Mr Blotchy

[Wickerman]

It still does not explain why Lewis/Kennedy (if the two names should be sorted in like that) was all over the place when giving information. Why would she deliberatley misinform as Kennedy and be truthful as Lewis? That makes no sense whatsoever, not least as she would compromise her own testimony rather badly by doing it.

Right, and Lewis told the court there was another woman with her, so this other woman had a story to tell which was the same in every detail as Lewis's regarding the Wednesday night escapade.
And, this is the story told by Kennedy, so by her own admission to the press, she is the other woman.

[Wickerman]

That might be the case for Fisherman, but I have no dog in this fight (so to speak) and I recognise the similarities between the two cases.

As I explained before, it is the differences which make or break an argument. Similarities are only to be expected, and are the easiest to explain.

[Abby Normal]

Some interesting posts earlier about possible sightings of Blotchy. Are they describing the same man who would appear to live in a lodging house in Thrawl Street ?

Mary Cox’s description of man going into Kelly’s room on November 8
Stout, aged around 35 or 36, about 5’5” tall, shabbily dressed in a long overcoat and a billycock hat, had a blotchy face and small side whiskers, carroty moustache, carrying a pail of beer.

Joseph Taylor and Mrs Fiddymont’s description of man at Prince Alfred pub at 7 a.m Septembers 8
This is several hours after Annie Chapman death.

Thin, about 5’8”, between 40 and 50 years (another article quoted Taylor say the man was between 30 and 40 years) , shabby genteel look, pepper & salt trousers, dark coat, eyes as wild as a hawk’s, ginger-coloured moustache curling a little at the end, short sandy hair, a light blue check shirt which was torn badly, blood under his right ear, dried blood between the fingers of his hand.

The man had a peculiar springy walk that I would recognise again. He carried himself very erect, like a horse soldier. He crossed Brushfeld St several times (Taylor thought he seemed confused, I think he was checking to see if Taylor was following him).

Mrs Fiddymont added that the man's head was grimy, as if it had been bloody, and had been dampened or spit upon in the endeavour to rub the blood off instead of washing it. The man did not look in the least like a butcher.
Taylor followed him to Halfmoon Street (near Bishopsgate Street and Artillery Lane). On another occasion Taylor saw the man come out of a lodging house in Thrawl Street.

Mr Galloway’s sighting on Wednesday, 14 November (early hours)

Galloway was suspicious as the man was similar to the published description by Mary Cox. The man was short, stout, about 35 to 40 years of age, a carroty colour moustache (not particularly heavy), his face blotchy through drink and dissipation, wore a long, dirty brown overcoat, and altogether presented a most villainous appearance. He darted back almost immediately to the other side of the road.

This was near Thrawl Street.

It would seem that they are describing the same man ?

cox and Galloway man seem like they were---not sure about fiddymont man though. too tall and thin, no blotches

[Wickerman]

Getting back to Lewis and Hutch, it’s worth remembering that Lewis testifies to seeing a man in the entrance to the Court at the inquest. Hutch comes forward after the inquest. Lewis does not corroborate Hutch, he corroborates her. We can’t use Lewis to prove the veracity of Hutch’s testimony.

I can see your point, however, we know from extant examples of both the official record of the Eddowes inquest and the Kelly inquest, that these records only capture a minimum of detail.

Two reason's for this are first, the court record was created in long-hand, whereas the press used short-hand, thereby permitting the press to record more detail.
Secondly, the press have a broader 'public' interest in the story than the court recorder, who has a selective 'legal' interest in what needs to be taken down.

So, in the press we get paragraphs whereas in the court record we get a line or two.

The reason we can use some of Lewis's testimony to corroborate Hutchinson is because Hutch gave his story to police on the evening of the 12th.
The press coverage of Lewis's testimony only came out on the morning of the 13th. In this press coverage we read that Lewis saw a man & woman enter Millers Court while the loiterer was standing opposite.
Lewis doesn't describe the man, but she says the woman was "the worse for drink", and "hatless", and when Lewis reached the court she said there was nobody in the court, which means this couple must have gone into one of the rooms in the court.

