Possible reason for Hutch coming forward

[c.d.]

There are also degrees of belief so it doesn't necessarily mean that they were willing to bet the souls of their grandchildren on his veracity. It could simply have been that they thought it more likely than not that he was telling the truth.

c.d.

[Robert St Devil]

In its' Dec 16th edition Lloyd's Weekly is reporting on the apprehension of Joseph Isaacs. He was brought to the attention of the police by Mary Cusins and other lodgers during the house-to-house inspections that followed the murder of Mary Jane Kelly.

After her statement a look-out was kept for the prisoner[Isaacs], whose appearance answered to the public description of a man with an astrachan trimming to his coat.

So, here it's mid-December, and the police are still following Hutchinson's description.

An aside, my wonder is does a rank-and-file exist amongst the newspapers, with the socialist newspapers (ie Echo, Star,Pall Mall) and their biases lining up on this side, and the, uh, "conservative" newspapers (ie Times,Evening News) and their biases lining up on that side.

[Abby Normal]

Even if the police were fooled by Hutchinson I am willing to cut them a little slack. Provided he didn't seem to be of alien origin or drunk or mentally ill or didn't immediately start asking about reward money why wouldn't they believe him especially if they believed this could be a huge lead which might crack the case? It is easy for us in 2017 to point the finger and say they dropped the ball but we don't even know that for sure and we are not under enormous pressure like they were to solve the case.

c.d.

Bingo cd.

Also keep in mind, that shortly after Abberline heard Lewis testimony, which included the waiting watching man, in waltzes hutch and corroborates that as him. No wonder abberline believed him initially.

[Abby Normal]

It could just be that Hutchinson was an honest Joe who had met Kelly that night and wanted to be of help. His help evidently led to nothing and so he put it to the back of his mind and was as dumbfounded as everyone else.
Merry Christmas everyone.

Same to you!

Of course that’s possible. For me though, that scenario is least likely.
But again that’s just me.

[Michael W Richards]

In its' Dec 16th edition Lloyd's Weekly is reporting on the apprehension of Joseph Isaacs. He was brought to the attention of the police by Mary Cusins and other lodgers during the house-to-house inspections that followed the murder of Mary Jane Kelly.

After her statement a look-out was kept for the prisoner[Isaacs], whose appearance answered to the public description of a man with an astrachan trimming to his coat.

So, here it's mid-December, and the police are still following Hutchinson's description.

An aside, my wonder is does a rank-and-file exist amongst the newspapers, with the socialist newspapers (ie Echo, Star,Pall Mall) and their biases lining up on this side, and the, uh, "conservative" newspapers (ie Times,Evening News) and their biases lining up on that side.

I cant address that last question but I will address the initial point. I think this just represents a police department covering their bases, since at that point they still had nothing solid on the killer and they may have realized that they may have let previous suspects slip because of statements like the constable to Mr Galloway. Long after Israel came in to make his statement it was still being referenced, yet there is absolutely no record of anything he said being submitted to the Inquest in any format for consideration. And a believed assault on the soon to be victim of a murder just a few minutes and paces from where it happens would certainly fall under the "relevant" category.

Hutchinson claims he was a friend of Mary Kellys and could be counted on occasionally to be hit up for a few p when she was desperate, do we have any reason to believe that at 2 in the morning when she arrived home before midnight barely able to walk she is desperate for something? She is weeks in arrears, anything Hutch might give her is a drop in that bucket, she has not been evicted despite the arrears, she has had a snootfull and when her singing ended the room went dark, and there is no other record that Mary Kelly ever hit up anyone for money except Joe Barnett.

Then you factor in the fact he waits 4 full days to provide this story. When there is no hope for his story to be of any use anymore. The suspect could be sailing away across the globe, or hiding in the countryside by then, for all we know.

I agree with the principle of curiosity of this thread...I think we should be asking why he came forward. Because it wasn't to help catch a friends killer at that point.

[Wickerman]

Speaking of the Echo...
It's not as mild as "not as important", though, is it? The Echo says "a very reduced importance". That, in itself, is congruent with Hutchinson's story being discredited by at least some of the officials, and that more than one paper got to hear about it.

"Very reduced importance" is quite consistent with the sudden change from one prime suspect (Astrachan), to there being two equally important suspects (Blotchy & Astrachan).

