Hutchinsons statement....

[Wickerman]

Hi Caz.

Petticoat Lane was also known locally at the time as the Jews' Market, and most people, however poor, would like to have dressed as well as their means allowed (best on Sunday, pawned on Monday, redeemed on payday, sound familiar?), which often meant scouting round the market stalls for old clothes, cast orf by the better orf; fur collars that could be stitched onto worn coats and jackets to give them a new lease of life; imitation jewellery and so on, if one wanted to look a bit flash on the cheap.

We see plenty of street scenes in contemporary photographs where men are wearing shabby, battered & tattered Top-hats. He is still a man in a top hat as far as a description goes, so immediately those words alone create the misleading impression of a 'toff' wandering the streets.
Nothing could be further from the truth.
As you know, Top hats were recycled along with all manner of clothing. Anyone could end up wearing clothes that had seen better days, in fact many in the East enders did just that.

If Hutch could not have seen that a hankie was red in the dark (which I and others have disputed in the past),....

Yes indeed, and a minor detail was ignored by promoters of that argument. There was a wall lamp just above and to one side of the passage permitting sufficient light on the couple.

Compared with Kelly and the people she usually hung around with, including the unemployed Hutch himself, he could still have appeared 'a cut above', merely on account of choosing to wear flashy gear he'd picked up for very little outlay.

Absolutely, it's all relative.

Besides, whenever it's trotted out that no self respecting killer, armed with a lethally sharp blade, would dare be seen out on those streets in smart clobber for fear of muggers or worse, I always think of the Krays and their ilk, and go hmmmm, right...

Love,

Caz
X

Yes, but members in the US are not likely to know about the Krays, and them in England may be too young.
Too much influence from the Silver Screen in these complaints.

[Sam Flynn]

Absolutely, it's all relative.

Sorry, Jon, but Hutchinson clearly described a very nattily attired man, not a comparatively less-than-shabby genteel.

[Wickerman]

Sorry, Jon, but Hutchinson clearly described a very nattily attired man, not a comparatively less-than-shabby genteel.

That's the impression you get.
There's nothing in his wording to indicate one way or the other.

[Michael W Richards]

That's the impression you get.
There's nothing in his wording to indicate one way or the other.

"Description age about 34 or 35. height 5ft6 complexion pale, dark eyes and eye lashes slight moustache, curled up each end, and hair dark, very surley looking dress long dark coat, collar and cuffs trimmed astracan. And a dark jacket under. Light waistcoat dark trousers dark felt hat turned down in the middle. Button boots and gaiters with white buttons. Wore a very thick gold chain white linen collar. Black tie with horse shoe pin. Respectable appearance walked very sharp. Jewish appearance. Can be identified"

Jon,

Re-reading the above, you may want to rephrase what was obviously an erroneous statement. The description clearly identifies the man as someone with money, or the ability to present himself as such.

[Wickerman]

Well hold on, I think you must mean Dr Phillips. Bond was giving a report to Anderson not the Coroner.

That is not what I was saying.
Dr. Bond was at Millers Court on Saturday subsequent to the autopsy, along with Philips. Both gentlemen were accompanied by the police, and Macdonald.
As Phillips, Bond & Macdonald were all police surgeons it would be impractical to suggest they did not discuss the medical evidence between them.

Yes, Dr. Bond did write his report to Anderson, to forward to Warren. But the details contained within that report are the result of the medical evidence.
I'm suggesting Macdonald was well aware of what Bond had deduced (likely in agreement with Phillips), not that he read any report.

You can't seriously think that the Coroner was able to rule out a time of death at 3:00am, sufficiently to rule out witness evidence which saw Kelly alive at that time, can you?

Not rule out, no, though the cry of murder did capture the imagination of the public, so he had to pursue that line of questioning.
It worked in his favor when Prater admitted cries like that were nothing unusual.
But as Cox's evidence is consistent with Dr. Bond's conclusions, then any claimed sighting of Kelly at 3:00 am will not fair well against what he had already learned.

I think he included Maxwell's evidence because this story was the most popular belief as recorded widely in the press. He needed to explore the possibility as mistaken identity.

And don't you find it strange that the Coroner asked Sarah Lewis so many questions about the man who accosted her in Bethnal Green considering that she also saw him outside the Britannia at a time when the Coroner believed Kelly had already been murdered and the killer's accomplice was waiting outside Miller's Court for him to emerge from number 13?

He asked more questions of Cox.

Regardless, there was no suspicion attached to this stranger seen by Lewis, and she had nothing to contribute towards a time of death.

[Wickerman]

"Description age about 34 or 35. height 5ft6 complexion pale, dark eyes and eye lashes slight moustache, curled up each end, and hair dark, very surley looking dress long dark coat, collar and cuffs trimmed astracan. And a dark jacket under. Light waistcoat dark trousers dark felt hat turned down in the middle. Button boots and gaiters with white buttons. Wore a very thick gold chain white linen collar. Black tie with horse shoe pin. Respectable appearance walked very sharp. Jewish appearance. Can be identified"

Jon,

Re-reading the above, you may want to rephrase what was obviously an erroneous statement. The description clearly identifies the man as someone with money, or the ability to present himself as such.

Michael, Joseph Isaacs managed to turn himself out as quite the dandy, "fancy dressed" was one observation of him. Isaacs didn't have two pennies to rub together. He was a confidence trickster & thief.

[harry]

Didn't Hutchinson say,Á man so well dressed'.Meaning a cut above the neighberhood? How could he tell it was astrakhan? Myself, I can't distinguish types of fur even in daylight.

[Fisherman]

Fisherman,
I have plenty of time to waste.I was merely drawing attention to the claim of 3am as interesting,as if true,it places several people in or near Millers Court at that time,certainly the victim,and possibly the murderer.

Aha. So now it is a question of Cox being placed "in or near" Millers Court at 3 AM?

And it is no longer a question of how Hutchinson should have stumbled over her?

I see.

[harry]

It's not a question or answer of anything.It's interesting.

[Fisherman]

It's not a question or answer of anything.It's interesting.

Yeah, well, contrary to you, I am less fond of wasting time.

To my mind, it would have been a lot easier for you to just say: "Oh, sorry, did I write Cox? It should have been Lewis."

... and that would have been the end of it. Choosing to stand your ground in the middle of the Atlantic ocean will only get you sunk.

[Abby Normal]

If the man stood out to hutch as being so well dressed, indeed this was his lame excuse for taking such notice, then I would go out on a limb and say that it was unusual. lol.

[Michael W Richards]

Michael, Joseph Isaacs managed to turn himself out as quite the dandy, "fancy dressed" was one observation of him. Isaacs didn't have two pennies to rub together. He was a confidence trickster & thief.

That's what I alluded to Jon, the ability to present oneself as a cut above the neighborhood. The description of that man matches either possibility, actual means or the representation of such. He was not shabby genteel or something to that effect, as was earlier suggested.

[Sam Flynn]

That's the impression you get.
There's nothing in his wording to indicate one way or the other.

Au contraire. The jewellery alone is remarkable enough.

[Wickerman]

Au contraire. The jewellery alone is remarkable enough.

Isaacs wore a gold chain - a fake gold chain. He probably nicked it, like everything else he owned.

Was the jewelry worn by Astrachan fake, or real?

[harry]

Fisherman,
Don't know what you mean.My mention was about 3am.Cox says that was the time she last came home.Lewis arrived about 2.30.Hutchinson was,according to Lewis.on the other side of the street.