Hutch in the 1911 Census?

[Crystal]

Yeah, Mr Hyde! You tell it like it is, mate!

[Mr.Hyde]

Dean and Natalie would agree with you!

[Malcolm X]

Hi Malcolm,
No ?
And why not ?
And it's not about Fleming being NOW Hutch in disguise.
The suggestion has been made years ago.
By someone who is, to say the least, a very "down-to-earth" poster, and far more knowledgeable than I am.
And there were, and still are, I believe, rather strong arguments to think so. Or at least to suggest so. This has nothing to do with crazy theories such as...too many examples.
Several elements in Fleming's biography make him a far more likely Hutch than Toppy. Obviously.
Unfortunately, no known samples of Fleming's handwriting so far...

Amitiés,
David

not a hope in hell, Hutch is definitely Hutch, he would not have lied about his identity and Fleming would not have tried to pretend to be Hutch, far too risky and the police would've definitely sussed this out...this is speculation gone too far.... in addition, the Hutch signatures almost definitely match....Toppy was there !

as for Fleming being JTR, yes maybe; because maybe Fleming was Blotchy Face and Hutch was covering his arse........... but definitely not pretending to be Hutch...

Fleming is highly suspicious, you'd have to crazy not to think so

[Ben]

Hi Mal,

I'd have to disagree here.

It's extremely unlikely that the police were ever in a position to "suss out" Joseph Fleming if - and it's naturally a big "if" - he was attempting to pass himself off as Hutchinson. Fleming only moved into the district in August of 1888 (according to information provided by Scott Nelson before the "crash") and if he wasn't known as "Joseph Fleming" when he lived at the Victoria Home (which we know he did), the police were really in no position to expose him as such. Verification of identity wasn't easily accomplished in 1888 - quite the reverse, in fact.

Fleming aside, I don't see what's so unlikely about the proposal that the man who introduced himself as George Hutchinson may have used an alias, especially if there are strong indications that he lied in other aspects of his account.

And no, I still don't believe for one moment that the Toppy and Hutch signatures match.

Best regards,
Ben

[DVV]

not a hope in hell, Hutch is definitely Hutch, he would not have lied about his identity and Fleming would not have tried to pretend to be Hutch, far too risky and the police would've definitely sussed this out...this is speculation gone too far.... in addition, the Hutch signatures almost definitely match....Toppy was there !

as for Fleming being JTR, yes maybe; because maybe Fleming was Blotchy Face and Hutch was covering his arse........... but definitely not pretending to be Hutch...

Fleming is highly suspicious, you'd have to crazy not to think so

Thanks for sending your opinions, Malcolm, but with all due respect and friendly, that's just your opinions.
You're free to send them flatly and to flatly dismiss people who think otherwise. No matter.

Toppy could be Hutch, yes, but I doubt.
And I have good reasons to doubt:

1- the expert who has examined the original documents has dismissed Toppy. True or not ?

2- nothing in Reg's story reminds me of Hutch. Am I right ?

Now let's compare (briefly) Hutch, Toppy and Fleming.

Where was Toppy in 1888 ?
We don't know.
Fleming was living in the Victoria Home.
Just like Hutch.

Can you imagine a man out of work like young Toppy, giving money to Mary ?
I hardly can.
But Fleming used to give money to Mary.
Just like Hutch.

Again, we don't know where and when Toppy met met Mary.
But we know Fleming knew mary for about 3 years.
Just like Hutch.

All these points can be (odd) coincidences. Of course.
But given all this, you should at least be a bit more careful.
For example, how can you say that it's IMPOSSIBLE that Fleming had gone to the police under an alias ?
Some serial killers do such things. And we KNOW that Fleming DID use an alias (in 1892).

You're welcome to find this theory unlikely, but...is it that much far-fetched ? I personally won't say so.

I agree with you that Fleming is a plausible suspect (indeed, it's my favourite).
But those who would disagree are not necessarily crazy, are they ?

Amitiés,
David

[Malcolm X]

Hi Mal,

I'd have to disagree here.

It's extremely unlikely that the police were ever in a position to "suss out" Joseph Fleming if - and it's naturally a big "if" - he was attempting to pass himself off as Hutchinson. Fleming only moved into the district in August of 1888 (according to information provided by Scott Nelson before the "crash") and if he wasn't known as "Joseph Fleming" when he lived at the Victoria Home (which we know he did), the police were really in no position to expose him as such. Verification of identity wasn't easily accomplished in 1888 - quite the reverse, in fact.

