Hutchinsons statement....

[Wickerman]

My point Precicely Jon even if he was 17 or 18 and she 25 with a warm bed and a known commodity, I wouldn't rule out him fancying his chances.

I must confess, the thoughts that ran through his mind can't be a whole lot different to the thoughts that ran through mine....
Only I did have a "6d" maybe that makes all the difference.

You single guy's, never be caught without a few pennies in your pants. You never know when your life is about to change.

[Varqm]

Hutchinson's statement is not corroborated by Lewis until it's firmly established that he,or any other, did not hear anything said in the inquest.Until then don't run away with the story.The inquest could have finished by 3 or 4 PM.

[Flower and Dean]

The couple seen by Sarah Lewis remain to be accounted for.

Let's not forget that she actually described two couples. One is the one at Miller's Court ahead of the waiting man. The other was the one she saw on her way there in Commercial Street (near the Britannia).

The Miller's Court couple is the one we assume included Kelly because of Hutchinson's testimony.

The Commercial Street couple is the one that includes the stranger who scared her and her friends before.

If we do away with Hutchsinon's testimony (which matches up with the description of a waiting man behind a couple, and so is associated with the Miller's Court couple part of Lewis's testimony) then it could really have been either couple.

This in turn would mean that Kelly could have been the one outside the Britannia with the scary man. This is more compatible with Kennedy's claim of seeing Kelly near the Britannia at 3 AM.

However, I have some doubts about Kennedy's testimony. I'm not so much doubting that Mrs. Kennedy was lying as wondering how much was embellished or misreported by the press. Unlike Lewis, Kennedy didn't speak at the inquest and all we have are press reports... some of which also include aa story similar to Lewis's about a scary man approaching her and a friend some days before. Kennedy's existence and which parts of her testimony were correct are a big question mark to me. Was she the same person as Lewis as I've seen it suggested? Was she a different woman (maybe connected to Lewis)? Was her testimony maybe mixed up with Lewis's in reporting?

My memory of what I've read about this before is foggy and there may be things I don't know, so correct me if I'm wrong or missing something.

[Wickerman]

How's about this...
Hutchinson can't be accused of fabricating his story, influenced by Lewis's testimony, until it is firmly established that he was present at the inquest.

[Wickerman]

Let's not forget that she actually described two couples. One is the one at Miller's Court ahead of the waiting man. The other was the one she saw on her way there in Commercial Street (near the Britannia).

The Miller's Court couple is the one we assume included Kelly because of Hutchinson's testimony.

The Commercial Street couple is the one that includes the stranger who scared her and her friends before.

If we do away with Hutchsinon's testimony (which matches up with the description of a waiting man behind a couple, and so is associated with the Miller's Court couple part of Lewis's testimony) then it could really have been either couple.

This in turn would mean that Kelly could have been the one outside the Britannia with the scary man. This is more compatible with Kennedy's claim of seeing Kelly near the Britannia at 3 AM.

However, I have some doubts about Kennedy's testimony. I'm not so much doubting that Mrs. Kennedy was lying as wondering how much was embellished or misreported by the press. Unlike Lewis, Kennedy didn't speak at the inquest and all we have are press reports... some of which also include aa story similar to Lewis's about a scary man approaching her and a friend some days before. Kennedy's existence and which parts of her testimony were correct are a big question mark to me. Was she the same person as Lewis as I've seen it suggested? Was she a different woman (maybe connected to Lewis)? Was her testimony maybe mixed up with Lewis's in reporting?

My memory of what I've read about this before is foggy and there may be things I don't know, so correct me if I'm wrong or missing something.

Lewis and Kennedy both saw a man & woman outside the Britannia. Lewis about 2:30 am, Kennedy about 3:00 am, but at 3:00 am Kennedy said Kelly was also with this other couple. So Kennedy saw one man & two women, but no loiterer.

[c.d.]

Why would an 18 year old be interested in a beery prostitute in her mid/late twenties, in the small hours of the morning, when he could entertain himself for free?

Ah, the Druitt approach. There is a lot to be said for it. Plus you don't have to get dressed up or shower.

c.d.

[harry]

The inquest statement of Lewis is not ambiguous.The couple she noticed,as she approached and turned into the court,were further on in the street.Further on that is from where she was,and where Hutchinson stood.So in the street,and not in the court.

The time of 2.30 as given by Lewis,is when the church clock chimed the half hour,as she passed the church,so there is a discrepancy of about 15 minutes,as to the couple Lewis observed in Dorset Street,and the time Hutchinson says Kelly and Aman turned into the court.

[Sam Flynn]

The inquest statement of Lewis is not ambiguous.The couple she noticed,as she approached and turned into the court,were further on in the street.Further on that is from where she was,and where Hutchinson stood.So in the street,and not in the court.

