Why Didn't the Police Have Schwartz and/or Lawende Take a Look at Hutchinson?

[MrBarnett]

She lied to him maybe? Hence why her background a semi-mystery.

The Ratcliffe Highway period was corroborated, as was the West End episode.

Are you saying that Kelly lied to Barnett, made up a complicated back story about herself being a prostitute that she didn’t spin to Flemming? She told him ‘I’m a good girl, I am!’, and he believed it?

[Batman]

But Kelly had been a career prostitute for years, working out of brothels and operating in Wales, the West End, the Ratcliffe Highway and France it would seem. The other 4 were casuals. Polly had only been in the East End for a few weeks, how on earth could anyone imagine she had led MJK astray?

She lied to him maybe? Hence why her background a semi-mystery.

[MrBarnett]

A hypothesis could go something like this.

MJK is the link to most/all the victims. They stayed in the shed (let's just say for now!) at the front of Miller's court. That's how they know her. She invited them to stay in her room from time to time, but not as a group.

Barnett was kicked out of Miller's court by MJK, not MJK out of Miller's court, which maybe indicates that she was in charge and so likely had some women back when Barnett was even there.

Flemming knew about these activities. Met some of the women and would ask them about MJK. That is how he came to know them. He hated them for bringing her down but would put on a fake smile to learn more from them.

Flemming goes nuts (actually seems to have finished his life that way) and murders those women for turning his ex-fiancee into a tramp. Eventually, he ends with MJK after Barnett has left and destroyed her completely because she destroyed herself.

This type of hypothesis would make JtR a revenge murderer and not just any old revenge but crimes of passion.

But Kelly had been a career prostitute for years, working out of brothels and operating in Wales, the West End, the Ratcliffe Highway and France it would seem. The other 4 were casuals. Polly had only been in the East End for a few weeks, how on earth could anyone imagine she had led MJK astray?

[Batman]

Hi batman and sam
I dont think they were the same person either.

But i do beleive they were both staying at the victoria home. As was barnetts brother, so hutch may have known both or at least heard about mary, her murder and or inquest news from them.

A hypothesis could go something like this.

MJK is the link to most/all the victims. They stayed in the shed (let's just say for now!) at the front of Miller's court. That's how they know her. She invited them to stay in her room from time to time, but not as a group.

Barnett was kicked out of Miller's court by MJK, not MJK out of Miller's court, which maybe indicates that she was in charge and so likely had some women back when Barnett was even there.

Flemming knew about these activities. Met some of the women and would ask them about MJK. That is how he came to know them. He hated them for bringing her down but would put on a fake smile to learn more from them.

Flemming goes nuts (actually seems to have finished his life that way) and murders those women for turning his ex-fiancee into a tramp. Eventually, he ends with MJK after Barnett has left and destroyed her completely because she destroyed herself.

This type of hypothesis would make JtR a revenge murderer and not just any old revenge but crimes of passion.

[Batman]

No, because he is reported as saying Romford in Essex.

Ah ok, thanks.

[MrBarnett]

Here’s Dew on Maxwell’s evidence:

In one way at least her version fitted into the facts as known. We knew that Marie had been drinking the previous night, and, as this was not a habit of hers, illness the next morning was just what might have been expected.

Several other witnesses mention Kelly’s occasional bouts of drunkenness, so Dew made a howler there - particularly if he used her supposed unfamiliarity with drink to dismiss both Maxwell and Hutch, and by default to pin the crime on blotchy.

Howlers don’t come more howly than that.

[MrBarnett]

Duplicate post.

[MrBarnett]

Probably Romford Arms pub, no?

No, because he is reported as saying Romford in Essex.

[MrBarnett]

There is a discrepancy, yes - but given how few men they had to choose from, I think that what Dew means is what he says: IF Blotchy ever existed, then he is the best bet as far as Dew is concerned.
Nota bene in this context that if Hutchinsons man ALSO existed, then how on earth could Blotchy be a better bid...?
I´ll explain how it works: because Dew accepts - like the rest of the police as per the Echo article Jon posted - that Astrakhan man was very real and that Hutchinson (who he deemed totally honest) had seen him. But NOT on the murder night!

Here’s Dews faulty logic:

Hutchinson reported that MJK had been drinking on the night he saw her. When Maxwell saw her, she had a hangover. According to Dew, Kelly had been drinking on the night before she was murdered - which she was not used to doing - so Hutchinson’s drunk Kelly is the baby thrown out with the Maxwell Bathwater.

[Batman]

Probably Romford Arms pub, no?

[Abby Normal]

The important question is if they knew each other. That would be the first thing to look at.

Hi batman and sam
I dont think they were the same person either.

But i do beleive they were both staying at the victoria home. As was barnetts brother, so hutch may have known both or at least heard about mary, her murder and or inquest news from them.

[MrBarnett]

Once again, Gary - his lifestyle produced the archetypical examples of people who mix up the days.

But we know next to nothing about his lifestyle in 1888 other than that he was unemployed for a short period, lived in one of the more respectable East End lodging houses and hoofed it back from Romford on one occasion.

If he went there on the promise of a job or, as a groom, in the hope of some casual work at the livestock market, he’d presumably have had a grasp of the days of the week. He was a young man from a seemingly respectable family who by 1891 was living in respectable lodgings in west London and employed in the trade that his father had followed.

[Fisherman]

Thanks, Fish.

Presumably he got into that work through his father, possibly working alongside him in his early teens.

How/when on earth did he become a groom, I wonder?

By doing a runner from his home, where there was some sort of conflict, and trying on another life. The way young people do before they join the ranks.

[Fisherman]

But what value is there in saying in one sentence that he believes blotchy killed Kelly and then in the next to throw doubt on whether blotchy even existed? It sounds like he was just sucking his pencil and guessing.

Cox was someone who probably did lead a chaotic lifestyle.

(At the inquest Cox actually stated that blotchy’s chin was clean shaven. Dew gave him a beard.

He also calls St Katherine Creechurch, St Katherine Free Church)

There is a discrepancy, yes - but given how few men they had to choose from, I think that what Dew means is what he says: IF Blotchy ever existed, then he is the best bet as far as Dew is concerned.
Nota bene in this context that if Hutchinsons man ALSO existed, then how on earth could Blotchy be a better bid...?
I´ll explain how it works: because Dew accepts - like the rest of the police as per the Echo article Jon posted - that Astrakhan man was very real and that Hutchinson (who he deemed totally honest) had seen him. But NOT on the murder night!

[Fisherman]

Yes, Hutch is painted as a plausible witness by the police, and if he was Toppy he doesn’t appear to have been someone who lived an especially chaotic lifestyle. So I have a problem with the idea that he got the day wrong, particularly as Romford Market would have given him a point of reference.

Once again, Gary - his lifestyle produced the archetypical examples of people who mix up the days.