Let's narrow down some Ripper 'facts'

[The Good Michael]

I've just had a thought. (Don't titter at the back there.) If Hutch was there at all that night, and neither mistaken about the date nor inventing the whole story to grab himself a bit of the action and perhaps make some money from the police or the papers, we can at least accept he was telling the truth about his lengthy 45 minute wait. What would he gain from making this supposedly fruitless vigil a minute longer than it actually was?

This leaves Hutch theorists with more explaining to do, because the only good reason for waiting outside like that, if his purpose was to go inside, would be if she had someone else in the room with her all that time. We know by the defence wounds that she was not completely unconscious through drink, nor in a deep sleep, at the point of attack. With a killer like this he'd have cut her throat before she knew what was happening if that were the case. So it's not as if she was alone and the killer was waiting in the court all that time for her to fall asleep (with the risk of being seen by all and sundry). Besides, how could he have been sure from the outside if and when she was finally asleep? If she knew him and trusted him, he didn't need to wait if she was alone. If she didn't know or trust him, she'd have likely yelled blue murder if he let himself in while she was still awake.

So how does the intruder scenario featuring Hutch actually work, if he did indeed have to wait for 45 long minutes before making his move? We have no clue what time Blotchy left the room, so it could have been before, during or after Hutch's vigil. But if Hutch was finally able to enter the room and find Mary alone, and is meant to have killed her shortly after 3am, he presumably watched her previous visitor - Blotchy or A.N. Other - leave. So would this previous visitor not have seen Hutch hanging around?

Sorry to do this on the 'facts' thread, but I think it might be important assuming the 45 minute wait is one of them.

C'mon Caz!

The only truth that night was that Hutchinson was spotted by Lewis and then went in and killed Kelly. Every word of his was a lie, except for the time he said he was there because he was caught dead to rights. Undismayed, he killed her anyway knowing that he could make up a story.... even if Lewis didn't recognize him or describe him.... to get him out of hot water.

Mike

[DVV]

Caz post isn't bad, Mike. It didn't deserve your comment.
She has some points worth discussing, no need to raise a hue and a cry.
But now she can't complain if the thread is Hutch-hijacked.

[caz]

No complaints from me if someone would kindly explain Hutch's 45 minute vigil in inclement weather if Mary was alone inside and still alive.

And I appreciated Mike's comment. In fact I laughed - with him, not at him.

Love,

Caz
X

[DVV]

No complaints from me if someone would kindly explain Hutch's 45 minute vigil in inclement weather if Mary was alone inside and still alive.
X

That's a task for Mike, I'm sure.

[Abby Normal]

No complaints from me if someone would kindly explain Hutch's 45 minute vigil in inclement weather if Mary was alone inside and still alive.

And I appreciated Mike's comment. In fact I laughed - with him, not at him.

Love,

Caz
X

Hi Caz
he was waiting for someone to leave. Perhaps Blotchy, If he was telling the truth about A-man, perhaps A-man, or someone else.

[DVV]

My main concern is about the next hour. Mary was murdered at 4 (thanks to Diddles, who afterwards refused to identify Kosminski, though), then what did Hutch do between 3 and 4 ?
Big question.
In my opinion, he ran to Romford and came back (at around 3:55).

[Wickerman]

....Her situation is akin to Schwartz.Both followed persons appearing intoxicated,but while Cox was still some distance behind at the crucial time,Schwartz had narrowed the distance to a point of near contact.Yet both gave specific details of appearance....

You were almost there Harry.

Without muddying the waters any further the question must be posed if a man who has a "small brown moustache" on Sept. 30th, could have grown it sufficiently for it to be described as a "thick carroty moustache" by Nov 9th.
The height at 5ft 5in is the same, and Schwartz did not see BS-man's face clearly, maybe he also had blotches.

Regards, Jon S.

[DVV]

Mrs Long's suspect had blotches as well, but in the back.

[Wickerman]

Hi Jon,

So you're saying that when Anderson stated on more than one occasion that the "only person who ever had a good view of the murderer" was a Jewish man, he wasn't being entirely truthful; ....

Anderson's recollections were defective certainly, therefore unreliable with respect to this debate and Cox did not get a good view by her own testimony.
She followed on behind a male figure through a dark passage, and only glimpsed his face as he slammed the door closed.
Example, in her testimony first he has a full carroty moustache which then changed to a short carroty moustache. But, I think Anderson has other concerns.

Given that Cox could only provide a suspect 1 hour and 15 minutes before Bond's probable "time of death" estimate, Anderson will know that Lawende is still a better witness from a legal perspective.

Bond's medical estimate does not make Cox a principal witness for sighting the Ripper, what it does do is eliminate Hutchinson from ever being considered as "the best witness", in spite of his claim.

On top of that, Anderson will naturally be inclined to stay with Lawende, due to the fact that Mary Cox is a prostitute and Scotland Yard might have a credibility issue if their star witness was a local prostitute.
Anderson will naturally choose the path of least resistance and stay with Lawende, afterall, his sighting was still within 10 minutes of a murder.

Regards, Jon s.

[DVV]

Hi Jon, would you tell me at what time Kelly took her last meal ? I'm sure I've missed something.

[Ben]

Bond's time of death estimation was calculated, at least in part, on the digestive rate of Kelly's stomach content. But since no-one had the vaguest idea as to the time at which Kelly had taken her final meal, Bond's estimation must have been largely speculatory. Personally, I think that the cry of 'Murder!' heard by two witnesses was the clincher as far as investigators were concerned, even though these same investigators normally placed a great deal of faith in the medical evidence.

