Possible reason for Hutch coming forward

[Varqm]

Are we to assume that Hutchinson, who by his own admission knew the deceased and saw her shortly before her death and then admitted to standing outside the deceased's apartment for some time, was questioned in exactly the same way as Fanny Mortimer who was a witness in the Stride case?

It seems to me that there are witnesses and then there is Hutchinson. Witness or no witness I can't believe he was handled with kid gloves and was not asked tough questions.

c.d.

I agree they wanted to catch the killer,and see if Hutch was a good lead or not.

It was a different environment then during the murders,there were a lot of false witnesses/suspicions and there was no law,it was not unusual.

It's not unusual for a PC to be mistaken initially,it's not like determining a witness to be a liar or not was accurate,that's why I said they would have investigated him.Even today with an additional polygraph test along with an interview/interrogation they still make mistakes.

[Wickerman]

Are we to assume that Hutchinson, who by his own admission knew the deceased and saw her shortly before her death and then admitted to standing outside the deceased's apartment for some time, was questioned in exactly the same way as Fanny Mortimer who was a witness in the Stride case?

It seems to me that there are witnesses and then there is Hutchinson. Witness or no witness I can't believe he was handled with kid gloves and was not asked tough questions.

c.d.

His treatment by Abberline may have been influenced, to a degree, by the reason he gave for not coming forward.
I think that would be true in any case.

[c.d.]

Are we to assume that Hutchinson, who by his own admission knew the deceased and saw her shortly before her death and then admitted to standing outside the deceased's apartment for some time, was questioned in exactly the same way as Fanny Mortimer who was a witness in the Stride case?

It seems to me that there are witnesses and then there is Hutchinson. Witness or no witness I can't believe he was handled with kid gloves and was not asked tough questions.

c.d.

[c.d.]

I am having trouble understanding how an interrogation differs depending on whether or not the person being interrogated is a witness as opposed to a person of interest. Maybe a witness gets a comfy chair and a cup of tea but aren't the questions basically the same especially if the witness has circumstances like Hutch?

c.d.

[Fisherman]

me obviously, and anyone who thinks hutch should be a suspect.

Then Iīll leave it to you to to produce some little contrafire, Abby. If her ability to judge the Lechmere case is something to go by, Iīd say you neednīt worry too much.

[Abby Normal]

Same point I made about Packer. He had every reason to be where he was, while Hutch had no credible explanation. That's why I doubt the police would have treated their accounts in the same way.



Well quite. My point was that if Hutch had been a woman who came forward with the exact same story, nobody today would view 'her' actions as suspicious, even if they still had her down as an attention seeking liar. In short, it appears that the only reason Hutch became a suspect in modern times is because he happened to be male and therefore fair game for pin the tail on the donkey.

Nobody in 1888 seriously considered him as a likely suspect, and I don't accept this was because he cunningly wrong-footed them all by coming forward [belatedly, remember] as a witness. What was he? A time traveller, who was au fait with modern offenders doing this, and knew the possibility would simply not occur to anyone in 1888 besides himself?

Love,

Caz
X

Hi Caz

Well quite. My point was that if Hutch had been a woman who came forward with the exact same story, nobody today would view 'her' actions as suspicious, even if they still had her down as an attention seeking liar. In short, it appears that the only reason Hutch became a suspect in modern times is because he happened to be male and therefore fair game for pin the tail on the donkey.

theres more reasons to suspect hutch -other than just being a man! LOL

What was he? A time traveller, who was au fait with modern offenders doing this, and knew the possibility would simply not occur to anyone in 1888 besides himself?

more than likely just an attention seeker IMHO. But if he was the ripper,no-not a time travellor-just a serial killer ahead of his time ; ).
seriously though-he would just be was a brazen killer and good liar/manipulator, who fooled the police. which the ripper did on many levels.

lets also keep in mind there were no more murders for many months until McKenzie-so Hutch figuring he needs to chill out for awhile fits also.

[Abby Normal]

I canīt make my mind up whether you are trying to make fun of Abby or me, Caz. You need to be more clear.

me obviously, and anyone who thinks hutch should be a suspect.

[Fisherman]

Oh no, Fish, you are quite wrong there. The police had no concept back then that an offender could possibly come forward claiming to be a mere witness. Hutch could have turned out his own pockets to reveal half a kidney and a human heart and his status would not have been upgraded even to a person of interest. He was safe as houses.

