Possible reason for Hutch coming forward

[Wickerman]

Because apparently they couldn’t prove he lied because his excuse was he walked around all night. How you going to disprove that?

But that is modern guesswork. We have no written record of any investigation into Hutchinson's movements.
So the chance they may have been able to corroborate his story is purely 50/50, maybe yes, maybe no.
The point is, they still believed his story in the first week of December.

[Abby Normal]

If the police determined Hutch to have lied about where he was after leaving the court, at the very least he would have been held/detained, for questioning. The press did report on anyone detained by police at the various stations. So that would have been in the press, given his abrupt rise then fall as an extraordinary witness, turned suspect.
But, it never happened.

Because apparently they couldn’t prove he lied because his excuse was he walked around all night. How you going to disprove that?

[Abby Normal]

But you're assuming the police didn't find an alibi. Another homeless night walker, coffee stall holder, anyone on the street who Hutchinson met.
It's like all the other accusations against Hutchinson, they're all based on supposition.
He was believed by the police, as far out as Dec 6th for sure. After that the subject never came up again.

I’m not assuming anything. They didn’t find an alibi, because he didn’t have one.
And the only thing based on supposition, as you say, is that they found one.

[Wickerman]

Hutchinson claimed to know the deceased and was with her right before her death. Now throw in a lie. You say you don't think the police were idiots but wouldn't have alarm bells gone off like crazy if this were the case. If you think his actions were suspicious why would the police not feel the same way? And if they had these suspicions would they not have acted on them?

c.d.

If the police determined Hutch to have lied about where he was after leaving the court, at the very least he would have been held/detained, for questioning. The press did report on anyone detained by police at the various stations. So that would have been in the press, given his abrupt rise then fall as an extraordinary witness, turned suspect.
But, it never happened.

[Wickerman]

What a coincidence that hutch ends his little vigil shortly before the screams of murder are heard and then walks about for the rest of the night.

That’s some alibi.

But you're assuming the police didn't find an alibi. Another homeless night walker, coffee stall holder, anyone on the street who Hutchinson met.
It's like all the other accusations against Hutchinson, they're all based on supposition.
He was believed by the police, as far out as Dec 6th for sure. After that the subject never came up again.

[Wickerman]

The police didn’t know the significance of stalking behavior back then.

Hi Abby.

Where did you get that idea from?

Stalking was an essential part of mugging (or garrotting), whether the mugged victim died of his injuries or not is immaterial. And mugging was a regular street crime since before the police were formed.
Stalking, is just sizing up a victim and waiting for the opportunity to pounce.

[Abby Normal]

Hello Caz,

I have always wondered if something like this might not have been the case. Hutchinson tells them that he was hoping to get some reward money or simply wanted the thrill of insinuating himself into the case. He admits that he was in an all night card game with ten other men. The police check his story and are able to verify it. So much for Hutch.

c.d.

if that were the case and they have a confession he lied, wasn't here, verified by other witnesses... then that probably would have been enough to charge him with lying.

[Abby Normal]

Hello Abby,

Let's assume for the sake of argument that the police determined his story was BS (in other words he LIED to them) AND he claimed to know the deceased AND was with her right before she died.

You're lumping Hutchinson in with other witnesses be they BS witnesses or not and missing the most important point --Hutchinson was not an ordinary witness. Hutchinson claimed to know the deceased and was with her right before her death. Now throw in a lie. You say you don't think the police were idiots but wouldn't have alarm bells gone off like crazy if this were the case. If you think his actions were suspicious why would the police not feel the same way? And if they had these suspicions would they not have acted on them?

c.d.

because they believed him? then nothing came of it. what are they supposed to do? he had no alibi-they couldn't check it out. waste of time.

[c.d.]

Hi Abby,

He had a potential alibi, if he left the court when he said he did, and Kelly could have been killed later.

But there is also the possibility that the police made enquiries and discovered Hutch was in Romford the whole time, or even safely tucked up in bed at the Victoria Home, and was perhaps recalling an encounter from a day or two earlier, if not inventing the whole thing. Either way he'd have been officially cleared - along with his real or fictional suspect.

Love,

Caz
X

Hello Caz,

I have always wondered if something like this might not have been the case. Hutchinson tells them that he was hoping to get some reward money or simply wanted the thrill of insinuating himself into the case. He admits that he was in an all night card game with ten other men. The police check his story and are able to verify it. So much for Hutch.

c.d.

[c.d.]

Hi caz
He had no alibi, was never, as we can tell a suspect, and never cleared.

