Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

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

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #76
    Harry D: Lechmere had reason to be in contact with the victim, Hutchinson didn't.

    Passing through Buck's Row at that hour was part of Lechmere's normal routine. Loitering outside Miller's Court was not orthodox behaviour.

    How does that alter what I am saying - that Hutch was close to a victims lodgings while Lechmere was actually in physical contact with a victim?

    The information about the extra PC is disputed and unsupported.

    How does that alter what I am saying - that Hutch was only suggested to have lied whereas the information about an extra PC when Lechmere was with the victim is demonstrably untrue?

    Comment


    • #77
      Originally posted by Abby Normal View Post
      Hi batman
      hutch also later told the press he went into the court and stood by marys door, something he left out of the police statement.


      now why would he leave such an important detail out of the police version?


      as to whether he was the man sarah lewis saw to me it is obvious that it was hutch. he dosnt say EXACTLY where he was staning , just outside the court . lewis is just being more specific.


      too bad we dont have a description of hutch other than lewis to corroberate what he looked like, but they both describe him as standing outside the court waiting and watching "as if waiting for someone to come out" which is exactly what he was doing, by his own admission. I find it almost impossible that they werent the same man.
      So if Hutchinson was mistaken on the days, why is it that it would be "almost impossible" for another man to stand outside a lodging house (where people lodged and passed in and out all day), looking out into the rain? And why could not Lewis have interpreted that as him looking up the court? And how exactly do we look when we wait for somebody to exit a court?

      Just how incredible would such a matter be? Would it not be more odd if nobody entered or exited the lodging house on the murder evening? And if that happened, why would not Lewis pass by at the time this happened? What is the deciding factor that tells us that this would be nigh on impossible?

      Comment


      • #78
        Originally posted by Sam Flynn View Post
        It only takes Hutchinson and/or Lewis's timings to be out by a couple of minutes. He doesn't say he was standing "over against" Crossingham's, and he doesn't say he saw Lewis. To me, this is a huge minus against Hutchinson being there when Lewis entered Miller's Court.

        Hutchinson says he watched Kelly and her man in Commercial Street on their way to Miller's Court, and Lewis said she saw a man and woman at the corner of Dorset and Commercial Street as she passed them en route to the Keylers. If the couple outside Ringers included Mary Kelly, then she had not yet got home; the man standing "over against" Crossingham's thus could not have followed Kelly and her man to Miller's Court and, ergo, he was not Hutchinson.
        hutch followed mary and aman after commercial street and watched them go in the court then took up his vigil. are you suggesting lewis went to and into millers court BEFORE mary, aman and hutch did??
        "Is all that we see or seem
        but a dream within a dream?"

        -Edgar Allan Poe


        "...the man and the peaked cap he is said to have worn
        quite tallies with the descriptions I got of him."

        -Frederick G. Abberline

        Comment


        • #79
          Originally posted by Fisherman View Post
          So if Hutchinson was mistaken on the days, why is it that it would be "almost impossible" for another man to stand outside a lodging house (where people lodged and passed in and out all day), looking out into the rain? And why could not Lewis have interpreted that as him looking up the court? And how exactly do we look when we wait for somebody to exit a court?

          Just how incredible would such a matter be? Would it not be more odd if nobody entered or exited the lodging house on the murder evening? And if that happened, why would not Lewis pass by at the time this happened? What is the deciding factor that tells us that this would be nigh on impossible?
          hi fish
          if hutch was mistaken on his days then of course it wouldnt be next to impossible that lewis saw someone else!


          just overall I think it next to impossible that he was mistaken on his days and that it wasn't him lewis saw.
          "Is all that we see or seem
          but a dream within a dream?"

          -Edgar Allan Poe


          "...the man and the peaked cap he is said to have worn
          quite tallies with the descriptions I got of him."

          -Frederick G. Abberline

          Comment


          • #80
            Originally posted by Abby Normal View Post
            hutch followed mary and aman after commercial street and watched them go in the court then took up his vigil. are you suggesting lewis went to and into millers court BEFORE mary, aman and hutch did??
            Yes, if the couple seen by Lewis outside Ringers was Kelly and a man (NB: I mean "a man" not necessarily "A[strakhan] Man" )
            Kind regards, Sam Flynn

            "Suche Nullen" (Nietzsche, Götzendämmerung, 1888)

            Comment


            • #81
              Originally posted by Sam Flynn View Post
              Yes, if the couple seen by Lewis outside Ringers was Kelly and a man (NB: I mean "a man" not necessarily "A[strakhan] Man" )
              Thanks Sam
              I hadn't thought of that possibility before. interesting.

              I cant remember all the details and witness statements but I have always found lewis's bethnal green botherer man an intriguing character and possible candidate for Aman.


              Is it possible that:

              and Lewis said she saw a man and woman at the corner of Dorset and Commercial Street as she passed them en route to the Keylers.
              this man could have been the bethnal green botherer? or does lewis sequence of events rule him out?

              just trying to see if it is possible that the bethnal green botherer could have been Aman.
              "Is all that we see or seem
              but a dream within a dream?"

