Who are the mostly likely suspects?

[The Good Michael]

.


I absolutely don't agree. I like singing folk songs, and it would take a few songs to warm up...then if it goes well, you don't want to stop ! Add in that she was talking, drinking, and doing other things inbetween...well 1 1/2 hours sounds fine to me.

Besides which, some of those ballads have loads of verses all with the chorus inbetween them -and they can last a long time..

This is true. Besides, Kelly seems to have been an obnoxious drunk. Obnoxious people can sing for hours with no regards to anyone else around them. I once stayed in a hostel on Lewis with a young woman next door singing, "All you Need is Love" over and over for 3 hours. They'll never find the body.

Mike

[Rubyretro]

.

One and a half hours singing (11:45 - 1:15) in your room is a little too long under the circumstances.

I absolutely don't agree. I like singing folk songs, and it would take a few songs to warm up...then if it goes well, you don't want to stop ! Add in that she was talking, drinking, and doing other things inbetween...well 1 1/2 hours sounds fine to me.

Besides which, some of those ballads have loads of verses all with the chorus inbetween them -and they can last a long time..

[Wickerman]

Strange that Cox still claims to have heard Kelly singing about 1:15 am, yet Prater heard nothing about 1:20 am.
One and a half hours singing (11:45 - 1:15) in your room is a little too long under the circumstances.

Regards, Jon S.

[harry]

Before commencing the journey to her room,I would expext that both were aware of the reason for doing so,what ever that reason was,and I am pleased that at least some posters are questioning the seemingly long held belief , that the male was a client responding to the overtures of a prostitute seeking cash.It could have been,but in my opinion the subsequent behaviour of Kelly on reaching Millers Court negates that.Evidence indicates that she only wanted to sing,and that is all she did,at least untill 1AM.

[lynn cates]

broad face

Hello Malcolm, David. What kind of face did he have?

(Snippet from "The Mercury" November 17, 1888.)

Cheers.
LC

[Hunter]

That's right, Dave.

He was such a redneck that it spread to his face.

'Me laydee an' Aye 'll have whatever the bloke on the floor was havin'...
an' punch another Hank Williams song on the jukebox.'

[DVV]

Blotchy was nice. He loved beer and sad songs.

[Malcolm X]

Kelly, on a small 'beat' which no doubt included a number of regulars at the Britannia and perhaps the Queens Head, repeat customers were likely the norm. How many strangers would we expect to see in the vicinity on a given weekday?
Sure, Blotchy may have been with Kelly before, but if he had been too regular Cox might have known his name instead of just describing him.

There might be a difference between Kelly "knowing" her client and Kelly entertaining a repeat customer. I do agree that Kelly most likely picked Blotchy up at the pub.

Regards, Jon S.

what is interesting is that MJK would have been known by all the pub regulars, because these were here ``locals``, she's obviously done this type of thing before, because as Sarah said, ``she's going to have a sing``. so probably every weekend.

this is the busy East End, so of all the blokes in the pub that night, at least 1/3 would have been strangers, just like today, this pub would also be very noisy/ rowdy..... i expect, full of drunken labourers and builders etc !

Blotchy face probably went over and joined her, whilst she was with her hideous friends, a bunch of ugly tarts all sitting together, shouting at the blokes and grabbing their arses as they walked by ...``core blimey love, you look like a big boy, you gonna' buy me a drink``..... just like one of those old Hammer horror movies... maybe!

the only entertainment they had back then was the local pub, so i expect they were packed solid, Blotchy gave Sarah a filthy look, but this might mean nothing

[Wickerman]

Jon,

As I said earlier, and others have said perhaps better, Blotchy is obviously (to me) someone Kelly was comfortable and familiar with. I imagine he was a drinking buddy and when he had enough money, a client.

Mike

Kelly, on a small 'beat' which no doubt included a number of regulars at the Britannia and perhaps the Queens Head, repeat customers were likely the norm. How many strangers would we expect to see in the vicinity on a given weekday?
Sure, Blotchy may have been with Kelly before, but if he had been too regular Cox might have known his name instead of just describing him.

There might be a difference between Kelly "knowing" her client and Kelly entertaining a repeat customer. I do agree that Kelly most likely picked Blotchy up at the pub.

Regards, Jon S.

[DVV]

Hi Richard

This was not spiced up, or invented by Topping's family
Regards Richard.

How would you know, honestly ?

What I see is one Reginald who took the opportunity to get some cash and some fame. His story has been accepted by Fairclough (no wonder) but rejected by others. He sure could get more fame telling his story to "academic" ripperologists, or even to any journalist, but he did not. He couldn't provide solid evidence that his father was the witness, I presume.

By the way, Richard, one must admit that nothing came after the radio program, as if Reg story did interest nobody, even not Knight.
Isn't that strange ?

Of course, we've got nothing from Toppy himself. It's all about a Hutchinson named Reginald and a crook called Fairclough. Or so it seems.

