The Times report

[Normy]

Hi all
I've taken this from JACK THE RIPPER …PERSON OR PERSONS UNKNOWN?
by
Garry Wroe

Is the report from the Times accepted as being jazzed up for the newspaper or accurate details of his account?

According to a report carried by The Times on 13 November, he didn’t simply tire of his Dorset Street vigil and wander away as has been previously supposed. Rather, a little before 3:00am, he entered Miller’s Court and stood outside Kelly’s room – which, he insisted, was quiet and in darkness. Forgetting for a moment the more obvious implications of this disclosure, one can but wonder why, as with the alleged conversation with a policeman in Petticoat Lane, he made no reference to it during the Abberline interview.

“When I left the corner of Miller’s Court,” he goes on, “the clock struck three o’clock ... After I left the court I walked about all night, as the place where I usually sleep was closed. I came in as soon as it opened in the morning.” This establishment was the Victoria Home, a common lodging house designated 39-41 Commercial Street and situated on the south-west corner of the Commercial/Wentworth Streets intersection.

Cheers all

[Ben]

Hi Normy,

Here's the relevent sentence attributed to Hutchinson by The Times of 14th November:

"I went up the court and stayed there a couple of minutes, but did not see any light in the house or hear any noise"

There is clear discrepency here, since there's no mention of Hutchinson entering Miller's Court in the initial police report. The question is whether Hutchinson himself was responsible for "jazzing up" his account when speaking to the press the next day, or whether an enterprising journalist was to blame. Now, I can envisage a journalist chucking in the odd "red stone seal" for added spice, but I doubt he'd invent both the "went up the court" detail and the Petticoat Lane/policeman encounter, so it seems a safer bet that they were Hutch-generated.

Hope this helps,

Ben

[Sam Flynn]

Hi Normy,

Here's the relevent sentence attributed to Hutchinson by The Times of 14th November:

"I went up the court and stayed there a couple of minutes, but did not see any light in the house or hear any noise"

There is clear discrepency here, since there's no mention of Hutchinson entering Miller's Court in the initial police report.

There's no real discrepancy, Ben. From his police statement: "I went to the court to see if I could see them, but could not".

[Ben]

Hi Gareth,

The Times report has him standing in two seperate locations; for "three quarters of an hour" he claims to have been standing in a position where he could "look up the court", but then after that he goes "up the court" (i.e. into it) where he stands for "a couple of minutes". Two locations are clearly mentioned, which wasn't the case in the police report.

All the best,
Ben

[Normy]

Hi Ben, Sam

Yes, saying he went to the court might have been him meaning, to the door, but it isn't really clearly stated.
I'm just looking for discrepencies in what he told the police and what he said afterwards.


Cheers all

[Sam Flynn]

Hello Norm,

Yes, saying he went to the court might have been him meaning, to the door, but it isn't really clearly stated.

However he does clearly state, in his police interview, that his purpose in "going to the court" was to "see if he could see them [i.e. Kelly and Mr Astrakhan]". Short of perching on a high building and looking down, he wouldn't have been able to "see if he could see them" from anywhere other than inside Miller's Court itself. The detail may be more clearly-worded in the press report, but - at this point at least - it is not at odds with, and certainly doesn't contradict, what he told the police.

[Observer]

Hi Normy

If it existed it's lost to us now but I reckon Hutchinson told the police more than was written down in his statement. I somehow get the impression he was the talkative type, and I wonder what transpired in the way of conversation as he walked around Spitalfileds accompaniedby by those two detectives?

all the best

Observer

[Dan Norder]

Just a minor correction for those who want to look these things up. Hutchinson did have an early statement in the Times of Nov. 13, but the majority of the details, including the mention of having went up the court, were not published until Nov. 14.

[Suzi]

There's no real discrepancy, Ben. From his police statement: "I went to the court to see if I could see them, but could not".