Fleming aside, I don't see what's so unlikely about the proposal that the man who introduced himself as George Hutchinson may have used an alias, especially if there are strong indications that he lied in other aspects of his account.

And no, I still don't believe for one moment that the Toppy and Hutch signatures match.

Best regards,
Ben

no hutch was definitely hutch as far as i'm concerned...i dont agree with you at all and i see no reason to consider fleming anything other than maybe ``blotchy face``... for reasons i've mentioned already

[Malcolm X]

Thanks for sending your opinions, Malcolm, but with all due respect and friendly, that's just your opinions.
You're free to send them flatly and to flatly dismiss people who think otherwise. No matter.

Toppy could be Hutch, yes, but I doubt.
And I have good reasons to doubt:

1- the expert who has examined the original documents has dismissed Toppy. True or not ?

2- nothing in Reg's story reminds me of Hutch. Am I right ?

Now let's compare (briefly) Hutch, Toppy and Fleming.

Where was Toppy in 1888 ?
We don't know.
Fleming was living in the Victoria Home.
Just like Hutch.

Can you imagine a man out of work like young Toppy, giving money to Mary ?
I hardly can.
But Fleming used to give money to Mary.
Just like Hutch.

Again, we don't know where and when Toppy met met Mary.
But we know Fleming knew mary for about 3 years.
Just like Hutch.

All these points can be (odd) coincidences. Of course.
But given all this, you should at least be a bit more careful.
For example, how can you say that it's IMPOSSIBLE that Fleming had gone to the police under an alias ?
Some serial killers do such things. And we KNOW that Fleming DID use an alias (in 1892).

You're welcome to find this theory unlikely, but...is it that much far-fetched ? I personally won't say so.

I agree with you that Fleming is a plausible suspect (indeed, it's my favourite).
But those who would disagree are not necessarily crazy, are they ?

Amitiés,
David

i'm certainly not going to get involved in your rediculous ``1911 census row``
it's garbage and should be locked by the administrators!

as for Fleming as Hutch, again no, i expect Hutch was Toppy, the signatures are indeed too close for comfort, in my opinion the ripper was either him or Blotchy face

Fleming forging Hutch's signature, not a hope in hell, because the later Hutch ones are too close to the statement signatures, you two are merely speculating about Fleming ..... if Fleming was after Kelly, he'd have killed her only....but no, she was a victim of somebody called JTR and not a copycat

i've told you what to do about those signatures, but you haven't bothered; too bloody interested in your own egos, so until then this 1911 thread is totally and utterly meaningless......it's all waffle and hot air!

i'm considering getting those signatures checked myself and then we'll know for sure, get them checked by 6 experts, then, if they dont match then we can consider Fleming again, until then those signatures are almost definitely Toppy Hutch, which totally rules out Fleming, unless of course he was Blotchy......... which he could be...i definitely agree with you there.

Hutch is talking rubbish we all know that......but i cant see Fleming being him, i dont vision it at all....way way too risky to lie like this.

i'm a bit upset that one of you lot hasn't bothered to get those signatures checked properly, good grief it's dead easy on the internet nowadays.

[Crystal]

Oh Good Grief-I'll bloody do it-As I said- I don't care who wins- Toppy, not Toppy, whatever. All I care about is the 1911 thread musical. I'm off to bang my head against a wall..

[Malcolm X]

i've been offline for a long time, so today i checked out the Fleming threads (i wasn't on this forum when you lot were discusing him as a suspect)...so all of this is new to me.

then i noticed this ``Flemingson`` theory, well; you may think so, but to me this seems one theory too far, it could be true i suppose; but for me those later signatures look too much like Hutchinson's and Sam has the most convincing arguements.........no insults to BEN or others.

we do have a problem here, because i think that Kelly was killed by ``A friend, a trusted one, someone dear``....... was Hutch this close to her as Fleming was too........my guess is no, simply because he totally lied about that night and far more than i thought he did 2 years ago when i was last here!

but guys..........PLEASE, we must get those signatures checked again, at least 6 more times by experts, before we can talk about Fleming again........because Blotchy appears to be too early at night for a 4am murder.

but if HUTCH is FLEMING, then oh my GOD; because there are certain things about HUTCH that dont make sense as the ripper, but do for Fleming/Evans.

why Fleming killed all the rest doesn't matter/ doesn't matter for H either, we only have to nail him for Kelly.

right, next week i'm going to send those signatures off..... i'll do this monday morning.... i will not mention JTR at all...i'll just say, ``can you please check these signatures for me, do they match``..... no need to say anymore, this way we'll get a speedy, simple, no bias reply

if they dont match then we have a big problem, then we need to take another look at Fleming ...........sorry for getting cross earlier on !

