Any updates, or opinions on this witness.

[Varqm]

Bit confused here, Varqm.

Why would Hutchinson have been asked any of these questions if he didn’t mention Lewis?

I do not understand.Just read Lewis's and Hutch;s testimony and police putting 2 and 2 together.If asked and he said he did not see the woman he is lying,end of story.If they did not ask their questioning was lacking.Based on the timings Hutch was the man Lewis saw,plus Hutch said he saw no one else so it must have been him,he was the only one standing there. The lodging house man and the policeman were farther away.He could not have missed encountering the woman.
If he said he did saw the woman then they ask him those questions to test him.Plus ask the people from his previous workplace(s) what was Hutchinson like?Ask the same question to the lodging residents or some and the lodging house deputy where he lived.Check his prison/court/conviction records.All these "checks" to be surer this witness could be trusted and to not waste time,weeks/months chasing a lead that does not exist,and if he could be trusted then they got a good witness.Without the checks above it was incomplete.
Abberline's letter,his basis for his opinion Hutch was "truthful" was far away,not enough checks,too soon, from knowing if Hutch could be trusted and cannot be used as a basis that Hutch was truthful.It did not even mention "more checks will be done."
But it was also right to start the investigation immediately just in case it was true while it was still "hot" ,which probably was one of the purposes of the letter or also an update.

---

[Trevor Marriott]

Did Dew write something that was not published in the press?

You tell me? I have simply quoted from his book when the question arose as to whether or nor he attended Millers Court

This is the interview where Reid claimed that the same hand was responsible for nine murders, and that the killer was not seen by any witness, so they never had a description of the killer.
And this, only eight years after the murders.

Yes and the front sheet of official Scotland Yard Whitechapel Murders file lists nine murders, so I would suggest that someone, or many in authority perhaps at the time believed the killer may have carried out nine murders.

He is also correct that no one ever saw the killer of any of the women.

So what point are you trying to prove?

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Fisherman]

Very impressive research from a researcher for whom Toppy is presumably little more than a diversion from his main area of interest.

Can't wait to see the headline act when it appears in book form.

That makes two of us, Gary.

[MrBarnett]

A few years back, Edward Stow traced his tracks, and the result - which should give you a fair picture of his moves - is found here:

https://forum.casebook.org/archive/i...hp/t-6036.html

Very impressive research from a researcher for whom Toppy is presumably little more than a diversion from his main area of interest.

Can't wait to see the headline act when it appears in book form.

[Fisherman]

Good morning Fisherman.
Excellent research, and discussion [ have not come across this before]
Reg , and Arthur Hutchinson's father, was born Sept/October 1866, making this person of interest twenty two years of age in 1888.
He and only he I consider to have been the witness Hutchinson.
My claim [ now backed up] was that a radio programme was aired in the early-mid 1970's, and I informed Casebook many years ago, that it was called ''The man that saw jack'' and featured the son of the witness Hutchinson.
As the tale was identical to what was relayed in the publication ''The Ripper , and the Royals''[ 1992] we can safely say, the son which featured on the broadcast was one Reg Hutchinson. son of Topping.
I have mentioned many times that only the real witness , would have known about the payment of £5, as it was not featured in any national newspaper, and indeed only came to light in this century, from a rare publication ''The Wheeling Register'' which is unlikely to have been seen by George William Topping, for him to have incorporated into his account..
I have heard that Toppings Grandson, indeed relates to a 1970's radio broadcast.
My insistence is purely to attempt to identify the witness known as Hutchinson, and to clarify that this account was not invented for the publication. as what was written there was news to Ripperology , but not to myself who heard the original broadcast , it was not a revelation to me.
Also my insistence from a personal level , is to satisfy myself and doubters , that I am not suffering from false memory.
Regards Richard.

Well, Richard, radio show or no radio show, I have no doubt that the witness was Topping. Glad you enjoyed the thread - it is excellent research, just as you say.

