The Surly Man

[Rubyretro]

will this unblock it ?

[Scorpio]

I did not realise the surly man, or Hutch's motives in his conception were the source of some much contention. Hutch's basic honesty is something that i have never really doubted, and any doubts in validity i would link to non sinister but very human causes. Your contributions are interesting though, but Edward, just who was Hutch looking out for? hhmm?.

[DVV]

I am absolutely convinced that Topping was telling the truth in every respect, and admire the man for his courage in coming foreward.

Hi Richard

the truth is that this surly man's trail leads nowhere, or worst, to Sir Randolph.
True also, is the fact that Hutch said he had seen his suspect again in Petticoat Lane on Sunday morning...and I truly can't swallow that one.
Can you ?

Amitiés
David

[Fisherman]

David:

"True also, is the fact that Hutch said he had seen his suspect again in Petticoat Lane on Sunday morning...and I truly can't swallow that one."

Actually, David, you may not need to swallow it after all - since it is not any fact that Hutchinson did say that he saw his man again in Petticoat Lane. What he said was: "I believe that he lives in the neighbourhood, and I fancied that I saw him in Petticoat lane on Sunday morning, but I was not certain."

So, in fact, Hutch only "fancied" that he saw him, but he was not certain. Why, we don´t know; maybe he saw a man from a distance who reminded him of Astrakhan man, maybe it was a sighting made in a fleeting second in a crowd ... who can tell? What we CAN tell, however, is that it seems that Hutchinson implies that Astrakhan was a man he was to some extent familiar with, since he stated that he believed that he lived in the neighbourhood. That, to me, speaks of prior knowledge on Hutchinsons behalf. And when you have a familiar face popping up in circumstances like the ones surrounding Kelly´s death, then maybe you are slightly prone to interpret his looks into people. Scientifically, it used to be called "dominance of interest", I believe.
Anyway, there was never any certainty in Hutch´s pointing out of Astrakhan man on that Sunday!

The best,
Fisherman

[Rubyretro]

Here is that moving bit of film again (I love it !); OK, granted it was taken in Petticoat Lane 15 years after Hutch's statement...but it surely can't have
changed THAT much in the intervening years- anymore than most of our local streets have radically changed character since the mid '90s ? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tTjzryR7FSg

Now imagine 'neighbourhood face' A Man sauntering down in an astrakhan overcoat, gold watchchain, spats etc..

Surely such a 'local man" would be known to the population -even if just by sight? He certainly would be to the stall holders, eyeing up the crowd for prospective business. Wouldn't all those small boys have avidly watched him ?

To my mind it is inconceivable that Hutch fancied he saw A Man in Petticoat Lane but 'couldn't be sure'. Who would Hutch mix A Man up with -he that had memorised every detail of the man's clothing ?

To my mind it is worth noting that Petticoat Lane Market was described as being 90% Jewish, and it is for this reason that he Hutch bothered to drop the name of the place into his recital.

[Abby Normal]

Ben - Look at that! Cognitive Leapfrog at it's finest!

Seriously though - there a a lot of maybes and might haves here, aren't there? It's interesting what you say about the number of posts actually making the case for Hutchinson being the killer being comparatively few - because he is, at the least, a mysterious figure, isn't he? Perhaps most people would prefer to see innocence rather than guilt?

I think I've identified one of my issues to be with the necessity of inventing Surly Man at all - which brings into question for me whether Hutchinson did actually see him. Why make him up?

Altogether, generally, I think your argument is fair enough, for now. Hmm, and this Hutch/Leiws thing. Off on a tangent, admittedly, but I wonder if it's all a bit over-engineered.

Hi Sally
which brings into question for me whether Hutchinson did actually see him. Why make him up?

To deflect possible suspician from himself, directly blame a jew and help give a reason why he is standing, waiting outside a murdered womens residence.

[Sally]

Let's begin with the last sentence : IF you believe that Hutch was JTR -and I'm not afraid to state that I do- then it is impossible to deny that he was someone who "really, really, likes risk". Infact huge adrenalin rushes during the 'danger period' and then feelings of omnipotence immediately after a murder, might have been part of the motivation.

