The Red Handkerchief...

[Sam Flynn]

In a statement that might be used in Court it is spot on as "Hutchinson can you lend me....".

He wasn't in court, though. He was describing his and Kelly's conversation to a desk sergeant. It would be more natural for a friend to have said "George, will you lend me sixpence?" or even, "George, can you lend me some money?" (why "sixpence", precisely?). It's not inconceivable that she'd have addressed him as "Hutchinson", but it still comes across as rather mannered.

[GUT]

G'day Sam

He wasn't in court, though. He was describing his and Kelly's conversation to a desk sergeant.

But it was a statement to a desk sergeant that may be relied upon in Court. Any police officer taking a statement should get it right.

I know people who call everyone by their last name.

[Fisherman]

So, different bids on this one too - what comes across as stilted to one poster is something that is totally uncontroversial to another.

Big surprise!

I agree with Gareth that the "then she says", "then he says" thing, quoting what you have been told, seems a common enough manner of describing a conversation, at least among "ordinary" people.

At the end of the day, what we should not loose track of is the more pertinent question whether Abberline would have asked Hutchinson about what Kelly wore, what she said, what state of mind she seemed to be in, etcetera, in order to minimize the risks of getting things wrong.
I say he would have.

The best,
Fisherman

[GUT]

G'day Fisherman

At the end of the day, what we should not loose track of is the more pertinent question whether Abberline would have asked Hutchinson about what Kelly wore, what she said, what state of mind she seemed to be in, etcetera, in order to minimize the risks of getting things wrong.
I say he would have.

I know we'll be back to

So, different bids on this one too - what comes across as stilted to one poster is something that is totally uncontroversial to another.

Big surprise!

But I find it hard to accept that it wasn't asked I would expect even the most junior police officer to ask just that.

[GUT]

I perhaps should add that in conversation I would agree it is an unusual way to phrase it, but in a document drafted by police that may be used in Court, totally normal.

[Sally]

Hi Gut,

I perhaps should add that in conversation I would agree it is an unusual way to phrase it, but in a document drafted by police that may be used in Court, totally normal.

Hmm – but we’re talking about reported speech here – reported speech between friends. I’d have thought Badham’s job was to record in a sworn witness statement what he was told verbatim – because if he didn’t he risked misrepresenting what the witness had actually said?

The difference between the formal ‘Mr Hutchinson’ and the informal ‘George’ alters the context of their reported exchange and creates a contradiction: Hutchinson reports that he knows Kelly ‘very well’ yet at the same time she addresses him as ‘Mr Hutchinson’. Since there was no distinction in class between them, the formal address would only have been appropriate if she didn’t know him.

There is a cultural mismatch here, which is why it sounds odd.

Nonetheless, if his statement to the police was the only source of information from Hutchinson it might be reasonable to let it pass as just one of those things.

Stuff happens.

But, Hutchinson went on to talk to the press shortly after his trip to the police station and he said exactly the same thing:

‘She said: Mr Hutchinson, can you lend me sixpence? I said: I cannot, as I am spent out going down to Romford’ [various press reports]

[My emphasis]

Notice the first person narrative there. This wasn't a statement given in an official context; this was a chat to the press; yet again he uses the formal address in his story. It’s odd – and it doesn’t quite work.

I’m tempted to suggest that it was all part of the script – but I’d better not, or we’ll be here all day…

[GUT]

G'day Sally

The difference between the formal ‘Mr Hutchinson’ and the informal ‘George’ alters the context of their reported exchange and creates a contradiction: Hutchinson reports that he knows Kelly ‘very well’ yet at the same time she addresses him as ‘Mr Hutchinson’. Since there was no distinction in class between them, the formal address would only have been appropriate if she didn’t know him.

Maybe I misunderstood then, but I understood the original to be why say "Hutchinson can you lend me ..." as oposed to "She said to me can you lend me ..."

As now posed ie why use Mr Hutchinson as opposed to say George all I can say is that I remember that one of my Great Grandmothers born in 1878 even called her brother in law Mr so I just took it to be something not uncommon to the period.

[Fisherman]

The difference between the formal ‘Mr Hutchinson’ and the informal ‘George’ alters the context of their reported exchange and creates a contradiction: Hutchinson reports that he knows Kelly ‘very well’ yet at the same time she addresses him as ‘Mr Hutchinson’. Since there was no distinction in class between them, the formal address would only have been appropriate if she didn’t know him.

There is a cultural mismatch here, which is why it sounds odd.

Actually, she never does that, according to Badhams report. She calls him "Hutchinson", not "Mr Hutchinson". A police report takes precedence over a paper article.
The difference between the two wordings is large. Just like you, I think it would be odd if she used "Mr Hutchinson". Therefore, I don´t think she did.

The best,
Fisherman

[Lechmere]

'Mr Hutchinson, can you lend me sixpence?' does sound natural to me - a bit saucy or coquettish. Particularly if Hutchinson was young and niave and she wanted something for nothing.
Having said that I doubt Hutchinson knew her for any length of time not least due to her geographic mobility.

