The Red Handkerchief...

[GUT]

Not by some of the stuff I've read written about our Dear Friend Jacky.

In fact it seems to some that the less evidence the stronger the suspicion.

[Paddy]

Jon

Memoirs are not a reliable source

Yes John I do agree they do puff them up a bit, however he gave a normal description of this man and a place were they watched him. I dont know if that bit is puffed up.
Of course the "We all strongly suspected this man" could have been.

Pat....................

[Wickerman]

Not by some of the stuff I've read written about our Dear Friend Jacky.

In fact it seems to some that the less evidence the stronger the suspicion.

If you recall, Charles Warren wrote to the Home Office on 19th Sept. about three suspects. These were Isenschmid, Puckeridge and one unknown male tenant of a local brothel.
Isenschmid was eventually cleared, the City police seem to have found evidence that formed an alibi for Puckeridge, and we hear nothing more of this unknown male, but again, there were many suspicions formed from local gossip.
From the candidacy of Isenschmid & Puckeridge it seems clear the police had formed an opinion of what type of person the Whitechapel murderer must be, a lunatic.
As for the unknown male, or later, the third medical student, these accusations are the result of gossip, so not true suspects in the eyes of the law.

If the police had cause to suspect a person, and that person was identified, then they eliminated him from their enquiries. This was how the investigation progressed, until finally the murders faded and the police were left with a blank suspect sheet, or at least we have no confirmation of any viable suspects during the murders who were named yet never cleared.

[Wickerman]

Memoirs are not a reliable source

Yes John I do agree they do puff them up a bit, however he gave a normal description of this man and a place were they watched him. I dont know if that bit is puffed up.
Of course the "We all strongly suspected this man" could have been.

Pat....................

Its at times like this when I wish I could recall the source of one quote. One officer remembered that there were hundreds of suspects followed, investigated, detained and eliminated.
Was this one (your quote) just one in a hundred?

[Paddy]

Was this one (your quote) just one in a hundred?
I am sure it was Jon ! I dont say its the answer, but just put it here for consideration.
I do think that the police formed an opinion though, that Jack could have been young, foreign possibly Jewish and insane. At least Swanson did and he was collating all witness statements.

Pat............................

[Wickerman]

I do think that the police formed an opinion though, ...

Hi Pat.
Then may I ask, if "the police" (collectively) did form an opinion, how is it that different police officials formed a different opinion?

....that Jack could have been young, foreign possibly Jewish and insane. At least Swanson did and he was collating all witness statements.

You think Swanson did?
I took it that Swason was one of the few who never voiced an opinion.

[Michael W Richards]

Not by some of the stuff I've read written about our Dear Friend Jacky.

In fact it seems to some that the less evidence the stronger the suspicion.

The frustrating truth GUT. Hard to swallow at times too.

Cheers mate

[pinkmoon]

Hutchinson behaved in a very strange way the day Kelly was murdered there is no doubt about that.To hang round for so long to observe who she was with and then to give such a fanciful description of a Jewish man in her company makes you wonder why especially when you consider she was brutally murderd very soon after he hung round.To what level was he investigated by the police?did they seriously think he was involved in her murder?could he have been a lookout for the murderer?could he have been hanging round to rob Kelly's clients?could he have been a pimp?

[Paddy]

Wickerman

Hi Pat.
Then may I ask, if "the police" (collectively) did form an opinion, how is it that different police officials formed a different opinion?

Because of all the upheaval with CID emerging and bosses changing, Officers had devided loyalties. One can imagine there was difficulty and resentment when the double event brought in the city chaps which also continued with Mary Kellys death.

Jacks possible identity would not have been formed until late in the case, reviewed in hindsight. Its quite possible that the top chaps were then told to muddy the waters regarding Jacks possible identity.
When it was said that the case went high up, I believe this was political and could have incited racial unrest and anti royalty feelings. I dont think they meant Jack was high up, just that it involved the home office and the Queen etc.
People like Cox or Sagar who did not name the suspect, were very careful what they said and didn't give dates.

Yes you are right Swanson appears very objective, but the majority of the descriptions of suspects he wrote down certainly fitted a young, Jewish, beardless, moustached man, who was insane (bar Pipe man and Mr Blotchy)

Pat.....................................

[Sam Flynn]

It was Richard, though, who claimed to have identified "the" Hutchinson family.

If you mean the Hutchinsons whose ancestor's signature matched closely that of Astrakhan-witness Hutchinson, then Richard certainly did.

