Fleming/Hutchinson theory?

[Wickerman]

He would have been exceedingly dim to kill her when she was just newly single again.

Lets not run away with the idea that enraged killers require a minimum IQ level.
:-)

[Wickerman]

On which basis are you saying Fleming can't be a serial killer ?

Sorry Dave, you misread me.
I have only ever considered Fleming as Kelly's potential murderer, but never a Ripper suspect, not that he couldn't be, I just never considered him as such.

Regards, Jon S.

[Sally]

Reasons to be Flemimg #1

Closest to 1888 be was a dock labourer.
Or if you prefer a costermonger.
The son of a plasterer isn't a plasterer.
He was 6 foot 7 inches tall.
If this guy was the one then I am sure the police would have got to him when he was sent to the lunatic asylum as they clearly kept themselves informed about admissions.

I think there's a good chance Kelly made the Fleming story up anyway.

No, really



Oh, Where to start? So many choices...

Closest to 1888 be was a dock labourer.
Or if you prefer a costermonger.

Hmm. And in 1891 he was a... what was it again? Oh yeah 'General Labourer'.
Wasn't Hutchinson a 'General Labourer'? Well, they came from the same class, at least..

The son of a plasterer isn't a plasterer.

Oh, now, you're only saying that because you want Toppy not to have been a plumber Lechmere. Evidence shows that most men were still following their fathers into profession or trade, at least initially, at this time - if they could make a living that way, of course. Sorry, but there it is. Black and white. And you do like the written word for evidence, don't you? Which brings us to..

He was 6 foot 7 inches tall.

Because it says so in the asylum records, right? Because nobody has ever mistranscribed a 6 for a 5? You have read census records, Lechmere, I know this to be true. And you must therefore know that census records (for example) are rife with error. Error in the written record is common enough. Now, this 6'7" doesn't have to be an error. But there are indications that it may be. And those indications (conrtaindications for your argument) have been pointed out already. To ignore them amounts to wilful blindness - they should at the very least receive due consideration. And so, again:-

In the latter half of the 19th century the average height of a man was 5'6-7'. At 6'7", Fleming would have been a giant. Not impossible, but unusual enough to engender caution. And I'm afraid that, as has been said already, a 6'7" man weighing 11st would not have been in good health, he would have been dangerously underweight. Contraindications, see.

If this guy was the one then I am sure the police would have got to him when he was sent to the lunatic asylum as they clearly kept themselves informed about admissions.

I'm not sure what you mean here, Lechmere. What do you mean? 'If this guy was the one' what?

This guy (Joseph Fleming) was living in the Victoria Home in 1891 when he 'went mad'. He was taken from Bishopsgate police station to the infirmary on 30th June - most likely because the police were called to take him from the Victoria Home. You claim that Fleming could not be Hutchinson because he couldn't possibly have passed himself off as Hutchinson because everyone knew he was Fleming - or something.

And yet, apparently he had no trouble in living as James Evans in 1891, in the Victoria Home, when in 1889 he had been living there, in the Victoria Home as... Oh yes, Joseph Fleming. Curiouser and Curiouser.

Obviously, it was possible - obviously, because he apparently did it - And, I think, this rather casts doubt on your assertion that Fleming couldn't possibly be Hutchinson. Theoretically:-

He could have been George Hutchinson in 1888
And, Joseph Fleming in 1889
And, James Evans in 1891

And for all you know, he had further aliases (I'm semi-speculating now, I concede)

I'm not saying that this has to be the case, but there really is no sound reason that I've so far seen that excludes the possibility.

And so I can't exclude it.

I think there's a good chance Kelly made the Fleming story up anyway

No, there isn't. There's a better chance that the Joseph Fleming living at the Victoria Home was the same Joseph Fleming with whom Mary Kelly once lived.

[GregBaron]

Tallest Man in Town...

Hi all,

Admittedly I understand nothing about the Hutchinson/Toppy/Fleming symbiosis. It's all beyond me...

The only thing I can say is that someone 6'7" in Whitechapel would have been like an 8 footer today and certainly something that wouldn't go unmentioned. Too bad basketball hadn't been invented yet.

I don't know the age when this Fleming died or his health history but someone of this length almost surely had Marfan's syndrome. This genetic anomaly brings along with it many health complications and often results in early death. I believe Abraham Lincoln was so afflicted. He was 6'4".

