Let's narrow down some Ripper 'facts'

[Malcolm X]

Yeah. Topping only told the truth about being across from the Court at about 2:15-3:00. he lied about absolutely everything else. Everything. But he was absolutely trustworthy enough that you believe the time and location and nothing else. hahahaha. So insane. Lewis, the drunken prostitute, told the absolute truth about going into the Court at the same time Topping was there. How do we know? Because she saw a stocky man in the vicinity of where Hutchinson said he was, though he lied about everything else. Hahaha. Great stuff. And he came forward because...he knew Lewis was testifying and...though she didn't mention him and didn't have description... and didn't really see anything....and though he was more clearly seen at other murder sites... this was the one he was concerned about. He waited until after the inquest, but he forgot (because he was stupid) to actually find out if he had been mentioned before going to the police. In effect, he could have been turning himself in for all he knew, but he boldly went. And, here's the good part, he stopped killing because Lewis saw a short stocky man and he thought that was too close of a call. Better to stop this little habit than get caught. Hahahah. Nuts!

Mike

if you're going to take the piss, make sure you know the theory first, because what i'm saying is totally different from this

e.g...... i very much doubt GH would have stopped killing just because he was seen by SL, and seen so badly too, no, it's being seen by at least 20 coppers over ther next 2 days that has finished off JTR.

PLUS, it's pretty damned obvious that he went to the police on purpose, that's why he killed MJK, so he could go to the police.

[curious]

What I was meaning with Prater was that if some of her clothes were wet I would expect her to take those outer garments off while she slept.
But I don't think it was raining while Prater stood waiting or she would have said so.
.

would she have?

Was she asked about the weather? Would she have been answering questions?

Maybe it was something "everybody knew" or no reason to state the obvious.

If she were standing waiting in the rain, would she not likely have selected a protected area in order to stay dry?

[Wickerman]

Hi Jon,

Here ya go.

[ATTACH]13378[/ATTACH]

Regards,

Simon

Very neatly done Simon.

So how much of that detail applies to Sunday morning, and how much only to Friday?


There is no doubt the formal proceedure both by the police & press at the time was to encapsulate a suspects description at the end of the story.
This works well enough 99.9 % of the time, even when the story has two suspects, example, the story by Schwartz.

When it does not work is on those rare occasions that the same suspect is seen on two different days, at different times of day, yet only one description is given.
It is highly improbable that any man of means in the 19th century would wear the same clothing on Sunday morning as he had on the previous Thursday night/Friday.

This 'fancy' description appearing so out of place in the dark streets of Whitechapel late at night has been a thorn in the side of researchers.
Maybe, it was never the case from the start.

Regards, Jon S.

[Wickerman]

would she have?

Was she asked about the weather? Would she have been answering questions?

Maybe it was something "everybody knew" or no reason to state the obvious.

If she were standing waiting in the rain, would she not likely have selected a protected area in order to stay dry?

Prater could have stood inside the passage out of the rain, but then Cox couldn't have squeezed past her unknown to Prater.

Regards, Jon S.

[Simon Wood]

Hi Jon,

"Maybe, it was never the case from the start."

Now you're getting the hang of things.

Regards,

Simon

[Wickerman]

nobody else ever saw LA DE DA fact.... only somebody that looks slightly similar, stop twisting things to suit you.

How's about you making an effort to provide less emotion and more substance, for a change.

[Malcolm X]

Hi Jon,

"Maybe, it was never the case from the start."

Now you're getting the hang of things.

Regards,

Simon

YUP, that's exactly what i thought years ago; when i was interested in G.Chapman.

``this description of him by GH looks way to accurate, in fact; this GH bloke looks a bit strange to me, lets take a closer look``

and ever since then it's been a confusing mess

[Malcolm X]

How's about you making an effort to provide less emotion and more substance, for a change.

the trouble is you just dont listen to others do you, you are running around quoting what you think are facts, from drunken prostitutes, assuming way too much without realising that over the years; that nobody else ever has !

what does this tell you about the garbage spoken after the 12th... obviously in your case nothing; but i think you're beginning to realise this...

[curious]

Prater could have stood inside the passage out of the rain, but then Cox couldn't have squeezed past her unknown to Prater.

Regards, Jon S.

Thanks, Jon,

But we're talking about two different things here. I read your post about the timing being off between the two women.

