Romford to Millers court

[lynn cates]

police pay

Hello Fish and Phil. Is it possible that you are discussing two sides of the same coin? Is there not a story extant that Reg mentioned his father as being paid a sum by the police? Would that not jibe with Phil's conjecture about Hutch?

Cheers.
LC

[Fisherman]

Phil writes:

"Fair comment.. but I have to say this, on balance, Joseph Sickert blotted his copybook bigtime with retractions and explanations, "cry wolf" comes to mind. I am sorry, but even with the best will in the world, and Melvin Fairclough's OWN distancing from the man and his stories...

I therefore do think the thoughts I wrote, above, are more plausible, on fair balance."

That is your wiew, to which you are entitled. But it does not in the slightest way offer an explanation to the baffling fact that "your" Hutch, just by chance, happened to write his signature in the same fashion as Topping, I´m afraid. Such things may happen in fiction stories, but in real life, they are rarer than hen´s teeth.
Also, I think you need to recognize the fact that it would have been Fairclough that sought out Reg, and not the other way around. In your opinion, it seems that this disqualifies whatever things Reg may have said. Many theorists have chosen to walk down that lane, but interestingly, they have chosen to pick pieces from Reg´s testimony that suit their reasoning. Therefore, some accept that Hutch was rarely, if ever out of work (tending to strengthen the possibility that he was NOT the witness) but disqualifying that Reg said that his father had spoken of being that exact witness. So it´s often a "You can´t trust Fairclough at times, but at other occasions he is a very useful source" affair.

The signature comparison is the only tangible evidence we have, and that speaks a clear language tht does not swear against Reg´s words. The other way around? Well, then it would seem that Reg cooked up a story on Faircloughs demand, and waddoyouknow - it turns out that the signatures actually manage to corroborate a false story. How´s that for a coincidence...?

The best,
Fisherman

[dixon9]

still find it strange that after that walk and obviously walking around romford,Hutch decides to wait around watching MJK room for 45minutes in the rain.I would have been looking for somewhere to get my head down,or maybe he was going to ask MJK to let him put his head down in millers court(when her man left)But then why didn't he ask when she asked for sixpence?

Dixon9
still learning

[harry]

Yes Fisherman,It would be possible for a specially trained person of a special forces unit to do the Romford to Whitechapel distance with ease,,but that would be a fit and trim young person,on a reasonably good balanced diet.I can also assure you that there were also those,the majority,who were buggered after the first five mile march carrying little equipment.Now to which of these does Hutchinson compare.

Of course the challenges of lying are unproven,as are the beliefs of those who declare Hutchinson truthful.There is nothing that substanciates a trip to Romford,nothing that proves he saw Kelly in Commercial street,nothing but his word (Hutchinson)that a Jewish looking person met her and accompanied her to Miller's Court.

Hutchinson was potentially the only witness that could get a man hung for Kelly's murder.Mere belief in his truthfulness falls far short of what would be expected in court,but that is all there is,belief.I would like to be shown proof.

[Fisherman]

Dixon9 writes:

"so Hutch walked neigh on the same distance as a marathon."

Yes - with the difference that a Marathon runner takes care of the distance in a little more than two hours, whereas Hutch would have had perhaps some 16-17 hours to accomplish it. Using an average walking pace of 3,5 mph or around 5 km/h, that would have left him 8-9 hours in Romford.

The best,
Fisherman

[Phil Carter]

Hello Fisherman,

Fair comment.. but I have to say this, on balance, Joseph Sickert blotted his copybook bigtime with retractions and explanations, "cry wolf" comes to mind. I am sorry, but even with the best will in the world, and Melvin Fairclough's OWN distancing from the man and his stories...

I therefore do think the thoughts I wrote, above, are more plausible, on fair balance.

best wishes

Phil

[dixon9]

thanks fisherman,so Hutch walked neigh on the same distance as a marathon.


Dixon9
still learning

[Fisherman]

Phil writes:

"Is it at all feasable that George Hutchinson was an undercover detective, that it wasn't his real name, that because of this it was Abberline only who "took" his statement, (or maybe even concocted it with him), that being the reason that the last man to supposedly see MJK alive was beyond reproach?
Nobody was supposed to know what the CID were up to. If this man WAS seen by others, someone would have to explain away his prescence...and what is more, would explain why nobody has ever referenced to him in their statements, before or after the murder, as someone MJK knew? It would also explain why we can't find him, before or since, and nobody ever hears from the man again.

That, imho, is far more plausible than being Reg's Dad.. because I am VERY doubtful of anything connected to a Joseph Sickert story!"