The only point I can make is that I think it more likely a misprint in the records than that this individual was truly 6'7". At that height he could have made a living in traveling freak shows. If you make the 6 a 5 then he looks just like everybody else. This I think the more likely scenario but I think we long ago threw out Ockham's razor and his laws of parsimony with the Royal Conspiracy Theory...........


Greg

[Lechmere]

Sally
You made a repeated schoolgirl error in saying 1891 and not 1892! I think you may perhaps be confusing the 1891 census with the 1892 asylum admission records? Of course Fleming hasn't been found yet in the 1891 census - as we know.
Further he was a dock labourer not a general labourer – unlike Hutchinson.

“Evidence shows that most men were still following their fathers into profession notor trade, at least initially, at this time - if they could make a living that way, of course. Sorry, but there it is. Black and white. And you do like the written word for evidence, don't you?”
Oh? Where is this evidence?
By the way Toppy’s father and uncle became plumbers but not initially – and it seems likely that Toppy did the same. But that follow my leader (father) thing was by no means the norm.

Sally the census records are usually in error when they are typed up and what was written down is misread. Or unfamiliar words were written down incorrectly in the first instance. Not numbers.
It is possible that a mistake was made of course but to pin your case on it is rather thread bare.

The weight issue is a red herring. If he had been going mad for a while then it is unlikely that he would have been (what’s that word?)... stout. If you look at asylum records you will find that the inmates were usually on the skinny side. I rather think that the diet wasn’t fantastic and patient care left a lot to be desired.

I will re-phrase that ticklish passage for you Sally...

If the Fleming who was 6 foot 7 inches tall (or as you would have it 5 foot 7 inches tall) was indeed Kelly’s Fleming, then when he was admitted to the asylum I am certain he would have come to the attention of the police.
This is because it is clear that the police were monitoring admissions to asylums. In any case he was handed in to the Workhouse Infirmary by the police in the first place!
I would suggest that when James Evans turned out to really be Joseph Fleming it would have rung bells.
However if Fleming had been cleared in November 1888 then the Police would not have taken any interest in 1892.
If they had looked for Fleming in 1888, found the bloke in the Victoria Home and eliminated him, then again they would not have taken any interest in 1892.
But if he had not been located in 1888 then I would suggest that the police would have very much kept him in mind.

This is supposition and conjecture – but it is based on what we know of how the police were conducting their investigation at that time.
By contrast, you have to insist that the police wouldn’t have found out about Fleming’s admission and would not have been interested in him.
In my opinion any case that is made for a suspect which is based on the police not doing the obvious, without a good explanation, is thread bare.

Sally, this is full of misapprehensions I am afraid:

“This guy (Joseph Fleming) was living in the Victoria Home in 1891 when he 'went mad'. He was taken from Bishopsgate police station to the infirmary on 30th June - most likely because the police were called to take him from the Victoria Home. You claim that Fleming could not be Hutchinson because he couldn't possibly have passed himself off as Hutchinson because everyone knew he was Fleming - or something.
And yet, apparently he had no trouble in living as James Evans in 1891, in the Victoria Home, when in 1889 he had been living there, in the Victoria Home as... Oh yes, Joseph Fleming.”

It seems he was picked up in Lower Thames Street not at the Victoria Home and gave his name to the police as Evans.
He was somehow traced back to the Victoria Home. There are two probable ways this happened. He either gave the Victoria Home as his address and he was then found to be Fleming, or he have his mother’s details and through her was traced back to the Victoria Home as Fleming.
The point is he told the police he was Evans but via his residence at the Victoria Home he was found to be Fleming.
And you seriously suppose the police didn’t think ‘Hold on a minute, wasn’t the ex-lover of that notorious unsolved murder victim Mary Jane Kelly also called Joe Fleming and this fellow is... mad!’

One slightly interesting aspect here is that when Fleming went to the Whitechapel Infirmary in 1889 he claimed 14 months residence in Whitechapel which is presumed to mean he was at the Victoria Home for that entire period.
Equally he may have come and gone from the Victoria Home.
When it was found that Fleming had lived at the Victoria Home prior to his admission in 1892 then logically his care should have been charged to Whitechapel. However his charge was eventually transferred to Bethnal Green, his place of birth. This somewhat suggests that when he was admitted in 1892 he hadn’t been at the Victoria Home or indeed in Whitechapel for over 12 months.
He seems to have initially gone to the City of London Infirmary as he was picked up at Lower Thames Street and taken to a City Police Station – Bishopsgate.
Taken together this implies that he was not permanently in the Victoria Home for the duration of the period from September 1888 to June 1892.

