Any updates, or opinions on this witness.

[Wickerman]

Jon,
Nowhere in your description of a grooms occupation have you established a need or a qualification of a superior use of memory function equal to that exhibited by Hutchinson.

Harry.
It's not 'superior', that's the point.
Who told you it was 'superior', I'd like to see the evidence for that. The whole premise is flawed.

Not as to detail.Nor is your argument on the use of notebooks of any value,as Hutchinson is not known to have recorded anything in written form,or was reading from a written acount.

You brought up the notebook argument, I had to wonder why.

Nor was Sarah Lewis reported as saying Hutchigson was watching a couple.
Her observation of him was that he appeared to be looking up the court.Just that.

Right, and she saw the couple pass up the court.
And, when Lewis got to the court there was no-one in the court.
So they had to go inside, like Kelly & Astrachan did.
How can you possibly read it differently, it's right there in black & white.

You have been told consistently,that Kelly and Aman,according to Hutchinson,passed up the court well before the 2.30 appearance of Lewis.She cannot give a description of Aman,because she did not see him.

Wrong Harry!
You are right that others have made that claim, but Lewis does not say she arrived there at 2:30, that's your assumption.

In her police statement she says she was there "between 2 and 3 o'clock".
In her court testimony she says she was there "at 2:30", not she arrived there at 2:30.
She was already there when the clock struck 2:30 - so she had to arrive BEFORE 2:30.

She also said:
"On the Friday morning about half past two when I was coming to Miller's Court..."
So she passed Spitalfields clock ABOUT half past two, not AT half past two.
You have to admit, she can't have been at both places at the same time.

Now to your post 215.
Are you suggesting that the description attributed to Hutchinson was in fact suggested by or scripted by Badham,and was not a true account.

No, I'm saying the paragraph is by Badham.

This, the whole thing, in police format, by Badham.
Description age about 34 or 35. height 5ft6 complexion pale, dark eyes and eye lashes slight moustache, curled up each end, and hair dark, very surley looking dress long dark coat, collar and cuffs trimmed astracan. And a dark jacket under. Light waistcoat dark trousers dark felt hat turned down in the middle. Button boots and gaiters with white buttons. Wore a very thick gold chain white linen collar. Black tie with horse shoe pin. Respectable appearance walked very sharp. Jewish appearance. Can be identified.

Your words.In fact that whole paragraph of description detail will belong to Badham.It is given there in typical police format.So what in your opinion Jon,did Hutchinson really report?

Badham has reduced Hutchinson's dialogue into terse & brief wording in keeping with their common format.

[DJA]

life is kopasetic in K-town, dave, how's life down under?

Had "American cloth" been used in descriptions of the ripper prior to Hutchinson's? It seemed like a curious mention when Hutch could have easily got away with just using "parcel" or playing off the "black bag". What gets me is how the cloth might refer to waterproof material, which may have been handy when dealing with blood or concealing a removed organ.

Most superlative Rob

Winter here. Struggling to get to 10C most days

Unsure of your source for "American cloth" which is waterproofed cotton cloth.
Surmise it is from the newspapers
Have a Drizabone coat and a waxed sleeveless jacket which are sort of related.

Reckon Dr Phillips took the organs home for cool storage.

There was no A man.

Cheers!

[DJA]

Is there a list of observers at Mary Kelly's inquest?
Is Henry Gawen Sutton on the list?
He was the Shoreditch Vestry's medical officer,probably better known as the expert consulted over Eddowes' kidney.Eventually people will wake up he was Jack the Ripper.

OK that's surmise,however given Hutchinson turned up soon after the inquest,there is a fair chance that was the source.

"Sarah Lewis deposed: I live at 24, Great Pearl-street, and am a laundress. I know Mrs. Keyler, in Miller's-court, and went to her house at 2, Miller's-court, at 2.30a.m. on Friday. It is the first house. I noticed the time by the Spitalfields' Church clock. When I went into the court, opposite the lodging-house I saw a man with a wideawake. There was no one talking to him. He was a stout-looking man, and not very tall. The hat was black. I did not take any notice of his clothes. The man was looking up the court; he seemed to be waiting or looking for some one. Further on there was a man and woman - the later being in drink. There was nobody in the court. I dozed in a chair at Mrs. Keyler's, and woke at about half- past three. I heard the clock strike."

Wouldn't he need to know who the woman was first?
Where does the name "Sarah Lewis" come from?

Hutch is standing in Dorset St. and this woman following on behind Kelly & Astrachan walks up the passage. She is not a resident, so how does he go about identifying her without causing suspicion?
And why should he, was he also concerned about the man he saw enter the lodging-house?
The man could have gone to the police, and they might believe a man over a woman.

[Wickerman]

DJA (Dave).

Not sure what you are trying to say.

