Hutchinson and antisemitism ?? A possibility?

[Fleetwood Mac]

Hi Hunter,

Very unlikely, indeed.

Amitiés,
David

Really?

Some graffiti about Jewish citizens which did not in any way shape of form mention murder or murder sites must be linked to a series of murders becase some apron was found underneath?

I find the opposite. I'd estimate there's a small chance that it had anything to do with the murders.

I feel you two may be in on your own joke here - but this doesn't seem the site for it.

[Fleetwood Mac]

Had Hutchinson not come forward,the obvious suspect would have been the man Cox says entered Kelly's room,in her,(kelly) company.

Surely Hutchinson coming forward suggests it wasn't him.

If he did it.....then he'd be thinking: "go to the police and if someone saw me going into the room then I'm well and truly goosed".

If he didn't do it....then he'd be thinking: "go to the police and there ain't a problem because I didn't go in the room - I didn't kill her - so there's no way I can get fingered for this".

The evidence doesn't point to H....nor does logic.

[Observer]

Hi Macca

If he did it.....then he'd be thinking: "go to the police and if someone saw me going into the room then I'm well and truly goosed".

If he didn't do it....then he'd be thinking: "go to the police and there ain't a problem because I didn't go in the room - I didn't kill her - so there's no way I can get fingered for this".

The evidence doesn't point to H....nor does logic.

You mean if you were in those two situations that is what you would do?

How can you possibly predict the train of thought of George Hutchinson? Had the ouija board out?

Observer

[Fleetwood Mac]

Hi Macca

You mean if you were in those two situations that is what you would do?

How can you possibly predict the train of thought of George Hutchinson? Had the ouija board out?

Observer

I'm not.....I'm saying that is the logical answer...no matter the person.

But this a bit rich Observer....considering your trail of thought.....which starts with "could have been lying"....and is the basis for "major suspect".

[DVV]

Really?

Some graffiti about Jewish citizens which did not in any way shape of form mention murder or murder sites must be linked to a series of murders becase some apron was found underneath?

I find the opposite. I'd estimate there's a small chance that it had anything to do with the murders.

I feel you two may be in on your own joke here - but this doesn't seem the site for it.

Oh I see... Another genius on boards.

He finds.
He estimates.
He feels.

And I don't care.

[Observer]

Observer

I'm not.....I'm saying that is the logical answer...no matter the person.

But this a bit rich Observer....considering your trail of thought.....which starts with "could have been lying"....and is the basis for "major suspect".

Exactly. My train of thought is totaly alien to you, you could not have predicted it, my logic baffles you, you see we are all different. Equally, it's pointles to predict what George Hutchinson would or would not have done whether he was guilty or innocent of the murder of Mary Kelly, you can not think for George Hutchinson.

[Garry Wroe]

But equally, as you say, Hutchinson could have been lying simply to give the impression that he had not waited until after the inquest - he must have known it was a question that he would obviously be asked by the police once he had come forward. He may simply have been adding yet another lie to make it appear that he had indeed come forward before the inquest when in all probability he had done no such thing.

I don't doubt it for a moment. Indeed, it's not beyond the bounds of possibility that Hutchinson's alleged conversation with a policeman on Petticoat Lane was checked, found to be untrue, and led to the first stirrings of suspicion with regard to the integrity of his police statement.

Again, were this a competent modern investigation, Hutchinson's demonstrable mendacity coupled with his presence at a crime scene at a time critical to a murder would stimulate genuine suspicion on the part of investigators.

Garry Wroe.

[DVV]

Observer



Exactly. My train of thought is totaly alien to you, you could not have predicted it, my logic baffles you, you see we are all different. Equally, it's pointles to predict what George Hutchinson would or would not have done whether he was guilty or innocent of the murder of Mary Kelly, you can not think for George Hutchinson.

How can you say so, Observer ?

Can't you realize this guy is opening a new era ?

Amitiés,
David

[Observer]

How can you say so, Observer ?

Can't you realize this guy is opening a new era ?

Amitiés,
David

Hi David, I don't think he could open a tin of beans, kidding Macca kidding.

All the best Observer

[DVV]

Hi David, I don't think he could open a tin of beans, kidding Macca kidding.

All the best Observer

Point taken ! I stand corrected !

Amitiés,
David

[Fleetwood Mac]

Observer



Exactly. My train of thought is totaly alien to you, you could not have predicted it, my logic baffles you, you see we are all different. Equally, it's pointles to predict what George Hutchinson would or would not have done whether he was guilty or innocent of the murder of Mary Kelly, you can not think for George Hutchinson.

Well...ain't this a bit strange...

From the off I argued that Hutchinson may well have done it but he is not the best suspect based on what we know.

You are attempting to make him more viable than the known evidence....so I played the game.....for everything you suggested is plausible I offered a plausible alternative.....thinking that was the deal.....but it seems you want to turn competing possibilities into some sort of vindication for your theory.

But what you can't possibly do is come up with any evidence that makes him a probable. Not in a million years.