Had he been admitted via the Victoria Home as Sally mistakenly thinks, then he would have been taken to a Met police station such as Leman Street or Commercial Street.

There is absolutely no evidence that he was known under any other name but Fleming at the Victoria Home. Had he popped up as celebrity witness Hutchinson, when it was also reported that Kelly had an ex-boyfriend called Joe Fleming then this lunatic was fortunate indeed in not being tumbled. Particularly when we know the staff at the Victoria Home were ex inmates.

And then we have the unanswered problem of local lad Fleming as Hutchinson wandering the streets with the Bill and not bumping into any acquaintances. Bethnal Green, Whitechapel and Spitalfields were different districts but were all local to each other.

[DVV]

Hi GregBaron

The only thing I can say is that someone 6'7" in Whitechapel would have been like an 8 footer today and certainly something that wouldn't go unmentioned.

That's so obvious, Greg. Could Kelly be "very fond" of such a constitution ? Not sure, but assuming she was, she undoubtedly would have told her friends how incredibly tall he was.
And she did not.
She didn't tell Mrs McCarthy, nor Barnett, nor Venturney.

I don't know the age when this Fleming died or his health history but someone of this length almost surely had Marfan's syndrome. This genetic anomaly brings along with it many health complications and often results in early death. I believe Abraham Lincoln was so afflicted. He was 6'4".

Again, that's a valid point. Fleming died in 1920, aged 61. Just check his records (there's a thread).

You'll find this skinniest dock labourer ever in constant "good health", although his initial weight decreases a bit at times.

And not a single mention of this extraordinary height, not a single mention of this extraordinary thinness in the medical records.

That said, it has to be reminded Fleming's height has nothing to do here. It's foolishly thrown here and there in an appalling attempt to hijack the thread.

This thread premises that Fleming-the-ex-fiancé-that-died-at-Claybury was the killer.

[DVV]

Closest to 1888 be was a dock labourer.
Or if you prefer a costermonger.
The son of a plasterer isn't a plasterer.
He was 6 foot 7 inches tall.
If this guy was the one then I am sure the police would have got to him when he was sent to the lunatic asylum as they clearly kept themselves informed about admissions.

I think there's a good chance Kelly made the Fleming story up anyway.

Entertaining, but now please stop hijacking the thread.

You can be fair enough to accept its postulate or to post your off-topic views elsewhere, can't you ?

[Sally]

Oh Dear...

Oh Dear, Oh Dear, Lechmere.

You really don't have an argument here, do you? As ever, I must dash - off to Newcastle for the weekend - but you can rest assured that I'll be addressing your 'points' when I get back.

[Lechmere]

Sally
Thank you for giving me something to look forward to in my tawdry life.

DVV
I am not trying to hijack this thread or throw it off topic. The thread opened with this comment:
“What do you about the theory that they were one and the same?”
I believe I have been addressing this issue.

[DVV]

DVV
I am not trying to hijack this thread or throw it off topic. The thread opened with this comment:
“What do you about the theory that they were one and the same?”
I believe I have been addressing this issue.

Yes, this thread is about the "theory that they were one and the same", and then no, "they" meaning : "Fleming & Hutch", you have been completely off-topic.

If you want to spread your fantastic nonsense that Fleming wasn't Fleming, please start a new thread and provide your evidence (of course you can't).

This thread isn't about Fleming & Fleming, it's about Fleming & Hutch.

[Lechmere]

But DVV a lot of the issues you raise to indicate that Fleming was Hutchinson have are based on sources which can be disputed or which you dispute (eg his height) and which have a bearing on whether the mad Fleming even was Kelly’s Fleming. If the mad Fleming was not Kelly’s Fleming then theories that turn Fleming into Hutchinson somewhat fall to the floor – and so it is all pertinent.

This thread doesn’t necessarily presume that the mad Fleming was the possible Hutchinson imposter anyway does it?
I have addressed the unlikelihood that Fleming was Hutchinson in some depth without any real response to the issues I raised.
I fully understand why you feel uncomfortable with criticisms of the Fleming as Fleming issue.