[Fisherman]

Sally:

Hutchinson went on to talk to the press shortly after his trip to the police station and he said exactly the same thing:

She said, "Mr. Hutchinson, can you lend me sixpence?" I said, "I cannot, as I am spent out going down to Romford."

In effect, Sally, Hutchinson did not say the exact same thing to Badham:

'Hutchinson, will you lend me Sixpence', I said, 'I can't , I've spent all my money going down to Romford.'

The wordings differ a lot:
Hutchinson - Mr Hutchinson
will you - can you
I can´t - I cannot
I´ve spent all my money - as I am spent out

You may call me pedantic if you want to, but it is not the exact same phrasings. I think that it is the sort of minor differences that must occur unless you have learnt a text by heart - which he obviously had not.

As for the "Mr Hutchinson", there can be no telling if he said that to the police too, and Badham got it wrong, or if the reporter was the one who missed out - or, of course, if he said "Hutchinson" to the police but "Mr Hutchinson" to the press. That´s anybody´s guess, but just as you think yourself, "Mr Hutchinson" would perhaps be the less expected alternative.

The best,
Fisherman

[Fisherman]

'Mr Hutchinson, can you lend me sixpence?' does sound natural to me - a bit saucy or coquettish. Particularly if Hutchinson was young and niave and she wanted something for nothing.
Having said that I doubt Hutchinson knew her for any length of time not least due to her geographic mobility.

Yes, that´s a viable reflection too. We will never know for sure, but I would advice against interpreting something sinister into the words he (or she) chose, whichever they were.

Again, the much more interesting question is whether the police asked Hutchinson about Kelly´s overall appearance, clothing and demeanor.

The best,
Fisherman

[Sally]

Morning Fish,

You may call me pedantic if you want to, but it is not the exact same phrasings. I think that it is the sort of minor differences that must occur unless you have learnt a text by heart - which he obviously had not.

Nah, I was going to, but you've saved me the trouble

You're right, it is a minor difference, and I'm afraid I think it immaterial to the point in hand. It still isn't the informal 'George' is it?

As for the "Mr Hutchinson", there can be no telling if he said that to the police too, and Badham got it wrong, or if the reporter was the one who missed out - or, of course, if he said "Hutchinson" to the police but "Mr Hutchinson" to the press. That´s anybody´s guess, but just as you think yourself, "Mr Hutchinson" would perhaps be the less expected alternative.

Nope, I think if he said 'Mr' we'd have seen 'Mr'. I was mistaken there, comes of always posting in haste - my own fault.

'Hutchinson' is still a bit peculiar, in my view.

[Sally]

'Mr Hutchinson, can you lend me sixpence?' does sound natural to me - a bit saucy or coquettish. Particularly if Hutchinson was young and niave and she wanted something for nothing.
Having said that I doubt Hutchinson knew her for any length of time not least due to her geographic mobility.

Oh yeah, that works, Ed.

Sorry! 'Mr Lechmere' was what I meant to say

[Abby Normal]

Hi Gut,



Hmm – but we’re talking about reported speech here – reported speech between friends. I’d have thought Badham’s job was to record in a sworn witness statement what he was told verbatim – because if he didn’t he risked misrepresenting what the witness had actually said?

The difference between the formal ‘Mr Hutchinson’ and the informal ‘George’ alters the context of their reported exchange and creates a contradiction: Hutchinson reports that he knows Kelly ‘very well’ yet at the same time she addresses him as ‘Mr Hutchinson’. Since there was no distinction in class between them, the formal address would only have been appropriate if she didn’t know him.

There is a cultural mismatch here, which is why it sounds odd.

Nonetheless, if his statement to the police was the only source of information from Hutchinson it might be reasonable to let it pass as just one of those things.

Stuff happens.

But, Hutchinson went on to talk to the press shortly after his trip to the police station and he said exactly the same thing:



[My emphasis]

Notice the first person narrative there. This wasn't a statement given in an official context; this was a chat to the press; yet again he uses the formal address in his story. It’s odd – and it doesn’t quite work.

I’m tempted to suggest that it was all part of the script – but I’d better not, or we’ll be here all day…

Hi Sally
No please suggest away!!! That was the basic point I was trying to make and have made several times in the past.

Hutches statement sounds like a script and a well rehearsed one at that.
Complete with interesting details, dialogue, action and intrigue.

No other witness description comes anywhere close.

[Ben]

This being the case, it is quite possible ,that Mrs Cox lied about seeing Kelly at 1145 pm ..for the simple reason , she [ Kelly] then was not wearing the same outfit

Nah, Rich.

There is no inconsistency between Cox and Prater with regard to Kelly's outfit, and the former agrees with the description offered by Maxwell, for what it's worth. Don't worry about the tale told by the alleged niece of Mary Cox either - it's complete nonsense, and Cox herself had nothing to do with it.

All the best,
Ben