long time on a cold night he would have seen her clients leave so is it possible he did visit her and found her murdered.

If you put yourself in Hutchinson's position (as above), wouldn't you have told the police?

pinkmoon
05-30-2014, 08:53 AM
If you put yourself in Hutchinson's position (as above), wouldn't you have told the police?

If I was paying a visit to a prostitute and I found her brutally murdered would I report it to the police I doubt it if I was calling round on respectable business like collecting rent and I found prostitute brutally murdered would I report it yes I would.It is quite possible that someone saw our killer leaving Kelly's room and didnt report it that someone could quite possibly be one of her clients.

Wickerman
05-31-2014, 05:04 AM
Great post, Jon. For once, we're in agreement :)

Happy to hear it Sally.
Mighty Oaks from small acorns grow...
:)

In all honesty though, we could ask the same questions about others, like McCarthy?
- Was he the killer?
- Was he guilty of anything? (he was a local 'tough')
- Did he lie about anything? (like, her rent arrears?)


Re: Hutchinson.

I personally don’t see why he isn’t a viable suspect – although I’m fully cognisant of other possibilities to account for his behaviour. Why not? He’s as good as several other suspects that come to mind – including Barnett, since he at least had a verifiable alibi – and better than some.

Perhaps to clear the waters a little...
For my part, I have never claimed he wasn't a viable suspect. The list of viable suspects is potentially endless, of course he is among them.
To go from viable to likely is a major hurdle, and requires more than the poorly created arguments we see thrown at Hutchinson.

Every argument used against him is a negative argument, and by that I mean that he is suspected due to our lack of information not, due to a positive argument, where we 'know' he did or said something wrong.

WE (you, me & every living soul) have not yet shown any proof he actually told ONE lie, about ANYTHING.
All, is supposition, and we can invent arguments based on supposition against anyone.

That is the basis for my objections.

Wickerman
05-31-2014, 05:42 AM
If I was paying a visit to a prostitute and I found her brutally murdered would I report it to the police I doubt it...

Mary Kelly is an acquaintance isn't she?, you've known her for the last three years. Why the need to assume you are calling on her as a client, and not as a friend?
Unrelated people did share accommodations, in this case you may have just needed a bed for the night, you call on her to ask if she can oblige..

keffins
04-04-2017, 01:08 AM
Hi everyone. Quick thought...

Schwartz stated he thought a man with a pipe watched Stride being attacked and followed him for a while after the Lipsky shout.

GH stated he stood across from Millers Court watching.

Could GH possibly be a look out, JTR being two people?

Michael W Richards
04-04-2017, 02:45 AM
My money is on George Hutchinson being a possible lookout, who only came forward when he realized he'd been spotted by someone. His story would have been relevant, and the information within it important, so the wait for almost 4 days before presenting it doesn't marry well with his other claim that they knew each other and were friends. Like Carrie Maxwells story, although she jumped at the opportunity to offer her two cents.

I think its possible George knew what happened in that room, and maybe who probably did the deed, but heroes are hard to come by and people rarely admit to being less than one after the fact.

Some of these witnesses lead us all down lanes we needn't travel, but I think George is worth following..although not as the knife man.

Abby Normal
04-04-2017, 03:49 AM
Hi everyone. Quick thought...

Schwartz stated he thought a man with a pipe watched Stride being attacked and followed him for a while after the Lipsky shout.

GH stated he stood across from Millers Court watching.

Could GH possibly be a look out, JTR being two people?

Hi keffins
Welcome. Hutch was described by Sarah Lewis as short. Pipeman was tall. I doubt hutch was piepman.

Besides, postmortem type serial killers always work alone.

Abby Normal
04-04-2017, 04:26 AM
Hi keffins
Welcome. Hutch was described by Sarah Lewis as short. Pipeman was tall. I doubt hutch was piepman.

Besides, postmortem type serial killers always work alone.

Oh and yes, out of all the suspects, I think hutch was most likely to be jack, if not him then blotchy.

