Favoured Suspects

[Garry Wroe]

Abberline knew the area, and the lighting conditions there in the LVP. We don't; we can only surmise. He may or may not have changed his mind later, but his documented remarks make it clear that, even if he did, there was nothing in Hutchinson's account to cause any immediate incredulity.

Several newspapers certainly expressed scepticism with reference to Hutchinson's version of events, Colin, not least because of the degree of micro-detail contained within the Astrakhan story. Neither should we forget that Hutchinson's official credibility appears to have taken a nosedive within twelve hours of his having presented himself at Commercial Street Police Station. Further down the line we can be sure beyond any shadow of doubt that his story came to be wholly rejected by investigators.

[Fleetwood Mac]

Who are peoples favoured suspects and why?

The dark horse would be Cutbush.

We're not quite sure how much time he spent in the East End, but an inspector fancied him for the job and he fits my vision of the type of man JTR was. A touch of piquerism about him which JTR displayed. It appears to me that JTR was in it for his own peculiar dissection of the human body and what is known of Cutbush fits that, and interestingly he was locked up a few days after Coles - who I believe was a JTR killing.

[Tom_Wescott]

Hi Garry, long time, no speak. I was curious if you would happen to know when/where the last reference to Hutchinson as a witness was made. I was curious to know when he ceased to be viewed by police as a viable witness.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Garry Wroe]

Hi Tom. Hope you're keeping well. The vast majority of Hutchinson-related press references occurred during the days immediately following the Kelly inquest hearing. I seem to recall that one journal carried a sketch of the Hutchinson/Astrakhan/Kelly scene a few years after the Kelly murder, possibly in 1909. Other than that there was very little. When such references did occur they usually related to sightings made by members of the public of men who resembled the published description of Astrakhan.

As far as investigators were concerned, only Walter Dew referred to Hutchinson by name. The rest gave Hutchinson not so much as a backward glance. Anderson, of course, stated that the only person who ever got a decent look at Jack the Ripper was the Jewish witness who Swanson stated identified Kosminski. There again, Macnaghten stated that no-one ever got a good look at the murderer.

So there you go. Clear as mud.

[Wickerman]

Hi Garry, long time, no speak. I was curious if you would happen to know when/where the last reference to Hutchinson as a witness was made. I was curious to know when he ceased to be viewed by police as a viable witness.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

Hello Tom.

The last press account that comes to mind, where his name is mentioned is dated Nov. 19th:

The police have not relaxed their endeavours to hunt down the murderer in the slightest degree; but so far they remain without any direct clue. Some of the authorities are inclined to place most reliance upon the statement made by Hutchinson as to his having seen the latest victim with a gentlemanly man of dark complexion, with a dark moustache. Others are disposed to think that the shabby man with a blotchy face and a carrotty moustache described by the witness Mary Ann Cox, is more likely to be the murderer.
Echo, 19th Nov. 1888.

However, the last press article which indicates the police were still working on the description offered by Hutchinson by saying the suspect..."whose appearance certainly answered to the published description of a man with an astrachan trimming to his coat."....though without mentioning Hutchinson by name, is dated 16th December 1888, in the Lloyds Weekly News.

After that the trail goes cold.

[Tom_Wescott]

Thanks Wick and Garry. I've been doing a bunch of digging recently for a Schwartz essay in my book, finding all the references I could to viable suspects made by policemen. Schwartz is dead in the water after Nov. 1st and it occurred to me that even Hutch fared better than that. But apparently not much better.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Ben]

Hi Jon,

The Lloyds article tells us only that they believed Isaacs's appearance "answered" to Hutchinson's description; it certainly doesn't indicate that the police were interested in him for that reason, or that the latter were continuing to "work on" Hutchinson's description.

They clearly weren't by that stage.

All the best,
Ben

[Wickerman]

Thanks Wick and Garry. I've been doing a bunch of digging recently for a Schwartz essay in my book, finding all the references I could to viable suspects made by policemen. Schwartz is dead in the water after Nov. 1st and it occurred to me that even Hutch fared better than that. But apparently not much better.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

Hi Tom, are you interested in suspects or witnesses?

[Tom_Wescott]

Hi Tom, are you interested in suspects or witnesses?

Well, both, I suppose. More specifically, at the moment, I'm interested in how the police came to seemingly decide, after the murders had abated, that there was only one reliable witness.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Garry Wroe]

I'm interested in how the police came to seemingly decide, after the murders had abated, that there was only one reliable witness.

Well, Tom, that was Anderson's take on the issue, but then Anderson claimed that the killer's identity had been established as a 'definitely ascertained fact'. Others clearly disagreed with him. And, as I mentioned in an earlier post, Macnaghten stated that no-one ever got a good view of the murderer. Good luck with Schwartz though. I'm convinced that there was a great deal more to his story than has been handed down to us through the newspaper reports and surviving police files.

[GUT]

I'm convinced that there was a great deal more to his story than has been handed down to us through the newspaper reports and surviving police files.

That's true of so many people and issues in the case.

I have a sneaking suspicion we'd be a lot closer to a solution if we had all the police files available to us.

[Wickerman]

Well, both, I suppose. More specifically, at the moment, I'm interested in how the police came to seemingly decide, after the murders had abated, that there was only one reliable witness.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

I doubt it is the 'official' police opinion.
No matter which official you look at they don't seem to describe the same witness, which they would do if the opinion was official.

Also, as each principal witness does describe someone different, the police cannot form a consensus what the killer looked like. Which in turn means they are required to either, dismiss all their principal witness testimony, or only select one witness to believe - which apparently different police officials did. It's just that they all chose a different witness.

Therefore, it's only their personal opinion.

[Tom_Wescott]

I doubt it is the 'official' police opinion.
No matter which official you look at they don't seem to describe the same witness, which they would do if the opinion was official.

Also, as each principal witness does describe someone different, the police cannot form a consensus what the killer looked like. Which in turn means they are required to either, dismiss all their principal witness testimony, or only select one witness to believe - which apparently different police officials did. It's just that they all chose a different witness.

Therefore, it's only their personal opinion.

Remarkably, many seem to have chosen a witness who didn't exist - the City PC in Mitre Square. I believe this is a confusion of PC Thompson and Joseph Lawende. In the end, Lawende appears to have been the preferred witness as he's the only one we have reports on being used in the 1890s.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[drstrange169]

hello Tom,

>>Schwartz is dead in the water after Nov. 1st <<

The last reference I have of the police referring to Schwarz, or rather his description of BS, was in a newspaper dated Nov 12.

I vaguely recall one on the 19th, but I can't find it, so I might be misremembering.

[Tom_Wescott]

hello Tom,

>>Schwartz is dead in the water after Nov. 1st <<

The last reference I have of the police referring to Schwarz, or rather his description of BS, was in a newspaper dated Nov 12.

I vaguely recall one on the 19th, but I can't find it, so I might be misremembering.

Hi Doc. What newspaper report of the 12th are you referring to? Or is that the Star reviving the Police Gazette descriptions of Oct. 19th? I'd be very interested to know.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott