Possible reason for Hutch coming forward

[MysterySinger]

Still can't get past the thought that Richard Blake and George Hutchinson could have been one and the same (see separate thread).

But as for Maxwell, I think she was mistaken as to who she saw that morning, and the most likely person was Elizabeth Prater. Articles have shown that she and Kelly may have looked similar. Maxwell had known "Kelly" for 4 months, the same length of time Prater had lived in Miller's Court. Early reports seemed to indicate that the victim lived upstairs.

[Wickerman]

Think about it,if Hutch was an upstanding person,his Romford visit,etc. checked out to be true,the Astakhan man was not going to be a prime suspect?,

Tell me, if Mrs Long was an upstanding woman, what happened to her 'suspect', the "shabby-genteel foreigner"?

What happened to Schwartz's 'suspect', the "broad-shouldered man"?

What happened to Lawende's 'suspect', the "red-neckerchief-man"?

Then of course we still have Mary Cox, so what happened to "Blotchy"?

C'mon Varqm, if you think the police lost interest in Hutchinson & his suspect because they make no further mention of him, then explain why Lawende, Schwartz, Long & Cox are no longer mentioned either.

Did they lose interest in all their suspects, or were the other witnesses liars too?
Then, they secretly believed some nobody called Kozminski was the killer, without a shred of evidence, or an established sighting?

[Wickerman]

The fact that we have no investigation data does suggest they took this statement at face value,...

Michael.
You appear to believe there are no missing police files. Do you seriously believe that what exists today is all the paperwork that there was in this case?

.....and the subsequent reposition of A man vs Blotchy as the "suspect of interest" that week suggests they did investigate his suspect.

What are you saying here?
A-man replaced Blotchy, therefore the police must have investigated A-man?
This contradicts your previous line, that they didn't investigate A-man.

The mention of him later in December is contrasted by the report the same week as the statement that they came to disbelieve his story Jon.

Who do you think the press were talking about when they wrote, on Nov. 19th, about the police being divided between Blotchy & A-man, them both being suspects?
Or, are you just ignoring that?

Because someone offers a later opinion on the viability of witness's suspect sighting long after that suspects sighting is being used in the active investigation doesn't mean it holds any water. The existing records discount those assertions.

How about providing some names to these vague assertions, it helps the reader follow what you are talking about.

Hutch's suspect was discarded that same week,

What week, when?

[Michael W Richards]

Hi Jon,

Michael.You appear to believe there are no missing police files. Do you seriously believe that what exists today is all the paperwork that there was in this case?

I don't presume to know what is in any document that is missing Jon.

What are you saying here?
A-man replaced Blotchy, therefore the police must have investigated A-man?
This contradicts your previous line, that they didn't investigate A-man.

I'm saying that it would seem that they accepted the story he gave and the delightfully detailed suspect description, without us having any data to assess why they would do so, and that they did indeed investigate A man rather than following up on Blotchy. I was acknowledging that point. There is no suggestion in any known document that they investigated the witness and the rest of his story, i.e. Romford.


Who do you think the press were talking about when they wrote, on Nov. 19th, about the police being divided between Blotchy & A-man, them both being suspects?
Or, are you just ignoring that?

I believe on the 15th there is a press release that states the story is not being held in high esteem any longer, maybe this is when they concluded any investigation on him if there was one.


How about providing some names to these vague assertions, it helps the reader follow what you are talking about.

I thought you would recognize the reference to the story given by Israel Schwartz which is mentioned again weeks later I believe in the Police Gazette, neither of which makes any difference since neither Israel or his story apparently had any bearing on the question of who killed Liz Stride. Something which IS contradictory, if they believed him.

What week, when?

As I already mentioned, the same week he gave the story.

Regards Jon.

[caz]

In Hutchs case, his statement turned the lurking wideawake into a friend looking out for the victim...

No it didn't, Michael.

How in the name of sanity does waiting outside Kelly's room for 45 minutes, while God knows who is inside, doing God knows what to her, then leaving them to it and walking off into the night, add up to 'a friend looking out for the victim'??

Love,

Caz
X

[Michael W Richards]

No it didn't, Michael.

How in the name of sanity does waiting outside Kelly's room for 45 minutes, while God knows who is inside, doing God knows what to her, then leaving them to it and walking off into the night, add up to 'a friend looking out for the victim'??

Love,

Caz
X

Because Caz, the unknown stranger suddenly turned into a friend of Marys, someone who knew her for a few years, and someone who she felt she could approach for a few coins. The fact that he is hanging around could be construed as him wanting to be sure that Mary was in no danger from A man. That's where the comment came from. Perhaps that's the way it was perceived.

The fact he waited four days kind of negates that if so.

[caz]

Hi Caz,

I wonder how many Ripperologists have actually spent a night on the streets? Precious few, I imagine, or they wouldn't find Hutchinson's behavior so suspicious.