Exactly Sam- Where did all that other toot come from...This could throw Sarah's evidence tits up (!)here- IF Hutch took a wander up and down the Court....Hmmmmm- The 'Went to the Court' suggests that he lurked opposite in Dorset Street- and had a quick look...let's face it-not a long look- OK he may have had a little look into the alley...but didn't head into the court proper and pull the coat/curtain aside to check.....for many reasons.... Can you imagine the cry of 'What The **** Do You Want 'Uthchinson?' from the bed!!!! (Sorry a slightly thought!!)

The thought is so amusing it doesn't really work...he didn't do that - just had a quick listening 'dip' into the court and then lurked outside opposite in the rain,probably in the doorway- till 3.00 am ish and the thought 'sod that' (for whatever reason) and shambled off into the night and obscurity (ish)

Suz x

OK Dan- Thanks- but lets face it -'Into the Court'- which aint that far- didn't involve listening at a door or pulling aside a window covering....well not in Hutch's statement!!.(or did it??? and not mentioned??- unlikely!) ) He probably just went down the alley just a few steps and listened.....Mind you if he had gone down and tried open a door./listened at a door/ or pulled aside a curtain/coat....things may have taken a totally different turn maybe........... apart from the possible response from the room!!! LOL great image there!!

[Ben]

However he does clearly state, in his police interview, that his purpose in "going to the court" was to "see if he could see them [i.e. Kelly and Mr Astrakhan]".

That would still be a contradiction, Gareth.

Let's assume his intended meaning (in the police report) was that he was directly outside Kelly's room for a whole 45 minutes. That would contradict the police report in which Hutchinson claimed to have stood at that location for "a couple of minutes". Either he stood there for 45 minutes or only two; he couldn't do both simultaneously in the same location.

Or we could assume he meant that he was outside the court looking into for 45 minutes. This would also condradict the police report in which he claimed to enter the court afterwards and wait there for a couple of minutes. Or if not a "contradiction", it could only have been an omission from a police report or an addition to the press account.

The bottom line is that two locations are mentioned in the press accounts from the 14th, but only one in the police report.

Best regards,
Ben

Edit: You're right there, Dan. The press accounts from 13th were much more in keeping with the original police statement.

[Sam Flynn]

That would still be a contradiction, Gareth.

Let's assume his intended meaning (in the police report) was that he was directly outside Kelly's room for a whole 45 minutes. That would contradict the police report in which Hutchinson claimed to have stood at that location for "a couple of minutes".

It's only a matter of detail, Ben. The police statement is clearly more pithy than the press report, or normal speech for that matter. In taking the statement, Sgt Badham would have summarised as he went along - it's not a verbatim transcript of every word Hutchinson said. Lack of detail, whether it was Badham's or Hutchinson's "fault", is not the same as contradiction. And, as I said, the press report doesn't contradict the police statement anyway - it's just more specific.

[Ben]

Thinking on, the accounts that appeared on 13th November probably came directly from the police, whereas the later versions may have been the result of Hutchinson communicating directly with the press.

[Suzi]

The Bapho's in the detail Sam!... Hmmmm can't be bothered to reiterate the above post but I do have a prob with Hutch snooping around Millers Court. My money's on the fact that he had a quick trot down the alley maybe listened for a bit-for whatever reason-perhaps he was in cahoots with Sarah saying...'You cover for me and I'll go in and give mi' statement on Monday' etc etc....aaagh!-

-and then buggerred off to the other side of the road-for whatever reason until the Monday when he had some sort of 'Must go to the Old Bill' moment.................

The Police/Press statements are of course quite amusing.............

[Ben]

Hi Gareth,

Surely there's some signifiance to be attached to the discrepency between Hutchinson loitering right outside Kelly's window for a full 45 minutes versus Hutchinson waiting there for only "a couple" of minutes? I can't see Badham or anyone else allowing any uncertainty there to prevail only for the press to pick up the pieces and explain the situation properly. Some details may be trivial and thus only appear in press renderings, I appreciate that, but here we're talking about a rather more significant addition/omission.

Best regards,
Ben

[Suzi]

Ben! Surely Hutch did'nt lurk outside Kelly's window (or doorstep!) This is ridiculous- where did this come from?? East End News of The Screws??