If Topping is the witness...

[Malcolm X]

i.e the ripper walked the streets like Joe Average, being seen by everybody, but when he saw a victim he stopped, looked around, checked very carefully and then shot in like a rat up a drain pipe.

this could be especially true for EDDOWES, he might have been waiting in the shadows for LAWENDE'S suspect to clear off........and then BANG in like a shot.

Hence, all our suspects might not be the Ripper, he was waiting for them to clear off!.............or LAWENDE's suspect is our man, but got careless that night and for the first time ever, was seen!

[DVV]

Malcolm, please, your posts have nothing to do with this thread. It would be so simple to send your thoughts at the proper place.

Amitiés,
David

[Ben]

the police knew this, now HUTCH probably doesn't match him or he would've been detained for far

Hi Mal,

It wouldn't have been the case that Hutchinson was ruled out because of an incompatability with Lawende's sighting (and they could have been dead ringers for eachother, for all we know). Michael Ostrog was mentioned specifically by Macnaghten, and we know full well that he didn't match Lawende's suspect in the slightest, nor indeed did Severin Klosowski who was later suspected by Abberline. In any case, Lawende's description chiefly concerned the man's attire, with the actual description of the his features being very vague and encompassing. Wholly insufficient to rule suspects in or out with any degree of confidence, especially given Lawende's professed "doubt" about the sighting.

There's no evidence that Barnett was subjected to a witness ID attempt, and there's no evidence that Hutchinson was ever considered a suspect.

Thomas Sadler obviously didn't correspond physically with Lawende's man, but by that stage they were using Lawende for identity attempts. They didn't just "check off" Sadler's his description with that of Lawende's man.

If Toppy was the fellow that gave the statement, his age at the time only discounts his eligibility for Jack....because no witness saw someone that young as the last seen with a victim before she is murdered.

True enough, Mike, but that would mean we'd have to "discount the eligibility" of Cutbush, Kosminski and Klowoski too.

Best regards,
Ben

[Malcolm X]

Hi Mal,

It wouldn't have been the case that Hutchinson was ruled out because of an incompatability with Lawende's sighting (and they could have been dead ringers for eachother, for all we know). Michael Ostrog was mentioned specifically by Macnaghten, and we know full well that he didn't match Lawende's suspect in the slightest, nor indeed did Severin Klosowski who was later suspected by Abberline. In any case, Lawende's description chiefly concerned the man's attire, with the actual description of the his features being very vague and encompassing. Wholly insufficient to rule suspects in or out with any degree of confidence, especially given Lawende's professed "doubt" about the sighting.

There's no evidence that Barnett was subjected to a witness ID attempt, and there's no evidence that Hutchinson was ever considered a suspect.

Thomas Sadler obviously didn't correspond physically with Lawende's man, but by that stage they were using Lawende for identity attempts. They didn't just "check off" Sadler's his description with that of Lawende's man.



True enough, Mike, but that would mean we'd have to "discount the eligibility" of Cutbush, Kosminski and Klowoski too.

Best regards,
Ben

you see Ben, you put this on the other thread too, so i've answered this over there... you're a pain sometimes. i'm not answering this because we've gone off topic again....look at my answer over on the ``gross police neglience`` one

[DVV]

Hi all,

from the BIG THREAD, it's quite obvious that the Toppy-believers (Richard, Sam, Good Mike...) do not consider him a possible Ripper.

Amitiés,
David

[Roy Corduroy]

That sounds reasonable.

[DVV]

I tend to agree, Roy, Toppy-the-Ripper would be a bit hard to swallow.
But I still wouldn't believe in Mr Astrakhan.
So...
Toppy-the-mythomaniac ?
Or the man who shielded JtR ??

Amitiés,
David

[Roy Corduroy]

Toppy-the-mythomaniac ?
Or the man who shielded JtR ??

Evening, David

Call him Over-the-Toppy.