Om, Toppy, Toppy! You know it makes sense, Ben

[Wickerman]

Hutchinson behaved in a very strange way the day Kelly was murdered there is no doubt about that.

I think it is necessary to remember that we are passing judgement on a time and place that is totally alien to most of us. People, men and women, did loiter around in doorways and on street corners when they had nothing else to do.
Hutchinson had nowhere to go, he allegedly had no money, no place to sleep, so what else was more important to him at this moment in time?

...... and then to give such a fanciful description of a Jewish man in her company

Well, we know the description is not altogether fanciful, at least one person did fit the description and that was Joseph Isaacs, who did live down the street from Kelly.
So long as we can determine from external sources that the description did fit one local man it cannot be said to be fanciful, and it could have fit others.

... especially when you consider she was brutally murderd very soon after he hung round.

True, but Eddowes was murdered very soon after Lawende & Co. left. Chapman was murdered around the time Cadosch left. Stride was murdered just after Schwartz left.
We can either use or ignore a coincidence as is our preference.

To what level was he investigated by the police?did they seriously think he was involved in her murder?could he have been a lookout for the murderer?could he have been hanging round to rob Kelly's clients?could he have been a pimp?

He could have been any of those things, but Abberline was not a rookie cop, he knew the local pimps, the local muggers, he most certainly had 'noses' to inform him of 'the word on the street' if Hutchinson had any form in that line of work.
Sitting face to face with a witness is the great advantage that Abberline had over us, all we have is a preliminary statement and a news report, Abberline had much more.

At the end of the day yes, the police could have made a mistake. Plenty of mistakes were made by police in the Yorkshire Ripper case, it could have also happened in the Whitechapel murder case.

We should really try to form our opinions based on what we know, and to argue that the police were wrong is merely modern-day guesswork.
It is far too easy to claim that Hutchinson is a good suspect because the police made a mistake. We have no basis for that conclusion.

[pinkmoon]

I think it is necessary to remember that we are passing judgement on a time and place that is totally alien to most of us. People, men and women, did loiter around in doorways and on street corners when they had nothing else to do.
Hutchinson had nowhere to go, he allegedly had no money, no place to sleep, so what else was more important to him at this moment in time?



Well, we know the description is not altogether fanciful, at least one person did fit the description and that was Joseph Isaacs, who did live down the street from Kelly.
So long as we can determine from external sources that the description did fit one local man it cannot be said to be fanciful, and it could have fit others.




True, but Eddowes was murdered very soon after Lawende & Co. left. Chapman was murdered around the time Cadosch left. Stride was murdered just after Schwartz left.
We can either use or ignore a coincidence as is our preference.



He could have been any of those things, but Abberline was not a rookie cop, he knew the local pimps, the local muggers, he most certainly had 'noses' to inform him of 'the word on the street' if Hutchinson had any form in that line of work.
Sitting face to face with a witness is the great advantage that Abberline had over us, all we have is a preliminary statement and a news report, Abberline had much more.

At the end of the day yes, the police could have made a mistake. Plenty of mistakes were made by police in the Yorkshire Ripper case, it could have also happened in the Whitechapel murder case.

We should really try to form our opinions based on what we know, and to argue that the police were wrong is merely modern-day guesswork.
It is far too easy to claim that Hutchinson is a good suspect because the police made a mistake. We have no basis for that conclusion.

Hi Jon,nice reply thank you.

[Wickerman]

[I][B].... One can imagine there was difficulty and resentment when the double event brought in the city chaps which also continued with Mary Kellys death.

Interesting that you should think that. In truth, the City police were assisting the Met. as early as the Nichols/Chapman murders. They did work together throughout the complete Whitechapel murder case.

Its quite possible that the top chaps were then told to muddy the waters regarding Jacks possible identity.

Muddy the waters for whom?

[Bridewell]

The Supposedly Suspect Hutchinson

It is far too easy to claim that Hutchinson is a good suspect because the police made a mistake. We have no basis for that conclusion.

Absolutely, Jon. A witness gives a detailed description and Abberline, who saw him face to face and interrogated him, formed the opinion that he was telling the truth. Self-appointed modern-day experts have decided that the street lighting was so poor that such a description could not be believed. This in the face of the inconvenient fact that an experienced detective, who knew the area and its lighting better than we can ever do, and who interrogated the witness, did believe it.

[Bridewell]

Its quite possible that the top chaps were then told to muddy the waters regarding Jacks possible identity.

Oh joy. Another conspiracy theory.