Hutchinson's sunday

[harry]

Caz,
Would Hutchinson know,when he left on that monday evening,that Aberline trusted and believed in his story?

We know of the belief of Aberline through the report he submitted to his superiors.Would Aberline have expressed that same belief to Hutchinson?I doubt it,so Hutchinson may have felt he needed extra material to further bolster his story.

Did he seek out the reporters,or did they seek him?In any case it may have been due to prompting on the reporters part,that caused Hutchinson to elaborate.He could hardly expect payment if he divulged nothing.

[DVV]

Would Hutchinson know,when he left on that monday evening,that Aberline trusted and believed in his story?

We know of the belief of Aberline through the report he submitted to his superiors.Would Aberline have expressed that same belief to Hutchinson?I doubt it,so Hutchinson may have felt he needed extra material to further bolster his story.

H Harry,
Just remember this, from Abberline's report: "He can identify the man, and arrangement was at once made for two officers to accompany him round the district for a few hours tonight..."
So, as soon as Monday evening, Hutchinson knew that Abberline "trusted and believed" him (at least to a sufficient extent).
Amitiés,
David

[harry]

David,
It is not unusual for witnesses to volunteer further help,so the idea of accompanying the police may have been a suggestion of Hutchinson.It would not neccessarily be a sign that his story was believed because Aberline consented to such an arrangement either.Police as a rule ,do not give indications of belief or disbelief at first approach,not to the witness that is,and Aberline,an experienced officer would surely not have done either.
So I do not think that Hutchinson would have been convinced his story had been totally accepted,hence the need to elaborate later.Something many guilty people do.

[DVV]

Hi Harry,
the matter seems to me a bit more complicated.

The fact that Astrakhan Man became dark-complexioned, that the moustache grew thicker, etc, doesn't make Hutch's story more believable than his police station statement.

In press reports, Hutch tries to answer a crucial question: why he only came forward on Monday.
"I told one policeman on Sunday morning what I have seen, but did not go to the police station. I told one of the lodgers here about it yesterday, and he advised me to go to the police station, which I did last night."
Daily News, 14 Nov
There is much to say about these two sentences, but for the time being, let's notice that Hutch, while pretending to answer the question of him delaying 3 days, actually avoids it ("I told one policeman...but did not go...": Hutch doesn't explain why), and that it's a pity that neither Hutch's first statement, nor Abberline's report, made any attempt to clarify this point. It almost seems that Abberline did not even asked the question to Hutch...

But discrepancies are not to be found exclusively between official documents and press reports. The Morning Advertiser (14 Nov) tells us that Hutch, "for certain reasons which it would be imprudent to state, did not immediately put himself in communication with the police." In the same article, Hutch explains that he followed Mary and the man because [I]his suspicions were aroused in consequence of the recent crimes"[I], while he told other journalists and Abberline that his suspicions have been aroused by the man being "so well dressed", but that he had "no suspicion that he was the murderer".

The Morning Adv also states that Hutch took elaborate notes of the man's appearance."
Interestingly, although this article was published on 14 Nov, "the name of the man who has given the information referred to the police is purposely witheld for reasons which are necessary for his own safety." This incognito, and the fact that in the article Astrakhan man still have a pale complexion, probably means that its sources are informations given before Hutch "classic press report", maybe as early as Monday evening.

Amitiés,
David

[harry]

David,
Whatever Hutchinson said,and to whom he said it,seem just more elaboration.I am sure that if he had confided to an inmate of the Victoria Home that monday morning,that information would have been widespread in Whitechapel long before he approached the police at six pm.ditto the policeman.In which case Hutchinson would not have needed to come forward,everyone would have been seeking him.Police,Press and all other interested parties.

[DVV]

Harry,
don't get me wrong (sorry my English is broken): I don't believe Hutchinson's various accounts, and as I have expressed several times, he is my favorite suspect (as a Fleming's alias).
I just try to dig the matter of Hutch's supposed "elaboration", asking "in which way did he elaborate", and for what purpose.
As suggested by the sources, Hutch did not worry too much about his accounts of the Friday night events. Changing the complexion of the suspect doesn't make him more or less credible.
The main problem Hutch had was to explain why he only came forward after 3 days, and that's exactly what he tried to do on Tuesday.
On the contrary, informations received on Monday night indicate that the police was anxious to preserve the witness incognito. Not a bad decision, and I guess Abberline and his colleagues must have been quite surprised and desapointed when they found that Hutch had talked to the press.
As a fact, we have an essential witness who is able to keep silent 3 days long, but who, as soon as he starts to help the police, betrays her,reveals everything, and starts talking too much, warning La Di Da how actively he was searched.
If Hutch's suspect did ever existed, lived in Whitechapel (as Hutch thought) and was the murderer, he just had to shave his moustache, hide his goldchain for a while and put ordinary clothes on. On 14 Nov, police knew that it was no more use to hunt the murderer with Hutchinson.
They could have thought: "What kind of person is that, at last?"
But unfortunately it seems that they took him for another "bad" witness, but nothing more dangerous. In this very week, Packer made an attempt to come back on the stage, and this would have reminded the police how strange coud a witness be, yet without suspecting him to be the ripper.

Amitiés,
David

[harry]

David,
There will always be conjecture as to why Hutchinson was at first believed,and then rejected as a good witness,or if in fact he was believed at any time.Aberline,if his report is studied,leaves it open,going only so far as to state an opinion.
The extra details about his sighting,given to the press,plus his report of telling a policeman and an inmate of victoria home,appears to me to be extra unsupported information to bolster what must have been,to him,and some posters here,a very weak explanation for his own activities as contained in his initial report.
It is common for witnesses to expand on an initial statement,be they innocent or guilty,and in Hutchinson's case,some extra details were of a nature that had they been true,could easily have been proven.It is not easy to explain the policeman or the Victoria home inmate not making themselves known,or not being tracked down,except in a belief that they did not exist.That being so,one can easily believe that those statements were lies,and Hutchinson was lying to cover up earlier lies.

