You are Hutchinson and you're in trouble....

[caz]

General reply.....

If Hutchinson wasn't the killer.....then he was taking no risk at all by going to the police.....because he would have known he wouldn't have been spotted coming out of her place or going in and so there couldn't possibly by any evidence against him and any crime to answer to.

On the other hand...if he was the killer.....he would have been taking a risk by going to the police....because he would have had no way of knowing whether or not he had been spotted going in or coming out......and once in police hands and admitting he was at the scene they could have stuck him in a line up and he could have been identified......and as the killer he would have known that that was a possibility and a risk.....

The chance of Hutchinson being the killer is extremely slim to non-existent in my view.....Blotchy is a much better bet when comparing the two.....

Why Hutchinson chose to go to the police is arguable.....I'd go with like countless others who confessed to being JTR he wanted a spot of attention......and had read newspaper reports or heard rumours about a 'foreign looking man'....

And I'd be amazed were the killer of MJK anyone other than JTR.....

I agree with every word, Fleetwood.

I think some people keep forgetting this was 1888. If Hutch had been Jack, he would surely have known that he had a much better chance of avoiding any trouble by avoiding the cops, not boldly entertaining them with his tall stories, just three days after his most horrific mutilation murder to date.

Abberline was not daft, and yet he found no immediate reason to believe that Hutch was crooked, or had in fact been waiting for the coast to clear so he could let rip on this woman who had been trying to tap him for sixpence.

Anything dodgy or violent in Hutch the Ripper's recent past, including any associations with women like Mary Kelly, could so easily have come back to haunt him, once he had volunteered his statement to the cops and courted more publicity by talking to the papers. The cops would have expected him to remain contactable for some time afterwards, in case he was wanted again in his witness capacity. So a disappearing act at that stage, if the cracks had begun to appear in his upright citizen status, would have been no wiser than right after the murder when the cops had never set eyes on him and didn't know him from Adam.

There's no evidence for Jack having an overwhelming desire to put himself through any of this, and no evidence that he would have felt any need at all to do so. It's still possible that he did, I just think it's not very likely in reality.

Love,

Caz
X

[Rubyretro]

In the case of Hutchinson we have a name that of 'Topping' as a likely candidate, who repeated the story many years later to his family, and the family had no reason to doubt his word.

Richard -I hate to tell you this, but it's only fair....
You know that I have always believed Toppy & Hutch were the same person -
but I have now back tracked and am sitting on the fence with a big question mark.

I had not read the thread on Casebook in which David Knott participated, and which the subject was identifying Hutch with Toppy :http://forum.casebook.org/showthread...%27s+signature

I was pointed to this thread by someone who told me that David is a member of the family on the side of Toppy's sister, Jane Knott (to be confirmed).

It has got to sound alarm bells over whether Toppy repeated this story to his family and whether the family have doubts over Toppy being the witness in the JtR case. It has to sow doubts as to whether Reg was really on the radio.

I'm not saying that I've changed my mind (sadly David doesn't give us the info to let us judge for ourselves as whether we agree or not with his opinion), but his plausibility does raise issues.

[richardnunweek]

Hi,
There are two vital witnesses in the millers court investigation.
Hutchinson
Maxwell
It should be remembered that both of them were interviewed by Abberline, and both of them were considered truthful.
In the case of Hutchinson we have a name that of 'Topping' as a likely candidate, who repeated the story many years later to his family, and the family had no reason to doubt his word.
With Maxwell we have her word confirmed twice. not only throughout a lengthy interrogation by the Inspector, who stated 'I could not budge the woman', but also her oath in court, dispite being warned that her evidence did not go with medical reports.
So lets say that both were being truthful.
We have a situation where Kelly was alive and well, at 2am, and also as late as 845am.
We have a well dressed man enter room 13 with Mary, but not seen to leave
We have a report of Kelly leaving her room after 8am, and returning shortly after, we have Maxwells sighting, and her alleged verbal interchange at 815 in Dorset Street.
We have the words spoken by kelly. 'I have the Horrors of drink....., we have the cry of 'Oh Murder' at 4am approx.
We have the melted kettle, the rolled up bedroll, the positioning of her clothes, and boots when she was discovered, and remains of a fire.
We have a description of the last person to have spoken to Mjk.
And we have two witnesses ,independant of each other, having one intresting observation which would suggest that they were being truthful.
At 2am kelly using the phrase' Oh I have lost my hankerchief'
At 815 am we have Maxwell using the term' Her eyes looked queer , as if she was suffering from a heavy cold'
I should state that this apparently was part of the original statement given to Abberline, which I read in 1974, I have never seen it since, neither could I trace it, although it was mentioned in McCormacks 59? publication as 'All muffled up as in cold.'
As hanky, and cold seem to fit nicely, it seems to give credence to both witnesses, as it would be impossible for Maxwell to have made that observation fours hours after her alleged death.
I am a firm believer in the daylight scenerio, and JTR being the last person seen with the last victim ie... Maxwells market porter.
True I am opposing medical opinions of the doctors at the scene,but were not the police also , by having Mrs Maxwell give evidence which was contridictory to their own police doctors.
Regards Richard.