Joshua Rogan
04-04-2017, 06:08 AM
Hi Keffins,
For me, the lookout theory is a non-starter. Schwartz, the only source we have for Pipeman, says he followed Broad Shouldered man down the length of Berner Street to the gateway where he met and accosted Stride. Yet Pipeman was apparently already hanging about in a doorway well beyond the gateway, so it's difficult to see how they could be in cahoots.
Likewise, I've never been able to fathom what need a killer in a private dwelling down a narrow court would have for a lookout.

Michael W Richards
04-04-2017, 07:54 AM
Dismissing George as a possible accomplice is unwise considering that this murder prompted, before George came forward, a Pardon for Accomplices. Its likely that the officers learned of Wideawake that Friday or early Saturday, and responded quickly with a pardon offer Saturday afternoon.

There is no reason to assume that this offer wasn't made due to the wideawake hat sighting, and no reason to assume the officers didn't feel the offer was warranted by the known evidence.

If you stop looking for the same people at every murder site....ie..looking for George among the Schwartz alledged attendees....you might enjoy a better path to the truth.

The ONLY truth in these murders is that there isn't a shred of known evidence linking any of the crimes with any one man for any one murder, let alone one man for all 5.

They are all unsolved and linked only by opinions.

Meaning...there may well have been 1 or more men involved in all of them , or any individual murder.

keffins
04-05-2017, 02:11 AM
Or maybe he waited until he could no longer hear MJK singing..?

Michael W Richards
04-05-2017, 02:47 AM
Or maybe he waited until he could no longer hear MJK singing..?

Kidding aside, there is legitimate suspicion about someone seen essentially spying on the courtyard, long after the lights in room 13 had been dimmed as well.

The implication here is that he was "looking out" for someone already in the room, not someone who might arrive, and as far as we know, Blotchy might still be in there.

keffins
04-06-2017, 04:48 AM
Not sure it was Blotchy. I believe he had already left, or would have joined in with MJK's singing "A flower I plucked" or be heard laughing/talking loudly.
And as she was heard singing for a while, I would have thought he'd have told her to be quiet after 10 mins or so?
Also, if he'd passed out on the bed, i don't believe he would be in any mood when awaking with a hangover to commit a frenzied murder.
GH could well be a lookout for a man who entered as the lights went out. Or GH knew MJK well, had visited her before and knew how to access the locked room whilst she was asleep.

Abby Normal
04-06-2017, 07:18 AM
Not sure it was Blotchy. I believe he had already left, or would have joined in with MJK's singing "A flower I plucked" or be heard laughing/talking loudly.
And as she was heard singing for a while, I would have thought he'd have told her to be quiet after 10 mins or so?
Also, if he'd passed out on the bed, i don't believe he would be in any mood when awaking with a hangover to commit a frenzied murder.
GH could well be a lookout for a man who entered as the lights went out. Or GH knew MJK well, had visited her before and knew how to access the locked room whilst she was asleep.

Hi Keffins
Not sure it was Blotchy. I believe he had already left, or would have joined in with MJK's singing "A flower I plucked" or be heard laughing/talking loudly.
And as she was heard singing for a while, I would have thought he'd have told her to be quiet after 10 mins or so?
Also, if he'd passed out on the bed, i don't believe he would be in any mood when awaking with a hangover to commit a frenzied murder.


Blotchy was silent when Cox saw them and may have trying to be inconspicous for any number of reasons-so doubt he would be noisy or sing with her!! if he was the ripper, and I think there is a good chance he was he may have been waiting for the court to die down and or Mary getting more drunk/pass out before he went for the kill. which may explain the apparent length of time he was with her.
Blotchy was the last legit suspect seen with Mary that evening-and no I don't believe Hutchs Aman story suspect for one second.

