Any updates, or opinions on this witness.

[Abby Normal]

Hi C.D.

Hutchinson did not state the length of time he knew Kelly as a demonstration of their alleged friendship, or a sign of friendly relations, etc., this is a misinterpretation by Abby and others trying ‘fit’ the poor lad up.

You need to read between the lines. Hutchinson was specifically asked by Badham how long he had known Kelly, or knew of her, not as a question of friendship, but for the sole purposes of determining whether or not he would have been able to reliably identify her as the person he had spoken to.

That’s it. Full stop.

ALL the witnesses were asked the same question. And all answered it.

Elizabeth Prater: I have known her since July - since I came to lodge here.

Mary Ann Cox: I have known the deceased for eight or nine months.

Julie Venturney: I have known the person occupying No.13 for about 4 months.

Ditto Hutchinson: he had known her about 3 years.

It is a standard question to determine if the person would even recognize the victim.

I knew one of my ex-bosses for 16 years. He was not a friend.

Similar circumstances about the money. Kelly asked HUTCHINSON for sixpence. This would have struck Badham as odd. Why would a Dorset Street unfortunate randomly ask a man for money? (!!)
Hutchinson’s response---that he occasionally gave her a few shillings--was a way of answering this question; it was not an attempt to demonstrate any intimacy between them. These answers are being misused to show ‘friendship’ when that was not the intention.

Hutch could have given her money for any of a number of different reasons; he was a pushover; he was a client; he bought blackmarket goods that Barnett had ripped off. Who knows? It was the slums. These people lived on a bartering system. Having spent a number of years in contact with what some might consider the ‘dregs of society,’ I can confirm that these sorts are always broke and on the edge of disaster and help each other out with loans. It’s not uncommon among acquaintances or even neighbors. In the slums, one learns to run from the bus stop to the tenement, or else risk getting hit up for money by half a dozen people! Friendship not proven, nor does it particularly matter, because most people below the poverty line always hesitate before getting involved with Johnny Law.

Im not misinterpreting anything rj. Theres nothing to misinterpret really as there relationship is ambiguous enough.

And the only misinterpreting going on is you misinterpreting my posts-ive clearly stated that re client v friends they could be either or both.

Something you and wicker cant admit for some odd knee jerk hutch reason.

Yeah they can only be client and prostitute..thats it. Bah.

[Robert St Devil]

Or do you think Blotchy has been in that room for two hours and the Ripper is remarkably patient?

The existence of Astrakhan could explain why a man was waiting across from the court. What is your explanation for it?

No mockery intended. It’s a serious question.

This one might be for the looney bin, rj, but any chance Jack the Ripper stuck his head out because his accomplice had been spotted? Prior to George Hutchinson, there's Blotchy and some man observing the court, possibly making for two men. After Hutchinson, Blotchy gets generally dismissed and George Hutchinson explains himself away as the man observing the court with an account of a man entirely opposite in description of Blotchy.

[Trevor Marriott]

Take a look at this. The top left red circle has both a dash " - " and a comma, together.
All the other red circles are commas.



Anything else I can help you with?

Each dash " - " separates a subject.

Yes, perhaps you can show me the commas in the pic you first posted, what you have now posted is totally different image. The first one does not contain commas, and I again suggest that the dashes were instead of commas to separate and highlight the various parts of the description, which you now allude to

It may be nit picking, but lets not allow speculative theories get in the way of the truth.

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Sam Flynn]

The reason this claim was made is to add a false suspicion for Hutchinson not coming forward. Who would leave it three days if they heard their friend had been murdered?

Friend or acquaintance, the supposition is not "false". He could and should have come forward sooner, and that's that.

[harry]

Residence was the word used in the police statement.Residence is the place a person resides.I have been almost 12 years in residence at the place I reside..It would be absolute nonsense to infer I had only been here one day if I used the term,and it is absolute nonsense to infer Hutchinson had been in residence only the day he used the term.It isn't known how long he had been staying at the Victoria Home,and there is no evidence of any other address.


Hutchinson Obviousy knew what he (Hutchinso)was going to say.It was a prepared statement.Why do you believe he went to the police station?.He could not be questioned on the content of his statement until he had either fully or partially told the police what he knew.So it is not a case of the questions always preceeding answers as you claim.What would the process matter ,you now ask.Being as it was you raised the issue,I think it is you that should give a reason.