So at this point you're pretty much grasping at anything to keep the discussion going.....even going with the you can't prove he didn't do it so it makes him a suspect.....well yeah you can't prove there's no god.....

At this juncture Observer...I'm rapidly coming round to the conclusion that you just want to win an argument. Me? Hanging around or lying ain't enough.....no matter your speculation.

[Observer]

You initially were of the opinion that Hutchinson may well have done it? We're in the same camp then, what are you moaning about? Lets forget about Hutch for a while though. Believe me my continuing posting to this thread has nothing to do with the winning of the argument, rather it is to question your logic.

An example. Over in the "Did Jack kill Liz Stride" you posted regarding Jack the Ripper

It seems a big risk to kill in an area where he knew lots of people were nearby...but we don't know the way his mind worked.

Next you're posting regarding George Hutchinson

If he did it.....then he'd be thinking: "go to the police and if someone saw me going into the room then I'm well and truly goosed".

If he didn't do it....then he'd be thinking: "go to the police and there ain't a problem because I didn't go in the room - I didn't kill her - so there's no way I can get fingered for this".

The evidence doesn't point to H....nor does logic.

Do you see where I'm coming from Macca? Can you see the contradiction here. We can't predict the way JTR's mind worked, but we can predict the way George Hutchinson's mind worked. Listen if you have a problem with my posts then lets agree to leave each others post alone, agreed?

Observer

[Adam Went]

Michael:

In Seoul the walls are not thick with graffiti, neither in Tokyo, Beijing, Chicago, Frankfurt, Vienna, Addis, Fukuoka, Taipei. Minneapolis... no.

Some graffiti, sure. Thick? No. Too much coincidence with the apron. Way too much.

Are you serious?
First of all, tell me what part of the graffiti actually suggests anything related to any murder, JTR or otherwise, or any criminal activity at all, JTR or otherwise?

Tell me why in all of the other potential JTR communications (I'm talking Dear Boss, Saucy Jacky and From Hell) the writer is so forward about who he is and what he intends to do, when the writer of the GSG is so cryptic?

Also, tell me why the GSG was written in "good schoolboy hand" when the From Hell letter in particular was quite messy and grammatically poor?

Also, show me the proof that Jack the Ripper could even read or write in the first place. The education system in 1888 was nothing like what it is now, half the East End or more couldn't read or write, or atleast they were very poor at it. And yet this "good schoolboy hand" graffiti turns up near the apron and it's taken as gospel from the killer?

No way.

Cheers.
Adam.

[The Good Michael]

First of all, tell me what part of the graffiti actually suggests anything related to any murder, JTR or otherwise, or any criminal activity at all, JTR or otherwise?

I don't believe it tells us anything about that. I think JTR made a personal connection to preexisting graffiti.

Tell me why in all of the other potential JTR communications (I'm talking Dear Boss, Saucy Jacky and From Hell) the writer is so forward about who he is and what he intends to do, when the writer of the GSG is so cryptic?

Duh... because they are unrelated?

Also, tell me why the GSG was written in "good schoolboy hand" when the From Hell letter in particular was quite messy and grammatically poor?

Another 'Duh'.

Also, show me the proof that Jack the Ripper could even read or write in the first place. The education system in 1888 was nothing like what it is now, half the East End or more couldn't read or write, or atleast they were very poor at it. And yet this "good schoolboy hand" graffiti turns up near the apron and it's taken as gospel from the killer?

The point of your argument was the absolute thickness of graffiti. This you've sidestepped, and this you have no proof for. While we're at it, show me proof that JTR couldn't read and write.

Mike

[Hunter]

First of all, tell me what part of the graffiti actually suggests anything related to any murder, JTR or otherwise, or any criminal activity at all, JTR or otherwise?

The Jews had been implicated in the previous murders. In fact, it was such a hot potato that Warren had the graffiti erased for that very reason.

Tell me why in all of the other potential JTR communications (I'm talking Dear Boss, Saucy Jacky and From Hell) the writer is so forward about who he is and what he intends to do, when the writer of the GSG is so cryptic?

The Zodiac killer sent both cryptic and more intentional messages. Go figure the mind of a serial killer.

Also, tell me why the GSG was written in "good schoolboy hand" when the From Hell letter in particular was quite messy and grammatically poor?

John Douglas, the FBI profiler stated that people's handwriting can be different when writing "chalkboard style" as opposed to the more constrained posture of letter writing. He even figured that the graffito would not give a clue to any of the letter writers because of this- from "The Cases That Haunt Us". The inferred dialect of the two writings are quite similar. Of course there's always the possibility that one isn't connected to the other. We just don't know enough to reach a definite conclusion.

Also, show me the proof that Jack the Ripper could even read or write in the first place. The education system in 1888 was nothing like what it is now, half the East End or more couldn't read or write, or at least they were very poor at it. And yet this "good schoolboy hand" graffiti turns up near the apron and it's taken as gospel from the killer?

Show me the proof that he couldn't read or write. I, for one, do not take the graffiti as "gospel from the killer" but because we really don't know, I wouldn't be so presumptuous to dismiss it outright either.