[DVV]

It is not easy to explain the policeman or the Victoria home inmate not making themselves known,or not being tracked down,except in a belief that they did not exist.

Hi Harry,
the Sunday's policeman and the VH friends are not of the same stuff.
The police could easily go to the Victoria Home (and probably she did). So there is a chance that Hutch did tell some people, on Monday morning, about what he would hours later tell the police. He was then starting to play the role of "Hutch the witness".
The Sunday policeman, in my opinion, never existed. I'd say he is too useful to have ever existed:
1: he makes Hutch's delay not a real one.
2: he contributes to explain why Hutch did not go to a policeman after the Petticoat Lane's sighting.
In fact, Hutch created this policeman to explain why he kept away from police 3 days long...

[harry]

David,
I believe the policeman and anyone in the Victoria home to whom Hutchinson confided,would have responded by passing the information along.The policeman from a sense of duty,the Home companion to all and sundry from a position of being in the know,and the news would have travelled swiftly.
As there appears to have been no knowledge of Hutchinson's alledged sighting untill his appearance at the police station that evening,I am of the opinion that both claims are false,that he confided to no one,but hoped additional claims might somehow add conviction to his story.Guilty persons are prone to do this.
Regards.

[DVV]

Hi Harry,
I'm almost with you here, except that I believe Hutch would have been clever enough to talk to some friends on Monday (morning, or noon), saying: "Look, I've seen this and that, what am I to do?" He could also argue that he was hesitating to go to the police being afraid that they would suspect him to be the murderer, since his testimony forced him to appear on the spot at a time close to the murder, his aliby, ie wandering the streets, being...almost not an aliby.
As for the Sunday's policeman, he certainly never existed, and a very important detail is that Hutch says nothing about his reaction (unless I missed some press reports, which is highly possible): I told a policeman, but did not go to the police station, Hutch reportedly said.

Amitiés,
David

[harry]

David,
As Ben has so amply stated,it was not untill the inquest that a male presence had been placed at Crossingham's on the night of the murder.That it was this knowledge which prompted Hutchinson to come forward,probably fearing he could be traced which would leave him in a more suspicious position,should he remain quiet.and be found.Perhaps too,he reasoned that Lewis had, previous to the inquest,already communicated with the police(a possibility,hence her appearance at the inquest),that it had been kept quiet,and a search was already under way.A person in Hutchinson's position might very well act in a manner that to some,appears unwarranted.
Regards.

[DVV]

Hi Harry,
that's a possible scenario, but not the only one possible. I'm not sure that Lewis testimony was dangerous enough for Hutch to take the risk of coming forward. Even if Lewis could recognize him, where was she to do so? Hutch, if the murderer, had plenty options, less risky than going to the police. So one can conjecture that Hutch injected himself to get more "adrenaline", to satisfy an insane desire to play with those who were hunting him.
In another possible scenario, Hutch being a Fleming's alias, our man would have been more worried about Barnett and Venturney's statements.
Speculations, of course, but although I like Hutch as a suspect, I have to admit that the reasons why he decided to come forward aren't firmly established.

Amitiés,
David

[Ben]

Hi David,

Both you and Harry have made excellent points, but I'd have to agree with Harry that the timing of Hutchinson's appearance at the police station so soon after Lewis' testimony was publicly divulged is just too coincidental for her evidence not to have been the motivation for Hutchinson coming forward, especially when we consider the congruity between his actions and those of Lewis' loiterer. The point is that he didn't know how potentially dangerous Lewis' testimony was, and with detailed witness sightings being suppressed, there was more than enough "ammunition" there to give Hutchinson the jitters, especially if the worst case scenario involved Hutchinson being identified by more than one witness and a link between crime scenes being established.

You're quite right, of course, that other motivations may have played a part.

Best regards,
Ben

[DVV]

Hello Ben,
one of my problem with Lewis, is that if Hutch was afraid that she had told more to the police than to the coroner, he would have logically supposed that she was still in touch with the police, and who knows? What if he was to meet her at the police station? As I already said, there was safer solutions.
But as you pointed out, the timing indicates that the inquest "did" something for Hutch's decision. I fully agree, however, that doesn't necessarily means: "because he had something to fear from Lewis or Barnett or Venturney".
On the contrary (and for the sake of speculation), he could have thought after the inquest: "I have little to worry if I go to the police, and make fun of them."
So I feel rather likely that Hutch was (at least partly) guided by something else than scare. I fit was just about Lewis, the anonymous Hutchinson had better keep hidden.
The less I can say is that Hutch, if the murderer, was doing nothing but playing with fire. Why? Because he liked that.

Amitiés,
David

[Fisherman]

Just a thought. David writes:
"The less I can say is that Hutch, if the murderer, was doing nothing but playing with fire. Why? Because he liked that."

...and that made me think that if he was of such a disposition, then why did he not taunt the police before? Why did he not stick his fingers in the fire after Tabram, Nichols, Chapman, Eddowes?

And when I had asked myself that, it suddenly struck me that he perhaps did do just that. Ironically, that may of course have been such a thing that made the police discard Hutch. Maybe someone attached to the investigation recognized Hutch as a helpful man who came forward and stated he had information in one or more of the earlier cases? Such a thing may have earned him a title of publicity-seeker among the police.

What a mess this case is...!

The best,
Fisherman