Love,

Caz
X

I canīt make my mind up whether you are trying to make fun of Abby or me, Caz. You need to be more clear.

[caz]

If something had surfaced during that interrogation that called for grading him up to an outright suspect, they would have done so.

Oh no, Fish, you are quite wrong there. The police had no concept back then that an offender could possibly come forward claiming to be a mere witness. Hutch could have turned out his own pockets to reveal half a kidney and a human heart and his status would not have been upgraded even to a person of interest. He was safe as houses.

Love,

Caz
X

[caz]

well I agree with you there. they SHOULD have treated him as a murder suspect, and or dragged his ass over the coals for wasting there time.

But only if they'd had reason to suspect his motives for coming forward, which they appear not to have done.

Only if they had concluded he was lying should they have looked much more closely at him and at why he was lying, but there is no evidence for this conclusion.

Good weekend.

Love,

Caz
X

[caz]

cox had every reason to be where she was-hutch had no explanation.

Same point I made about Packer. He had every reason to be where he was, while Hutch had no credible explanation. That's why I doubt the police would have treated their accounts in the same way.

and to your "georgina" point-that's because no one really thinks then as now, rightfully, that a woman is going to be the ripper.

Well quite. My point was that if Hutch had been a woman who came forward with the exact same story, nobody today would view 'her' actions as suspicious, even if they still had her down as an attention seeking liar. In short, it appears that the only reason Hutch became a suspect in modern times is because he happened to be male and therefore fair game for pin the tail on the donkey.

Nobody in 1888 seriously considered him as a likely suspect, and I don't accept this was because he cunningly wrong-footed them all by coming forward [belatedly, remember] as a witness. What was he? A time traveller, who was au fait with modern offenders doing this, and knew the possibility would simply not occur to anyone in 1888 besides himself?

Love,

Caz
X

[Fisherman]

well I agree with you there. they SHOULD have treated him as a murder suspect, and or dragged his ass over the coals for wasting there time.

They should only have treated him as a murder suspect if there were indications that he had killed Kelly, and no such indications were present.

And they DID haul his behind over the coals - he was interrogated, and so we may conclude that he was regarded as a person of interest in the investigation. If something had surfaced during that interrogation that called for grading him up to an outright suspect, they would have done so.

Additionally, far from thinking he had wasted their time, the police apparently acted upon his tip about Astrakhan man, and sought the latter high and low for many days after the Kelly murder.

[Abby Normal]

Not really, Abby, no. I don't think they'd have simply assumed this to be the case, without at least trying to establish his true whereabouts that night if they didn't believe he was where he claimed to be.

With Packer, they knew where he'd have been and that he had an obviously genuine reason for being there, even if his witness account was a packer lies. There was certainly no reason to treat him as a murder suspect, unlike someone who claimed to have been loitering near a horrific crime scene for what was a faintly ridiculous reason. At the very least, the police should have given Hutch a scare he wouldn't forget, for wasting their time. If they thought he'd invented the entire story out of whole cloth, just for some attention, they ought to have given him a very hard time and made him think they suspected him, even if they didn't, to teach him a lesson.

Love,

Caz
X

well I agree with you there. they SHOULD have treated him as a murder suspect, and or dragged his ass over the coals for wasting there time.

[Abby Normal]

Agreed, Jon.

I don't think the police doubted that Hutch came forward because he thought his information could be important. It seems that the trail went cold, just as it did with the search for Blotchy. Nobody thinks Mrs Cox was making him up, or should have been a suspect, do they?

Had we been talking about a Georgina Hutchinson, who was overly curious about Kelly's latest flashy customer, things would have been very different over the last few years!

Love,

Caz
X

Hi Caz

Nobody thinks Mrs Cox was making him up, or should have been a suspect, do they?

they have no reason to think she was making it up-indeed to this day shes one of the most credible witnesses and a lot of people even now still think that blotchy is a good bet for the ripper, unlike hutch and his Aman.

Had we been talking about a Georgina Hutchinson, who was overly curious about Kelly's latest flashy customer, things would have been very different over the last few years!

cox had every reason to be where she was-hutch had no explanation. and to your "georgina" point-that's because no one really thinks then as now, rightfully, that a woman is going to be the ripper.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Pure speculation.
But Chapman was missing a ring, it was determined it had been taken recently and forcefully, probably by the killer.

Thanks Abby,

I thought that there’d been some revelation while I’ve been away?