Proof of identity

[Bob Hinton]

The Meeting

Is it known how Fairclough and Reg got together? The interview took place after the first edition of Ripper and the Royals was published and appears in an appendix in the second edition. Fairclough says he had the 'good fortune' to interview Reg but doesn't say how the meeting came about. My best guess is that Reg contacted Fairclough after reading the first edition.

I believe, but I am no means sure of this, that after the first edition came out it was Sickert who made the introduction of Reg to Fairclough.

[Ben]

Hi Stephen,

That's possible. I'd say it's more likely that Fairclough ploughed through the phone book contacting anyone named "Hutchinson" living in the right area hoping to hit gold. A sort of:

- Hello. This is a long shot shot, but are you related to a man named George Hutchinson who was a witness in the JTR case?

- Ermm.....yeah!

[Stephen Thomas]

Is it known how Fairclough and Reg got together? The interview took place after the first edition of Ripper and the Royals was published and appears in an appendix in the second edition. Fairclough says he had the 'good fortune' to interview Reg but doesn't say how the meeting came about. My best guess is that Reg contacted Fairclough after reading the first edition.

[Ben]

Hi Richard,

I noticed that you are taking part in a thread on a rival site, which at least has some believers present.

"Mr. Poster" is not a believer in the Toppy theory. Mr. Poster is someone who read Phillip Sugden's book once because everyone was talking about it, immediately endorsed the unpopular theory advanced therein, up to and including the obvious "Severin Klosowski was Mr. Astrakhan" fallacy, and then tried to argue aggressively against anything that interfered with the shepherding of that theory.

Don't get me wrong, he's a hellova nice guy a lot of the time, and it's a shame he's placed me on ignore on the grounds of my "barely concealed psychosis", but I'd err on the side of caution and chalk his remarks up to a desire to get one over on the "pro-GHers" rather than any particular adherence to the Toppy theory.

But since he's wondering about the original "source" for the paper article, let's look at what the "Wheeling Register" headline announced:

Gossip Concerning the Fiend’s Latest Atrocity

Gossip.

A frank avowel on the part on American newspaper that it was picking up "gossip" from the East End. If we explore a number of other claims in that same article, such as Barnett being "furiously drunk at the inquest" or that he was living with a "notorious character", it immediately becomes clear just what sort of quality "gossip" we're dealing with here.

[richardnunweek]

Bob,
Many thanks for the huge letters, I can actually read that without my glasses.with regard to my reading ability, I consider myself capable of interpreting the meaning of sentences, also I never find it hard to remember my name, which is Richard Brian Nunweek, unfortunately it appears that is somewhat harder for you to comprehend, thus the term 'Nunners' being subsituted on a now 'Regular basis'
I really am bewildered, as too why your posts to me are full of childish remarks, when all I have done is start a thread that I thought worthy of discussion, which I can honestly say in all the threads I have created during my nine years with Casebook[ and there are many]very few have not been well received, and good debate has resulted.
To sum up.
Ii is my believe that Gwth was the original Gh, and I used the American article to endorse that, I will not waver on my claim of that elusive radio programme, which appears according to you, as either a lie, or confusion on my part.
I noticed that you are taking part in a thread on a rival site, which at least has some believers present.
Regards Richard.

[Bob Hinton]

Unbelievable!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

This man is unbelievable. Still no matter I now know Nunners’s problem – he cannot read and understand simple sentences. Look what he’s come up with now.

The picture on the wall is clearly Gwth, to suggest otherwise is beyond me

Who said that it wasn’t? Read what I said:

NUNNERISM: “We should also ignore the fact that the same photo that featured in the Ripper and the Royals hung in Regs London flat, which would indicate that it was his father GWTH.”

FACT: This is classic Nunners. The reason the photos are the same is that Melvyn Fairclough borrowed the picture to make a copy for the second edition of his book.

CONCLUSION: Again two items having a common source are going to be the same.

I’m going to put this in big letters so you might have a chance of understanding.

THE PHOTO ON REG’S WALL IS OF HIS FATHER GWTH. THE REASON IT IS THE SAME AS IN THE BOOK IS BECAUSE FAIRCLOUGH COPIED IT. TWO ITEMS HAVING A COMMON SOURCE ARE GOING TO BE THE SAME.

DO YOU UNDERSTAND NOW?

Honestly you claim to have a good memory yet you act like someone who couldn’t remember his name unless prompted.

[Bob Hinton]

Missing Programme

To be fair, Suzi, I doubt that Reggie's appearance got top billing, so it's hardly surprising if we can't find any mention of it in the archives of the Radio Times, or online. A friend of mine, a cornet/trumpet prodigy, appeared twice or three times on various BBC shows in the late 70s/early 80s (she even duetted with Roy Castle), but having just trawled through Google and the BBC's website, I haven't found a single reference to her.

Very good point Sam, that's why I've only given it a 98% Never Happened rating instead of 100%.

However there are two points which must be taken into account.

One, at about the time the Nunners said the broadcast was made, there was a radio programme about Jack the Ripper in which George Hutchinson appeared. I can't recall the name now, but I did actually have a script which I later sold on Ebay. I offered Nunners a copy of this script to see if this was the programme he thought he remembered, but he just refused, saying I was wrong and he was right.

Two. If Reg had appeared in such a programme what would he have contributed? As he admitted in 1992 he didn't even know about the statement which is the major part of the GH saga. So what would he have said? 'My dad lived in the East End at the time' Hardly makes for riveting listening does it.

And don't you think if he had taken part in such a programme he might have mentioned that to Fairclough and Sickert when the interviewed him?