[The Good Michael]

Hi,
The whole crux of the matter, is although we on Casebook find the statement of Hutchinson's so full of suspicion, the Hutchinson family would not have shared our incriminating views.
All Reg did was relay the family tale to those who asked , rather like Topping would have years previous, it is quite right in suggesting that the radio broadcast was at a time when the Royal conspiracy was at its height, and the well dressed Mr A,fitted the bill for a suspect, that could have been of the upper classes.
I can vouch that the broadcast, revealed an almost identical story, and was not spiced up for added royalties for the publication, some 18 years later.
What I can gather from a private source, Reg enjoyed the limelight, to a extent, especially if a cash gift was a possibility, but did not invent the tale, his late uncle Arthur[ Toppings brother, who died in Dec11] and other younger members of the family were aware also, of the witness story.
This was not spiced up, or invented by Topping's family, although a possibility exists that the latter may have told a whopper, however, as I have said many times that suggestion looks extremely unlikely for many solid reason's.
Did Topping tell the truth to the police, or was it told to cover up something, was he worried about being seen loitering in Dorset street, was he in room 13 that morning, but on hearing medical T.O.D, was frightful of revealing it.
All this is possible , but does not make him a killer..
The objection to that is, why bring up the whole subject, and his knowledge of knowing a victim, and giving a statement , and relay it to anybody who would listen, I would suggest ''Mums the word ''would be the better policy.would it not.? if there was concious in his past.
Regards Richard.

Richard,

I can see if GWTH was a young man trying to make a buck, that he wouldn't have been so proud to tell his kids the whole truth of that night, namely, that he embellished a bit, or that he had suspicions and did nothing about them that evening, thereby sealing the doom of a not-so-innocent woman. Indeed, this something I would have had a hard time with, if I did nothing because I was maybe hoping that the guy would come back out after doing his business and I could cheat or rob him.

Mike

[richardnunweek]

Hi,
The whole crux of the matter, is although we on Casebook find the statement of Hutchinson's so full of suspicion, the Hutchinson family would not have shared our incriminating views.
All Reg did was relay the family tale to those who asked , rather like Topping would have years previous, it is quite right in suggesting that the radio broadcast was at a time when the Royal conspiracy was at its height, and the well dressed Mr A,fitted the bill for a suspect, that could have been of the upper classes.
I can vouch that the broadcast, revealed an almost identical story, and was not spiced up for added royalties for the publication, some 18 years later.
What I can gather from a private source, Reg enjoyed the limelight, to a extent, especially if a cash gift was a possibility, but did not invent the tale, his late uncle Arthur[ Toppings brother, who died in Dec11] and other younger members of the family were aware also, of the witness story.
This was not spiced up, or invented by Topping's family, although a possibility exists that the latter may have told a whopper, however, as I have said many times that suggestion looks extremely unlikely for many solid reason's.
Did Topping tell the truth to the police, or was it told to cover up something, was he worried about being seen loitering in Dorset street, was he in room 13 that morning, but on hearing medical T.O.D, was frightful of revealing it.
All this is possible , but does not make him a killer..
The objection to that is, why bring up the whole subject, and his knowledge of knowing a victim, and giving a statement , and relay it to anybody who would listen, I would suggest ''Mums the word ''would be the better policy.would it not.? if there was concious in his past.
Regards Richard.

[DVV]

Hi Greg

Well, at least this would prove your nemesis didn't fabricate or dream up his radio program.

Actually I've never heard this elusive program, but I trust Richard, no problem. I just can repeat it was the heyday of royal theories.

And Fairclough may be a fabricator also, but does that mean everything he's ever said is nonsense? He who has not fibbed cast the first stone!

It's worse : he is a fabricator and fabrications are fundamental in his theory, as proved by the Abberline diaries and PAV the Undead (looking much like Count Orlock).

Also, we're condemning the solid family man Toppy as a liar without evidence....I myself find his story incredible but what if it's true?

Well, if true, it was easy for Reginald to go to Rumbelow, SPE, whoever, tell his story and show his evidence.

He did not. The few persons he has been in touch with (other than Fairclough) weren't impressed, to say the least (Edwards, Feldman).

[Malcolm X]

solid family man Toppy = someone like the BTK killer, and probably much more if i care to Google it

it's unlikely, but Toppy could quite easily be JTR, the trouble we have is that we dont know how old GH was, or exactly what he looked like, because he might have looked nothing like Toppy and 10 years older.

bloody hell, we have no idea what Toppy looked like either do we, only his age, because that photo of him looks like it's from the 1970s, in a photo-me booth.

we only know what Reg looks like.... oh sorry, we dont even know that do we, because only Fairclough and I.Edwards knew.

[Malcolm X]

Hi Malcolm,

It doesn't make sense to sensible people, and perhaps it doesn't make sense at all. Was JtR sensible? If he had what would nowadays be called Obsessive Compulsive Disorder, he would have had to do things in a particular order:
e.g. Throttle, Cut Throat, Mutilate Abdomen, Mutilate Face, Mutilate Limbs, detach Ears.

If (big if) that were the case, he would "not have time" because he had only enough to do the abdominal and facial mutilation and not the next events in the required sequence.

I'm not saying that's how it was, just that it's how it could have been.

yes maybe, but if you think that the postcard is from him, then he must be playing games.... big time.

because the graffiti is written by someone far better educated than this bloke, maybe he's written the postcard too quickly to be bothered, but it looks like he's saying that he's goofed killing Stride, which JTR did anyway.

he's saying ``number one made too much noise, so i couldn't finish her off``

i.e ``she made a noise when i grabbed her, i was seen by others, so i had to walk off and return later``..... he's just quickly writing the postcard and as such it looks like it's from an idiot........ maybe.

plus, we dont know exactly what Schwartz saw, and maybe even he doesn't, maybe it's his version of events that's wrong.

but you cant help thinking that BS is too stupid to be JTR, can you..... unless of course as said, Schwartz is wrong