Agreed on both counts, Garry.

Hi Jon,

Dorset Street wasn't badly lighted in comparison to other streets, and there was a lamp opposite Kelly's room where the Cox sighting occurred. On the illumination front at least, Cox's sighting was superior to Lawende's. Where are you getting a "short carroty moustache" from, incidentally? In all versions of Cox's testimony I've read, the moustache is described either as "full" or "thick", which amounts to the same thing.

I don't know if you've had a chance to read the 13th November Star article I've provided, but it effectively dispenses with any suggestion that the police supported Bond's suggested time of death at Anderson's behest. It instead demonstrates that the police supported a later time of death in accordance with the evidence of Prater, Lewis etc.

All the best,
Ben

[Ben]

Hi all,

I notice the issue of the "intruder" keeps cropping up, and I touched upon it earlier in this thread. I consider it more probable than not that Kelly fell victim to an intruder rather than someone she brought home as a client. A point worth noting about those known serial killers who became intruders (or "home invaders") during the course of their rampages, is that they embarked on a period of pre-crime surveillance prior to attacking. With the possible exception of the haphazard Richard Trenton Chase, they didn't simply turn up at the venue and launch straight into it, since for obvious reasons this would have been imprudent. Rather, they installed themselves at a convenient vantage point and monitored the various comings and goings of neighbours and other visitors, only striking at what they considered to be the opportune moment.

[Wickerman]

I never said that Dew called Hutchinson a liar, Jon. I said that he ‘rejected Hutchinson’s account’. There is a difference.

Garry.
I lose count of how many posts where you have claimed that Hutchinson was lying. With that in mind, what I was alluding to is your attempt to now enroll Walter Dew as if he supported your contention, which he does not.
You have claimed Hutchinson was lying, Dew makes it clear in his opinion Hutchinson was not a liar, mistaken perhaps, just like Maxwell.

...we seem to be making progress of sorts. You now appear to be acknowledging that Hutchinson’s story was dismissed by the authorities.

I hope we are not descending into semantics.
Dismissed is not discredited.

So long as Anderson & Warren both accept Bond's estimated time of death, there is no reflection on George Hutchinson, because their acceptance comes down to a matter of opinion, not of fact.

No-one found fault with Hutchinson's story, nor any part of his claims, therefore he was never dismissed as a liar, which runs contrary to your assertions.

It might be well to highlite a reminder here of something I explained to Ben some months ago.
"Diminution" is not "Discredit".

When the Echo wrote:
"The importance which they then attached to it has since suffered diminution."

They were alluding to the fact Hutchinson's story has been reduced in importance, diminution means reduced, it does not mean dismissed or discredited.

And in the very same paper we read:
"The Metropolitan police, however, have been induced to attach more significance to Cox's statement."

Which, as it now turns out appears to be a reasonably accurate use of terminology. Swanson/Abberline were "induced" by Warren/Anderson to take direction from Bond's medical report in preference to all else.

The police merely chose to work with the word of a trusted professional due to Macdonald not being able to provide a time of death at the conclusion of the Inquest, which unfortunately displaces Hutchinson to second place, with Cox now being the most prominent.
Both Anderson & Warren will know that there lies a degree of uncertainty as to the precise time of death, as both Bond and Phillips have explained.

According to Dew, Hutchinson may have mixed up the time or date of his alleged sighting of Kelly. At any event, this means that Hutchinson did not meet Kelly on Commercial Street at the time specified in his witness statement, and that Kelly did not encounter Astrakhan shortly thereafter.

Depending on whether Dr Bond was correct, if not, then Hutchinson is back in the frame. Which demonstrates that Hutchinson was not discredited for lying. The change in focus was a prudent move on behalf of the authorites, with no intended reflection on any witnesses.

Just for the sake of our disagreement, it is important to distinguish between Hutchinson being discredited for lying, which is the persistent claim here, or that Hutchinson's claim was relegated in importance due to outside influences, hence he was not accused by anyone of lying.

The latter appears to reflect the true situation.

Regards, Jon S.

[Observer]

Anderson's recollections were defective certainly, therefore unreliable with respect to this debate

Hi Wickerman

I'd agree. Likewise, Aberlline's assertion that JTR was only ever viewed from the rear is defective, and therefore unreliable with respect to this debate also.

[Wickerman]

Thanks, Garry.

I think we can safely dispense with the notion that Cox's evidence was prioritized purely because of Bond's suggested time of death. Indeed, the following extract from the Star, 13th November, flatly refutes it:

I am stunned Ben, you are actually expecting to sway an argument by introducing a newspaper "opinion" as fact.


Fact - Macdonald never provided an official time of death, why?

Fact - Dr. Phillips was never given the opportunity to offer an opinion.

Fact - An estimated time of death was mentioned based "entirely" on the estimated time of hearing the cry of "murder".

Fact - Nothing was "proven" concerning the time of death, regardless what your preferred source (The Star) speculates.

What did your Star write the night before?

"Dr. Bagster Phillips, divisional surgeon, says that when he was called (at a quarter to eleven) Kelly had been dead some five or six hours. "
The Star, 12 Nov.

Dr. Phillips appears to lean towards Kelly dying between 5:45 - 6:45 am, roughly.
How does that fit your theory?

You were pulling my leg, right?

It was in consequence of Macdonald failing to provide an official time of death by the conclusion of his Inquest that Anderson would be compelled to share Dr. Bond's report with Swanson, which in effect, re-shuffled the deck.

Regards, Jon S.