The Ripper's MO....

[perrymason]

Couple of good things coming out of those last few posts.

For David, I think 2 of the things you mentioned were noteworthy, the first being the pairing of Fleming with Sailor Man, and that he was a former plasterer working as a dock worker. Dockers had the highest numbers for treatment of sexually transmitted diseases in that area at the time, by occupation, according to the infirmary records.

On the issue you were dealing with Ben, I think you cited the probable reason we did see his entrance so late in the game....for fear someone in the courtyard as a witness might recognize him if he'd appeared at the Inquest. That would suggest that the man felt he had been seen there before by others, or knew others there, and that really is what we would expect of George Hutchinson by his remarks. That he knew her, and she him.

That may be a sort of corroboration for a part of his story. So why would he evade that possible confirmation in court, by having say Mary Ann state she had seen him as a friend of Marys or something to that effect.

If he feared their recognition, it would likely be due to his having a bad reputation. What if Hutch was a pimp?

But more importantly, do we have any reason to suspect that anyone in that courtyard or who knew Mary at the time, any witness with the proximity and access to her knew Joe Fleming by sight? The only person who even mentions a "Joe" that was not Barnett is Julia, and that Mary had told her of him.

I think that puts a crimp in Flem as Hutch myself, he would have no fear testifying, other than perhaps fearing the killers wrath, if no-one knew him by sight in that courtyard area.

If he knew of Sarah's story before Monday night at 6pm, he could well have been a very odd prankster taking her loitering man as a "character". He became important for 48 hours...a little nobody like him, in that big case with the scary headlines. That might have been his goal, something that would get him some free pints for the story forever.

Seems to me Richard suggests he never retracted his tale....even though the records show the police thought it was false.

There were a lot of weird witnesses, like the man who picked up his gladstone at the police station after offering to decapitate the officer in charge and replace his head without there ever being a clue anything had ever happened. Whose to say Israel Schwartz wasnt another crackpot, maybe trying to make an excuse to use with the Mrs when he gets home from the noon market after 1am. They had ample time to investigate and prepare him for the Inquest, and not only is he not there he isnt even mentioned, and a witness who had the same sighting timing as his is there.

Look at all the letters, hundreds, or was it eventually thousands? Lots of cranks were using these murders as their mini Halloween.

My best regards

[Ben]

Hi Mike,

I think that puts a crimp in Flem as Hutch myself, he would have no fear testifying, other than perhaps fearing the killers wrath, if no-one knew him by sight in that courtyard area.

But in the scenario I've posited, Hutchinson would have feared being recognised, whether he was actually known or not, and this would have held true whatever his identity, be it Joseph Fleming or Toppy the violin-player. The fact that he came forward and admitted to loitering near the crime scene at 2:30am as soon as Lewis's evidence - concerning a man she saw loitering near the crime scene at 2:30am - was made public knowledge should really dispense with the "publicity-seeker" premise, in this instance. It is quite clear that his case is world's apart from that of Packer or Violenia.

Best regards,
Ben

[smezenen]

Hi Mike,



But in the scenario I've posited, Hutchinson would have feared being recognised, whether he was actually known or not, and this would have held true whatever his identity, be it Joseph Fleming or Toppy the violin-player. The fact that he came forward and admitted to loitering near the crime scene at 2:30am as soon as Lewis's evidence - concerning a man she saw loitering near the crime scene at 2:30am - was made public knowledge should really dispense with the "publicity-seeker" premise, in this instance. It is quite clear that his case is world's apart from that of Packer or Violenia.

Best regards,
Ben

What if Michael is right here and George Hutchinson was Mary's pimp or was somehow extorting her. Some will say farfetched and ridiculous but I have 3 more hours to be at work with nothing to do and nothing to think about so let’s look at his statement and read between the lines a little.

About 2 am 9th I was coming by Thrawl Street, Commercial Street, and saw just before I got to Flower and Dean Street I saw the murdered woman Kelly.
What was he doing at 2 AM? Checking on his prostitutes? Collecting the night’s dues?

And she said to me Hutchinson will you lend me sixpence.
This would suggest that Mary was not currently one of his ladies or that she was trying to hold back her dues by playing broke.

I said I cant I have spent all my money going down to Romford. She said Good morning I must go and find some money.
Is she telling him she will give him his cut latter, after she finds a client?

She went away toward Thrawl Street. A man coming in the opposite direction to Kelly tapped her on the shoulder and said something to her. They both burst out laughing. I heard her say alright to him. And the man said you will be alright for what I have told you. He then placed his right hand around her shoulders.
Nothing too suspicious here he is actually just describing the man she takes up with after leaving his company.

He also had a kind of a small parcel in his left hand with a kind of strap round it. I stood against the lamp of the Queen’s Head Public House and watched him. They both then came past me and the man hid down his head with his hat over his eyes. I stooped down and looked him in the face. He looked at me stern.
The lack of a more detailed description of the man’s face along with the fact that there is no reason I can think of for George to stoop down and look this closely (as if examining) the man leads me to think this part of the statement is probably fluff to make his story more appealing.

