Hutchinsons statement....

[Flower and Dean]

The suggestion that Hutchinson obtained all the necessary details from the weekend press is proven wrong.
It's that simple.

But that's the point, if he was lying he wouldn't necessarily have needed to get the details from the weekend press. We know that the murders generated a lot of commotion and talk in the area, so it's not outside of the realm of possibility that someone living in the East End at this time would hear about details (real and false) through the grapevine.

Lewis didn't talk to the press over the weekend but couldn't she have talked to someone else, who in turn told someone else, etc.? We know she had friends or maybe family in Miller's Court, and that people sometimes gathered around the scenes where the crimes had taken place out of curiosity. Couldn't the story have made its way to locals somehow?

We also know that Hutchinson came forward on the exact day that Lewis spoke at the inquest. Again, this was something that interested the locals a lot and it's not utterly impossible that people could have shared what they knew.

Hutchinson could have gotten some of his details -- like the man's Jewish appearance -- from local gossip. Or he could have just added details like the man's clothing on his own to make his testimony sound (to his ears) more credible or interesting.

I'm inclined to think there was a grain of truth to his story but I don't have any certainties. I don't know how people can be so sure of things when it's clear that the information we have can be interpreted in so many ways and we can't exactly go and ask Hutchinson about it.

Well it's possible he wasn't there at all and he possibly picked up on Lewis story and retroactively falsely put himself there in the place of her waiting man.I guess that's the the biggest lie scenario then. But usually the best liars weave a bit of truth into there lies so I think that at the very least, some of his story was probably true.

Sure, and like I said, we don't know which parts might be true or what his intentions were.

[Sam Flynn]

Until it can be confirmed that Hutch heard the inquest testimonies it can be argued Hutch's statement was corroborated by Lewis's testimony.

It was not necessary for Hutch to hear the inquest testimonies, as it is unquestionable that stories were circulating widely about the events surrounding Kelly's death. In this context, it is probable that details from Sarah Lewis's account took a life of their own before the inquest, some evidence of which may be apparent in the "Mrs Kennedy" and related stories that appeared very early on in the press. Who knows what else was carried by, and elaborated on, the jungle grapevine during the next couple of days?

[Sam Flynn]

Are you saying that there is credible and contemporary documentary evidence which specifically names George Hutchinson as "discredited"?

To be fair, the relevant press report refers to his story as discredited (as in "no longer believed"), rather than to Hutchinson himself being discredited (as in "disreputable"). Either reading is possible, I suppose, but strictly-speaking it's the message that was reported as "discredited", not the messenger.

[Sam Flynn]

Hello Bridewell

Or are you letting your biases interpret vague references to a discredited witness as being specific references to Hutchinson?

There's a very specific report in the Star of 15th November:

"Another story now discredited is that of the man Hutchinson, who said that on Friday morning last he saw Kelly with a dark-complexioned, middle-aged, foreign-looking, bushy-eyebrowed gentleman, with the dark moustache turned up at the ends, who wore the soft felt hat, the long dark coat, trimmed with astrachan, the black necktie, with horseshoe pin, and the button boots, and displayed a massive gold watch-chain, with large seal and a red stone attached. As we have already said, the only piece of information of any value which has yet transpired is the description given by the widow Cox of a man - short, stout, with a blotchy face and a carroty moustache - who at midnight on Thursday went with the murdered woman into her room."

[Abby Normal]

Hello Bridewell
There's a very specific report in the Star of 15th November:

"Another story now discredited is that of the man Hutchinson, who said that on Friday morning last he saw Kelly with a dark-complexioned, middle-aged, foreign-looking, bushy-eyebrowed gentleman, with the dark moustache turned up at the ends, who wore the soft felt hat, the long dark coat, trimmed with astrachan, the black necktie, with horseshoe pin, and the button boots, and displayed a massive gold watch-chain, with large seal and a red stone attached. As we have already said, the only piece of information of any value which has yet transpired is the description given by the widow Cox of a man - short, stout, with a blotchy face and a carroty moustache - who at midnight on Thursday went with the murdered woman into her room."

nothing vague about that.

[Joshua Rogan]

As we have already said, the only piece of information of any value which has yet transpired is the description given by the widow Cox of a man - short, stout, with a blotchy face and a carroty moustache - who at midnight on Thursday went with the murdered woman into her room."

Interesting they should say that about Mrs Cox....is there any corroboration whatsoever for her sighting?

[Pcdunn]

Apologies to Sam Flynn. In an earlier post I said 'her' and have been informed that he's a guy. Sorry about that. HS

No worries, HS-- I still get taken for a guy, sometimes.

[Sam Flynn]

Interesting they should say that about Mrs Cox....is there any corroboration whatsoever for her sighting?

I've not heard of one, Josh. But then, her story is so unremarkable there's little reason to doubt it. Like they say, "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence".

[Pcdunn]

A sequence of events is a series of things that have happened. That doesn't make them a coincidence (or even 'a story full of convenient devices') - just a narrative. Also the stranger didn't 'happen' to look straight into Hutchinson's face. Hutchinson looked into his - and he wasn't very happy about it.

That's right, and Hutchinson described it as "I bent down and looked into his face..." Could we surmise from this that George is taller than AM?

[Joshua Rogan]

That's right, and Hutchinson described it as "I bent down and looked into his face..." Could we surmise from this that George is taller than AM?

Not necessarily, Pat....Hutch was forced to stoop down because the man "hid down his head with his hat over his eyes".

[Pcdunn]

Not necessarily, Pat....Hutch was forced to stoop down because the man "hid down his head with his hat over his eyes".

Ah, that's right. Thanks.

[Joshua Rogan]

I've not heard of one, Josh. But then, her story is so unremarkable there's little reason to doubt it. Like they say, "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence".

You don't find it at all extraordinary that she claimed to see and hear things that night that nobody else did, and didn't hear things other people claimed to hear?

[Abby Normal]

You don't find it at all extraordinary that she claimed to see and hear things that night that nobody else did, and didn't hear things other people claimed to hear?

umm that's pretty much par for the course with witnesses (unless of course theyre with others at the time, like Lawende.)

But in coxs case it is corroborated anyway-Mary singing.

[Abby Normal]

I've not heard of one, Josh. But then, her story is so unremarkable there's little reason to doubt it. Like they say, "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence".

Marys singing heard by Cox and others.
and yes very unremarkable, pretty much like all other witnesses in the case, except hutch.

[Bridewell]

nothing vague about that.

Indeed. My apologies to Sam Flynn. I wasn't aware (or had forgotten if once I was) that Hutchinson was named in this way. Who or what discredited him I wonder - (or caused The Star to believe that he had been).