The Statement of George Hutchinson

[celee]

No I think you have summed it up perfectly. I must admit I am always a bit sceptical of people who promise the earth - tomorrow!

Hi,

Okay, It boils down to this, you either believe Hutchinson or not. Crystal believes Hutchinson is not being truthful. However, the Inspecter who took down the statement believed Hutchinson. I suggest he gave a good interview.

I cant fault Crystal. This thread has been interesting.

Your friend, Brad

[The Good Michael]

Brad,

You'd fault her if you read this entire thread.

Mike

[Ben]

Any chance we can move on from this now?

Whatever Crystal's other transgressions, you can choose to take it from me - or not - that she is at the very least, a professional document examiner who made her findings public on the first page of this thread. It is for the readership to decide whether she'd invent all of those details. If they choose not to believe it, fair enough, but further reiteration of how terrible Crystal is may not be wholly productive now that she has left the thread.

[Ally]

Discussing how terrible she is may not be productive, however, an analysis of whether Crystal can be relied upon to give an objective an unbiased and TRUTHFUL analysis would be extremely productive.

She couldn't be called an unbiased eye before it came out that she was willing to deceive and manipulate, now that we know she is willing to deceive and lie, how can any of her analysis be trusted to not be likewise biased?

It goes to credibility and objectivity.

[Ben]

Hi Ally,

Several of her observations were borne out by the detailed images she sent me. For an example, accompanying the statement there is a handwritten note from Inspector Abberline outlining the nature of the statement. I'd never seen it before, and had even forgotten its existence until Crystal sent me an image and compared it to the handwriting on the ammended statement, observing that the phrase "ten bells" matched Abberline's handwriting, which I conceded it did. She has also expressed her intention to publish her findings.

All the best,
Ben

[Ally]

And that's fine. And observations that can be independently verified are lovely. It's her conclusions and opinions that are unfortunately going to be suspected and the entire thing is tainted at the source.

However, people have believed much shadier things with a much worse provenance, so if she wants to come back on here, I'll be happy to bow out and let everyone who believes in her reliability continue the debate.

The truth about it is out there, everyone can judge for themselves the reliability of her information based on knowing that truth and make up their own minds.

[perrymason]

so it's coincidence that all the threads with bust ups are Hutch threads ? Not only recently but earlier times as well ?

Hi Barry,

I agree with you, and think that this topic now belongs to the same folks who exchange similar ideas on the diary threads.

It would seem that many people still believe they can make a silk purse from a sows ear.

All the best.

[Brenda]

If she publishes her findings, will she use her real name so her credentials as a document examiner can be verified, or will she publish under a pseudonym?

[celee]

Hi,

I am missing something. What did she tell us that was all that important any way. I dont think anything she claimed was earth shattering. She feels in her "expert" opinion that Hutchinson was lieing. Let her publish her findings. People are either going to believe her or not. It is not that important

Your friend, Brad

[babybird67]

hi Brad

well, it could have been important.

The fingerprint is still interesting to me.

If as was originally claimed this showed conclusively that Hutch was signing the statement with his left hand, it would have allowed us to eliminate him from the suspect list.

However other experts have said the signatures were signed with the right hand, so we cant rule him out on this evidence.

[Ben]

Hi Brad,

A lot of it was very interesting to me, at least. I don't think it had ever been observed before that Abberline had apparently ammended the statement after Badham's initial write-up. Having seen the images, I recongise the merit in that observation. I don't think her analysis was intended to prove or demonstrate that Hutchinson was lying, but rather to recount her findings and leave it to the readership to assess their potential significance.

Best regards,
Ben

[Crystal]

It's easier to publish fiction under a pseudonym than it is factual information. It may be published, but not by me. It's out of my hands. I'm leaving the country next week, ought to be far enough away for you, I should think. So long, and thanks for all the fish...(Exits stage left, pursued by a bear)

[Stephen Thomas]

Thank you and goodnight.

[richardnunweek]

Hi Guys,
I wish to make it clear that i bear no malice towards the poster known as Crystal, now or at any time in the past, infact i have made it clear that i supported her via PM, but this nonsense has gone on long enough, all this old hat 'I shall take leave of you all' is not worthy of a person that claims to have acted out on behalf of the vast majority of 'Casebook' by visiting Kew in her own time.
I have attempted many times in the chatroom, to make conversation with Crystal, but i cannot get a sensible answer, so therefore i find myself reluctantly joining the majority who vote this person as a 'waste of time' but i truely wish things were not that way.
Regards Richard

[Ben]

Just to clarify, Richard, you're dismissing Crystal as a "waste of time" because you didn't think she was very forthcoming in terms of conversation in the chatroom?

Thanks in advance,

Ben