That's how I tend to read it, too.

[Sam Flynn]

Lewis and Kennedy both saw a man & woman outside the Britannia. Lewis about 2:30 am, Kennedy about 3:00 am, but at 3:00 am Kennedy said Kelly was also with this other couple. So Kennedy saw one man & two women, but no loiterer.

The "Kennedy" reports are early, and somewhat garbled anyway. If they aren't an agency reporter's hastily-compiled and inaccurate version of Lewis's own story, it's possible that Kennedy picked up Lewis's story via the jungle grapevine and put her own stamp on it. If "Kennedy" was able to do this, then Hutchinson would have been able to do it also.

[Bridewell]

I think Hutch's interest was MJK, and her warm little bed.

Hutch would only have been in his late teens at the time, so I doubt that. Is it not possible that he was merely a cocky teenager with a vivid imagination, hoping to earn a few shillings from the press and/or police for his stories?

You don't think that an 18-year-old lad would have been interested in getting into bed with MJK? It's a long, long time since I was 18, but I haven't forgotten where my interests lay!

[Bridewell]

He's basically a kid, and he's knocking about with a seasoned prostitute at 2 in the morning? Sorry, doesn't add up.

But Hutchinson himself says he spent time chatting to MJK in the small hours of the morning; according to Hutchinson she knew him and addressed him by name - but he didn't have what she wanted - sixpence.

[Sam Flynn]

You don't think that an 18-year-old lad would have been interested in getting into bed with MJK?

I honestly find it unlikely. Rough as the East End was, they were very different times and, as I suggested, I can't imagine that a too many teenage boys would want to boff a beery streetwalker - either then or now.

[Michael W Richards]

But Hutchinson himself says he spent time chatting to MJK in the small hours of the morning; according to Hutchinson she knew him and addressed him by name - but he didn't have what she wanted - sixpence.

Which raises a question, what did Mary need with 6p when the pubs were closed? She had apparently had drink already...lots of it...and a meal, based on the autopsy findings. She arrives home at 11:45, can barely get the words out to say Hi to Mary Ann, goes inside and sings to her companion for over an hour, off and on. Then her lights go dark, the singing stops and all is still by 1:30am.

That's the scenario painted by the people she saw everyday, the people we can be certain would recognize Mary and knew Mary at least to some degree.
Then we have Caroline and George, who claim to have known this woman that was the news sensation of the Empire...(hint as to why they came forward),... although we have nothing but their word as proof that they knew the woman called Mary Jane Kelly at all.

In these cases we have legitimate witness reports that can be corroborated by 1 or more other witnesses accounts...like Fannys sighting of Goldstein, ...we have witnesses who sought the fame from an association with this story, and those who gave stories intended to misdirect the investigations....like Israel Schwartz deflecting suspicion from a club of anarchist Jews to a anti-Semite drunk off the property, or, as I believe, George Hutchinson. I believe he came forward to diminish the evil portent of Wideawake Hat man...to make him a friend looking out for Kelly, instead of a possible accomplice in her murder.

I also don't believe we would have ever heard of him in connection with these investigations had the Pardon Offer issuance not occurred the previous Saturday. Someone wanted to waylay the possibility of 2 or more men on this murder...which makes some sense, since the authorities were already assigning this murder to the lone killer in the district despite the offer from Warren.

[Wickerman]

That's how I tend to read it, too.

C'mon Gareth, you very well know the context is the passage (up the court), the reports actually say that. Not one of the reports place this sighting specifically in Dorset St.

The loiterer was looking "up the court", and further on there was a couple.
The next report tells us the couple went "up the court", which clearly (in plain English no less) explains what "further on" means.
The couple was further on up the passage (court).
Lewis was saying that this loiterer was watching this couple.

Any couple which happened to be further on up or down Dorset St. has no bearing on what this loiterer was looking at.

[Sam Flynn]

But Hutchinson himself says he spent time chatting to MJK in the small hours of the morning; according to Hutchinson she knew him and addressed him by name

He claims to have known her for five years, which is unlikely in itself given MJK's biography; still less likely, given his tender age. He was fraternising with prostitutes from the Ratcliff Highway when he was barely in his teens? Doesn't ring true to me.

but he didn't have what she wanted - sixpence.

Hutchinson's line is that Kelly asked him to lend her sixpence, a request phrased in oddly formal terms ("Mr Hutchinson, can you lend me sixpence?"), and one which comes seemingly out of the blue. In isolation, that might strike one as odd, but the good news is that Hutchinson has a ready justification for this in the form of his long-standing acquaintance with her, and that he'd sometimes lend her a few shillings. Covered your arse nicely there, George!

Of course, the fact that Kelly was short of cash and desperately seeking money was widely told in the newspapers on the 10th November. (Kelly according to Hutchinson: "I must go and look for some money".)