Tweet
We already found the witness.
Mike
Mike
-
huh? -
-
Hi,
We certainly have found the witness, even if his identity has been discussed for years, which to anybody new reading this, would seem a mite confusing..
The witness apparently was a potential liar, mugger, stalker, and even someone with homicidal tendencies , not to mention a tad confused over dates.
It really is straight forward ..it really is?
Regards Richard.Comment
-
Yes Richard. It's time to accept and move on.
Mikehuh?Comment
-
interesting
Hello Pat. That is quite interesting. Thanks for sharing.
Cheers.
LCComment
-
Thanks Lynn
I thought it interesting that George James lived most of his life around Martha street Shadwell, quite near to Pennington street and Breezers hill. So could have frequented the same pubs as Mary Jane Kelly when she lived there...
Pat..............................Comment
-
knew her
Hello Pat. Thanks.
Might that explain Hutch's claim to have known "MJK" for some time?
Cheers.
LCComment
-
Hi,
If Reg, or family of Topping, validated that the tale of GWTH was false then I would consider any other Hutchinson named.
But In the case of the late Reg [ son of Topping] he was adamant during his life that his father was Hutchinson the witness that knew Mary Kelly, and his younger brother also was aware of the same Tale from his father.
To suggest that the witness was another individual is flying against reality in my opinion.
Both Topping and Kelly were only a couple of years apart in age, so it is feasible that they could have known each other, they both resided in 1888 in the same area, and Topping admitted to exactly what the statement read.
In order for the latter to falsify such a claim, he would have had to take over the identity and make it his own, complete with a payment addition, confirmed in a rare publication.
For what intention.?
Answers please on a postcard.
Regards Richard.Comment
-
Hutchinsons age.
I always got the impression that Hutchinson was older than Mary Jane Kelly.
When she saw him that night didnt she address him as Mr Hutchinson?
To me that implys respect, possibly as he was older than her. If he knew her for a few years I wonder why she didnt call him George?
Pat............................................... .....Comment
-
Hi Pat.Originally posted by Paddy View Post
Bare in mind these are Hutchinson's words, not Mary's.
Also, it was customary in those days to address a man more formerly than we might today.
Then again, it could also be argued that an unmarried woman should address a married man with the formal title of 'Mr' as opposed to the informal christian name of George.
We can read these words given second-hand in various ways.Regards, Jon S.Comment
-
Both Topping and Kelly were only a couple of years apart in age, so it is feasible that they could have known each other,
Odd logic - similarity of age surely does not relate to whether two people could have known each other?
The only consideration is death dates. You CANNOT know someone dead before your own birth - but one meets people of all ages through one's life. I have had many friends older and younger than i am - i still do.
Besides MJK was a whore and would have known older men - perhaps as regular customers.
Hutinson's age relative to MJK is irrelevant.
A Breezer's hill connection is not.
PhilComment
-
Age, social class and proximity would have thrown them together more likely than Kelly having become friends with the queen (assuming she had any). The 3 pieces together, I would argue, are an important combination, so let's not dismiss age altogether as a factor.Originally posted by Phil H View Post
Mikehuh?Comment
-
Question
Has any of you ever found the John Hutchinson born 1859, Labourer, living in 9-11 Dorset Street in 1881, in any other census ?
Pat..................................Comment
-
This John?
Paddy -
If you haven’t already, you might be like to look at John William Hutchinson, born c.1862 in Whitechapel to John and Kezia(h). In 1871 he was living at 31 Alie Street with his parents; brothers George and James; sisters Sarah and Emily and grandmother Anne Plumb. His mother Keziah was from Leytonstone in Essex, his father from Nottinghamshire. The next time he can be definitely identified as far as I can see is in 1890, when he married Jane Carver in Bermondsey on 9th November (co-incidence, I’m sure…) So (unless I’ve missed him, of course) he could possibly be identified with the John Hutchinson living in the Dorset St. Lodging house – a variant of 3 years in birth date is nothing significant. By the time he was married, he was working as a dyer; his profession from then on. That wasn’t an inherited profession – his father was a cook. JW and his wife lived at Lucey Road, Bermondsey, for at least 20 years. They had 4 children - none survived. His marriage certificate and 1911 census entry are both on Ancestry, so you can check those out if you want to. From memory, John’s brother, George (b.1866) trained at on the training ship Exmouth in Grays, where he is listed in the 1881 census. He can be seen in the 1891 census at his mother’s house in Newington, listed as a seaman. He married Rachel Wines on 1st September 1895, at which time he was listed as a labourer. Again, his marriage certificate should be on Ancestry to look at.Comment
-
I'm, erm, 50 and I still address older people as Mr or Mrs soandso. In years gone by, that would have been quite normal I'd have thought.Originally posted by Paddy View Post
Comment
Comment