[harry]

The trouble with Lewis testimony,is that she declares the person she saw was in shadow,so while she could be believed as to the general appearance of coat and hat,facial features would be harder to swear to.None the less,Hutchinson couldn't be sure of that.

Not that it matters in my opinion,as I believe the focus of Hutchinson's story is to place a Jewish suspect in Kelly's company,and in her room,and to do that,he would have to have had to be in a position to observe the court.In that respect,Lewis's sighting of him,adds weight to Hutchinson's statement.

[Fleetwood Mac]

General reply.....

If Hutchinson wasn't the killer.....then he was taking no risk at all by going to the police.....because he would have known he wouldn't have been spotted coming out of her place or going in and so there couldn't possibly by any evidence against him and any crime to answer to.

On the other hand...if he was the killer.....he would have been taking a risk by going to the police....because he would have had no way of knowing whether or not he had been spotted going in or coming out......and once in police hands and admitting he was at the scene they could have stuck him in a line up and he could have been identified......and as the killer he would have known that that was a possibility and a risk.....

The chance of Hutchinson being the killer is extremely slim to non-existent in my view.....Blotchy is a much better bet when comparing the two.....

Why Hutchinson chose to go to the police is arguable.....I'd go with like countless others who confessed to being JTR he wanted a spot of attention......and had read newspaper reports or heard rumours about a 'foreign looking man'....

And I'd be amazed were the killer of MJK anyone other than JTR.....

[Marc]

Not quite sure that works because once he knew he'd been spotted hanging around the court by someone who knew him, he'd have been daft to go ahead and commit murder there.

Hi Caz, understand your point, but I'd advocate we're perhaps giving Miller's court 'vicinity' (that's the word I intently used in my post) too much significance in the way of building suspicions about the killer identity.

After all, this area was among the most populated place in the whole East End, and many people could be seen roaming around there, even late at night...or early in the morning, depending on your own definition <G>

As long as Hutch didn't live too far from Miller's court, there was nothing suspect for him to be seen around the place, unless someone who knew his name, also knew he had a distant link with the 'deceased' (MJK) if his own story is to be believed, at least partly.

As long as THIS someone didn't see him entering Miller's court with MJK specifically, he could always made up a story, like the one he served to the Police with this imaginary dialogue :

"If I was near Miller's court the night MJK was killed ?"
"Certainly, she even asked me for some money, but I told her I was broke"
"Oh, by the way, I saw her going with a strange looking fellow just after she had talked to me"

Specifically, would he stops his planned attack because someone he was know of had seen him, may be a few hundred yards away, some time before, and not in company of MJK ?
Perhaps I'm wrong, but I don't think so.
IF Hutch was our killer, previous murders show IMHO an astonishing boldness, coupled with an incredible swiftness, both doesn't seem to bother that much for near possible witnesses.

On the other hand, one thing in his 'Astrakan man' story rang a particular bell
for me :
AM and MJK stop on their way to MJK's room and chat for a few minutes before entering Miller's court (the scene of the lost handkerchief ?)
FWIW, I found this behaviour a bit surprising for a client who has just engaged a prostitute (according to Hutch) in the late hours of a rainy night.
Wouldn't the client be in a hurry of sheltering himself in a drier, if not warmer, place, particularly if this place is a mere stone throw away ?

This behaviour looks very much like AM is waiting for the surroundings to be clear of near onlookers before entering Miller's court with MJK at his arm.
To do this innocently, he pretend to be in a chatting mood, and the poor drunken MJK doesn't take exception for this seemingly strange attitude.

Given that Hutch tells he looked at AM with much insistance, and stayed around, AM's chatting with MJK by the sidewalk sounds curious.
This may not be relevant with Hutch as a possible suspect, but I found this part interesting none the less.