[Malcolm X]

now then, SAM

please post up here the best signatures to check, not file compressed etc, top quality ones and then i'll download them

Mal

[Malcolm X]

Sam doesn't want to get involved anymore, i dont blame him either, so these are the ones that i'm going to send off, now; if you want anymore sent off yourself, you'd better post them up here, because i'm no expert on this.......i've tried not to get involved, but i think we need confirmation one way or another

i will be totally unbias, i will post up the email replies exactly as they arrive back

[Ben]

but for me those later signatures look too much like Hutchinson's and Sam has the most convincing arguements, no insults to BEN or others.

Oh, no worries on that score, Mal.

I don't feel insulted at all, but having said that, let's not go there all over again, eh? As far as I'm concerned, an experienced document examiner has compared the signatures - the actual orignals - and came to the conclusion tha they didn't match. That's good enough for me, although I anxiously await the results of Crystal's investigation. I don't think they match either, but I'm not a professional document examiner.

All the best,
Ben

[Malcolm X]

Oh, no worries on that score, Mal.

I don't feel insulted at all, but having said that, let's not go there all over again, eh? As far as I'm concerned, an experienced document examiner has compared the signatures - the actual orignals - and came to the conclusion tha they didn't match. That's good enough for me, although I anxiously await the results of Crystal's investigation. I don't think they match either, but I'm not a professional document examiner.

All the best,
Ben

but we need to find out though, because this thread will keep flaring up from time to time and i need to know too, because this Fleming worries me

[DVV]

Don't worry, Malcolm,
dear Joe passed away on 28 Aug 1920.
Anyway, if the witness signatures turn out to be Toppy's, does it mean that Fleming would be less suspicious to you?
I thought you did not believe at all in Flemtchinson...

Amitiés,
David

[babybird67]

ermmmm....i know i shouldn't be on here but...

<pokes head above parapet and takes a big gulp...>



having reclaimed my life after reading this thread, just thought i would give my view, which isn't important but after reading such a mammoth thread it would be rude to wander off not saying anything...

I have to say, this thread has been intriguing and really interesting to read where it has been discussing the evidence...where it has wandered off aimlessly sometimes...well...i'm sure everyone knows

The signatures of Toppy and Hutch the witness do not in my opinion give grounds for claiming a match as factual...there are just too many variables, as Crystal has said, such as the witness Hutch maybe being dead even before the census was taken and i think of the variables in the similarities/differences of the actual signature. Because to some eyes the Hutch witness sig looks more of a match with the Lambeth Hutch as well, this should give us caution in claiming "Hutch has been found!" I would rather err on the side of caution in this respect...it just hasn't been clinched for me...obviously with the other factors mentioned, such as Toppy being too young really to have known MJK for three years at 22, Toppy being a plumber etc, no connection at that time with the East End...and yes i know he could have changed his profession etc but there is just something not sitting right with Toppy as Hutch.

I don't believe Hutch was JtR however; yes he lied or made up some details, and there is something which doesn't sit right there either but i think he was trying to cover up either wanting himself to visit MJK for her services or - if he did see someone he thought was well to do - perhaps waiting for her customer to come out to maybe try his luck at petty theft, as he was unemployed and didn't have money to give to MJK. I think if he was either a married man visiting a prostitute, or a potential thief, he had to weigh up being spotted by someone hanging around and his fear could have been great that although he was there up to no good if you like, if he didnt come forward with some kind of reason for being there and Lewis had seen him, he might find himself being identified as a possible suspect, and was thinking about this before he came forward which might explain the delay.

Has anyone checked out any connection with Romford? In his statement Hutch mentions having been there doesn't he? Might be interesting.

everything here is the opinion of a newbie, can/will be subject to change as i learn, lol, so dont come down too hard on me!

also...i will warn you now...i am naturally a very good speller and writer...however for over two years i have been suffering from ME...won't bore anyone with the details but brain goes to mush a lot of the time, and basic spelling errors that normally wouldn't be seen dead in one of my sentences somehow sneak in, and sometimes even breed!!!

Seriously, there are many reasons people make spelling/grammar errors...some medical, some not. I don't think spelling is at all important as long as sense/meaning is clear, which, from context, is almost always deductible imo (not sure that is spelled correctly but hey ho!)

Besides, if anyone on the boards cannot deduce what a slightly mis-spelled word means from its context, maybe they shouldn't be trying to deduce which suspect from a pool of thousands murdered (at least?) 5 women in 1888!!! (this is a pet hate of mine so forgive me)

bb x