GH could well be a lookout for a man who entered as the lights went out. Or GH knew MJK well, had visited her before and knew how to access the locked room whilst she was asleep

He wasn't a look out. he was a "friend" of Marys who (if blotchy was the ripper) was probably looking for a place to crash and or hook up with her. I think he realized she was already preoccupied in her room and was waiting for blotchy to leave. If blotchy wasn't her killer then I think theres a slighty better chance hutch was her killer. and he came back after waiting to see that blotchy had left before entering her room.

so I guess Ive played my hand that my favored suspects are Hutch and Blotchy-Ive got them ranked 1 and 1 A on my list!

John G
04-06-2017, 08:18 AM
Hi keffins
Welcome. Hutch was described by Sarah Lewis as short. Pipeman was tall. I doubt hutch was piepman.

Besides, postmortem type serial killers always work alone.

Hi Abby,

Here's a fairly extreme possibility to consider: Could Hutch, about whom we know very little, apart from the fact he was described as being of "military appearance", have been blotchy?

Abby Normal
04-06-2017, 08:29 AM
Hi Abby,

Here's a fairly extreme possibility to consider: Could Hutch, about whom we know very little, apart from the fact he was described as being of "military appearance", have been blotchy?

Naa. ive heard that before. Timings not right-I doubt hutch would have lingered around after he killed her.

Also, blotchy while described as short just like waiting man/hutch-but had a very distinctive look. I would have thought Abberline or someone would have picked up on it.

Michael W Richards
04-06-2017, 09:08 AM
One thing about George....by showing up at the police station Monday after the Inquiry closed, he avoided being seen by any other witness related to the Kelly murder. That's Sarah....Mary Ann, Elizabeth, ...all witnesses that by vantage point were valuable stories in this investigation.

Heres one for you, just occurred to me now...what if George was a Pimp and he was there ensuring that Mary Ann and maybe Elizabeth were working.

John G
04-06-2017, 09:28 AM
Naa. ive heard that before. Timings not right-I doubt hutch would have lingered around after he killed her.

Also, blotchy while described as short just like waiting man/hutch-but had a very distinctive look. I would have thought Abberline or someone would have picked up on it.

Hi Abby,

Yes, you make a fair point about Blotchy's distinctive complexion. However, I don't see a problem with timings. If Hutch was Blotchy he must have, for instance, made up the latter AS man sighting-as he would have murdered Kelly by that time- presumably to deflect attention away from himself following Cox's evidence.

Abby Normal
04-06-2017, 09:32 AM
Hi Abby,

Yes, you make a fair point about Blotchy's distinctive complexion. However, I don't see a problem with timings. If Hutch was Blotchy he must have made up the latter AS man sighting, presumably to deflect attention away from himself following Cox's evidence.

well I'm convinced That sarah Lewis saw him so IMHO he was there waiting and watching at the time they both said he was. and I believe he made up A man for whatever reason.

John G
04-06-2017, 09:39 AM
well I'm convinced That sarah Lewis saw him so IMHO he was there waiting and watching at the time they both said he was. and I believe he made up A man for whatever reason.

Hi Abby,

Yes, that's an excellent point about Sarah Lewis, which I must admit I'd failed to consider. And it does seem very likely that, if he be did lie about A Man, it was Lewis's evidence that prompted him to come forward.

Harry D
04-06-2017, 10:20 AM
Of course, if Hutchinson did come forward because he knew Sarah Lewis had seen him, that doesn't automatically make him a suspect. I think 'Astrakhan Man' was likely an embellishment, if not a total fabrication. However, he knew it didn't look him good for him to be caught sniffing around a crime-scene, innocent or no, and decided to come forward.

keffins
04-07-2017, 02:31 AM
At 11:45 pm Mary Ann Cox,saw Kelly walking ahead of her with Blotchy.

As Cox went into her home, she heard Kelly starting to sing “A Violet from Mother’s Grave”. - She started singing immediately.

Catherine Pickett and her husband, remember hearing her singing at 12:30 am as well. Catherine remembered that she wanted to go shut Kelly up and her husband prevented her from doing so - possibly indicating rather loud singing.

