The Surly Man

[Scorpio]

And people would have us believe he is the infamous ripper.

[DVV]

Poor Hutch waited for no reason...quite a long moment, but not enough to see the man sortie de scène...(too bad)...and left for no reason...(to go nowhere, by his own account).

Amitiés
David

[Ben]

Hi Scorpio,

he surely waited for the reason he stated, which was the surly mans unlikely appearance.

But that's not really a reason for "waiting".

Waiting for what?

I believe Hutchinson invented the surly man because he realised he had been seen by another witness (Sarah Lewis), and saw an opportunity to both explain his presence there and deflect suspicion in a false direction.

Best regards,
Ben

[Scorpio]

It is a good point about the voyeurism angle or lack of one, but this only strengthens my belief in Hutch's statement, he surely waited for the reason he stated, which was the surly mans unlikely appearance. If he is a fiction then what is the possible motivation for constructing the surly man?.

[Ben]

“Hutch made two statements and the sheer number of details sucessfully recalled between the two is impressive for a BS merchant.”

Not really, Scorpio.

It would mean he merely remembered many of the lies he provided in his police interview, and that was hardly “impressive” considering that many of these “recollections” were offset by polar opposite versions of some of the key particulars of the man’s appearance, to say nothing of the various other contradictions and embellishments that appeared in the press. He also claimed to have “recalled” details of the man’s appearance that he almost certainly could not have even noticed.

“This phrase is proof positive of reconstructive memory at work”

Again, it really isn’t, because we only have discredited Hutchinson’s word for it that he was “memorizing” an encounter with a man. If the Astrakhan man didn’t even exist, it would have been a case of wholesale invention as opposed to embellished “memory”, entirely irrespective of the man’s appearance. That’s not to say I disagree with your observation that he may have incorporated “experience and various clichés absorbed from Gentile culture about Jewishness”, but the point is that he could have applied these experiences and cliches to an entirely invented individual.

“in truth, it was probably old fashioned voyeurism”

Probably not, Scorpio.

Kelly’s window was situated within the court itself and faced north, whereas Hutchinson claimed to have loitered outside the entrance to the court itself, also looking north. He would have needed to enter the passage into the court and turn left if he wanted to witness any action. His professed vantage point rendered “voyeurism” impossible, and the same was true of the man seen by Sarah Lewis.

Best regards,
Ben

[Rubyretro]

I have just copied my reply from 'Bloody Tourists' on the same subject :

'If Kelly knew this 'surly man' with his 'swanky threads' it's certainly strange
that no one else did ! Did he have no job ? No neighbours ? No friends nor
acquaintances -not even a landlord ? No family, nor a maid or visiting tradesmen ? Did he never shop ? Never set foot in a pub or a place of worship -not even walk down the street where he lived ? He was totally
unknown to his neighbourhood Policeman on the beat ?

With his description circulating in all the papers, a vast reward offered,
and a very conspicuous watch and tiepin (taken together, even if you argue that individually neither were very rare), I am very surprised that nobody 'shopped' him ; he must have been a very well loved man ! (not so 'surly' then).

Of course he might only have put his spats on, at night (according to Bob Hinton they were 'day wear') just not to be noticed in grim slum streets..'

[Rubyretro]

I believe the most important phrase in Hutchinsons statement is " jewish in appearance ".

Me, too.

Hutchinson mixture of experience and various cliiches absorbed from Gentile culture about Jewishness was well established in his mind and was probably colouring his recall

.
..or his imagination.

Some elements like jewellery and style of clothing and physical appearance may have been exaggerated if not invented completely

,
It would certainly seem so.

The question of appearance is so important, since it was the mans appearance that Hutchinson claims was his motivation for loitering

,
Too true !!

the sheer number of details sucessfully recalled between the two is impressive for a BS merchant.

[/QUOTE]
He certainly would of had to have had a concrete visual image steadfast in his mind to retain his description...whether that would of been possible describing A Man, given the circumstances, is highly unlikely. I always thought that he had a real (or composite) person from his past in mind. Bob Hinton makes a strong case for a shop window dummy, in his book.

[Scorpio]

I should clarify my own thoughts on the subject. Hutchinson provides a good example of reconstructive memory, which is an interesting but annoying, as far as the law is concerned, quirk of human long term memory. Detectives and Lawyers want black and white, no nonsense recall, but long term/auto biographical memory only works in colour. Hutchinsons memory of events , like ours, is coloured by memories and information that is already established. I believe the most important phrase in Hutchinsons statement is " jewish in appearance ". This phrase is proof positive of reconstructive memory at work, this is evidence that Hutchinson mixture of experience and various cliiches absorbed from Gentile culture about Jewishness was well established in his mind and was probably colouring his recall. Some elements like jewellery and style of clothing and physical appearance may have been exaggerated if not invented completely, to fit with his description recalled long after an affective short term memory lapse. The question of appearance is so important, since it was the mans appearance that Hutchinson claims was his motivation for loitering , when,in truth, it was probably old fashioned voyeurism. Hutch probably wanted to avoid admitting that, so the motivation was there to make the mans description more eye catching. Hutch made two statements and the sheer number of details sucessfully recalled between the two is impressive for a BS merchant.

[Rubyretro]

does the sultry man simply not exist at all ?.:

Sadly I don't think he does exist...but I'd love to meet a sultry man when I
have a drink there in January..

[Scorpio]

I am sure this question has been brought up more often than an eye-opener at the ten bells, but do you believe Hutchinsons surly man killed Kelly?. Did MJK pick up more men after her encounter with him or does the sultry man simply not exist at all ?.