The only thing Hutchinson was killing was time. He missed his curfew and was now stuck on the street for a tedious six hours...waiting waiting waiting for the sun to come up.

Standing across from Millers Court for 45 mintues?

Big deal. The building had an awning on it. It was November and spitting rain off and on. A perfect place to stand.

Further, he had just seen Kelly with an obviously wealthy client. If she was suddenly 'in clover' he knows--or hopes--he can borrow a few p when the coffee stalls open back up.

It's really not all that hard to figure out, is it?

That's what he is telling Abbeline. He doesn't need to spell it out. He lent HER a few pence on occasion, and now he wants some in return. Surely this toff will pay well. And tomorrow is Lord Mayor's Day, after all. No one is more 'into' these civic holidays than the abject poor who have nothing else to look forward to. It would be simply too bloody tomorrow if he can't scrounge up enough for a pint or a pinch of tobacco.

So, with nothing else better to do, he waits.

People in the lowest 'strata' have a sort of informal 'code' of borrowing and scrounging to help each other out. And there was probably no worse scrounge than the unemployed male in the East End who must have been forever trying to squeeze the 'unfortunates' who had one sure way of coming up with 3 p.

Abberline wasn't the least bit suspicious because he shouldn't have been. H Division was his turf for years and he knew it all too well.

And yes, of course, in the back of his mind, if the rain turned really bad, Hutch was hoping in his heart of hearts that he might spend a couple of hours indoors with a not bad looking Irish prostitute.

Nothing unusual about any of it. Except the client.

Hi rj,

I get all that. I really do. That's why I think Abberline wasn't suspicious. But Hutch didn't state that he waited there for 45 minutes 'because I had nothing better to do'. He stated that he 'stood there... to see if they came out. They did not so I went away'.

So the obvious question Abberline would have asked was: "Why did you want to see if they came out? What was it to you?" The woman in the case would be found horribly butchered in the morning. Why wouldn't Abberline have been interested in Hutch's interest in the couple?

Hutch's answer presumably gave Abberline the extra info he needed to satisfy himself that his given reason made perfect sense.

Love,

Caz
X

[caz]

Because Caz, the unknown stranger suddenly turned into a friend of Marys, someone who knew her for a few years, and someone who she felt she could approach for a few coins. The fact that he is hanging around could be construed as him wanting to be sure that Mary was in no danger from A man. That's where the comment came from. Perhaps that's the way it was perceived.

The fact he waited four days kind of negates that if so.

I'm really sorry, Michael, but I have no idea what you are trying to say here.

Unknown stranger?

How could Hutch possibly have implied he was making sure Kelly was in no danger from the man inside the room with her while Hutch was outside - until he got fed up waiting to see if they came out and pushed off with no attempt to check if she was alive or dead? What's more, he actually said the man gave him no cause to fear for Kelly's safety. It doesn't get any clearer, Michael. Hutch was not claiming to have been Kelly's guardian angel, and didn't imagine she needed one.

Love,

Caz
X

[Herlock Sholmes]

Do we just accept that Hutchinson was telling the truth about knowing Mary and that he occasionally gave her money? Or was he just a sad ne’er-do-well trying to, simultaneously, gain kudos by ‘seeing’ the ripper and paint himself as the generous benefactor?

[Abby Normal]

Do we just accept that Hutchinson was telling the truth about knowing Mary and that he occasionally gave her money? Or was he just a sad ne’er-do-well trying to, simultaneously, gain kudos by ‘seeing’ the ripper and paint himself as the generous benefactor?

HI HS
well both, but he didn't make the story up from whole cloth, He knew her. he was there waiting and watching for her. but I don't think he saw her that night, and Aman is definitely made up.

[Abby Normal]

Tell me, if Mrs Long was an upstanding woman, what happened to her 'suspect', the "shabby-genteel foreigner"?

What happened to Schwartz's 'suspect', the "broad-shouldered man"?

What happened to Lawende's 'suspect', the "red-neckerchief-man"?

Then of course we still have Mary Cox, so what happened to "Blotchy"?

C'mon Varqm, if you think the police lost interest in Hutchinson & his suspect because they make no further mention of him, then explain why Lawende, Schwartz, Long & Cox are no longer mentioned either.

Did they lose interest in all their suspects, or were the other witnesses liars too?
Then, they secretly believed some nobody called Kozminski was the killer, without a shred of evidence, or an established sighting?

Hi Wick
none of those witnesses got nearly a good a view as Hutch. and cox and lawende didn't even hear the man speak, long and Schwartz only heard him speak one word.

Hutch followed his man, heard him speak extensively, got a great description, down to his spats and horseshoe pin, even the mans religion, said he thinks hes seen him before and knows the area where he lives!

hutch should be best witness by far and Aman should be suspect number one.

and yet none of the police later give his man any credence and neither do we.

Because his story is bullshit and everyone knows it.

[rjpalmer]

It was only after he left the court, around 3:00 am, that he found his "regular place" was closed.

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.

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.

[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.

[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.

[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