If MJK had taken Blotchy for professional reasons, surely he would be bored of her singing after 2 or 3 minutes, never mind 3/4 of an hour - and would have wanted some "action".

At midnight, Cox went back out, and then came back an hour later at 1 am, the light was on in Kelly’s room and Cox could still hear her singing.
This is now 1 hour and 15 minutes of potentially loud singing and probably no action for Blotchy.
I just can't see him putting up with this and THEN murdering her. I feel if he was the killer, he would have snapped after 5 minutes or less.

Michael W Richards
04-07-2017, 02:33 AM
Of course, if Hutchinson did come forward because he knew Sarah Lewis had seen him, that doesn't automatically make him a suspect. I think 'Astrakhan Man' was likely an embellishment, if not a total fabrication. However, he knew it didn't look him good for him to be caught sniffing around a crime-scene, innocent or no, and decided to come forward.

I believe that's the gist of George's situation also. I also believe he waited to come out of the woodwork because he didn't want any of the other witnesses to see him. The fact that he was watching vs just hanging around is a key point. That was a densely populated street and people out and about at night wouldn't be too surprising. In fact its interesting that so few were out that night.

But the watching for me indicates one of three things...1, he was a peeping tom waiting for a chance to peek through windows, 2, he was planning to do something in that court himself and was waiting something out...or he was watching out for someone.

Michael W Richards
04-07-2017, 02:40 AM
At 11:45 pm Mary Ann Cox,saw Kelly walking ahead of her with Blotchy.

As Cox went into her home, she heard Kelly starting to sing “A Violet from Mother’s Grave”. - She started singing immediately.

Catherine Pickett and her husband, remember hearing her singing at 12:30 am as well. Catherine remembered that she wanted to go shut Kelly up and her husband prevented her from doing so - possibly indicating rather loud singing.

If MJK had taken Blotchy for professional reasons, surely he would be bored of her singing after 2 or 3 minutes, never mind 3/4 of an hour - and would have wanted some "action".

At midnight, Cox went back out, and then came back an hour later at 1 am, the light was on in Kelly’s room and Cox could still hear her singing. This is now 1 hour and 15 minutes of potentially loud singing and probably no action for Blotchy. I just can't see him putting up with this and THEN murdering her. I feel if he was the killer, he would have snapped after 5 minutes or less.

That part in bold is the best argument for Blotchy not having been a client. No-one pays street whores for concerts. I think Blotchy was to see Mary home, and then to report to someone else about her condition and the courtyards. he probably bought her drinks too.

The weakness for alcohol with all of these women, and hundreds others in the district, was something that could be used against them...I think Kate was bought drinks Saturday afternoon to get her to chat.

Bridewell
04-07-2017, 02:11 PM
I'm in a minority of perhaps just me in thinking that Hutchinson saw what he says he did. What he noted (or claimed to note) about Astrakhan Man were the details which suggested that he was prosperous. I don't think he was waiting for MJK; more likely hoping to relieve Astrakhan Man of his valuables on his way out - in the circumstances (emerging from the room of a prostitute) he was guaranteed not to be interested in going to the police. Hutchinson as a low-life is likely - don't see him as the killer though.

Wickerman
04-07-2017, 02:48 PM
well I'm convinced That sarah Lewis saw him so IMHO he was there waiting and watching at the time they both said he was. and I believe he made up A man for whatever reason.

I agree that Sarah L. saw Hutch, and if we can put "two & two together", so could Abberline. If that scenario had happened today the detectives would want Sarah L. to meet Hutch to confirm he was the man she saw.
I see no reason to believe Abberline would see it differently.

Bridewell
04-07-2017, 03:00 PM
I agree that Sarah L. saw Hutch, and if we can put "two & two together", so could Abberline. If that scenario had happened today the detectives would want Sarah L. to meet Hutch to confirm he was the man she saw.
I see no reason to believe Abberline would see it differently.