Sorry for the long post

[John Winsett]

Lets assume he saw Lewis when he was lurking around. So what? she apparently didn't know him because if she did she would've said "I saw George Hutchinson hanging around Miller's Court". She didn't so we can leave the speculation that they knew each other to history.

If he did kill MJK what reason would he have for going to the police?
1. To throw them off the track
2. To find out what they knew

If he didn't kill her and was a casual friend/customer, then I could see him coming forward with information if he had a soft spot for her.

Lets throw a really crazy idea out there and say that GH was JtR's accomplice. He goes to the police so he can give them a false description and lead them in the wrong direction.

Either way there was a reason he went to the police. Most likely because he had a soft spot for MJK and he spent 3 days coming to terms on risking arrest for the murder. But my personal speculation says he was throwing them off track. It was just too detailed a description to be credible in my opinion.

[Abby Normal]

*sigh* *laugh* *sigh again*

Not sure why you responded like that-i was asking an honest question/clarification

[claire]

Hi Claire
Well the question is if Lewis lurker testiomony was in the press before GH went to the police. If it was- then OK there is a chance GH knew about the lurker and then placed himself there. if her lurker testimony was not in the press before GH went to the ppolice then we can reasonably figure that GH was the lurker. Don't you think?

*sigh* *laugh* *sigh again*

[Abby Normal]

I'm with Harry -I think that the key is that HE recognised Mrs Lewis (it could be that he recognised someone else -but he came forward after HER statement).

I think that the reason that he went on to commit the crime, despite being seen by, and seeing Mrs Lewis, can stand up if we imagine that :

- she didn't address him if she knew him and didn't appear to see who it was on the moment
- He was in a state of high excitaton and was anticipating the fact that he would at last have the comfort, time & privacy to do anything that he wanted (something that he wouldn't easily find if he sloped off to find a different victim).
- He could have been drinking all day/evening and his judgement was clouded (alcohol abuse could be a factor in this case).
-there were no telephones, and he hung around long enough to know that she hadn't gone to look for a policeman to catch him in the act
-the risk factor added to his adrenalin rush

Then there could be secondary reasons:
-it was rainy & he was tired from walking and wanted to be in that room
-Mary was very young and attractive, unlike the other victims, and that excited him even more than just any old prostitute
-he'd taken terrible risks before and had never been caught
-he'd been seen by witnesses before who either hadn't come forward at all, or had got their descriptions wrong
-Mrs Lewis was someone whom he often passed, that he recognised -maybe even knew her name- but he didn't know if she would know him

He might have got into a panic after the crime when he followed the inquests with a 'special' interest :
- Mrs Lewis came forward and she got his description closer than anyone
- the 'lurker' described by Lewis would be the prime suspect while he stayed 'anonymous'
-he passed Mrs Lewis often in the street and it might easily jog her memory into pointing the finger at him, if she passed him again
-he had been talking to Mary openly in a busy street a short while before the crimes and could have been seen by anyone
-he might have been hassling Mary in previous times, and this could be known to various prostitutes/drinkers in the pubs
-if he DIDN't come forward, was subsequently identified by Mrs Lewis, this could prompt witnesses unknown, of the 2 previous points, to wade in with
their statements
-if he 'ran' than it would look terrible if he had previously told people of his intentions to stay & work in the area
-if it were subsequently discovered that he had made himself scarce after the 'Double Event' say, then it would look worse

Then I can imagine secondary reasons :
-when he remembered how far he'd gone with MJK, the next day, he was lucid & disgusted with himself (like an alcoholic or drug addict ) and resolved to stop.
Coming forward to police was a way for him to make it impossible to commit another crime.
-he decided that, if he continued risk taking, then he would end up reviled and hung -and he didn't want to die
-he had known Mary, liked her on another level, and was sorry that the 'demon' in him had led him to such depravity
-he felt that he was cleverer than the police & crafty enough to give a plausible explanation for talking to Mary in the street, and lurking in Miller's Court
-he thrived on risk and it gave him a buzz to go to the police
-he thrived on public attention
-it gave him another opportunity to put forward a jewish suspect

Only imagination -but I can find logical (to me) reasons for Hutch commiting the crime despite being seen in Miller's Court, and not running but coming forward to the police..

Agree with all except the first 3 bullets of the last paragraph-I don't think GH/JtR stopped because he felt bad or guilty about it.

