The Red Handkerchief...

[Wickerman]

I favor blotchy slightly over hutch as Mary's killer. If blotchy was her killer and lingered in her room, it explains why hutch was outside waiting for so long-he was waiting for blotchy to leave. And while this, of course, precludes hutch as being a murderer, it means he was at least a liar about Aman,which I Beleive is the most likely scenario.

?
Then why do you think Hutchinson did not describe Kelly's last client as the shabby-looking Blotchy?

[Abby Normal]

?
Then why do you think Hutchinson did not describe Kelly's last client as the shabby-looking Blotchy?

Hello wicky
because she was already in her room with blotchy when hutch came around.

[Wickerman]

Hello wicky
because she was already in her room with blotchy when hutch came around.

Hi Abby.
Ok, so Hutchinson did not follow anybody, yet he knew Blotchy was in the room?
How did he know?

[Fisherman]

Hello wicky
because she was already in her room with blotchy when hutch came around.

Blotchy arrived with Kelly at 11.45, as per Cox. That means that he had been in Kellys room with her for two and a quarter hours as Hutchinson took up his vigil. That sounds like a hefty amount of time if Blotchy was a punter.
Anyway, the scenario begs another question: If Hutchinson stayed outside because Blotchy was with Kelly - how did he know this? He could not see the windows from Dorset Street.
How would he know that he could not just walk right up to the door and knock upon it?
How did he even know that Kelly was awake, at 2 AM?

All the best,
Fisherman

[Wickerman]

Agreed Christer.

To justify his 45 minute(?) vigil he must have known someone was in that room.
If Kelly was by herself then why wait?
If she was entertaining, then how did he know?
If he did know then he either followed the client & Kelly to Millers Court, or he must have walked up the court and stood outside her window, listening.
(which, incidentally he had claimed to do).

"I went up the court and stayed there a couple of minutes, but did not see any light in the house or hear any noise."
Statement to press.

So why not admit to hearing male & female voices from within the room if he did indeed know Blotchy was in there with her?

It doesn't flow...

[Abby Normal]

Hutch could have knocked on her door and told to bugger off or he could have heard through the broken window that she was entertaining.

[Wickerman]

Ok, so why not tell the police that?

If the scenario you envisage is true then what was to be gained by Hutchinson saying what he did?

[Abby Normal]

Ok, so why not tell the police that?

If the scenario you envisage is true then what was to be gained by Hutchinson saying what he did?

Because he has a chance to make more fame and fortune with his Aman story.

[Wickerman]

Because he has a chance to make more fame and fortune with his Aman story.

Are we assuming, for the sake of argument, that Hutchinson approached the police with knowledge of the case from the inquest?

If he is lying then wouldn't it have made more sense to say he met Kelly on the street about 11:30 pm rather than 2:00 am?

He would say he saw Kelly who was tipsy, and she was accompanied by a shabby little man, and he watched them both go up the court together.

This at least would be confirmed by Cox who saw Kelly & Blotchy come up the court together at 11:45.

If Hutchinson was lying altogether then picking a time consistent with Cox's story makes more sense than the Lewis story.

[Bridewell]

If Hutchinson was lying altogether then picking a time consistent with Cox's story makes more sense than the Lewis story.

Good point.

[Sam Flynn]

If Hutchinson was lying altogether then picking a time consistent with Cox's story makes more sense than the Lewis story.

Not necessarily, Jon. Mr Blotchy presumably existed and, if he was known (or became known) to the police, he could potentially have blown Hutchinson's story altogether. Far safer to pick a later time, and invent a very different client, than the shabby chap in Cox's story; a story which was published in the local press on the evening before Hutchinson's statement was made.

[Wickerman]

Not necessarily, Jon. Mr Blotchy presumably existed and, if he was known (or became known) to the police, he could potentially have blown Hutchinson's story altogether.

Hi Gareth.
How could Blotchy have blown Hutchinson's story about witnessing Blotchy enter Millers Court with Kelly, a story also confirmed by Cox?

[Sam Flynn]

How could Blotchy have blown Hutchinson's story about witnessing Blotchy enter Millers Court with Kelly, a story also confirmed by Cox?

Hello Jon

If Hutch had moved his timeline to coincide with Cox/Blotchy, either one of them could have provided details that might have tripped Hutchinson up. Simple little things like, for example, Mrs Cox stating that she popped back and forth to Miller's Court during Hutch's 45 minute vigil; Mr Blotchy turning up at the police station and saying that he didn't leave Kelly until later, or that he left much sooner; and so on.

If Hutch wanted to make a name for himself by concocting a story, it would have made sense to have put as much distance as possible between his made-up story and the known (and published) events.

[Wickerman]

Hello Jon

If Hutch had moved his timeline to coincide with Cox/Blotchy, either one of them could have provided details that might have tripped Hutchinson up. Simple little things like, for example, Mrs Cox stating that she popped back and forth to Miller's Court during Hutch's 45 minute vigil; Mr Blotchy turning up at the police station and saying that he didn't leave Kelly until later, or that he left much sooner; and so on.

If Hutch wanted to make a name for himself by concocting a story, it would have made sense to have put as much distance as possible between his made-up story and the known (and published) events.

Ah, you are thinking of Hutchinson inventing a story quite independent of what transpired at the inquest?

The scenario that has been suggested is that Hutchinson learned the stories told by the other witnesses from the inquest, so he is already familiar with Cox's story before he comes forward.

I don't buy into this, but a similar scenario had been proposed for Sarah Lewis's story, that Hutchinson memorized it, which prompted Hutchinson to come forward.

As a nuisance witness Hutchinson's agenda would be better served by him building on Cox's story, rather than that of Lewis, is what I am saying.

[Ben]

Hi Jon,

If he is lying then wouldn't it have made more sense to say he met Kelly on the street about 11:30 pm rather than 2:00 am?

It depends what he was lying about.

If he was attempting to vindicate his presence at 2:15am after realising that Sarah Lewis had seen him there, he had no choice but to revolve his lie around that time frame, and not 11:30am.

All the best,
Ben