I think I'm missing the point here, Jon. If Hutchinson puts himself there anyway, how would an ID by Sarah L do anything other than confirm something which Hutchinson wasn't disputing anyway?

Wickerman
04-07-2017, 03:09 PM
Hi Keffins,
For me, the lookout theory is a non-starter.
.... I've never been able to fathom what need a killer in a private dwelling down a narrow court would have for a lookout.

Agreed, it makes no practical sense at that location.
By the time the lookout ran down the passage, alerted his buddy, and both came back up the passage. The constable would be right out front.

No-one has explained just how this 'lookout' theory is supposed to work.

Wickerman
04-07-2017, 03:16 PM
I think I'm missing the point here, Jon. If Hutchinson puts himself there anyway, how would an ID by Sarah L do anything other than confirm something which Hutchinson wasn't disputing anyway?

The scenario has been proposed that Hutch made his story up based on the extremely detailed description he gave of Astrakhan.

If Abberline had cause to doubt Hutch, then at least he had Sara L. as his prime witness to confirm time & date of Hutchinson's presence.
Personally, I don't think Abberline doubted Hutch, but if he did, at least he had Sarah L. to reach out to.

Wickerman
04-07-2017, 03:25 PM
I'm in a minority of perhaps just me in thinking that Hutchinson saw what he says he did.....

You're not alone, but we are a minority.
It is unfortunate that the court recorder did not provide more of Lewis's testimony. The newspapers who covered the inquest gave a little more detail.

For instance, Lewis saw a man & woman ahead of Hutch enter the passage. The female was the worst for drink & hat-less. Which seems confirm Hutch's story to that extent at least.
Hutch was there, and he saw someone with Kelly.

Michael W Richards
04-07-2017, 06:14 PM
Agreed, it makes no practical sense at that location.
By the time the lookout ran down the passage, alerted his buddy, and both came back up the passage. The constable would be right out front.

No-one has explained just how this 'lookout' theory is supposed to work.

Workable scenarios arent that hard to imagine are they? I can think of a few off the top of my head;

a) Wideawake is sent to wait and watch until all the courtyard traffic had ceased for the night. Then he would let whomever eventually kills her that the "coast was clear"
b) Wideawake is to watch for anyone entering the courtyard while his associate is in the room, and something like whistle if it seems dangerous.
c) Wideawake is watching for Blotchy to leave.


Essentially all stories revolve around the Wideawake character making sure that whomever was in the room with Mary didnt get caught off guard by someone. Considering that much of his time is spent facing the partition wall and with his back to the windows and door, might have been a prudent idea. Though then you have 2 people who need to keep their mouth shut after the fact.

Im not convinced myself that Hutchinson was really Wideawake though. He uses an existing statement and unknown character and places himself at the scene in the same time frame, in the shoes of unknown Mr Wideawake. I agree with an earlier statement that an introduction of Sarah to George via a lineup would have been very interesting.

Why would he do that? Why place himself in a suspicious characters shoes? Dangerous game. And with an obviously embellished.. at the very least... story.

I suspect he was sent in by someone he feared to explain why someone was seen there watching the court, making it appear benign...instead of waiting for the police to pursue further the notion that the lookout and killer worked together. They may also have been known by police to have worked together, which is why identifying one might have identified both.

Wickerman
04-07-2017, 06:52 PM
Hi Michael.

What I alluded to earlier is a practical example of how a man out in Dorset St. could raise the alarm to someone in a room, within Millers Court.

And, who was the 'lookout' looking out for?
Constables were supposed to patrol Dorset St., and one witness even suggested the footsteps she heard 'might' have been a Constable patrolling the Court that night.

Ok, so this killer was occupied within room 13 for, how long, an hour or two?
How many constables had to have passed up and down Dorset St. in that time?

Then there is the opinion that no constables actually patrolled Dorset St., so what was the 'lookout', looking out for?
But this opinion must be weighed against the witness who alluded to a constable in the court that night.
She is hardly likely to invent the elusive constable, if constables never patrolled the court at all.