They both went into Dorset Street I followed them.
He follows them in hopes of collect his cut when the man left.

They both stood at the corner of the Court for about 3 minutes. He said something to her. She said alright my dear come along you will be comfortable He then placed his arm on her shoulder and gave her a kiss. She said she had lost her handkerchief he then pulled his handkerchief a red one out and gave it to her.
More fluff

They both then went up the court together. I then went to the Court to see if I could see them, but could not. I stood there for about three quarters of an hour to see if they came out they did not so I went away.
Once again he is waiting for his cut. Sarah Lewis sees him at 2:30, After 45 minutes he moved on to collect somewhere else.

It also fits in that he comes forward after finding out that Sarah gave testimony of seeing a man at 2:30 because he thinks she can identify him. He doesn’t want to get fingered for a murder so he tells the police why he is there without telling them the real reason and connecting himself to her with motive.

Of course it could also be that he came back later to collect and she didn’t want to pay so he gets angry, kills her, then tried to cover it up by making it look like a the Rippers work. Or it could be that he IS the ripper after all.

I have no evidence to support these postulations; just what I hope is thoughtful insight into what his statement might mean IF he is extorting Mary in some manner. So I haven’t answered any questions at all, but it did take me 3 hours to think all this thru to this point so my job is done for the moment

[EricCarter]

What if Michael is right here and George Hutchinson was Mary's pimp or was somehow extorting her. Some will say farfetched and ridiculous but I have 3 more hours to be at work with nothing to do and nothing to think about so let’s look at his statement and read between the lines a little.

About 2 am 9th I was coming by Thrawl Street, Commercial Street, and saw just before I got to Flower and Dean Street I saw the murdered woman Kelly.
What was he doing at 2 AM? Checking on his prostitutes? Collecting the night’s dues?


He was on his way back from Romford, as he stated.

And she said to me Hutchinson will you lend me sixpence.
This would suggest that Mary was not currently one of his ladies or that she was trying to hold back her dues by playing broke.

Or that hse had no money and was asking a friend some some.

I said I cant I have spent all my money going down to Romford. She said Good morning I must go and find some money.
Is she telling him she will give him his cut latter, after she finds a client?

She needed money one way or another, she was 29d in arears for rent (and possibly a cut to her pimp/landlord.

She went away toward Thrawl Street. A man coming in the opposite direction to Kelly tapped her on the shoulder and said something to her. They both burst out laughing. I heard her say alright to him. And the man said you will be alright for what I have told you. He then placed his right hand around her shoulders.
Nothing too suspicious here he is actually just describing the man she takes up with after leaving his company.

He also had a kind of a small parcel in his left hand with a kind of strap round it. I stood against the lamp of the Queen’s Head Public House and watched him. They both then came past me and the man hid down his head with his hat over his eyes. I stooped down and looked him in the face. He looked at me stern.
The lack of a more detailed description of the man’s face along with the fact that there is no reason I can think of for George to stoop down and look this closely (as if examining) the man leads me to think this part of the statement is probably fluff to make his story more appealing.


George had one of the most detailed descriptions of a suspect, also his story never really changed at all no matter who he talked to or when. Even after several weeks it was for the most part the same, minor if any changes and not to the main points to his story. Abberline took him serious and I for one am willing to take most of Abberline's views to heart.

They both went into Dorset Street I followed them.
He follows them in hopes of collect his cut when the man left.

Or he follows because there have been 5 or 6 murders in the area and he had already stated a weird feeling about the man.

They both stood at the corner of the Court for about 3 minutes. He said something to her. She said alright my dear come along you will be comfortable He then placed his arm on her shoulder and gave her a kiss. She said she had lost her handkerchief he then pulled his handkerchief a red one out and gave it to her.
More fluff

More detail, and possibly a bit of an insight to the Ripper, very Ted Bundy in this exchange.

They both then went up the court together. I then went to the Court to see if I could see them, but could not. I stood there for about three quarters of an hour to see if they came out they did not so I went away.
Once again he is waiting for his cut. Sarah Lewis sees him at 2:30, After 45 minutes he moved on to collect somewhere else.

Or just got tired and went on home.

It also fits in that he comes forward after finding out that Sarah gave testimony of seeing a man at 2:30 because he thinks she can identify him. He doesn’t want to get fingered for a murder so he tells the police why he is there without telling them the real reason and connecting himself to her with motive.

Or he heard that a man had been seen and didn't want the police wasting time and effort to find him when he wasn't the murderer and wanted them out looking for the murderer who had killed a friend.

Of course it could also be that he came back later to collect and she didn’t want to pay so he gets angry, kills her, then tried to cover it up by making it look like a the Rippers work. Or it could be that he IS the ripper after all.

Or its all just like he said and he gave one of the most detailed decriptions of the killer we have.

I have no evidence to support these postulations; just what I hope is thoughtful insight into what his statement might mean IF he is extorting Mary in some manner. So I haven’t answered any questions at all, but it did take me 3 hours to think all this thru to this point so my job is done for the moment

Nither do I, but Abberline liked him so I can't read to much more into what he said other than what he said.

Eric