Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Possible reason for Hutch coming forward

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Originally posted by Abby Normal View Post
    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.
    Last edited by Fisherman; 12-01-2017, 08:57 AM.

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by Abby Normal View Post
      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
      "Comedy is simply a funny way of being serious." Peter Ustinov


      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by Abby Normal View Post
        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
        "Comedy is simply a funny way of being serious." Peter Ustinov


        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by Fisherman View Post
          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
          "Comedy is simply a funny way of being serious." Peter Ustinov


          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by caz View Post
            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.
            Last edited by Fisherman; 12-01-2017, 10:38 AM.

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by Fisherman View Post
              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.
              "Is all that we see or seem
              but a dream within a dream?"

              -Edgar Allan Poe


              "...the man and the peaked cap he is said to have worn
              quite tallies with the descriptions I got of him."

              -Frederick G. Abberline

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by caz View Post
                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.
                Last edited by Abby Normal; 12-01-2017, 12:03 PM.
                "Is all that we see or seem
                but a dream within a dream?"

                -Edgar Allan Poe


                "...the man and the peaked cap he is said to have worn
                quite tallies with the descriptions I got of him."

                -Frederick G. Abberline

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by Abby Normal View Post
                  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.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    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.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      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.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by c.d. View Post
                        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.
                        Regards, Jon S.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Originally posted by c.d. View Post
                          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.
                          Last edited by Varqm; 12-02-2017, 08:30 PM.
                          Clearly the first human laws (way older and already established) spawned organized religion's morality - from which it's writers only copied/stole,ex. you cannot kill,rob,steal (forced, otherwise people run back to the hills,no towns).
                          M. Pacana

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Originally posted by Fisherman View Post
                            I canīt make my mind up whether you are trying to make fun of Abby or me, Caz. You need to be more clear.
                            A bit of both, if the cap fits, Fish.

                            You might want to watch that any argument you make that the police would have upgraded Hutch from witness to person of interest or suspect if his story didn't add up [for example if it conflicted with other witness testimony] is applied equally to Lech. If the police doubted Kelly went out again after Blotchy, for instance, they'd have had reason to keep a closer eye on Hutch. Similarly, if the police accepted PC Mizen's version of events after the Buck's Row murder, they'd have had reason to keep a closer eye on Lech.

                            Many elements of the typical arguments for and against Hutch can be seen by those of us on the outside looking in as similar to those for and against Lech.

                            Love,

                            Caz
                            X
                            "Comedy is simply a funny way of being serious." Peter Ustinov


                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Originally posted by Abby Normal View Post
                              Hi Caz

                              theres more reasons to suspect hutch -other than just being a man! LOL
                              Yes, Abby, but being a man would have been the first thing the police noticed about Hutch and, as such, someone for them to eliminate from their ongoing murder enquiries, given his claimed proximity in time and place to the latest victim of the most wanted killer in recent criminal history. Whatever reasons you may conjure up today to suspect Hutch, the police clearly had none of them at the time, when they had him there up close and personal, to interrogate and compare with all previous witness descriptions and so on.

                              Love,

                              Caz
                              X
                              "Comedy is simply a funny way of being serious." Peter Ustinov


                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Originally posted by caz View Post
                                Yes, Abby, but being a man would have been the first thing the police noticed about Hutch and, as such, someone for them to eliminate from their ongoing murder enquiries, given his claimed proximity in time and place to the latest victim of the most wanted killer in recent criminal history. Whatever reasons you may conjure up today to suspect Hutch, the police clearly had none of them at the time, when they had him there up close and personal, to interrogate and compare with all previous witness descriptions and so on.

                                Love,

                                Caz
                                X
                                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.
                                Last edited by Abby Normal; 12-04-2017, 08:30 AM.
                                "Is all that we see or seem
                                but a dream within a dream?"

                                -Edgar Allan Poe


                                "...the man and the peaked cap he is said to have worn
                                quite tallies with the descriptions I got of him."

                                -Frederick G. Abberline

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X