Of course Hutch's behaviour -if he were guilty- after MJK's murder, of offering to go 'walkabout' with the Police, is extreme. Yet what could be more 'extreme' behaviour than butchering Mary's body for a couple of hours ?

It is apparently a trait of some serial killers to want to prolong the excitement that they felt during a murder by involving themselves in the investigation -thus keeping the killing 'fresh' in their minds.

Actually, what did he have to fear ? There were no DNA tests, he may have known nothing of fingerprinting, and there were no CCT cameras. In Ripper Lore there are witnesses to some murders -but only JTR would have been left to know if that was true, at the time ; maybe there weren't...

...or only (unwittingly) Mrs Lewis..

Hi Rubyretro. I like your post - but how did it get replicated 6 times??

If you choose to accept him as a killer, as you say you do, then fine. It hangs together quite well. It requires that you interpret events surrounding Hutchinson with the presumption of his guilt though.

Yet, you are perhaps right in that, if he truly was the strategist he would have been if he did pull this off - and was the murderer, he would have had nothing to fear.

Yes, there were no CCTV cameras, no dna profiling etc. He would have had the advantage of having put himself forward as a voluntary witness - so who would suspect him, I suppose.

But even more than that, if you are right, and he truly was capable of such brilliant bravado in the full knowledge of having killed at least 5 women - then he had nothing to fear in any case; because he was clearly brighter than the police could ever hope to be.

I am a long way from having decided about all this - the fun is in the mystery for me. It really is interesting to watch this discussion develop - there are so many differing views!

Regards,

Sally

[Fisherman]

Rubyretro:

"To my mind it is inconceivable that Hutch fancied he saw A Man in Petticoat Lane but 'couldn't be sure'. Who would Hutch mix A Man up with -he that had memorised every detail of the man's clothing ?"

What makes you so sure that the man was wearing the same attire? It was a different day. Plus we have no knowledge of the circumstances under which Hutch made this observation.

"Surely such a 'local man" would be known to the population -even if just by sight?"

He probably was, Ruby. Then again, we do not know how many men were wearing astrakhan trimmed coats in that vicinity. We only know that there were enough of them about for Abberline to realize that Hutch´s story was nothing too much out of the ordinary, contrary to what you seemingly believe.

The best,
Fisherman

[Abby Normal]

Rubyretro:

"To my mind it is inconceivable that Hutch fancied he saw A Man in Petticoat Lane but 'couldn't be sure'. Who would Hutch mix A Man up with -he that had memorised every detail of the man's clothing ?"

What makes you so sure that the man was wearing the same attire? It was a different day. Plus we have no knowledge of the circumstances under which Hutch made this observation.

"Surely such a 'local man" would be known to the population -even if just by sight?"

He probably was, Ruby. Then again, we do not know how many men were wearing astrakhan trimmed coats in that vicinity. We only know that there were enough of them about for Abberline to realize that Hutch´s story was nothing too much out of the ordinary, contrary to what you seemingly believe.

The best,
Fisherman

Hi Fish
How could someone who has a good enough memory to describe in such detail A-man on the night of the murder could not be sure if he saw him again, regardless of if he was wearing the same clothes or not? Especially by this time that GH was aware of MK's murder and that his A-man her likely killer.
"oh there he is again I think-oh well".

Wouldn't he try to follow him? would he not try to find the nearest PC? Surely this cavalier statement/behavior is another odd statement from GH. Red flags for me for sure.

[Sally]

Hi Fish
How could someone who has a good enough memory to describe in such detail A-man on the night of the murder could not be sure if he saw him again, regardless of if he was wearing the same clothes or not? Especially by this time that GH was aware of MK's murder and that his A-man her likely killer.
"oh there he is again I think-oh well".

Wouldn't he try to follow him? would he not try to find the nearest PC? Surely this cavalier statement/behavior is another odd statement from GH. Red flags for me for sure.

Good Point.

