Hutchinsons statement....

[Michael W Richards]

Hutchinson can only be placed outside Crossingham's about 2.30.When he arrived,or how long he stayed,is open to argument,as is his reasons for being there.There is only his word. What appears to me is that there is so much of an abnormal nature to his story,it would not be wise to accept it at face value.

I think Harry that the real truth here is that we have only his word for everything he says. The fact that Sarah Lewis says she saw someone loitering where Hutchinson later says he was is not corroboration, it merely serves us with questions as to whether his statement had coincidental characteristics, whether Sarah saw someone who Hutchinson later claims to be, or whether he placed himself in the Wideawake hat intentionally.

There are many reasons to be suspicious of Hutchinson, for the reasons above, and for the 4 day delay in even coming in with a story that surely could have been important evidence in what was the brutal murder of his alleged friend. As so many people want to associate this murder with The so called "Ripper", if a true story, it may well have provided a real clue that might apply to all the assumed "mad killer at large" investigations. He could have helped catch this Ripper fellow. But no, he waits 4 days until after the Inquest and then gives us a story about where he was and what he did and saw that night, none of which can be corroborated.... cleanly.

With Hutchinson, the real question is why he did it at all, not what he said happened.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Hi:

As a guy who has always dismissed Hutchinson as a fantasist I have had a bit of a re-think. My main question, the one that's playing on my mind, is:

If Hutchinson simply invented Astrakhan Man, would the benefits from this invention; a possible reward or a bit of fame, outweigh the negative i.e. Putting yourself right on the spot of an horrendous murder. A murder of someone that he knew and outside who's address you had been loitering for 45 minutes? Add these to the fact that he could have easily have been spotted talking to MJK shortly before her death.

Food for thought?

Regards
HS

[Sam Flynn]

If Hutchinson simply invented Astrakhan Man, would the benefits from this invention; a possible reward or a bit of fame, outweigh the negative i.e. Putting yourself right on the spot of an horrendous murder.

Perhaps little more than Matthew Packer, whose fabriction was merely less imaginative than George Hutchinson. Let's also not forget those other deluded individuals, losers and hoaxers who actually claimed to be a murderer in order to get their 5 minutes of fame.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Ah Packer. I've been meaning to have a look into him again especially after reading the Bruce Robinson book. I don't believe in Michael Maybrick as Jack but i recall his take on Packer was that quite a few people mentioned seeing grapes(didn't that include Diemschutz?) and one of the newspaper illustrations included grapes. Haven't gotten around to looking at it again yet, I'm reading Patterson's Francis Thompson book at the moment.

Regards
HS

[Sam Flynn]

I don't believe in Michael Maybrick as Jack but i recall his take on Packer was that quite a few people mentioned seeing grapes (didn't that include Diemschutz?)

Self-styled private investigators Batchelor and Grand (the latter being a bit of a rogue and a conman, who had a criminal record under a number of aliases) claimed to have found a grape-stalk in a drain at Dutfield's Yard. No reliable witnesses reported grapes or grape-stalks in connection with the Stride murder.

[Abby Normal]

Hi:

As a guy who has always dismissed Hutchinson as a fantasist I have had a bit of a re-think. My main question, the one that's playing on my mind, is:

If Hutchinson simply invented Astrakhan Man, would the benefits from this invention; a possible reward or a bit of fame, outweigh the negative i.e. Putting yourself right on the spot of an horrendous murder. A murder of someone that he knew and outside who's address you had been loitering for 45 minutes? Add these to the fact that he could have easily have been spotted talking to MJK shortly before her death.

Food for thought?

Regards
HS

he was there anyway, watching and waiting for Kelly, probably knew he was seen by someone already (lewis) so why not come forth for a little personal gain.

(of course assuming he wasn't her murderer).

[Herlock Sholmes]

Self-styled private investigators Batchelor and Grand (the latter being a bit of a rogue and a conman, who had a criminal record under a number of aliases) claimed to have found a grape-stalk in a drain at Dutfield's Yard. No reliable witnesses reported grapes or grape-stalks in connection with the Stride murder.