There is only one exit from that court, as I said earlier, by the time the alarm is raised any constable coming down the street is going to see someone leaving Millers Court right in front of him.
It just doesn't make a lot of sense.

Varqm
04-08-2017, 01:51 AM
"Originally Posted by keffins View Post
At 11:45 pm Mary Ann Cox,saw Kelly walking ahead of her with Blotchy.

As Cox went into her home, she heard Kelly starting to sing “A Violet from Mother’s Grave”. - She started singing immediately.

Catherine Pickett and her husband, remember hearing her singing at 12:30 am as well. Catherine remembered that she wanted to go shut Kelly up and her husband prevented her from doing so - possibly indicating rather loud singing.

If MJK had taken Blotchy for professional reasons, surely he would be bored of her singing after 2 or 3 minutes, never mind 3/4 of an hour - and would have wanted some "action".

At midnight, Cox went back out, and then came back an hour later at 1 am, the light was on in Kelly’s room and Cox could still hear her singing. This is now 1 hour and 15 minutes of potentially loud singing and probably no action for Blotchy. I just can't see him putting up with this and THEN murdering her. I feel if he was the killer, he would have snapped after 5 minutes or less.
That part in bold is the best argument for Blotchy not having been a client. No-one pays street whores for concerts. I think Blotchy was to see Mary home, and then to report to someone else about her condition and the courtyards. he probably bought her drinks too.

The weakness for alcohol with all of these women, and hundreds others in the district, was something that could be used against them...I think Kate was bought drinks Saturday afternoon to get her to chat.
__________________
Michael Richards "



The thing though is, it does not say if Kelly was "continuously" singing the whole time.Blotchy could have used his mic for 2-4 minutes and Kelly could have resumed singing after the deed.

Wickerman
04-08-2017, 11:04 AM
At midnight, Cox went back out, and then came back an hour later at 1 am, the light was on in Kelly’s room and Cox could still hear her singing.
This is now 1 hour and 15 minutes of potentially loud singing and probably no action for Blotchy.


Was Cox correct in what she said?, if you recall Mrs Prater said there was no singing after 1:00 am, and no light from room 13 either.

Abby Normal
04-08-2017, 03:45 PM
At 11:45 pm Mary Ann Cox,saw Kelly walking ahead of her with Blotchy.

As Cox went into her home, she heard Kelly starting to sing “A Violet from Mother’s Grave”. - She started singing immediately.

Catherine Pickett and her husband, remember hearing her singing at 12:30 am as well. Catherine remembered that she wanted to go shut Kelly up and her husband prevented her from doing so - possibly indicating rather loud singing.

If MJK had taken Blotchy for professional reasons, surely he would be bored of her singing after 2 or 3 minutes, never mind 3/4 of an hour - and would have wanted some "action".

At midnight, Cox went back out, and then came back an hour later at 1 am, the light was on in Kelly’s room and Cox could still hear her singing.
This is now 1 hour and 15 minutes of potentially loud singing and probably no action for Blotchy.
I just can't see him putting up with this and THEN murdering her. I feel if he was the killer, he would have snapped after 5 minutes or less.

Killer or not maybe he enjoyed her singing. And how do you know he was a paying client? Maybe they were friends, or hook up, or maybe she was looking for a new sugar daddy and or boyfriend?

DJA
04-08-2017, 09:50 PM
Workable scenarios arent that hard to imagine are they? I can think of a few off the top of my head;

a) Wideawake is sent to wait and watch until all the courtyard traffic had ceased for the night. Then he would let whomever eventually kills her that the "coast was clear"

Completely agree with that statement,however doubt Hutchinson realized he was going to be a lookout for a murder.

Wickerman
04-09-2017, 05:33 AM
A lookout would be running up and down that passage like a yo-yo.

This was a street loaded with doss-houses. People coming and going all night long, and McCarthy's shop at the corner was open 'till three o'clock.
Even if a constable came into the street there's no reason to think he will enter Millers Court. Theorists seem to forget, unless the killer was covered in blood, there would be nothing suspicious about him - what was there to be concerned about?
And if he was covered in blood, a lookout isn't going to help him any.