[Rubyretro]

I'm with Harry -I think that the key is that HE recognised Mrs Lewis (it could be that he recognised someone else -but he came forward after HER statement).

I think that the reason that he went on to commit the crime, despite being seen by, and seeing Mrs Lewis, can stand up if we imagine that :

- she didn't address him if she knew him and didn't appear to see who it was on the moment
- He was in a state of high excitaton and was anticipating the fact that he would at last have the comfort, time & privacy to do anything that he wanted (something that he wouldn't easily find if he sloped off to find a different victim).
- He could have been drinking all day/evening and his judgement was clouded (alcohol abuse could be a factor in this case).
-there were no telephones, and he hung around long enough to know that she hadn't gone to look for a policeman to catch him in the act
-the risk factor added to his adrenalin rush

Then there could be secondary reasons:
-it was rainy & he was tired from walking and wanted to be in that room
-Mary was very young and attractive, unlike the other victims, and that excited him even more than just any old prostitute
-he'd taken terrible risks before and had never been caught
-he'd been seen by witnesses before who either hadn't come forward at all, or had got their descriptions wrong
-Mrs Lewis was someone whom he often passed, that he recognised -maybe even knew her name- but he didn't know if she would know him

He might have got into a panic after the crime when he followed the inquests with a 'special' interest :
- Mrs Lewis came forward and she got his description closer than anyone
- the 'lurker' described by Lewis would be the prime suspect while he stayed 'anonymous'
-he passed Mrs Lewis often in the street and it might easily jog her memory into pointing the finger at him, if she passed him again
-he had been talking to Mary openly in a busy street a short while before the crimes and could have been seen by anyone
-he might have been hassling Mary in previous times, and this could be known to various prostitutes/drinkers in the pubs
-if he DIDN't come forward, was subsequently identified by Mrs Lewis, this could prompt witnesses unknown, of the 2 previous points, to wade in with
their statements
-if he 'ran' than it would look terrible if he had previously told people of his intentions to stay & work in the area
-if it were subsequently discovered that he had made himself scarce after the 'Double Event' say, then it would look worse

Then I can imagine secondary reasons :
-when he remembered how far he'd gone with MJK, the next day, he was lucid & disgusted with himself (like an alcoholic or drug addict ) and resolved to stop.
Coming forward to police was a way for him to make it impossible to commit another crime.
-he decided that, if he continued risk taking, then he would end up reviled and hung -and he didn't want to die
-he had known Mary, liked her on another level, and was sorry that the 'demon' in him had led him to such depravity
-he felt that he was cleverer than the police & crafty enough to give a plausible explanation for talking to Mary in the street, and lurking in Miller's Court
-he thrived on risk and it gave him a buzz to go to the police
-he thrived on public attention
-it gave him another opportunity to put forward a jewish suspect

Only imagination -but I can find logical (to me) reasons for Hutch commiting the crime despite being seen in Miller's Court, and not running but coming forward to the police..

[Abby Normal]

I'm sorry, but how is it a conspiracy theory to suggest that it was possible that he wasn't there? What, apart from his own statement, which even you concede was fabricated as per events of that night, makes you so sure that he *was* there? Or, should I say, what, apart from your own pet theory? There is simply no proof of Hutch's presence on Dorset-street; very tenuous suggestions that your Hutchinson was 'the' Hutchinson, and an astonishing lack of evidence for most of the supposition and postulation here.

I don't really like the tone of 'this site is beginning to be as if it's for the conspiracy theorists of 9/11.' I appreciate that you're hot on Hutch, as it were, but disagreeing or suggesting that he wasn't what he, or you, take him to be really doesn't make me, or anyone else, a 9/11 conspiracy theorist. 'This site' was, and occasionally remains, a place for well-considered, evidence-based argument.

For the record, the only facts I believe are that Lewis saw a man hanging about, and that, subsequent to that becoming a matter for public record, a man calling himself George Hutchinson presented himself to police with an extremely detailed description of a man accompanying a woman whom the entire country had known to have been brutally murdered some three days prior. Now, it's possible he was covering himself. It's possible he ran into Mary and fancied framing someone. It's possible he made the whole thing up. But none of those possibilities are any more 'conspiracy theories' than poor old Toppy the Groom being a wily murderer of several women.

If you want to sling a noose round the man's neck, then so be it, but it's decent to entertain the alternatives.