I never really understood why Diemschutz, who appears not to have been disbelieved about anything else, is not trusted on this point. I know that he said that he couldn't recall the position of the hands but he was actually there when the doctor opened her them, probably lifting them to do this. He was correct about the sweetmeats/cachous why would he 'make up' the grapes. Seems a bit strange? I haven't checked but didn't Mrs Mortimer and others mention grapes too ?
Regards
HS

[Sam Flynn]

I never really understood why Diemschutz, who appears not to have been disbelieved about anything else, is not trusted on this point

Diemschutz didn't mention grapes; that was Packer, Batchelor and Grand. Perhaps they were sponsored by the Grape Marketing Board

[Herlock Sholmes]

It's a strange one. Fanny Mortimer said she saw grapes as did Diemschutz and Kozebrodsky who were there when the doctor examined the body. But, and it's a huge one, neither the doctor, Blackwell or his assistant Johnston mention grapes. Phillips specifically says that there were no grapes which he wouldn't have needed to do if no one had mentioned grapes in the first place. There's also a strange phrase (that I know Bruce Robinson picked up on) Phillips said that she'd swallowed neither the skin or the seed of grapes! Why not say that she hadn't eaten grapes? Robinson posits that she spat out the skin and seed, which is possible. Phillips also said that there was 'fruit' juice on her handkerchief. I'll bet your average east end prostitute wouldn't have wasted much cash on fruit? I'm not looking for a mystery where non exists here but the question that I would ask, and we all have to answer it, is how do we choose which witnesses to believe and which not to? And do we always get it right?

Regards
HS

[Herlock Sholmes]

Diemschutz didn't mention grapes; that was Packer, Batchelor and Grand. Perhaps they were sponsored by the Grape Marketing Board

Sam: I've just looked on the casebook witness section and Diemschutz does say that he saw grapes

HS

[Sam Flynn]

Sam: I've just looked on the casebook witness section and Diemschutz does say that he saw grapes

You're right, HS, and thanks for the correction. It's interesting to note that the statement about grapes was linked to Diemschutz only by one newspaper, the Daily News of 1st October 1888; the same article attributes statements about grapes to the others you've mentioned, Kozebrodski and Mortimer. It may be that the testimony of one or both the latter inadvertently "contaminated" Diemschutz's account in a press agency release.

[Herlock Sholmes]

You're right, HS, and thanks for the correction. It's interesting to note that the statement about grapes was linked to Diemschutz only by one newspaper, the Daily News of 1st October 1888; the same article attributes statements about grapes to the others you've mentioned, Kozebrodski and Mortimer. It may be that the testimony of one or both the latter inadvertently "contaminated" Diemschutz's account in a press agency release.

Could be Sam. I've just re read the inquest statement by Diemschutz though and it's noticeable that he's being questioned about events 'up to' the doctors arrival. He doesn't mention anything about cachous or grapes or whatever might have been in Stride's hands. Whereas in the press report he speaks of actually watching the doctor open her hands and finding grapes in one and cachous in the other. Kozebrodsky and Mortimer both say they also saw grapes albeit in press reports. Questions, questions! What reason would Diemschutz, Kozebrodsky or Mortimer have for making up the grapes? Conversely, why would Blackwell and Johnston not mention them when they do mention cachous?
I keep seeing William Gulls face. Only joking.
Regards
HS

[jerryd]

You're right, HS, and thanks for the correction. It's interesting to note that the statement about grapes was linked to Diemschutz only by one newspaper, the Daily News of 1st October 1888; the same article attributes statements about grapes to the others you've mentioned, Kozebrodski and Mortimer. It may be that the testimony of one or both the latter inadvertently "contaminated" Diemschutz's account in a press agency release.

Hi Sam,

I found this awhile back in regard to Legrand and Batchelor and the grape story.

London Evening News and Post, June 28, 1889

The large rewards offered at the time of the late Whitechapel murders, induced him for a time to devote his energies to the pursuit of "Jack the Ripper", in collaboration with an English private inquiry agent, and the two unearthed some facts which startled the town very considerably when published in the Evening News, to which Grandy sold his information.

It was a result of their exertions that the story of Matthew Packer, the greengrocer who sold the memorable pound of grapes to the murderer and his victim half-an-hour before the crime, was first given to the public in the Evening News-from which it was printed by nearly all the London papers and many of the provincial ones.

[Sam Flynn]

It was a result of [Grand and Batchelor's] exertions that the story of Matthew Packer, the greengrocer who sold the memorable pound of grapes to the murderer and his victim half-an-hour before the crime, was first given to the public in the Evening News-from which it was printed by nearly all the London papers and many of the provincial ones.

So, "as a result of Grand and Batchelor's exertions" Packer's grapes story found its way into the press. Not sure if that was the case, but it would explain a fair bit if it were.

Thanks, Jerry

[Herlock Sholmes]

It doesn't explain why Diemschutz, Kozebrodsky and Mortimer, who were there, and the first two actually saw Blackwell open Strides hands, all mention grapes? I need to check the Robinson book because I'm sure that he mentioned 8 or 9 people who all mentioned grapes.
Talking of grapes, time to crack open a bottle.

Goodnight all
HS