Seeing Sarah

[Normy]

Well he didn't mention her, it would have been more to his benefit if his story tallied with her version of events.
I think he had enough time to realise that, making his version match hers makes his story less suspicious, no?

[Ben]

Hi Normy,

We don't know for certain that he didn't mention her. The police may well have decided that it wasn't relevent or noteworthy enough to include in the report.

On the other hand, if Lewis' wideawake sighting provided the incentive for Hutchinson to come forward and "explain" his presence at a crime scene, it might not have been a wise move to mention her specifically, since doing so would only make it more obvious that he came forward as a direct result of her evidence.

Best regards,
Ben

[Normy]

Hi Ben
That's a very good point.
I guess I'm trying to hard to match up this, and the possiblity that the 'wide awake hat man' is also the second man in the Stride murder and was watching out for Hutchinson.

Cheers

[Sam Flynn]

On balence, though, I'm inclined to consider the identifcation of Hutchinson with the wideawake loiterer as the more likely, primarily on the grounds of timing and coincidence.

Thanks, Ben - although in terms of timing, as we've seen, witnesses' reliability in this area is very approximate at best, and a difference of a few minutes either way in both Lewis's and Hutchinson's estimations would make a major difference to the scenario.

In terms of coincidence - both Hutchinson and Lewis saw a man in proximity to a lodging-house in Dorset Street whilst they were there. That they may both have seen the same man wouldn't therefore be as major a coincidence as one might think.

[Ben]

Hi Gareth,

What tends to clinch it for me is the fact that both Hutchinson and Lewis' loiterer were "watching" and "waiting for someone to come out", whereas the chap returning to the lodging house was, by all accounts, doing just that - no waiting or watching involved.

All the best,
Ben

[Normy]

What tends to clinch it for me is the fact that both Hutchinson and Lewis' loiterer were "watching" and "waiting for someone to come out", whereas the chap returning to the lodging house was, by all accounts, doing just that - no waiting or watching involved.

Hi Ben
As Hutchinson gave his version of events later than Lewis, wouldn't he have had time to adjust his story to match Lewis's if he knew he had been implicated?

Cheers

[Ben]

Yep, precisely, Normy.

[Normy]

Still on here Ben?
Bedtime for me mate!

Cheers

[Celesta]

She saw a man against a lodging-house wall in Dorset Street, he says he saw a man enter a lodging-house in Dorset Street.

Yes, and even if he did see her, he could not have been certain that she would be able to identify him as the man she saw. He could have sat tight until someone came looking for him. Surely GH knew how hard a time the police were having finding someone to fit JTR's description. Why would he think they would have had an easier chance of finding him? Lots of wide-awake hats and men going into lodging houses in that vicinity.

[perrymason]

Hello all,

It would seem, as in the case of Watkins, Jack and Harvey, that Sarah Lewis's presence at the scene and George Hutchinson's loitering near there at approximately the same time did not result in them seeing each other. Nor did Sarah see or hear anything regarding Mary Kelly on her "return" home, or room 13.

When Hutchinson's statement was taken, Sarah was on record about Wideawake. When George gives his version of events, surely the police would have then looked at Sarah's man as Hutch to see if she is corroborated by this new story, and his presence is corroborated by her sighting. They do not overtly represent him as such though, and do not conclude that Hutch and Wideawake are the same man.

Which I now feel might answer the question as to why they did not investigate this man publicly after dropping his suspect description by November 16th. They didnt think Sarah saw Hutch...they think she may have seen an accomplice which was the major catalyst for the pardon finally being issued, within 24 hours of the start of the Kelly investigation. So when George didnt pan out as a reliable suspect or victim witness, he wasnt then subjected to further scruntiny as a potential suspect himself.

Normy...on Stride's accomplice, there is every indication that he left as a potential row had begun in front of Dutfields Yard, just as Schwartz did, or as a Jew like Schwartz, likely frightened by the Lipski inference. There is no connection known of PipeMan and Broadshouldered Man, nor is there real reason to suspect one.

Best regards all.

[Normy]

Hi all
Perrymason, thanks for the Stride related pointer.
I seem to be drawing blanks again!

Ah well...cheers

[Ben]

Hi Celesta,

Yes, and even if he did see her, he could not have been certain that she would be able to identify him as the man she saw. He could have sat tight until someone came looking for him.

...When he gets dragged in as a suspect and asked to explain his loitering presence near a crime scene shortly before the murder? I can see him avoiding that potentiality at all costs. He would have been well aware of the speed with which rumour and suspicion gathered momentum in such as close-knit locality, courtesy of the Pizer fiasco. By coming forward and nailing his colours to the "I'm a witness" mast from the outset, he could "neutralize" police suspicion if and when it arrived. "Well, obviously it wasn't me? I was cooperative and helped you, remember?"

Lots of wide-awake hats and men going into lodging houses in that vicinity.

Lewis' man wasn't going into any lodging house, according to her evidence; he was ostensibly watching Miller's Court and waiting for someone to emerge. There weren't lots of men doing that, and similarly, I'm rather doubtful as to the proliferation of wideawake hats.

When George gives his version of events, surely the police would have then looked at Sarah's man as Hutch to see if she is corroborated by this new story, and his presence is corroborated by her sighting.

I don't know how "surely" that is, Mike, unfortunately. Looking at her police statement, it was clear she was in no position to recognise the man again or provide a detailed description (though Hutchinson, not being privy to that police statement, couldn't have known it). If ever she was confronted with Hutchinson, she was more likely to deliver a "don't know/can't remember" type of response rather than conclusively ruling him in or out.

It would seem, as in the case of Watkins, Jack and Harvey, that Sarah Lewis's presence at the scene and George Hutchinson's loitering near there at approximately the same time did not result in them seeing each other.

I'm afraid it doesn't seem that way at all. The reverse, in fact.

Best regards,
Ben

[Normy]

Hi Ben
I've seen Billycock hats on the net described as Wideawake hats. Are they one in the same do you know? They do get mentioned by other witnesses.

Cheers in advance.

[Ben]

Hi Normy,

Yes, I've discovered the same thing, which may be siginificant in light of Mary Ann Cox's description of a short, stout, blotchy-faced man in a billycock accompanying Kelly home at 11:45pm on the night of her murder.

All the best,
Ben

[Jon Guy]

Hi Normy,

Yes, I've discovered the same thing, which may be siginificant in light of Mary Ann Cox's description of a short, stout, blotchy-faced man in a billycock accompanying Kelly home at 11:45pm on the night of her murder.

All the best,
Ben

Hi Ben

I too had that hunch regarding Mr Blotchy,but when I googled a wideawake hat it described something like what a Quaker would wear,a large brimmed felt hat, whereas, the billycock is more like a bowler hat. I wanted to,but I cannot reconcile a billycock with a widewake hat,but I could be wrong.

I can see Blotchy in Kelly`s room, and he can see men`s clothing and a pipe, so when he leaves Kelly he hangs around waiting to see whether her man returns for the night.