Possible reason for Hutch coming forward

[Abby Normal]

Wasn't it Maurice Lewis who claimed to have known Kelly 5 years? According to Abberline's 12th Nov report, Hutchinson had known her for "about 3 years".
That said, most of your point stands.

Incidentally, Abberline also tells us the reason George gave for watching the pair;

"An important statement has been made by a man named George Hutchinson which I forward herewith. I have interrogated him this evening and I am of the opinion his statement is true. He informed me that he had occasionally given the deceased a few shillings, and that he had known her about 3 years. Also that he was surprised to see a man so well dressed in her company which caused him to watch them."

If Abberline had winkled a more convincing reason out of Hutchinson, I'm sure he'd have informed his superiors.

Hi JR
I think your right-hutch said he knew her for several or about three years.

I think this part of his story is true. to say you know someone who you really don't know at all is way to risky a lie to be found out. especially to say you've known them for at least a couple years.

too many things to bust you on that if not true.

Howver, I doubt he even saw her that night (but was there). but best liars weave elements of truth into there story.

[Sam Flynn]

But if there was shelter where he was, leaving it to walk the streets makes less sense.

I daresay he could have crashed out in the arched passageway at the entrance to Miller's Court if he'd felt so inclined. That way, he could have found shelter from the elements AND kept an eye on Kelly's room at the same time. He might even have caught the killer as an added bonus

[Joshua Rogan]

For what it's worth, Dew's memoirs mention the well-dressed East End criminal gang from The Blind Beggar....presumably they weren't afraid to walk the streets of Spitalfields at night.

[Harry D]

Don't forget, J. Best and John Gardner also described a well-dressed individual with a similar appearance to Astrakhan Man seen with Stride on the night of her murder.

[Joshua Rogan]

I don't see it that way.

Here is what Hutchinson said:

"After I left the court I walked about all night, as the place where I usually sleep was closed."

But surely that doesn't mean to say he just now realizes (at 3 a.m.) that the Victoria W. M.'s Home was closed?

I don't see it. These were his usual digs; 'closed' means 'curfew,' and he would have known the curfew. Half-way from Romford he already knew he was 'screwed,' and this is confirmed when, reaching the East End, he hears the clock strike 2 a.m. Hence he loiters in Fashion & Dean & environs until 3 a.m. and then wanders around until daybreak, because, he states, "the place where I usually sleep was closed." (Almost an afterthought after explaining the entire night's movements). That's how I've always read it.

Me too. Hutchinson had just passed the Victoria Home when he met Kelly, so was in the perfect position to know then whether or not he could sleep there that night.

Incidentally, I always assumed he left Dorset Street around 3am because the weather took a turn for the worse - Mrs Cox went back to her room at that time, and said it was raining hard (although the two events aren't necessarily linked, it always seemed to me like a good reason to get off the streets).
But if there was shelter where he was, leaving it to walk the streets makes less sense.

[Abby Normal]

I agree, Gareth. But to be fair, Hutch was meant to be speaking with hindsight and giving a description of a potential suspect for Kelly's murder. I'm sure he's not the only witness who didn't suspect anything bad was about to happen until after the event, when they thought back and 'remembered' - or imagined - sinister details they hadn't picked up on at the time. The basic story has a ring of truth about it in a way. He couldn't have suspected anything, or he wouldn't have simply walked away, indifferent to Kelly's fate. So I do think it's entirely possible he never saw who was in the room with Kelly, but assumed she was just 'entertaining', which would explain why it didn't occur to him that it might be the ripper until he heard about the murder, and then he thought it wise to conjure up a suitably sinister 'guest' on the inside while he was only ever on the outside.

Love,

Caz
X

hi Caz
the basic story does have a ring of truth to it, until Aman enters the scene!

[Abby Normal]

I daresay, RJ, but here we have a shifty-looking "forriner" consorting with a street-walker in the heart of Ripper country and in the middle of the Ripper scare. Why did Hutchinson really take such an interest in this man, and pay so much detailed attention to him, if he had not sensed that something was out of the ordinary?

To me, it doesn't quite stack up.

because Aman didn't really exist and Hutch apparent interest in him has to justify how he got such a great description of him.

[Abby Normal]

Which doesn't quite square with his rather creepy description of Astrakhan Man - "he looked at me stern", "very surly looking", "Jewish/foreign appearance", "small parcel with a kind of strap around it", etc. This at the height of the Ripper scare, and Hutch thought this guy was nothing to worry about? Hard to believe.

he even added the red hankercheif of sailor man and a dastardly curled up mustache to boot!

[Joshua Rogan]

He claimed that he'd known Kelly for five years, which - if her biography has any grains of truth in it - is difficult to believe in itself, as she apparently had only moved to London 4 years previously. That aside, we can say with some confidence that she'd only arrived in Spitalfields within the last two years, prior to which she'd lived at Stepney and around the Ratcliff Highway. To my mind it's rather unlikely that Hutchinson's trajectory took him to those places at the same time as Kelly and that, at best, he was likely exaggerating the length of their acquaintance; at worst, he made it up in order to make his encounter with her, and the subsequent interest he took in her liaison with Astrakhan Man, seem more plausible.