Hutchinson wasn't going to the markets when he made the remark he had no money.He doesn't mention markets.He was returning from Romford.There was no fixed objective mentioned.

[Darryl Kenyon]

Elizabeth Long saw Annie Chapman in Hanbury Street shortly before her murder on Sept 8. By all appearances, Long didn't come forward until Sept. 11th. A three day delay. Her moral perspective was obviously flawed.

Lawende, Levy, and Harris saw a woman they believed to have been Eddowes just outside an entry into Mitre Square. They undoubtedly learned of the murder later that morning, but certainly didn't rush down to the nick. They appear to have been discovered during house-to-house inquiries on Oct 1st --some 36 hours later. For all we know, they never would have come forward.

A lot of people are hesitant to get involved, Ben. Witnesses come forward days later, weeks later, months later. Anyone who reads true crime knows this.

Hi Rj the trouble with this is Mrs long did not know Annie and did not know she was an unfortunate and in her own words - Mrs Long saw nothing to indicate that they were not sober and apparently, it was not an unusual thing to see men and women talking together at that hour, in that locality. As far as she was concerned at that time she didn't think she saw anything out of the ordinary. That perhaps would account for the delay. Also with Lawende, he didn't know the victim or her occupation [as such], either, in fact, it was only the man he got a look at, only identifying Catherine by her clothes.
No pictures of victims to look at in the morning papers etc But with Hutch, it was different he had known Mary for three years, almost certainly known she was an unfortunate who jack was targetting. He would have known she was the victim not long after the murder, and he would have known he had a very good description of a potential killer. Even if he thought Mary was killed at 9 am he still saw someone acting dodgy [They both then came past me and the man hid down his head with his hat over his eyes. I stooped down and looked him in the face. He looked at me stern] with her only a few hours earlier. Not only that but someone who was in the very room she was killed in for at least half an hour, and as far as Hutch was concerned since he never came out could have been there all night.

[Sam Flynn]

Hi Rj the trouble with this is Mrs long did not know Annie and did not know she was an unfortunate and in her own words - Mrs Long saw nothing to indicate that they were not sober and apparently, it was not an unusual thing to see men and women talking together at that hour, in that locality. As far as she was concerned at that time she didn't think she saw anything out of the ordinary. That perhaps would account for the delay. Also with Lawende, he didn't know the victim or her occupation [as such], either, in fact, it was only the man he got a look at, only identifying Catherine by her clothes.

Indeed. In addition, Long, Lawende and company only got a fleeting glance of the suspect as they walked past, whereas Hutchinson had a really detailed description to give, and - by his own account - he had remained at the scene for the best part of an hour, during which time he "knew" that the suspect was in the room with Kelly. A room in which she was later found horribly butchered, with no report of her having been accompanied to her room by any other man since Hutchinson left the scene.

Edit: Sorry, Harry, just noticed you'd already covered those points also. Seconded!

[Abby Normal]

This one might be for the looney bin, rj, but any chance Jack the Ripper stuck his head out because his accomplice had been spotted? Prior to George Hutchinson, there's Blotchy and some man observing the court, possibly making for two men. After Hutchinson, Blotchy gets generally dismissed and George Hutchinson explains himself away as the man observing the court with an account of a man entirely opposite in description of Blotchy.

Not for the looney bin at all devil.
Or perhaps hutch as the rippers acomplice comes forward.

[Abby Normal]

Hi Rj the trouble with this is Mrs long did not know Annie and did not know she was an unfortunate and in her own words - Mrs Long saw nothing to indicate that they were not sober and apparently, it was not an unusual thing to see men and women talking together at that hour, in that locality. As far as she was concerned at that time she didn't think she saw anything out of the ordinary. That perhaps would account for the delay. Also with Lawende, he didn't know the victim or her occupation [as such], either, in fact, it was only the man he got a look at, only identifying Catherine by her clothes.
No pictures of victims to look at in the morning papers etc But with Hutch, it was different he had known Mary for three years, almost certainly known she was an unfortunate who jack was targetting. He would have known she was the victim not long after the murder, and he would have known he had a very good description of a potential killer. Even if he thought Mary was killed at 9 am he still saw someone acting dodgy [They both then came past me and the man hid down his head with his hat over his eyes. I stooped down and looked him in the face. He looked at me stern] with her only a few hours earlier. Not only that but someone who was in the very room she was killed in for at least half an hour, and as far as Hutch was concerned since he never came out could have been there all night.