In those days a killer could walk out of Millers court, right passed a constable, or a group of locals, and he had nothing to fear.

c.d.
04-09-2017, 06:24 AM
I can see having a lookout for a robbery perhaps but I simply cannot imagine a scenario where you say to your buddy "hey I'm going to enter this woman's room and brutally butcher her. Would you mind keeping a lookout for any coppers?" We would have to imagine another incredibly sick individual who would agree with such a plan and if he were that sick and deranged wouldn't he want to be directly involved in the killing as well? Just can't see it.

As a another poster suggested, maybe Hutchinson wasn't aware of the killers intent but that seems unlikely and what about afterwords wouldn't he have noticed the blood on the killer? And that brings up the reward money. Very, very tempting for someone of poor means living in Whitechapel.

c.d.

Sam Flynn
04-09-2017, 07:25 AM
Killer or not maybe he enjoyed her singing. And how do you know he was a paying client?
If I were a prostitute and a punter asked me to sing for him, I don't think I'd choose a dreary ballad about a lad reflecting on his loneliness by contemplating a flower from his mother's tomb. Equally, if I were the punter, that kind song would have had a seriously dampening effect on my ardour, especially after a few beers. I know that the Victorians were reputedly as randy as they were sentimental, but there's limits :)

c.d.
04-09-2017, 07:42 AM
I can see all the witty or smart ass posters on here (depending on your point of view) coming up with possible song titles.

c.d.

Abby Normal
04-09-2017, 02:27 PM
If I were a prostitute and a punter asked me to sing for him, I don't think I'd choose a dreary ballad about a lad reflecting on his loneliness by contemplating a flower from his mother's tomb. Equally, if I were the punter, that kind song would have had a seriously dampening effect on my ardour, especially after a few beers. I know that the Victorians were reputedly as randy as they were sentimental, but there's limits :)

Well then that just shows that it may not have been a punter prostitute encounter. And if he was the ripper then the song makes perfect sense doesn't it ? ; )

Sam Flynn
04-09-2017, 03:58 PM
Well then that just shows that it may not have been a punter prostitute encounter.Indeed. Unless Blotchy was a bit kinkier than we might think.And if he was the ripper then the song makes perfect sense doesn't it ?
In a strange way, you may be right.

caz
05-05-2017, 02:45 AM
If I were a prostitute and a punter asked me to sing for him, I don't think I'd choose a dreary ballad about a lad reflecting on his loneliness by contemplating a flower from his mother's tomb. Equally, if I were the punter, that kind song would have had a seriously dampening effect on my ardour, especially after a few beers. I know that the Victorians were reputedly as randy as they were sentimental, but there's limits :)

Hi Gareth,

Maybe that would have been your typical prostitute's aim, to seriously dampen the ardour of drunken punters after parting them from their pennies. I doubt these women did the business for their health. :rolleyes2:

I can see all the witty or smart ass posters on here (depending on your point of view) coming up with possible song titles.

c.d.

One for Jack to sing: I've got to get you onto my knife.

And one for Mary when he was all done: Don't leave me this way.

Love,

Smart ass Caz
X

Robert
05-05-2017, 03:59 AM
MJK : I've got you under my skin.

FrankO
05-05-2017, 05:07 AM
"Burning heart"... One for Jack perhaps?

Wickerman
05-05-2017, 05:29 PM
Hi Gareth,

Maybe that would have been your typical prostitute's aim, to seriously dampen the ardour of drunken punters after parting them from their pennies. I doubt these women did the business for their health. :rolleyes2:

But she started singing the moment the door was closed, and continued for over an hour.

Not hard to think of a motive now.
:)

Wickerman
05-05-2017, 05:31 PM
Well then that just shows that it may not have been a punter prostitute encounter.

Or maybe Blotchy was deaf?