Has anybody seen this before?

[Phil Carter]

Phil,

what amazes me is the date "September 88"...
Fleming's whereabouts are still a recent discovery, remember...

Amitiés,
David

David,

I know...and that has given the whole thing an extra tingle. When was the Fleming thing discovered again?

best wishes

Phil

[richardnunweek]

Hi,
That site has to be a hoax, planted there for someone to see a significance in a well touted name,and once again get the ball rolling.
Hutchinson was Topping, aged 22 years in 1888, he was not a ex lover of Kellys, just a mate, he was not a killer, a ex lover, a pimp, mugger, etc etc, he was simply a young man bewildered with events that happened on commercial street in the early hours of friday 9th November 1888, and after some deliberation decided to put himself in a dodgy situation by reporting to the police on the eve of the 12th.
Its that simple.
Hutchinson was not a alias of Fleming, that man was a seperate individual.
How do I come to such a confident conclusion?
Because as you know, I have strong reasons for believing the Hutch story, unlike any other Casebook member.
Regard s Richard.

[DVV]

It was in the thread "Alias Fleming and Hutch", from memory, I'd say 2005 or 2006...J'ai encore les poils qui se dressent en pensant au post de Sam Flynn...believe me...
Actually, at that time, Fleming was said to have moved in August... Last year it has been corrected (by Scott Nelson I think), and September seems more likely.

Amitiés,
David

[DVV]

Hi Richard,

I was expecting you here...

Amitiés,
David

[Phil Carter]

Hello Richard,

I have an open mind... and have gone into the homepage...but cant get further.
We will have to see. Hoax site or not, it is very elaborate.

best wishes

Phil

[DVV]

Because as you know, I have strong reasons for believing the Hutch story, unlike any other Casebook member.
Regard s Richard.

I myself have strong reasons to believe the Sax Rohmer story... Commercial Road... Long limousine... And then appears Mr King in his astrakhan coat...
The very birth of my master Dr Fu Manchu.

Amitiés,
David

[Phil Carter]

David,

Actually it says ST...not SEP 88... It is Commercial ST

sorry my friend. I blinked as well.

best wishes

Phil

[DVV]

Aaaaaaahhhhhhh

Amitiés,
David

[curious]

This is remarkable, on a website call Stepney Folk (below)
the astounding line at the bottom of the page...
that George Hutchinson LIVED WITH Mary Kelly!!!

http://74.125.77.132/search?q=cache:fDf45a1u5XAJ:website.lineone.net/~fight/Stepney/namesh.htm+commonweal+whitechapel+murders1888&cd=6&hl=no&ct=clnk&gl=no&client=firefox-a

best wishes

Phil

if you go to http://eastlondonhistory.com/murder-in-medieval-london

it looks as though you can get to your index,

suggesting:For more detail on the grisly history of the East End in general and Stepney in particular, go to the excellent http://website.lineone.net/~fight/Stepney/index.html

but I haven't yet found a way to get there.

How did you find this?

Thanks,

Curious

[Phil Carter]

Curious,

Sheer chance, googling!!!

besy wishes

Phil

[Sox]

Hello Sox,

I really don't know... because the only link between the two names underneath each other is the (1) listed after Hutch's name.
It certainly IS revealing if so, and whats more throws the whole question of MJK/Hutch out in the open.
The mere MENTION that Hutchinson LIVED WITH Mary Kelly... that is startling, imho.

best wishes

Phil

It's a good find Phil, I suppose now all we need to do is trace it to it's source, and yes, quite startling.

[curious]

Curious,

Sheer chance, googling!!!

besy wishes

Phil

Isn't google wonderful!

what did you search for?

curious

[richardnunweek]

Hi,
Lets suppose that Hutchinson was indeed a ex of Kellys, and somewhen in that three previous years had shared accomodation with her[ which I doubt]
What might be the significance?
We would have two ex lovers both sharing the same lodging house [ Victoria home] and a common law brother -in-law[ Dan Barnett].
Joseph Barnett however was not living there, but may well have heard some remarks made by either of the old flames,passed on by his brother.
Jealousy is a strong motive, and emotions can get out of control, and we should not forget that the millers court murder initially was believed to have been the work of a Jealous lover.
So if indeed Hutch was involved at one time with Kelly, instead of having Fleming, and J Barnett in the frame, we could now add George Hutchinson.
Would that not be intresting?
Regards Richard.

[Phil Carter]

Hello Richard,
Well summarised indeed...not withstanding this too... that we can strongly hold Hutchinson's VITAL witness statement in doubt. THAT means that Caroline Maxwell and Morris Lewis are now very important indeed. And it would mean, by mere supposition, admittedly, that Blotchy face was Hutchinson, for Astrakan man is now in serious doubt. It throws into doubt much of the summing up of the MJK murder. Timing, and doubt about MJK's (supposed) death too.

I don't know whether all this is true at all, all I know ids that I have reason to doubt things now, far styronger than before. I am endeavouring to make contact with someone about all this.

Hopefully, for all our sakes, this will turn out to be a false clue. Because if it isn't...

best wishes

Phil

[Roy Corduroy]

Hi Phil,

Yes this is obviously a mistake. There is an entry for Hutchinson at the Vic. OK. Then there is an entry for Hutchinson lived with Mary Kelly. That is the mistake.

It is some kind of confusion with Joe Barnett, who lived Mary Kelly. We know they lived together. There have been whole books written about Joe Barnett and Hutch. None of them say Hutch lived with Mary Kelly. There are dissertations and tens of thousands of post here on Casebook, and none of them say Hutch lived with Mary Kelly. In fact, this site, Casebook, even has a built in bias towards Hutch, in that you have to try really hard to make a post about him as a mere witness. Under the Witnesses Section where you would start your post you would have to ignore the large banner at the top says George Hutchinson, which will re-direct your thread to be a Suspect one. And even here on Casebook, of all places, there is no information that Hutch lived with Mary Kelly.

It's a simple mistake. Put in a list of Stepney ancients by someone who doesn't know a great deal and confused Hutch with Barnett.

No big deal. Stuff happens. It has happened to me. I have seen things on the internet I wonder might be new astounding finds which turn out not to be so. I once posted a potrait drawing on a Casebook thread which I found on the internet, which said it was Tumblety. Turns out it was Oscar Wilde. Now is that wild, or what?

Roy