              -Edgar Allan Poe


              "...the man and the peaked cap he is said to have worn
              quite tallies with the descriptions I got of him."

              -Frederick G. Abberline

              Comment


              • #82
                Originally posted by Abby Normal View Post
                hi fish
                if hutch was mistaken on his days then of course it wouldnt be next to impossible that lewis saw someone else!


                just overall I think it next to impossible that he was mistaken on his days and that it wasn't him lewis saw.
                People mistake days ever so often. Accordingly, I fail to see why Hutchinson could not have done so. As I have pointed out before, he was actually in a situation that is a classical backdrop for making that kind of mistake; working irregular hours, changing jobs from day to day, sleeping in different places and having no regularity at all to deduct from in your schedule.

                It is actually hard to think of a man better suited to make this kind of error.

                Comment


                • #83
                  Originally posted by Fisherman View Post
                  Prove it?

                  Have you proven that the men were the same? Or are you guessing?

                  I told you not to be a donkey. Please come good on that.
                  You can't prove that it was - quote - "two different men on two consecutive nights." - Fisherman.

                  You are guessing this.
                  Bona fide canonical and then some.

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    Originally posted by Fisherman View Post
                    People mistake days ever so often. Accordingly, I fail to see why Hutchinson could not have done so. As I have pointed out before, he was actually in a situation that is a classical backdrop for making that kind of mistake; working irregular hours, changing jobs from day to day, sleeping in different places and having no regularity at all to deduct from in your schedule.

                    It is actually hard to think of a man better suited to make this kind of error.
                    You are also claiming Abberline's investigation of that matter was in error by making such conjectures.

                    The fact is, Hutchinson was taken so seriously that people were arrested because of him.
                    Bona fide canonical and then some.

                    Comment


                    • #85
                      Originally posted by Batman View Post
                      You can't prove that it was - quote - "two different men on two consecutive nights." - Fisherman.

                      You are guessing this.
                      You may be the last person on these boards to notice. But I would prefer the term concluding instead of guessing.

                      Comment


                      • #86
                        Originally posted by Batman View Post
                        You are also claiming Abberline's investigation of that matter was in error by making such conjectures.

                        The fact is, Hutchinson was taken so seriously that people were arrested because of him.
                        Yes, I am claiming that there is every chance that Abberline´s investigation was not up to scratch from the start, and that it took him and his men some little time to see the flaw in their thinking.

                        So sue me. It still won´t put Hutch outside Crossinghams.

                        Comment


                        • #87
                          Originally posted by Fisherman View Post
                          You may be the last person on these boards to notice. But I would prefer the term concluding instead of guessing.
                          A guess is often congruent with many of these 'conclusions' which are not based on evidence but conjecture... which is the same as a guess.

                          Anyway, there is no evidence to support your conclusion that it was "two different men on two consecutive nights."

                          What there is evidence for is that Lewis saw someone in that tiny area looking down the court as if he waiting for someone.

                          This is what Hutchinson claims to have done.

                          A reasonable conclusion would be that Abberline accepted it because it checked out.
                          Bona fide canonical and then some.

                          Comment


                          • #88
                            Originally posted by Fisherman View Post
                            Yes, I am claiming that there is every chance that Abberline´s investigation was not up to scratch from the start, and that it took him and his men some little time to see the flaw in their thinking.

                            So sue me. It still won´t put Hutch outside Crossinghams.
                            Now you have Abberline been duped for awhile as they arrest people because of Hutchinson and then suddenly figuring out it was just a trick all along?

                            He didn't think there was any flaw in it. He quite accepted the view that Chapman was JtR and Chapman wasn't a million miles from Hutchinson's description at all.

                            I have yet to see anyone prove Abberline was duped or that he rejected Hutchinson.

                            All we have is this post-inquest witness, arrests made because of him and nothing more of it.

                            I would say many of them believed the Ripper had been identified and that is why it 'stopped' with the C5.
                            Bona fide canonical and then some.

                            Comment


                            • #89
                              Originally posted by Batman View Post
                              Now you have Abberline been duped for awhile as they arrest people because of Hutchinson and then suddenly figuring out it was just a trick all along?

                              He didn't think there was any flaw in it. He quite accepted the view that Chapman was JtR and Chapman wasn't a million miles from Hutchinson's description at all.

                              I have yet to see anyone prove Abberline was duped or that he rejected Hutchinson.

                              All we have is this post-inquest witness, arrests made because of him and nothing more of it.

                              I would say many of them believed the Ripper had been identified and that is why it 'stopped' with the C5.
                              Hi Batman
                              are you saying that hutch was telling the truth all along, and that Aman was Chapman?
                              "Is all that we see or seem
                              but a dream within a dream?"

                              -Edgar Allan Poe


                              "...the man and the peaked cap he is said to have worn
                              quite tallies with the descriptions I got of him."

                              -Frederick G. Abberline

                              Comment


                              • #90
                                I have no wish to participate in the Chapman stew again, and will not do so.

                                Batman got it wrong by saying that Hutchinson said he stood where Lewis saw her loiterer.

                                That was false.

                                I only took part to point that out, and I have no intention of getting caught up in his fantasies otherwise.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X