[Rubyretro]

Hi Sally ! -my Post got replicated because my computer got 'blocked' on that thread and I went into 'Basil Fawlty' mode...manically hitting the 'Post' button whilst threatening my laptop (" right ! I'm warning you..you'd better reply to to Sally before the conversation has moved on, or I'm going to smash you to pieces and throw you out the window from the third floor..and you will never
correct me again..). I evidently got it's back up, because not only did it -(can't think why)- Post 6 times, but it then blocked again so I couldn't 'delete' 'cancel' or even reply anything else.....Grrrrrr..

Otherwise...well, Hutch-as-JtR wasn't so bright as all that...he would have effectively knobbled himself from ever risking being seen near a murder site again...

...the reason why the murders stopped ?

[Fisherman]

Abby:

"How could someone who has a good enough memory to describe in such detail A-man on the night of the murder could not be sure if he saw him again, regardless of if he was wearing the same clothes or not? Especially by this time that GH was aware of MK's murder and that his A-man her likely killer.
"oh there he is again I think-oh well".

We make our preconceived guesses, and we are sometimes amazed, Abby. Keep in mind that we know next to nothing about the cirumstances involved!

What if Hutchinson saw a man fifty yards away in the crowd, and getting into a carriage as Hutch thought "wait a sec, wasn´t that ...?" If we are not sure in such situations, what do we do? Run off to the nearest police station to tell them that we have seen a man that MAY have been the same man, and who by that time is halfways to Banbury?

We know nothing of the levels involved here, please remember that! If you think things over, you´ll realize that there are very many possible scenarios that lend themselves to perfectly innocent solutions to what you see as a red flag alert.

The bottom line is that Hutchinson was uncertain whether the Petticoat Lane man was the Dorset Street man. And most people do not yell for the police until they are certain!

The best,
Fisherman

[Rubyretro]

I think that Abby has a very good point.

Not only that, Fish, but Hutch seemed to have remembered the clothing far better than the features of the man, which he changed when talking to the Press.

So funny that when he fancied that he saw this man again -wearing different clothing -that he didn't pay even more attention to the man's features ( whilst trying to decide whether it was indeed the same person).

This local man must have been very rich indeed if he didn't use the same watch (did he change his jewellery for his various outfits ?), nor even the same tie pin.

I have to say that I am amazed that Hutch would inventory every aspect of Surly/A Man in the dark with a fleeting glimpse, yet be so hazy on the man (after he was aware of Mary's murder), when he 'maybe' saw him in broad daylight.

[Sally]

Yes, I agree, Abby does have a good point. I think it warrants some explanation. There actually does appear to be an incongruity here.

I don't accord so much weight to the change in Surly Man's clothing once Hutchinson's story hit the press, because that could have been journalistic licence as easily as Hutchinson changing his mind.

But I do think it's curious that a person who made such an impression on him in the dark was not wholly recognisable to him in the day.

Something doesn't fit here. It could be as inoccuous as Hutchinson having exaggerated his impression in the first place, of course - and not really getting the good look at Surly Man that he claimed. Or it could point to something more dubious.

[Sally]

Hi Sally ! -my Post got replicated because my computer got 'blocked' on that thread and I went into 'Basil Fawlty' mode...manically hitting the 'Post' button whilst threatening my laptop (" right ! I'm warning you..you'd better reply to to Sally before the conversation has moved on, or I'm going to smash you to pieces and throw you out the window from the third floor..and you will never
correct me again..). I evidently got it's back up, because not only did it -(can't think why)- Post 6 times, but it then blocked again so I couldn't 'delete' 'cancel' or even reply anything else.....Grrrrrr..

Otherwise...well, Hutch-as-JtR wasn't so bright as all that...he would have effectively knobbled himself from ever risking being seen near a murder site again...

...the reason why the murders stopped ?

Hi Ruby - that's hilarious! I hope your computer will do as it's told from now on!

I think I may have wondered before about this - if Hutchinson was the murderer, didn't he shoot himself in the foot somewhat? Why would he do that? Do you think he didn't think that far ahead?