[DVV]

But DVV a lot of the issues you raise to indicate that Fleming was Hutchinson have are based on sources which can be disputed or which you dispute (eg his height) and which have a bearing on whether the mad Fleming even was Kelly’s Fleming. If the mad Fleming was not Kelly’s Fleming then theories that turn Fleming into Hutchinson somewhat fall to the floor – and so it is all pertinent.

Pertinent ? How can it be pertinent ? You have been asked more than once to provide your evidence. And of course you can't. Because Fleming was Fleming, his identity is well documented.

Then, like it or not, but that's something you will have to live with.

As for his height, it's up to you to believe the skinniest guy of the East End would have done the hardest jobs ever (dock labourer, plasterer, costermonger), and that Mary didn't tell her friends how tall was the Joe she was so fond of. It's up to you to believe that she had "fabricated" the whole thing.

But once again, that's off-topic and as usual, unsubstantiated.

I fully understand why you feel uncomfortable with criticisms of the Fleming as Fleming issue.

No, you fully understand how comfortable I am, Fleming's identity being so well documented.
While you cannot provide a single evidence.

[GregBaron]

Too tall to believe...

Again, that's a valid point. Fleming died in 1920, aged 61. Just check his records (there's a thread).

You'll find this skinniest dock labourer ever in constant "good health", although his initial weight decreases a bit at times.

And not a single mention of this extraordinary height, not a single mention of this extraordinary thinness in the medical records.

That said, it has to be reminded Fleming's height has nothing to do here. It's foolishly thrown here and there in an appalling attempt to hijack the thread.

This thread premises that Fleming-the-ex-fiancé-that-died-at-Claybury was the killer.
________________

__


I completely agree with you DVV.........I can't see how this fellow could be a super skinny 6'7" -and not meaning to hijack the thread - and this go unremarked. I also think that if this skinny giant was hanging around on the night of MJK's murder someone would have seen him and mentioned it.........you know..the guy who hits his head on the doorway when he steps into Millers Court..........something like that.......also not many people with Marfan's live to be 61.....but anyway, I'll step out with apologies and let the argument continue....



Greg

[DVV]

I can't see how this fellow could be a super skinny 6'7" -and not meaning to hijack the thread - and this go unremarked.

Exactly, Greg. Fleming's height is nothing but a basic (and very poor) argument against Fleming's candidacy, while the question here is : Could Fleming-the-Ripper have passed himself as Hutch ?

I'll step out with apologies and let the argument continue....

You have no reason to step out with apologies, Greg.

I can safely conjecture Fleming felt very "uncomfortable" (even more than Lechmere) after the inquest.

First, he had been spotted by Lewis. By chance, the description she gave was vague. But what if other details had been purposely withheld ? One never knows (see the Lawende episode).

More importantly, two other witnesses had alluded to "Joe Fleming" or "Joe", portrayed as a jealous and occasionally violent (ex?) lover.

As reported, the public excitement was great. It was the most horrible murder ever, it was believed to be the 6th or the 7th of a series. In short, it was the apex of the most formidable man hunt ever.

In such a context, no need to be a paranoid to fear the police would try their best in every way and thus look also for the jealous ex-fiancé who used to visit Kelly - suspect or witness, they sure wanted him.

If caught (as Fleming), he would be immediately asked why he didn't come forward.
A most embarrassing question, for both Fleming-the-ex-boyfriend and Fleming-Wideawake-Hat.

But easily answered once one George Hutchinson had come forward.

[richardnunweek]

Hi,
According to Mary Kelly. she was very fond of another man called Joe, who often ill-used her for her carrying on's with Barnett..
That being the case, after the 30TH October, that would have left the door open , for this admirer, a person who appears to have been the man who according to Kellys ex landlady. would have married her.
It is hard to imagine that poor Mary Kelly would have to have walked the streets, when this ex beau would surely have been her next meal ticket.
But lets put this into reality.
How many men in the east end of London..alone, were called Joe?, the guy might not have been Fleming, it could have been anyone.
How about the mysterious Lawrence, the drover that one woman believed could have been her husband? was his name Joe?
I am amazed that this man has never been discussed, he appears to have visited Mary frequently.
Just to assume that the ex plasterer Fleming, who had the name Joe , must have been the man she was fond of, is far from conclusive.
Regards Richard,