The suggestion that Hutchinson looked for Sarah Lewis requires him to be present inside the court, yet there was no room for more than a handful of people. The inquest was held in a small room, like the living room of a house.
yes, it was a Victorian house, so quite large, but it wasn't a Town Hall or football stadium.
Hutch would easily have been seen by Abberline.
That tends to destroy the argument - his game would have been up the minute he walked in to give his statement.

Therefore, he wasn't at the inquest.

Did he stand outside and wait for the witnesses to come out?
If so, then how does he know if he was even seen, and which woman saw him in Dorset St?
How does he even know she would be a witness?
That was my question.

This plot is so full of holes....

[Wickerman]

.......,however given Hutchinson turned up soon after the inquest,there is a fair chance that was the source.

Before the inquest had terminated, the Star published their early edition.
In it they gave a subtitle to Cox's testimony - The Murderer Described.
Given that Cox suggested a suspect with Kelly at 11:45 pm on Thursday, then saying all was quiet in Kelly's room at 3:00.
Hutchinson would know this could not be true.
The Cox suspect could not be the murderer.
Reason enough to come forward.

[DJA]

Took place at the Shoreditch Town Hall.

Mary Kelly's body was next door to St Leonards Church.

I did not suggest Hutchinson was at the inquest.

Surmised that Henry Gawen Sutton was.

[Wickerman]

Took place at the Shoreditch Town Hall.

Mary Kelly's body was next door to St Leonards Church.

I did not suggest Hutchinson was at the inquest.

Surmised that Henry Gawen Sutton was.

There's a report somewhere that the inquest chamber was under repair, and a smaller ante-chamber was designated for the Kelly inquest.
The Casebook Newspaper Search routine isn't working yet, we'll have to wait till they fix it to find that report - if it matters?

I know of no list of members of the public in attendance.
No, you didn't suggest Hutch was there, the argument requires it. Others have suggested it though.

[DJA]

Not if Sutton was Jack the Ripper.

In fact Sutton did not need to be there. Phillips could have told him.

I know about the repairs.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uLlv_aZjHXc

[Wickerman]

This is all I could find at present - the room being small.

[DJA]

Agreed.

If the medical officer of the Vestry Board,who has already been sought out for his expert opinion on Eddowes' kidney,asked to be among the "very few",do you reckon he had a very good chance?

The Vestry Board met in the Town Hall. Coincidence.

[harry]

Jon,
It was you that raised the question of police procedures,including he means of police recording events.It was you that claimed Hutchinson was a groom,when on the statement he is described as unemployed labourer.

Hutchinson left Dorset street about 3am,having been there three quarters of an hour,so arrival time about 2.15.Lewis, accordind to you, arrived after 2.30.Ho w could they have seen the same couple,if,according to Hutchinson,Kelly and companion went up the court three minutes after arriving at the entrance.


Of course the descriptive paragraph was written by Badham.The whole interview statement was.The content however was supplied by Hutchinson.The manner of which it was presented on paper was a personnel choice of Badham.
Where do you get the idea that there was a Format that had to be adhered to,or was in use by police at that time.Show evidence of such.

[Michael W Richards]

Yes Abby, but there were legitimate suspect descriptions available, he had no need to make one up.
Your favorite 'peaked-cap' man for instance. All three of the Double-event suspects were published in the Daily Telegraph on the 12th. The PC Smith suspect, Broad-shouldered man, & your guy.

Why create something completely out of the ordinary like Astrachan?

Because he already knew that they were conducting surveillance on someone who fit the general description, in particular, the specific type of coat he wore.

Since they did not later suggest that Issacs was the suspect that Hutch provided when they caught up with him, and since there are no other sightings of someone matching his description, it remains an unsubstantiated tale which is incredible in detail and suspect due to the timing of its delivery and the, again unsubstantiated, supposed friendship between the 2. Why would someone who was a friend of someone murdered in that fashion, someone you saw that very night, wait 4 days to come forward? With what might have been a case cracking ID.

[Abby Normal]

Because he already knew that they were conducting surveillance on someone who fit the general description, in particular, the specific type of coat he wore.

Since they did not later suggest that Issacs was the suspect that Hutch provided when they caught up with him, and since there are no other sightings of someone matching his description, it remains an unsubstantiated tale which is incredible in detail and suspect due to the timing of its delivery and the, again unsubstantiated, supposed friendship between the 2. Why would someone who was a friend of someone murdered in that fashion, someone you saw that very night, wait 4 days to come forward? With what might have been a case cracking ID.

Hi MR
IMHO to wait and see what was already going to be publicly known about the murder, come up with his incredible story and avoid having to appear at the inquest.

[Simon Wood]

The MJK inquest was held in the Vestry Room of Shoreditch Town Hall.

[Joshua Rogan]

The MJK inquest was held in the Vestry Room of Shoreditch Town Hall.

Can still be hired today for a mere £3k per day;

https://www.tagvenue.com/venues/london-england/363/shoreditch-town-hall

https://www.tagvenue.com/rooms/london-england/879/shoreditch-town-hall/council-chamber