However, you had asked why Prater did not mention the rain . . . I was just providing thoughts about that.

[Wickerman]

Hi Jon,

"Maybe, it was never the case from the start."

Now you're getting the hang of things.

Regards,

Simon

Indeed, though the mistake has been to assume that Hutchinson made it up, all the while it may have been in consequence of how it was written up.

Regards, Jon S.

[DVV]

It's really cute that some posters believe in the Sunday sighting.
I'm sure they can explain why Hutch made no mention of such an important encounter to Abberline. hahahahaha. nuts.

[Wickerman]

We don't know everything they talked about, only what he saw leading up to the murder was important for this statement. Likewise, what he did after is not recorded.

[DVV]

We don't know everything they talked about, only what he saw leading up to the murder was important for this statement.

Except, Jon, that Abberline is insistent that Hutch "can identify the man", which echoes the statement ("can be identified"), and that "an arrangement was at once made for two officers to accompany him round the district for a few hours tonight with the view of finding the man if possible".
As you can notice, Abberline is quite articulate about this promising possible identification, but not a word on the hilarious Sunday sighting.

[Garry Wroe]

The Inquest testimony of Sarah Lewis is the mainstay of this issue. The fact Lewis confirms Hutchinson implies very strongly that Kelly was indeed out after midnight.

It does nothing of the kind, Jon. This is muddled thinking of the first order.

The fact you choose to ignore her words in favour of 30 year old memoirs (Anderson) recalling a Jewish witness as opposed to Hutchinson being the principal witness is laughable.

I do not ignore Lewis’s words. On the contrary. I simply do not accept that Sarah Lewis’s testimony confirms Hutchinson’s claim that he met and spoke to Mary Kelly at two o’clock. And nor in my view would any objective, rational person.

Likewise, I’m baffled as to your conclusion that Lewis’s account and Anderson’s exclusion of Hutchinson as a stellar witness are mutually incompatible. They are not. The problem lies not with these two conditions, but rather with your dogmatic insistence that Hutchinson continued to be regarded as a reliable informant. He didn’t. The evidence for such is overwhelming. But you ignore it because it doesn’t accord your own preconceived notions. That is what’s laughable, Jon.

But then again your selective acceptance of what suits your theory and what contests it might have something to do with your preferential treatment of the evidence.

I’m guessing that the irony of this statement was lost on you, Jon.

And I have never "asserted" Lewis's Britannia-man & Astrachan were the same, only that they might have been.

Really? Well, I’ll leave that for other posters to review your previous contributions and draw their own conclusions.

Lewis saw a loiterer watching a couple "pass up the court". Hutchinson was a loiterer watching a couple "pass up the court", both sightings at the same location and same time …

This would be the same Sarah Lewis who asserted that the court was empty as she entered it? And the same Hutchinson who explicitly stated that no-one entered or left the interconnecting passage whilst he maintained his watch on the court from his position on Dorset Street?

… Hutchinson is confirmed, he was telling the truth, and Kelly was outside Millers Court after midnight, regardless of whether you accept newspaper stories.

This is fantasy of Trenouthian proportions. It’s right up there with alien abductions and Creationism. My advice, Jon, is that you rethink your position before embarrassing yourself further.

[Malcolm X]

hard work isn't it Garry !

SL saw someone outside Millers court, there's no proof that this was GH, but likewise not much proof that it wasn't, it could be that GH simply failed to mention her in his statement, after all; his focus of attention was MJK.

but it would be extremely foolish going to Abberline, if you were never there, and realising at the same time, that SL saw somebody lurking around outside that wasn't you...... this would be really dumb ass !

you notice GH does not mention this in his next statement either, because by now ( if he's smart) he should know that SL saw him, yet he still doesn't mention her, only another bloke and the copper; this is a little bit odd !

GH only has to be careful from 2 to 2.15 am, this is when absolutely nobody must be around... after this, the more people that see him the better.

realising this why is GH distancing himself from SL, unless of course he told all of this to Abberline after the statement was taken, and he couldn't be bothered to re do it all.

it is impossible for GH not to see her, unless of course she sneaked home while he was strolling away from Millers Court, only to turn around and come back 20 seconds later, after all; it must be extremely boring standing fixed in one place for an hour.

.