[Ben]

It has nothing whatsoever to do with "trust", Richard.

If there's no corroboration to your claim that this radio show existed, it cannot be accepted as evidence. That's not an attack on your integrity. It's simply taking the responsible approach to the analysis of evidence. As it stands, it's uncorroborated second-hand hearsay at best, and wholly lacking in any sort of provenance. Until that corroboration is forthcoming - and I'm afraid I'm not at all optimistic - it's completelty worthless as evidence.

And no, the fact that a bloke called Reg Hutchinson turned up in 1992 claiming his dad saw Lord Randoph Churchill the Ripper doesn't mean GWTH was "living a lie" from 1888. Reg could have caught wind of all the JTR interest around the centenary of the murders and found an opportunity to jump on the bandwagon when Fairclough called. GWTH himself may have had nothing to do with any false claims to have been the Kelly "witness".

Best regards,
Ben

[richardnunweek]

Bob,
A excellent summing up by the prosecution, so its only fair the defence now reacts.
Despite extensive research into this claim states Bob..
Now its memory time, I would place that programme between 1973-75, it was entitled 'The man that saw Jack' and it was advertised in the Radio times, also the radio channel was not a popular one, but English, it also featured a taped extract from Reg Hutchinson, and although the statement was read on air it was not in the actual slot of the interview.
If memory serves,all Reg mentioned was that his father knew one of the victims and gave a statement to the police, and he described the man he saw as more upper class then lower, he also mentioned his father was paid for his efforts in attempting to find the man the sum of five pounds.
Note that Reg gave a taped interview and therefore the truth is proberly he never saw the statement until 1992.
Surely somebody connected to the BBC, must have some recollection of that programme, it was a forty minute show and was on at 8pm.
I am not disputing that it is a possibility that the American article was based on rumours, but are we seriously suggesting that Regs father was living a lie from 1888 until his death by posing as George Hutchinson of Ripper fame, and not only that, his son Reg decided to keep up that charade right up until his death some five years back.
With reference to Handwriting experts, while I am sure Sue Ironmonger knows her trade it is not exactly a exact science, and as the Hutchinson statement has question marks to answer, I certainly would expect at least a second opinion.
The picture on the wall is clearly Gwth, to suggest otherwise is beyond me.
Summing up I feel Bob , a bit more trust would be appreciated when it comes to that Radio Broadcast, I am not telling lies, or am I suffering from a mental illness, and like Gh I have a very good memory.
Regards Richard.

[Suzi]

Love the 'To be fair' line there!

Yep you're right if he had been in ITV he would have slipped in probably beteween the 'Pepsodent 'and 'Tiger in your tank' ads hehe! (I had one/some of those Tiger tails- at least one!!)

Hmmmmmmm I'm giving up on this one..... I'm sure that like most things....(Like JTR!).........it's out there somewhere.........probably hidden in an old TV Times........or a Titbits!!!!.. Thats the Hutch prog ...not JTR .........although you never know!!!

[Sam Flynn]

as to the 1970's programme I have Googled myself silly and spent ages in online/newspaper /TV papers etc etc research but.........oddly............nothing!

To be fair, Suzi, I doubt that Reggie's appearance got top billing, so it's hardly surprising if we can't find any mention of it in the archives of the Radio Times, or online. A friend of mine, a cornet/trumpet prodigy, appeared twice or three times on various BBC shows in the late 70s/early 80s (she even duetted with Roy Castle), but having just trawled through Google and the BBC's website, I haven't found a single reference to her.

[Suzi]

Hi PM-
OK I suppose we have to look at the families/how they react/how long ago it was etc etc to have a take on this........it would really depend on that and all sorts of other 'stuff'!

BUT......if people are comfortable with what they know/discover /etc etc and are prepared to make that public knowledge, then where's the problem......Sometimes people find these things out and sing like a bird!!!........sometimes they dont....

Whatever......

....Thankfully people write these things down in whatever way.....either from being lucky enough to interview them or maybe from some sort of press /hearsay.........whatever!! (Hate that phrase!) it's there!!!!

!

Hi all,

Although most here were duly unimpressed when I mentioned that a story like that wouldnt be one that most families would readily pass down...in this case the tale of a relative that police felt provided false evidence in a murder investigation, ...and when you were addressing your research Bob, you made these comments....."I followed the line all the way down to the present day and found someone. I then went to see him and before telling him anything detailed, asked him to tell me about his family. He gave me a lot of information (he had been constructing his family tree) but admitted he had come to a stop with his great great grandfather, as he could get no information about him from his family."

I think in many instances, families would do just as you suggest...bury scandalous histories, not keep retelling them to future generations.

I cant imagine the relatives of Berkowitz/Son of Sam, or the Dahlmer family gathering around the grandparents at Christmastime listening with glee as they are regaled with stories of their infamous murderous relatives.

My best regards Bob, all.

[Suzi]

Well said..... and well posted Mr H !

(Great pic!)

I do tend to get a tad confused as to Reggie when thought of in the same brain moment as George H.... At the end of the day our Reggie was probably an 'interesting man' with common memories of/at the time concerning the 'Orrible Murders' in the East End-:-There it begins and ends I think.



I have a disturbing image here now of that 'Picture on the wall!'.... A VERRY worrying image indeed!!

Hmmmmmmmmmmm.......

Sorry Nunners...as to the 1970's programme I have Googled myself silly and spent ages in online/newspaper /TV papers etc etc research but.........oddly............nothing!

[Bob Hinton]

Here's a picture of me with the great great grandson of a murderer. This case was also interesting as it produced a genuine letter written by a killer.