Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The Red Handkerchief...

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • The Red Handkerchief...

    ...Where is it?

    According to Hutchinson's official statement:

    She said she had lost her handkerchief. He then pulled his handkerchief, a red one, and gave it to her.
    So where did it go? It's not mentioned at the scene at all, and I think they would look for it among the burnt bits of cloth after what he told them. Even if it burned, material charrs and rarely gets entirely destroyed. They should have been able to find some evidence of it but if they did, it's not mentioned. Maybe another reason not to lend a huge amount of credence to this guy?
    Last edited by Chava; 04-01-2008, 08:42 PM.

  • #2
    Hi Chava,

    Conspiracists will no doubt intimate that police did find it, which is why Abberline believed him! The problem with this scenario is twofold: A) Why no mention of it in the initial report? And B) Why, in light of this corroboratory red reg, did they discard his evidence eventually?

    In all likelihood, the hanky never existed, and Hutchinson had merely "borrowed" that detail from Lawende's Church Pasage description. Even if they did find such an item, it would only confirm the presence of a red handkerchief in the room, not Hutchinson's version of how it got there, meaning it could have belonged to Hutchinson himself.

    All the best,
    Ben
    Last edited by Ben; 04-01-2008, 08:37 PM.

    Comment


    • #3
      Hi All,

      It's been mentioned before, but how did GH determine the handkerchief was red when gaslight (which burns with a greenish hue) renders red objects as either brown or black?

      Regards,

      Simon
      Never believe anything until it has been officially denied.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Simon Wood View Post
        Hi All,

        It's been mentioned before, but how did GH determine the handkerchief was red when gaslight (which burns with a greenish hue) renders red objects as either brown or black?

        Regards,

        Simon
        .....but Simon,Lawende allegedly saw a man with a red handkerchief round his neck in the even more dimly lit Church Passage.
        Best
        Natalie

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Natalie Severn View Post
          .....but Simon,Lawende allegedly saw a man with a red handkerchief round his neck in the even more dimly lit Church Passage.
          Then again, Lawende was Jewish - and Jews, as we know, eat a lot of carrots.







          ...scrub that. I got "rabbits" and "rabbis" muddled up
          Kind regards, Sam Flynn

          "Suche Nullen" (Nietzsche, Götzendämmerung, 1888)

          Comment


          • #6
            Hi Guys,
            I am not so much intrested in the actual colour, of the alleged hankerchief, more so Kellys request for one.
            'Oh I have lost my hankerchief'.
            Two points that spring to mind are, the term 'Oh' [ as in 'Oh murder'] also the obvious use of requiring a hanky,, is to wipe ones nose, or blow it, which could indicate a possible infection.
            The statement made by Maxwell as I have many times on Casebook mentioned, contained the following observation, 'Her eyes looked queer as if suffering from a heavy cold'.[this is apparently quoted from a missing part of her statement, which I read in the early seventies].
            The nearest I have read with similiar details is from McComack in which it is mentioned as the term'All muffed up with cold'.
            The significance of that is obvious.
            If two independant witness ie, Hutchinson/Maxwell observed that the woman described as Mjk .
            a] Reguired the use of a hanky at 2am
            b]looked like she was 'in cold' at 815am.
            Then Mary Kelly had to be killed after Maxwells last sighting, or the woman found in room 13 was not her.
            Regards Richard.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Sam Flynn View Post
              Then again, Lawende was Jewish - and Jews, as we know, eat a lot of carrots.

              Yes and as the Welsh eat a lot of leeks they have started to see green dragons Sam!







              ...scrub that. I got "rabbits" and "rabbis" muddled up
              [hey how did that happen----that was my joke about the dragons!]

              Comment


              • #8
                As I'm half-Jewish, would the hankie have appeared orange to me?

                (Nod to G Marx)

                Cheers,

                Graham
                We are suffering from a plethora of surmise, conjecture and hypothesis. - Sherlock Holmes, The Adventure Of Silver Blaze

                Comment


                • #9
                  Hi,
                  The simple fact we all forget, Victorian eyeset was used to the light that us in modern times cannot comprehend, they were use to gaslight/candlelight, and therefore items of colour, would have been described as seen, and not thought of as suspicious by the media/police during that period.
                  Regards Richard.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Hi Natalie,

                    Red kerchiefs!

                    Gadzooks! Scotland Yard's finest had at last latched onto a clue.

                    Two or more so years after Mitre Square, Lawende was asked to identify Sadler, hauled up for something or other and also on the off chance of being JtR.

                    BUT—

                    Sadler was twenty years older than the man Lawende described seeing in Church Passage. He also had sticky-out ears—something Lawende didn't mention and couldn't have missed.

                    Two red neckerchiefs in thirty months. What an amazing coincidence!

                    Now, I ask you . . .

                    Regards,

                    Simon
                    Never believe anything until it has been officially denied.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      But they dont seem to have bothered much over the red kerchiefs thing.Maybe everyone had one?
                      But sure----it does sound a bit like a pantomime sometimes or a farce.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by richardnunweek View Post
                        'Oh I have lost my hankerchief'.
                        Two points that spring to mind are, the term 'Oh' [ as in 'Oh murder']
                        Hello, Richard. I find your point here interesting, espescially since Maxwell quotes Kelly as saying, "Oh! I do feel so bad! Oh Carry I feel so bad!" But I can't find the "Oh" in the handkerchief quote. The sources I have just say, "I've lost my . . .."

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Yes, but a handkerchief had many uses, and in those days and for a long time afterwards 'handkerchief' also meant 'scarf' or 'neckchief'. A lot of working-class people of both genders wore a handkerchief around their necks. So I wouldn't bet the farm on Kelly having a cold...

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Chava View Post
                            ...Where is it?

                            According to Hutchinson's official statement:



                            So where did it go? It's not mentioned at the scene at all, and I think they would look for it among the burnt bits of cloth after what he told them. Even if it burned, material charrs and rarely gets entirely destroyed. They should have been able to find some evidence of it but if they did, it's not mentioned. Maybe another reason not to lend a huge amount of credence to this guy?
                            Hi Chava! Long time no bump into, here! I, too, have wondered about this little hankie. I wonder if it might have been burned along with some of the items that were burned. Assuming, of course, GH wasn't making it up. Those little kerchiefs were popular. Take care. C.
                            "What our ancestors would really be thinking, if they were alive today, is: "Why is it so dark in here?"" From Pyramids by Sir Terry Pratchett, a British National Treasure.

                            __________________________________

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Hi Celesta!

                              Actually those kerchiefs weren't all that little. I'd say they were at least 18" square and were used for all kinds of things. Even if it were burnt, I'd guess bits of it would be left and could be identified. My guess is that was the detail that sank Hutchinson's witness statement. Someone probably noted that the scarf was missing and pointed that out to Abberline etc. It's a shame, because Hutchinson's statement was as good as a play. You could see it all happen. But he got carried away and the whole thing just fell apart. The sad thing is that he may well have seen Kelly with a man. But he embellished and embellished. He heard everything they said to each other. He saw every detail, every speck on that horseshoe tiepin. By the time he finished he was totally unbelievable IMO.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X