So you see, these press details do corroborate that part of Hutchinson's story because Hutch was not aware of these details when he gave his account on Monday night.

[Wickerman]

.....

Now there is one thing that works against Mr Blotchy being the killer: Kelly’s stomach does not contain beer. However my guess is Mr B drowned his impatience in that beer while his prospective victim sang. And sang. And sang.

From what I've read alcohol is absorbed by the stomach, and it is absorbed in a relatively short time.

[Sam Flynn]

From what I've read alcohol is absorbed by the stomach, and it is absorbed in a relatively short time.

Alcohol molecules might be, but not the entire liquid medium in which they come. There could still have been a pint or so of beery liquid sloshing about inside her, assuming she partook of Blotchy's quart can.. Then again, her stomach was in a somewhat broken state, so perhaps the point is moot.

[Craig H]

cox and Galloway man seem like they were---not sure about fiddymont man though. too tall and thin, no blotches

Hi Abby
Yes - Joseph Taylor & Mrs Fiddymont's description seems slightly different.
Not sure if "blotchy" skin disorder was more obvious in November (2 months later) - some skin conditions get worse at certain times.
Craig

[caz]

Right, and Lewis told the court there was another woman with her, so this other woman had a story to tell which was the same in every detail as Lewis's regarding the Wednesday night escapade.
And, this is the story told by Kennedy, so by her own admission to the press, she is the other woman.

Hi Jon,

That was the point I was going to make.

Unless we dismiss all the Lewis/Kennedy stories as invention, we have two women being talked about.

So if Lewis and Kennedy are one and the same, there is still a second woman to account for, with a similar story to tell, but who apparently never talks about it. She lets Lewis go it alone.

I'm not sure how likely that is.

Love,

Caz
X

[Sam Flynn]

So if Lewis and Kennedy are one and the same, there is still a second woman to account for, with a similar story to tell, but who apparently never talks about it. She lets Lewis go it alone.

I'm not sure how likely that is.

Love,

Caz
X

Much more likely than two different women who independently decided to leave their lodgings at about the same time on the morning of Kelly's death and shack up with relatives in the room directly opposite Kelly.

[Harry D]

As I explained before, it is the differences which make or break an argument. Similarities are only to be expected, and are the easiest to explain.

At the risk of parroting a certain angler, you're saying it's easier to explain away two overlapping murder series where the victims had their abdominal walls cut away, rings stolen, missing organs, etc. than it is to explain the differences, (presumably the local geography and logistics)?

[Chava]

Alcohol molecules might be, but not the entire liquid medium in which they come. There could still have been a pint or so of beery liquid sloshing about inside her, assuming she partook of Blotchy's quart can.. Then again, her stomach was in a somewhat broken state, so perhaps the point is moot.

Also the smell would have been noticed. Beer has an unmistakeable odour that hangs around a long time. In fact I wonder if there was any beer in that ale-pail when it went into the room. It might be that Cox saw the pail and assumed its contents. Let’s not forget the piece of apron that may well have been contrived as a trophy-carrier. This time our killer may have thought to come prepared.

Getting back to Hutch, he isn’t necessarily dependent on the newspapers. He could have spoken to or overheard anyone who was present at the inquest to get the Lewis info. I’m sure the murder and the inquest dominated discussion everywhere in the area.

[Abby Normal]

Hi Jon,

That was the point I was going to make.

Unless we dismiss all the Lewis/Kennedy stories as invention, we have two women being talked about.

So if Lewis and Kennedy are one and the same, there is still a second woman to account for, with a similar story to tell, but who apparently never talks about it. She lets Lewis go it alone.

I'm not sure how likely that is.

Love,

Caz
X

many people just don't want to get involved.

[Abby Normal]

Much more likely than two different women who independently decided to leave their lodgings at about the same time on the morning of Kelly's death and shack up with relatives in the room directly opposite Kelly.

yup! Kennedy is a fig newton of someones imagination

[DJA]

From what I've read alcohol is absorbed by the stomach, and it is absorbed in a relatively short time.

20% by the stomach,80% by the small intestine.

[Joshua Rogan]

yup! Kennedy is a fig newton of someones imagination

Mmmmm, fig Newtons....I'm imagining some now.