Hutch in the 1911 Census?

[Ben]

Hi Garry,

Taking a moment to divert from the matter of signature comparisons, I'd like to endorse your observations regarding the physical particulars of George Hutchinson as depicted in the sketch you mentioned. As you are no doubt aware, there are at least two sketches depicting the alleged "Astrakhan" encounter. Since one of them is clearly inaccurate and features various other "onlookers" (including what appears to be a young girl smearing chocolate over her face!), I'm inclined to deter to the other one - the one on the "cover" of your book - as being the more likely of the two to reflect Hutchinson's true location, physique etc.

Best regards,
Ben

P.S. I meant "circumspection" and "engender" in my last post to Mike. Gotta stop this 3.00am bedtime.

[The Good Michael]

Garry,

I apologize for my outburst. I understood your meaning to be that the style doesn't match from your previous post. Instead of your meaning that the name as written, isn't the same. That is true, but something I thought we'd all known, hence my misunderstanding of your intent. Again, sorry about that.

Mike

In fact, Toppy is listed, and appears in the 1911 Census as 'George Hutchinson Sen' (for 'Senior'). I take your point concerning full names: the practice, however, did not always accommodate the theory. It is an era in which multiple names and variant spellings abound. I know. It's a curse I live with on a daily basis.

[Garry Wroe]

Just to point out to anyone reading this thread, Garry is sold on Hutchinson much like Ben is based upon his MINDHUNTER comparisons. Of course it is impossible from that point of view to look objectively at these signatures. Psychologists will bear this out of course.

Just a couple of points of clarification. First, I am a psychologist, Mike, and as a consequence endeavour wherever possible to apply a systematic, objective approach to any intellectual challenge that presents itself. I also happen to believe that one can disagree without being disagreeable. As is evidenced by several of your posts, however, this is not a view to which you readily subscribe.

You are clearly of the opinion that the Hutchinson and Toppy signatures are connected by a link of common authorship. If that is indeed your position, then you are, as far as I am concerned, perfectly entitled to it. Others, on the other hand, ought to be able to hold a different view without becoming the subject of innuendo and outright personal abuse.

For the record, my point on the Hutchinson/Toppy signatures is eminently straightforward and should in no way be taken as an attack on yourself or anyone else who concurs with your view on this issue. Essentially, despite the similarity between the two writing styles, the signatures are at variance in one important material respect: unlike the Hutchinson sample, the Toppy specimen contains a middle name. Given that signatures, then as now, represent the individual's personal textual identifier, they tend to remain fairly constant over extended periods of time. As such, the manifestly clear material differentiation between the two inclines me toward the view that they did not originate from a common hand. And if you disagree with me, fine. But please do not attribute this opinion to a hidden agenda predicated upon a pro-Hutchinson bias.

Garry Wroe.

David

You're welcome: and you're right, it is Hutch.

Much, much more to come this way, my friend. Today has been most enlightening.

Cx

[DVV]

Hi Crystal,

We ALL care, I think. And not only those who have posted here.
It's Hutch, it's the Miller's Court murder. It's for everybody interested in the case.

Thanks again,
David

Hi All

It's done. I think it would not be overstating the case to say that the picture has been somewhat altered by what I have seen today.

I am due back on Saturday to pick up some additional material, and in the meantime, I'll be putting everything together for the perusal of any who care to see it.

C x

Ben Loves Me?

Well...

Ben, I love you too.

We love each other.

But not as much as Hutch...

[babybird67]

Ben !!!!!!!!!!!

never mind.

All the more of her for me!

[Ben]

I've nothing to ask you, except: work good, forget Fish, forget Ben, forget everyone and everything. Have new eyes today, please, and if it's Toppy, it's Toppy.

Sound advice, David.

It would constitute progress even if she did report back that Hutchinson was the Toppster all along.

I'd still love her.

Just that little bit less.

[The Good Michael]

Was that a Paul Simon song?

Just get in the queue lou,
For entering Kew sue,
Don't step in the poo, you,
Just listen to me,

Just look at the big sig,
Don't need to do a jig, pig
Just find out the fact Jack,
And set this thread free

Paul without Art

[DVV]

Ditty (or "the reason why I write in French to be published)

Crystal is in Kew
Some Swede will say: "Phew..."
Crystal is in Kew
For the Toppy few
Crystal is in Kew
To bring something new
Let me then call you
For a barbecue...

[DVV]

Hi Crystal,

How does it feel to look at the Ripper signature ?

No, that's a stupid joke...
I've nothing to ask you, except: work good, forget Fish, forget Ben, forget everyone and everything.
Have new eyes today, please, and if it's Toppy, it's Toppy.

No matter!
No wonder...?

Amitiés,
and thanks,
David

[The Good Michael]

Ben

I feel sorry for you.

Mike

[Ben]

Mike,

Please join Fisherman on his fishing trip if you're insistent upon making tiresome and irrational accusations against posters with honest motivations. Garry expressed his opinion on the signatures, which he is more than entitled to do. He did so with total circuspection, and without being the slightest bit inflammatory, touching on an important observation that to his mind had been overlooked during the course of the discussion. I agree, since it recalled an earlier observation by another poster that full names, or at least initials, were to be appended to police statements for the purpose of correct identification. He didn't make anything resembling a "blanket statement", although I think you know full well that if someone chimed in with "Toppy is Hutch - end of discussion!", you wouldn't be chastising them.

Of course it is impossible from that point of view to look objectively at these signatures.

Why just from that point of view? You've been on an extremely anti-Hutchinson mindset for at least three years, as I recall. I don't see how that preconception is any less likely to endger a biased mindset. I'm sure psychologists will bear that out, too.

If you're unhappy with the bitterness, please don't contribute to it whenever possible by disparaging the contributions made by new members to the message boards, especially when your criticisim is so obviously allied to your frustration that yet another contributor does not agree with your overconfident Toppy-is-Hutch mindset.