The point I have been making for years is that "very reduced importance", and that his story was "discredited", are being used to prove the police no longer had any interest in Hutchinson.
Which clearly is not the case.
Therefore, these claims are not so damming as some theorists like to make out.
The police were still investigating Hutchinson's story for several days after these claims were made by the press.

[Wickerman]

Thank you Mr Wickerman(said in mature tone).

Merry Xmas to you too

[Wickerman]

An aside, my wonder is does a rank-and-file exist amongst the newspapers, with the socialist newspapers (ie Echo, Star,Pall Mall) and their biases lining up on this side, and the, uh, "conservative" newspapers (ie Times,Evening News) and their biases lining up on that side.

The major press did tend to divide along party lines. Liberal newspapers tended to criticize the authorities whereas the Conservative press would support the authorities. This is why we read of some newspapers criticizing Home Secretary Matthews, but supporting Charles Warren, and vice-versa.

[Abby Normal]

"Very reduced importance" is quite consistent with the sudden change from one prime suspect (Astrachan), to there being two equally important suspects (Blotchy & Astrachan).

The point I have been making for years is that "very reduced importance", and that his story was "discredited", are being used to prove the police no longer had any interest in Hutchinson.
Which clearly is not the case.
Therefore, these claims are not so damming as some theorists like to make out.
The police were still investigating Hutchinson's story for several days after these claims were made by the press.

but blotchy comes first

[Abby Normal]

Merry Xmas to you too

Merry Christmas wick !

[Wickerman]

but blotchy comes first

In actual fact he didn't.
Nowhere in the press from Friday to Monday (day of inquest), is there any suggestion that Blotchy was a prime suspect. In fact Cox's statement is not mentioned in the press as of any significance.
Plus, speculation in the press over that weekend was more in favor of Maxwell's statement, no mention of Cox.
The police didn't, and wouldn't, preempt the inquest by publicizing whom they believed was the best suspect.

Immediately following the inquest the Star wrote a column suggesting "the murderer described", when writing Cox's testimony - but that was their opinion, not that of the police.
Which is what I think prompted Hutchinson to come forward, he knew Cox could not have been the last witness to see Kelly alive.

So, Blotchy never became the prime police suspect.

[Varqm]

Sadly, we don't know one way or another whether that happened, as the surviving records are woefully sparse.

It's possible, or he was a client.Per inquest nobody was in the court - Cox came at 3 am,so something caught the man's attention per Lewis 'standing in the street was looking up the court as if waiting for someone to come out',possible but less likely.Most likely to me was he was up to no good.Will leave it at that.

[Varqm]

In its' Dec 16th edition Lloyd's Weekly is reporting on the apprehension of Joseph Isaacs. He was brought to the attention of the police by Mary Cusins and other lodgers during the house-to-house inspections that followed the murder of Mary Jane Kelly.

After her statement a look-out was kept for the prisoner[Isaacs], whose appearance answered to the public description of a man with an astrachan trimming to his coat.

So, here it's mid-December, and the police are still following Hutchinson's description.

An aside, my wonder is does a rank-and-file exist amongst the newspapers, with the socialist newspapers (ie Echo, Star,Pall Mall) and their biases lining up on this side, and the, uh, "conservative" newspapers (ie Times,Evening News) and their biases lining up on that side.

Isaacs was acting strangely,thats why he was sought.It was the reporters opinion it had something to do with the Astrakhan description.There was no official line in regards to the Astrakhan man.It might have been to some reporters it was discredited,others not,but both were possible.

[Wickerman]

Isaacs was acting strangely,thats why he was sought.It was the reporters opinion it had something to do with the Astrakhan description.There was no official line in regards to the Astrakhan man.It might have been to some reporters it was discredited,others not,but both were possible.

The police were told he went missing directly after the murder too.

[Varqm]

The police were told he went missing directly after the murder too.

Yes and they lured him with his violin a week or two later,followed him, then Isaacs stole.
The only close to official line was Dew's interpretation that Hutch was not there,
but only one.Even the officials were divided at least a week or 2 after Nov,12?
I guess there were so many false info and there was no law they did not even bother with it.And if I remember correctly from a newspaper, the police were trying to put a distance between them and the press.