Roy

[The Good Michael]

David,

I know that Hutch is Toppy, but I don't necessarily discount him as a suspect. He doesn't fit a typical profile, but what is typical? What happens from here is that there is a huge burden put upon those who believe Hutch is guilty to prove something. It probably can't happen. We also know that Hutch is not Fleming as Fleming was 6'7". That leaves Fleming on his own, but hardly viable as a hulking, killing entity unless there was a mistake in the records. If not, Fleming was not Hutchinson because the police report would have spoken of a giant of military bearing, I would have to believe.

Mike

[Ben]

What happens from here is that there is a huge burden put upon those who believe Hutch is guilty to prove something.

No there isn't.

I'm not seeking to prove anyone guilty of the Whitechapel murders. I've expressed the opinion that Hutchinson is a likely suspect, and certainly the best of the named (albeit not fully identified) suspects, but there's certainly no purden of proof upon me or anyone who subscribes to a similar view.

We also know that Hutch is not Fleming as Fleming was 6'7".

Well, you'd need to consider how likely the "6'7" height is, especially if he was also reported as weighing 11 stone and being in "good bodily health". Since the likelihood of him being all three of these things at the same time is very slim, a mistake in the records would seem a reasonable proposal, especially when we know they got the age wrong.

If Toppy was the witness, everything suspicious about him would remain suspicious, so it wouldn't change much.

But he wasn't the witness, so..

[The Good Michael]

Ben,

But he wasn't the witness, so..

This thread is about the supposition that he is the witness. Your two cents need to be taken elsewhere as you are, once again, off topic.

You want to get your 'truth' into everything and we all laugh at you for this, but it does get annoying. Please don't bring that garbage here.

Cheers,

Mike

[DVV]

David,
I know that Hutch is Toppy, but I don't necessarily discount him as a suspect.
We also know that Hutch is not Fleming as Fleming was 6'7".Mike

Hi Mike,

I wasn't aware of your sudden change of mind, for yesterday you wrote in the big thread:

"This is a great opportunity to get rid of a suspect."

About Fleming's height, we know, for the obvious reason given above by Ben, and some others already mentioned elsewhere, that it wasn't 6'7.

Amitiés,
David

[Ben]

This thread is about the supposition that he is the witness.

So don't say things like "I know that Hutch is Toppy", since that's no less annoying. I'm no more or less on topic than you are, as I suspect you know full well. As soon as you start giving my excuses to take you seriously, I might start getting perturbed by your laughter.

But you haven't, so I don't.

[The Good Michael]

David,

I did mention that the 6'7" may have been a mistake, if you read my post.
I think it unlikely, but ... hey let's look at the original documents!

And I do think it may be an opportunity to get rid of a suspect, but I don't have an agenda and I don't discount anything. As this thread surmises, toppy as hutch becomes a bit troublesome. If we can get corroboration about Toppy/Hutch's life from relatives, second-hand though it may be, we start removing roadblocks that have been put in poor George's path. All surmise here, of course.

Cheers,

Mike

[DVV]

I did mention that the 6'7" may have been a mistake, if you read my post.
Mike

I read your post, Mike, that flatly says :

"We know Hutch is not Fleming, as Fleming was 6'7."

Then, I'll grant you that, you alluded to a possible mistake - but just as a remote possibility.

Now, knowing that even years after his admission in hospital, Fleming was still about 70 kilos and still said in good wealth, it's obvious that 6'7 was a mistake.
I'm afraid the original documents tell us nothing more.
We've seen them.
It's a form, probably filled out by a secretary, who was copying the height and weight as written by a nurse or a doctor. And this nurse, or this doctor, certainly shaped his 6 like a 5. Nothing extraordinary or unbelievable.

Think also, Mike, that nobody has ever refered to Fleming as a giant - neither Barnett, nor Venturney, although, in 1888, such a height would have made Fleming a freak. And this would have come down to us.
"He used to ill-use her, and he was almost a monster, his head touching the ceiling."

Amitiés,
David