Seeing Sarah

[Normy]

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

Ah well...cheers

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.

[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.

[Normy]

Still on here Ben?
Bedtime for me mate!

Cheers

[Ben]

Yep, precisely, Normy.

[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]

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

[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.

[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

[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]

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?

[Normy]

Morning!
Here's Sarah's quote:
'I live at 24, Great Pearl-street, and am a laundress. I know Mrs. Keyler, in Miller's-court, and went to her house at 2, Miller's-court, at 2.30a.m. on Friday. It is the first house. I noticed the time by the Spitalfields' Church clock. When I went into the court, opposite the lodging-house I saw a man with a wideawake. There was no one talking to him. He was a stout-looking man, and not very tall. The hat was black. I did not take any notice of his clothes. The man was looking up the court; he seemed to be waiting or looking for some one.'

If it wasn't Hutchinson, then whoever it was might well have seen the ripper and not come forward for whatever reason.

[joelhall]

He almost certainly did see her, Joel. Impossible to miss, although the implications of her arrival on the scene at that time may only have registered later.

thats what i thought so whats with all the puzzling?

[Ben]

He almost certainly did see her, Joel. Impossible to miss, although the implications of her arrival on the scene at that time may only have registered later.

[joelhall]

how do we know he didnt see her?