Hutchinsons statement....

[Sam Flynn]

"Separate abodes" refers to Lewis who lived in Great Pearl Street, and Kennedy who lived at No.2 Millers Court.

Not so fast, Jon. The report says that the Gallaghers lived there, and that Kennedy "came home" to her parents. Now, when we visit our parents, we "go home" too, but that doesn't mean that we still live there.

In truth, the papers don't actually tell us where Kennedy lived, but I wouldn't mind betting that it was Great Pearl Street.

[David Orsam]

The question is pointless, we don't know if Kennedy had a sister.

What about Sarah Lewis?

Do we know if she had a sister?

[David Orsam]

Who was "standing in the court"?
Don't forget, Lewis already said, "no-one was in the court".
What did you call this, oh yes, a "factual correction"?

Yes a good example of a garbled account where I had in mind she was in the court while she saw a man standing opposite. Which shows how easy it is.

[David Orsam]

And that's a problem?

Yes of course it's a problem that you seem to be relying so heavily on a newspaper account in respect of the difference between 2.30 and 3.00am in circumstances where Lewis had told the police she arrived at Millers Court between 2 and 3.

[Wickerman]

So there were two couples, plus Wideawake Man? Doesn't she only mention one couple elsewhere?

That notwithstanding, it is nonetheless true, as I suggested, that a couple seen standing outside the Britannia could be described as "further on" from the POV of someone at the entrance to Miller's Court.

I don't see how.
Lewis is walking away from the Britannia, towards Millers court when she say's that there was a couple further on. She's already mentioned the couple outside the Britannia as she passed them. Now, she is down Dorset street....

[Sam Flynn]

"Separate abodes" refers to Lewis who lived in Great Pearl Street, and Kennedy who lived at No.2 Millers Court.

I thought the Gallaghers lived there... with the Keylers, evidently. What with Lewis and Kennedy both deciding to turn up in the wee small hours, it must have been one hell of a squeeze in there that night.

[Wickerman]

It came from you Jon (#685):

"But David, you are making up a story with no contemporary evidence to substantiate it. But here we have quite separate identities, separate abodes, and separate times, provided for these two women."

And you seriously think there was enough spare rooms in no. 2 Millers Court to accommodate two women, both presumably facing no. 13?

"Separate abodes" refers to Lewis who lived in Great Pearl Street, and Kennedy who lived at No.2 Millers Court.

Am I going too fast for you?

[Wickerman]

Well I suggest it's more respectable to be walking down Bethnal Green Road in the evening with your sister than with a prostitute.

But are you saying they were sisters then?

I asked you this earlier but got no answer.

The question is pointless, we don't know if Kennedy had a sister.

[Wickerman]

A classic example of what you would refer to as being "naïve" surely?

Everything you say about the timing of Kennedy's sighting comes from a newspaper account.

And that's a problem?

So what has happened to "scribal errors" suddenly?

The same about the man and woman.

As I keep saying, it's all garbled versions of the same story.

And I have to correct you factually. Lewis saw TWO men. One standing in the court and one young man with a woman.

Who was "standing in the court"?
Don't forget, Lewis already said, "no-one was in the court".
What did you call this, oh yes, a "factual correction"?

[David Orsam]

What evidence do you have that these articles are not accurate?
What we read in the press is consistent with the court record, plus the Times & Evening News all seem to be projecting the same story - or is everybody involved in this conspiracy?

Now you've lost me. If the story in the Evening News, the Times and the court record is the same story it suggests that Sarah Lewis was the same woman as Mrs Kennedy doesn't it?

[David Orsam]

I don't see the connection you are trying to make.

I wasn't making any connection, I was giving an example of how an account in a newspaper can be garbled. In this case, however, I see that Lewis did speak of a man and a woman near the Britannia - the man being the one who accosted her earlier in the week - so it must be yet another coincidence that both she and Kennedy spotted the same man on the Friday morning who had accosted them on the Wednesday night.

[Wickerman]

I think you misunderstand my purpose in quoting from the Evening News.

It's not because I don't think newspapers can be in error. It's the exact opposite. I'm saying they DO make mistakes so please don't wave the articles featuring Mrs Kennedy and then focus on every small inconsistency between her story and the story of Sarah Lewis.

As far as I am concerned it is you who is being naïve because your entire theory rests on the newspaper stories being 100% accurate.

What evidence do you have that these articles are not accurate?
What we read in the press is consistent with the court record, plus the Times & Evening News all seem to be projecting the same story - or is everybody involved in this conspiracy?

[Wickerman]

Ha! A "scribal error"? Is that what they are called now?

That's what somebody suggested it might be, but like I said it does not satisfy the whole quote.

Yes actually there is a perfectly satisfactory resolution which is that "Mrs Kennedy" was telling the reporter exactly the same story as Sarah Lewis told at the inquest except that it got garbled either due to "scribal error" or misunderstanding or whatever you want to call it.

She told the reporter that on her way home she passed the Britannia pub and saw a man in Dorset Street. This has been translated as "Passing the Britannia..she saw..".

I don't see the connection you are trying to make.

[Bridewell]

Having experienced the remarkable things he claimed to have experienced, and learned that his friend had been horrifically murdered hours later, it is almost inconceivable that he'd get the date wrong.

I take your point, but if he got the date wrong then it wouldn't be hours later but a day or two.

[Sam Flynn]

But there are those who will not accept that Hutchinson could err like that.

It's not a question of not accepting that Hutchinson could get the date wrong, it's a question of how likely he was to have done so.