Proof of identity

[Ben]

Were there any precedents which suggested to the local populace that the police gave five times the weekly salary to any member of the public, who because they came forward with usefull information, lost work?

Not as far as I know, Observer, but I can't see how Hutchinson's efforts could possibly have lost him five weeks worth of work.

[Sam Flynn]

At what point did it become apparent to Hutchinson that he was to recieve five times his salary?

Hi Observer,

As I said, it's a matter of secondary importance whether he received 5 pennies or 5 pounds - the crucial point is that we have two accounts, seemingly independent and separated by some 80 years, both of which claim that Hutchinson received that level of recompense.

[Ben]

Hi Gareth,

The interesting thing about this discussion is that it appears that somebody got wind of the story and printed it in a single obscure American paper, and the fact that the newspaper article has intriguing parallels to a tale which was told by Reg Hutchinson some 80 years later.

But Reg Hutchinson told a story about his dad being paid off for keeping quiet about spotting Churchill the Ripper in a book that was ultimately discredited by its own author. Dodgy provenance.

The Wheeling Register carried an article headed "Gossip" which included claims about characters involved in the Miller's Court saga that were flatly contradicted by other newspapers. Dodgy provenance.

The dodginess of both sources, coupled with the fact that the signatures don't match, pretty much ennervates any "coincidence" in association with the payment issue, and since the real Hutchinson claimed to be in no regular employment at the time, the question of "salary" is rendered moot.

All the best,
Ben

[Observer]

Were there any precedents which suggested to the local populace that the police gave five times the weekly salary to any member of the public, who because they came forward with usefull information, lost work?

Observer

[Ben]

Hi Observer,

Are you trying to tell me that the police would have doubted his given occupation as that of a groom?

Are you trying to tell me that the police paid five times Hutchinson's salary without knowing what Hutchinson did for a living? And with only Hutchinson's word as to what his occupation was? If so, I'd have to disagree pretty strongly on both counts.

Who's to know, it could well be that he was aware of this arangement before he even entered the police station.

'Ang on.

You're suggesting that Hutchinson knew, before he even entered the police station, that he'd be paid five times his normal salary?

[Sam Flynn]

They could conceivably pay a witness expenses for assistance, but five times a normal salary is fantastically unlikely.

£5 was a nice little earner, for sure - but "fantastically unlikely"? Even if it were, we're not debating the accuracy of the amount, or anything else pertaining to this or Hutchinson's story. The interesting thing about this discussion is that it appears that somebody got wind of the story and printed it in a single obscure American paper, and the fact that the newspaper article has intriguing parallels to a tale which was told by Reg Hutchinson some 80 years later.

[Observer]

Hi

Are you trying to tell me that the police would have doubted his given occupation as that of a groom? Why would they assume that he was telling lies regarding his occupation? At what point did it become apparent to Hutchinson that he was to recieve five times his salary? You say

That was alleged only in connection with his wandering the streets on an Astrakhan-hunt.

Who's to know, it could well be that he was aware of this arangement before he even entered the police station. It could well be that he was on the make from the word go.

Observer

[Ben]

Unlike many aspects of Hutchinson's account, his employment details weren't beyond the realms of "checkability", and it if transpired that he'd lied about his occupation, he certainly wouldn't have been paid off. At the time he related his statement, he wasn't "aware that he was to receive five times his weekly wage". That was alleged only in connection with his wandering the streets on an Astrakhan-hunt.

And if Reg knew that Toppy was a liar...but odd to go public about it in 1992? Especially it served the purpose of adding an even more ludicrous element to an aleady ludicrous account.

[Observer]

A) Why would he lie about that?

B) If Toppy was lying about everything, he was not, as his son claimed, an honest-to-goodness gent who "never embellished anything"

C) How could the police have paid him at "five times his normal salary" without knowing what his occupation was?

A. Because he was a liar. Also see (C)



B. Come on Ben, his son was hardly likely to have called his father a liar on live radio.



C. Because he was aware that he was to receive five times his weekly wage. Had he worked as a groom on a casual basis at some time or other. Was a groom paid more per week that a plumber? If so then it would make sense to tell the authorities he was a groom

Observer

[Ben]

I'm not saying that Hutchinson wasn't colorful on his description, just that it is very plausible that a poor ex-groom, living in the Victorian Home, and without any money, may have sought a way to get some.

Absolutely, Mike, and that holds true irrespective of whether or not he was a killer. But even if he did have hopes of being paid off, he certainly wouldn't have received any dough from the cops unless his description led to the miscreant's capture. Pay-offs occur, but no so much with witnesses because they'd be deluged with liars and money-grabbers that way. If they wanted Hutchinson to accompanty them, he'd be forced to agree. They could conceivably pay a witness expenses for assistance, but five times a normal salary is fantastically unlikely.

Cheers,
Ben

[The Good Michael]

Jumping on the bandwagon: As I said, the thought of a payoff to someone for information has a ring of credibility to it. This happens all the time today, and especially in large cities. I suggest that there had to have been cash around for such purposes, and especially when there was such desperation. There was nothing but lousy leads and then there is a man who can describe in detail the killer, but needs a bit of remuneration for his efforts and time.

This is highly plausible, and the only real reason to doubt it is because one may want to look at Hutchinson as a killer, and we don't think of a vicious murderer necessarily as someone who would turn around and make a profit from it in this way.

I'm not saying that Hutchinson wasn't colorful on his description, just that it is very plausible that a poor ex-groom, living in the Victorian Home, and without any money, may have sought a way to get some.

Cheers,

Mike

[Ben]

If he was lying about the well-dressed man he saw with Kelly, who’s to say he wasn’t in actual fact a plumber?

A) Why would he lie about that?

B) If Toppy was lying about everything, he was not, as his son claimed, an honest-to-goodness gent who "never embellished anything"

C) How could the police have paid him at "five times his normal salary" without knowing what his occupation was?

[Observer]

Hi

The general consensus regarding Hutchinson here in this forum seems to imply that Hutchinson was a fantasist. I am therefore amazed that the detractors to his 9th Nov sighting take his assertion that he was a groom at face value. If he was lying about the well-dressed man he saw with Kelly, who’s to say he wasn’t in actual fact a plumber?

Observer

[Ben]

However, that still leaves us lacking an explanation as to where this story of "Hutchinson's windfall" came from

Two highly dubious sources, Gareth. And as I'm sure you know, two dubious sources attesting to the same thing don't equal "interesting coincidence", especially if the payment detail is incredibly unlikely and the occupations and signatures don't match etc.

pipes burst more often in the Winter

Aha! So plenty of plumbing work in cold November then.

[Sam Flynn]

Why would plumbing work be seasonal? Surely loos can go wrong at any time of year?

...pipes burst more often in the Winter, as we know. It must have been even more true back then when most bogs were in the back yard