[richardnunweek]

Good morning Fisherman.
Excellent research, and discussion [ have not come across this before]
Reg , and Arthur Hutchinson's father, was born Sept/October 1866, making this person of interest twenty two years of age in 1888.
He and only he I consider to have been the witness Hutchinson.
My claim [ now backed up] was that a radio programme was aired in the early-mid 1970's, and I informed Casebook many years ago, that it was called ''The man that saw jack'' and featured the son of the witness Hutchinson.
As the tale was identical to what was relayed in the publication ''The Ripper , and the Royals''[ 1992] we can safely say, the son which featured on the broadcast was one Reg Hutchinson. son of Topping.
I have mentioned many times that only the real witness , would have known about the payment of £5, as it was not featured in any national newspaper, and indeed only came to light in this century, from a rare publication ''The Wheeling Register'' which is unlikely to have been seen by George William Topping, for him to have incorporated into his account..
I have heard that Toppings Grandson, indeed relates to a 1970's radio broadcast.
My insistence is purely to attempt to identify the witness known as Hutchinson, and to clarify that this account was not invented for the publication. as what was written there was news to Ripperology , but not to myself who heard the original broadcast , it was not a revelation to me.
Also my insistence from a personal level , is to satisfy myself and doubters , that I am not suffering from false memory.
Regards Richard.

[Fisherman]

Yes, sorry that last bit was a little rhetorical.
Where was he in 1891, or 81 for that matter, and what was he doing?

I'm inclined to accept the signature evidence in the same way as yourself, though I'm not so convinced that I would argue the case. I'd like to know more about him before that.

What about the rest of the story, this time from his son Reg. that Toppy thought it was a royal conspiracy, and that he was paid a hundred shillings, by whom & for what the book does not say.
Those details seem to be a bit of a stretch for me.

Ah, "Topping" was his mother's maiden name, I wondered what that name referred to.

A few years back, Edward Stow traced his tracks, and the result - which should give you a fair picture of his moves - is found here:

https://forum.casebook.org/archive/index.php/t-6036.html

[Wickerman]

Yes, sorry that last bit was a little rhetorical.
Where was he in 1891, or 81 for that matter, and what was he doing?

I'm inclined to accept the signature evidence in the same way as yourself, though I'm not so convinced that I would argue the case. I'd like to know more about him before that.

What about the rest of the story, this time from his son Reg. that Toppy thought it was a royal conspiracy, and that he was paid a hundred shillings, by whom & for what the book does not say.
Those details seem to be a bit of a stretch for me.

Ah, "Topping" was his mother's maiden name, I wondered what that name referred to.

[Sam Flynn]

Seconded, about Topping, it's just not conclusive for researchers in general, and where is he in 1888?

Unfortunately, we don't have a yearly census, so we can't be definitive about most people's whereabouts all the time - Toppy included. However, I do know that someone was using his name and signature on a certain witness statement on 12th November 1888, and that he was resident in Spitalfields at the time.

[Wickerman]

Seconded, about Topping, it's just not conclusive for researchers in general, and where is he in 1888?

[richardnunweek]

Hi Sam.
We certainly agree on that.
Regards Richard.

[Sam Flynn]

Lets pick a number that you feel is more accurate. Then provide a reason why one specific Hutchinson should be our witness, as opposed to any one of them.

I personally have no need to do so, Jon, because the signature evidence alone makes me 100% certain that the witness was George Topping Hutchinson - no scintilla of doubt in my mind.

[Wickerman]

50+ separate George Hutchinsons, or 50+ mentions of somebody called George Hutchinson? Either way, what were their ages, social class/occupations and where in London did they live? And what year(s) do the press reports refer to? And do they all actually refer to a London George Hutchinson, or are they reporting stories of George Hutchinsons elsewhere?

Lets pick a number that you feel is more accurate. Then provide a reason why one specific Hutchinson should be our witness, as opposed to any one of them.

What was the true age of our witness?
What was his true occupation at the time of the article or census?
What part of the country did our witness reside at the time of the article or census?
Was he even at home on the day of the census?

All these reason's, and possibly more, have prevented us from identifying the real witness.

[rjpalmer]

If the argument is whether or not the 'able seaman' aboard the RMS Ormuz is the same George Hutchinson as the witness we see in the MEPO files, it's rather stacking the deck to insist that he has to be a Londoner found a London census return, isn't it? Why can't this able seaman be from Glasgow or Plymouth or somewhere else?

[Sam Flynn]

So tell me, why does only 50 George Hutchinson's (there's more than 50 in the press)

50+ separate George Hutchinsons, or 50+ mentions of somebody called George Hutchinson? Either way, what were their ages, social class/occupations and where in London did they live? And what year(s) do the press reports refer to? And do they all actually refer to a London George Hutchinson, or are they reporting stories of George Hutchinsons elsewhere?