Hi Claire
Well the question is if Lewis lurker testiomony was in the press before GH went to the police. If it was- then OK there is a chance GH knew about the lurker and then placed himself there. if her lurker testimony was not in the press before GH went to the ppolice then we can reasonably figure that GH was the lurker. Don't you think?

[caz]

- If Hutch was your lurker (aka JtR along your line) he could have gone forward to invent a story instead of taking the next boat to nowhere because he knew that someone who KNEW him had seen him in the vicinity of Miller's court that night.

Hi Marc,

Not quite sure that works because once he knew he'd been spotted hanging around the court by someone who knew him, he'd have been daft to go ahead and commit murder there. Far better to be off like a rocket and find another unfortunate somewhere else. That way, the person who knew him could supply a half decent alibi if he needed one later. "Couldn't have been George, he was definitely in Miller's Court around the time of the latest murder on ..... Street."

I do agree it's possible it wasn't him, but the information before us, in my opinion, shows it was him. That's not a bad or good thing. If it was him, fine. If it wasn't that's also fine. The only advantage to it being him is that, with the eyewitness corroboration, it gives more credence to Hutchinson's statement to Abberline as being more truthful. Whether it is the truth or not it does at least verify part of his statement.

Hi John,

It's 50-50. Whether Hutch was being deliberately dishonest or not, the result of him coming forward at all was that he put himself close to where a woman he claimed to know was later found butchered in a ripper-like manner. In fact, he made himself the last man to see Mary alive apart from a character only he claimed to see entering that room and then would not be able to find again (obviously, if he didn't exist). You have it the wrong way round. What Lewis saw cannot possibly verify Hutch's subsequent claim to have been there. If he did know about her evidence and made his statement on the back of it, it could have been wholly invented, largely the truth or any shade between, without telling us if he was involved in the murder or not. We don't even know what time the killer struck or what time he left. But Hutch would have been dicing with death if he was involved, and risked incriminating himself under questioning.

If on the other hand he didn't know about Lewis's lurker when he came forward (which is at least possible, if the story hadn't hit the papers by then and the latest gossip wasn't reliable or detailed enough), there'd have been no good reason to do so and no damage to limit, whether he was Jack or a one-off killer.

Love,

Caz
X

[harry]

When Hutchinson came forward and made his statement to Aberline,there would have been things he did know,and things he didn't.One thing he would not have been aware of, was whether,if it was someone other than himself at Crossinghams,this other person had already come forward and stated as such,or would in the future.It is a part of his statement that,in my opinion,he had to tell the truth.His whole story is built around it.It was the only way he could place a person in her room.He could not afford,on that point,to be caught telling a lie.

Although much is made of whether Lewis recognised him,might he not have recognised her?He does not mention her in the statement,perhaps deliberately,so as not to be questioned on a possible identification,but I would have thought the police might have been interested.

As to whether Kelly was a ripper killing,I believe it to be so.
I believe he paused after the double event,and decided if he was to obtain full satisfaction,then the streets and the occurance of being interupted there,was not the place to obtain it.So he waited,untill the oportunity of catching Kelly alone in her room presented itself,and who better than an aquaintance would know of her circumstances,and be able to plan accordingly.

[Marc]

Claire,

I reckon doubting Hutch story as a whole, even including him being 'the' (or one among others ?) lurker doesn't make a conspiracy theorist out of
anyone :-)
But on the other hand, we have to admit that few things are 100% sure in the WM...Was MJK even there, to begin with ?
Mostly plausible, but 100% sure ?

Going by the theory (sorry, hypothesis <G>) that Hutch wasn't there but was looking for 'media coverage' for himself still makes him an interesting individual IMHO.

You've got to have some guts or be completely dumb, or perhaps both, to pretend being near the crime scene and the TOD of a murder like MJK's because the police is certainly going to ask you a 'few questions'.

There is an option that I didn't see discussed (doesn't mean it never was, could have missed it) about Hutch 'late' testimony :

- If Hutch was your lurker (aka JtR along your line) he could have gone forward to invent a story instead of taking the next boat to nowhere because he knew that someone who KNEW him had seen him in the vicinity of Miller's court that night.
Not Mrs Long, who didn't know his name (or she would have told it) but someone else, an other 'lurker'.

Not waiting for this other bloke to come forward and say 'BTW, I now remember I saw this good old Hutch near Miller's Court the night etc...'
Hutch would build his Astrakan man story where he admit being a lurker
and nothing more.