Exactly Darryl.

Its a poor analogy, as i also pointed out, becaus the difference is they knew each other. The whole premise was flawed and the long post from RJ is moot.

[Michael W Richards]

Friend or acquaintance, the supposition is not "false". He could and should have come forward sooner, and that's that.

That's the simple truth here Sam, Ive been saying that all along. Its not reasonable to assume that delay doesn't contrast greatly with the idea of a friendship between them. You would think, if this story is intended to show him as a kindly older gentleman friend of Marys, I would expect outrage, not silence.

I stand by the position that Hutch coming forward is an attempt to re-characterize the loitering man seen by Sarah, swaying the view from suspicious possible accomplice to trusted "friend" looking out for Mary..albeit in a stalker like fashion. Perhaps the Pardon issuance on Saturday was the catalyst for a move like this, the party who was seen by Sarah may well be a contributing factor to its creation.

I think Sarah saw someone involved in some way with that Murder, and he/ they produced a Hutchinson to create the impression that he is really just a friend.

[Sam Flynn]

Edit: Sorry, Harry...

I meant Darryl. D'oh!

[Joshua Rogan]

That's the simple truth here Sam, Ive been saying that all along. Its not reasonable to assume that delay doesn't contrast greatly with the idea of a friendship between them. You would think, if this story is intended to show him as a kindly older gentleman friend of Marys, I would expect outrage, not silence.

I stand by the position that Hutch coming forward is an attempt to re-characterize the loitering man seen by Sarah, swaying the view from suspicious possible accomplice to trusted "friend" looking out for Mary..albeit in a stalker like fashion.

But that's just it Michael, there's no indication of friendship in Hutchison's statement that I can see. He shows no concern for Mary at all, in fact he specifically says he didn't have any concerns for her. If he was trying to paint himself as a trusted friend, he did a poor job of it. And if he was stalking anyone, it was Astrakhan Man.
Also, what makes you think he was older than Mary?

[Wickerman]

Yes, perhaps you can show me the commas in the pic you first posted, what you have now posted is totally different image. The first one does not contain commas, and I again suggest that the dashes were instead of commas to separate and highlight the various parts of the description, which you now allude to

It may be nit picking, but lets not allow speculative theories get in the way of the truth.

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

I intentionally chose her second page because it seemed necessary to demonstrate to you that the writer (Hammond?) was quite able to distinguish between writing a comma, and writing a dash.
He was after all quite literate, being the court recorder as one of his duties.

[Wickerman]

Residence was the word used in the police statement.Residence is the place a person resides.I have been almost 12 years in residence at the place I reside..It would be absolute nonsense to infer I had only been here one day if I used the term,and it is absolute nonsense to infer Hutchinson had been in residence only the day he used the term.It isn't known how long he had been staying at the Victoria Home,and there is no evidence of any other address.

Where, is the word "residence", or "resident", used, in the police or press statement?

Hutchinson Obviousy knew what he (Hutchinso)was going to say.It was a prepared statement.Why do you believe he went to the police station?.He could not be questioned on the content of his statement until he had either fully or partially told the police what he knew.

Isn't that exactly what I described in the "process"?

Hutchinson wasn't going to the markets when he made the remark he had no money.He doesn't mention markets.He was returning from Romford.There was no fixed objective mentioned.

Is this tied to that "residence/resident" remark above?

[Wickerman]

...
No pictures of victims to look at in the morning papers etc But with Hutch, it was different he had known Mary for three years, almost certainly known she was an unfortunate who jack was targetting. He would have known she was the victim not long after the murder, and he would have known he had a very good description of a potential killer. Even if he thought Mary was killed at 9 am he still saw someone acting dodgy [They both then came past me and the man hid down his head with his hat over his eyes. I stooped down and looked him in the face. He looked at me stern] with her only a few hours earlier. Not only that but someone who was in the very room she was killed in for at least half an hour, and as far as Hutch was concerned since he never came out could have been there all night.

You write as if you are totally oblivious of the fact witnesses, even today, can be very reluctant to come forward, whether they know the victim or not.
Is this a false reality being created?

Any potential for you to admit that this can be (and, is) the case negates all what you wrote above.
Besides, does Hutchinson want to make himself a target?, "he looked at me stern", yes, this potential killer can identify me if I report him!