Now if you and others want to say his witness interview somehow included him being a defacto suspect and questioning and clearing then so be it, but it’s not really how it played out. The extent of suspicion never got farther than perhaps the police came to believe his story as a witness was BS, like previous BS witnesses, as reflected in the press stories as being discounted, and didn’t want to waste any more time with him.

Hello Abby,

Let's assume for the sake of argument that the police determined his story was BS (in other words he LIED to them) AND he claimed to know the deceased AND was with her right before she died.

You're lumping Hutchinson in with other witnesses be they BS witnesses or not and missing the most important point --Hutchinson was not an ordinary witness. Hutchinson claimed to know the deceased and was with her right before her death. Now throw in a lie. You say you don't think the police were idiots but wouldn't have alarm bells gone off like crazy if this were the case. If you think his actions were suspicious why would the police not feel the same way? And if they had these suspicions would they not have acted on them?

c.d.

[Abby Normal]

So an alibi for Hutch.

And others thought it was after a cry of murder heard shortly before 4am, or even several hours later.

So an alibi again for Hutch, presuming nobody could prove he didn't leave at 3am as he claimed.

Did anyone put the time of death while Hutch was meant to be hanging round the court?

One of the points frequently brought up in the A6 murder thread is that a suspect doesn't have to prove their whereabouts or come up with a credible alibi; it's up to the prosecution, not just to demolish an alibi, but to put the suspect beyond reasonable doubt at the scene of crime when it was committed.

If there is no conclusive time of death, this makes it virtually impossible to put Hutch in 13 Miller's Court when Kelly was being slaughtered.

Love,

Caz
X

What a coincidence that hutch ends his little vigil shortly before the screams of murder are heard and then walks about for the rest of the night.

That’s some alibi.

[Abby Normal]

You were addressing Abby's post, Michael, not mine. I don't really buy the 'stalker' accusation. We only have Hutch's own words for what he was doing, and the police didn't appear to get the impression that he had been indulging in stalking behaviour and was now choosing to volunteer that information.

Love,

Caz
X

The police didn’t know the significance of stalking behavior back then.
And if you don’t think following a woman around, watching what she was doing with other people, following her to her house, and waiting and watching her house for the better part of an hour in the middle of the night than I can’t help you.

[Abby Normal]

Hi Abby,

He had a potential alibi, if he left the court when he said he did, and Kelly could have been killed later.

But there is also the possibility that the police made enquiries and discovered Hutch was in Romford the whole time, or even safely tucked up in bed at the Victoria Home, and was perhaps recalling an encounter from a day or two earlier, if not inventing the whole thing. Either way he'd have been officially cleared - along with his real or fictional suspect.

Love,

Caz
X

Hi caz
He had no alibi, was never, as we can tell a suspect, and never cleared.

Now if you and others want to say his witness interview somehow included him being a defacto suspect and questioning and clearing then so be it, but it’s not really how it played out. The extent of suspicion never got farther than perhaps the police came to believe his story as a witness was BS, like previous BS witnesses, as reflected in the press stories as being discounted, and didn’t want to waste any more time with him.

[caz]

You were addressing Abby's post, Michael, not mine. I don't really buy the 'stalker' accusation. We only have Hutch's own words for what he was doing, and the police didn't appear to get the impression that he had been indulging in stalking behaviour and was now choosing to volunteer that information.

Love,

Caz
X

[Michael W Richards]

Hi Caz
your absolutely right-the police never apparently suspected him, and that is a check mark against his validity as a suspect to me also. However, I'm certainly not conjuring up anything. he engaged in stalking behavior, had fictitional suspect and waited until after the inquest to come forward and had no alibi.

I don't think the police were idiots, but neither were they infallible-especially at this early stage in serial/homicide "motiveless" crimes.

and the only thing "conjured up" is hutches Aman.

I think its possible the entire story was a fairy tale Caz, including the walk from Romford. What I don't see is why extra caution wasnt given to this story without any proof of it in the most meaningful accounts given. Those witnesses of the courtyard, and from #26. The fact that one of those witnesses saw someone lurking makes this coming forward....after 4 days...dangerous. His story when married with another account makes him as you say, at the very least a stalker, and a potential accomplice to the crime..."if only after the fact". Maybe they thought they had missed the boat with Packer and decided to throw caution to the wind.

Why he would do it is for me the fascination with Hutchinson. What could be gained,... although on the face of it the obvious transition from stalker to friend-looking-out-for-friend would allow the actual Wideawake some time to breathe. I think his intention was to do just that, but to whose benefit?