Wasn't it Maurice Lewis who claimed to have known Kelly 5 years? According to Abberline's 12th Nov report, Hutchinson had known her for "about 3 years".
That said, most of your point stands.

Incidentally, Abberline also tells us the reason George gave for watching the pair;

"An important statement has been made by a man named George Hutchinson which I forward herewith. I have interrogated him this evening and I am of the opinion his statement is true. He informed me that he had occasionally given the deceased a few shillings, and that he had known her about 3 years. Also that he was surprised to see a man so well dressed in her company which caused him to watch them."

If Abberline had winkled a more convincing reason out of Hutchinson, I'm sure he'd have informed his superiors.

[caz]

Which doesn't quite square with his rather creepy description of Astrakhan Man - "he looked at me stern", "very surly looking", "Jewish/foreign appearance", "small parcel with a kind of strap around it", etc. This at the height of the Ripper scare, and Hutch thought this guy was nothing to worry about? Hard to believe.

I agree, Gareth. But to be fair, Hutch was meant to be speaking with hindsight and giving a description of a potential suspect for Kelly's murder. I'm sure he's not the only witness who didn't suspect anything bad was about to happen until after the event, when they thought back and 'remembered' - or imagined - sinister details they hadn't picked up on at the time. The basic story has a ring of truth about it in a way. He couldn't have suspected anything, or he wouldn't have simply walked away, indifferent to Kelly's fate. So I do think it's entirely possible he never saw who was in the room with Kelly, but assumed she was just 'entertaining', which would explain why it didn't occur to him that it might be the ripper until he heard about the murder, and then he thought it wise to conjure up a suitably sinister 'guest' on the inside while he was only ever on the outside.

Love,

Caz
X

[Sam Flynn]

"But, my lady, did not your husband beat your child every night? Did not you fear he would murder it?"

"O, he had a terrible temper, sir, and sent us limping to the infirmary many a time, but no, sir, he wouldn't hurt a fly, and never did I fear it."

I come across it all the time.

I daresay, RJ, but here we have a shifty-looking "forriner" consorting with a street-walker in the heart of Ripper country and in the middle of the Ripper scare. Why did Hutchinson really take such an interest in this man, and pay so much detailed attention to him, if he had not sensed that something was out of the ordinary?

To me, it doesn't quite stack up.

[rjpalmer]

Hard to believe.

I don't know. Maybe my ears are keen to it because I'm not British, but when I read contemporary trial proceedings or inquest reports in The Times or some other London paper, it seems like it was almost pulling teeth for the average British "lower class" (ahem) witness to say something bad about the "accused."

"But, my lady, did not your husband beat your child every night? Did not you fear he would murder it?"

"O, he had a terrible temper, sir, and sent us limping to the infirmary many a time, but no, sir, he wouldn't hurt a fly, and never did I fear it."

I come across it all the time.

[caz]

Hi Caz,

Same answer as above. Yes, pragmatically, George DID indeed state that his motive for loitering was 'to see the man come out.' True, but isn't curiosity entirely relative? The way I see it, George could have been curious (mildly) because he had "nothing better to do." In other words, we are both right. If George was interested, it was only because there was a handy awning, he already missed his kip, he might yet get lucky.

I think Abberline could understand that logic.

Abbey: I must remain cryptic. This has been pointed out before, but Abberline states in his report to his superiors that he "interrogated" Hutchinson--not that he interviewed him. What does that imply? Well, for one, that Frederick is not the dupe he is usually purported to be.

No, he is not that dupe, rj, but more than that he had a tongue in his head and didn't need to try and understand Hutch's logic. He had him there and merely had to ask the question we can't: "So, George, were you waiting to see if the man with the murdered woman would come out again because you were mildly curious and had nothing better to do? Or were you hoping to 'get lucky' and, if so, how so?"

However the response was couched, Abberline professed himself happy with it.

Love,

Caz
X

[Sam Flynn]

Do we just accept that Hutchinson was telling the truth about knowing Mary and that he occasionally gave her money?

He claimed that he'd known Kelly for five years, which - if her biography has any grains of truth in it - is difficult to believe in itself, as she apparently had only moved to London 4 years previously. That aside, we can say with some confidence that she'd only arrived in Spitalfields within the last two years, prior to which she'd lived at Stepney and around the Ratcliff Highway. To my mind it's rather unlikely that Hutchinson's trajectory took him to those places at the same time as Kelly and that, at best, he was likely exaggerating the length of their acquaintance; at worst, he made it up in order to make his encounter with her, and the subsequent interest he took in her liaison with Astrakhan Man, seem more plausible.

[Sam Flynn]

What's more, he actually said the man gave him no cause to fear for Kelly's safety.

Which doesn't quite square with his rather creepy description of Astrakhan Man - "he looked at me stern", "very surly looking", "Jewish/foreign appearance", "small parcel with a kind of strap around it", etc. This at the height of the Ripper scare, and Hutch thought this guy was nothing to worry about? Hard to believe.