If he WAS an undercover detective, using an alias, he for some reason managed to come up with a signature that tallies more or less completely with that of Topping Hutchinson. Don´t you find that a tad strange, Phil?

The best,
Fisherman

[Fisherman]

Dixon asks:

"i wonder if he walked to romford and back again on that same day/evening"

Apparantly, yes - he stated that he was in Romford on Thursday and then returned at about 2 AM on Friday morning. His departure time on Thursday is something we lack, just as we lack the time he arrived in Romford. Nor do we know the exact time he set out for London again. But he did the treck in one day, by appearances.

The best,
Fisherman

[Phil Carter]

Hello Richard,

Due to the ever present dangling carrot of the Special Branch Ledgers...

Is it at all feasable that George Hutchinson was an undercover detective, that it wasn't his real name, that because of this it was Abberline only who "took" his statement, (or maybe even concocted it with him), that being the reason that the last man to supposedly see MJK alive was beyond reproach?
Nobody was supposed to know what the CID were up to. If this man WAS seen by others, someone would have to explain away his prescence...and what is more, would explain why nobody has ever referenced to him in their statements, before or after the murder, as someone MJK knew? It would also explain why we can't find him, before or since, and nobody ever hears from the man again.

That, imho, is far more plausible than being Reg's Dad.. because I am VERY doubtful of anything connected to a Joseph Sickert story!

best wishes

Phil

[richardnunweek]

Hi,
I keep coming back to 'Will the real Hutchinson step forward'?
And its a absolute fact is it not, that only one person has ever claimed knowledge of the identity of that person , naming his own father Topping'.
So in 122 years we have only one identification, so why on earth are we still in doubt.
I have frustrated myself countless times on Casebook explaining about a radio broadcast, which only me appeared to have heard[ sorry Bob], I also mentioned the significance of the Wheeling report[ sorry Bob], but many still see GWTH, as a non starter, and maintain that GH was a illusive character, not identified as yet , that may have been a pimp, a mugger, a stalker, and wait for it a murderer, or at the very least a compulsive liar.
But wait for it .... If we are talking about Regs dad , do we still see HIM as any of the above characters?.
Regards Richard.

[dixon9]

i wonder if he walked to romford and back again on that same day/evening.lol

dixon9
still learning

[Fisherman]

Harry!

When I did my military service, I did it in close company with paratroopers who marched 160 kilometres in rough terrain in four days, carrying nigh on 80 pounds on their backs, and who returned to our quarters, some of them with sore feet but most of them fit as a fiddle. Now, THAT is what I would call remarkable men! A guy who manages London - Romford - London in a day wearing an overcoat plays in another league methinks. Of course, it may have made him somewhat fatigue, but where does it say that he was not? Also, just like there are thin arguments, there are thin overcoats too.

You also write that almost everything of Hutch´s statement can be challenged as to it´s truthfulness, but such challenges are left unproven in each and every instance, I´m afraid - there is no question that there are somewhat strange elements incorporated in his story, but I for one would not say that going down to Romford is such an element. We know full well that Eastenders made long walks to find the odd job; it was a practice brought about by the harsh monetary conditions under which they lived.

So why would we place a perfectly reasonable claim, historically corroborated by lots and lots of similar stories, near the head of a sort of list of things we find utterly hard to believe? To me, such a thing speaks much more of a lack of substance than of any tenable suspicion.

There is nothing wrong in questioning the veracity of people´s testimonies in the Ripper case - for sure, somebody probably WAS using a false facade to obscure his real intentions. But do we really need to read something sinister into Hutchinson doing what leagues of other Eastenders did - find job wherever they could?

Finally, if Hutch had been the criminal some hold him to be, then why would he speak of going down to Romford over the day? He must have had a purpose for doing so - looking for a job, seeing relatives, buying something that was only available there - all of these things carrying the common denominator that he must have contacted somebody in Romford to go through with his purpose. And in such a case, there would in all probability have been people who could have corroborated his story, if asked by the police. He also stated that he spent his money going to Romford, and there we have the second category of corroborating witnesses - somebody would have been on the receiving end of Hutch´s money.

Surely there must have been other stories to tell, if you needed an alibi for the Thursday that would stand up without any neccessary corroboration. And - not least - why on earth would he need an alibi for that Thursday in the first place?

The best,
Fisherman

[Rubyretro]

Exactly, Garry !

[harry]

The rate of progress would depend on what was being carried,and the type of terrain covered.From the brief description given by Lewis Hutchinson was at least wearing an overcoat,which in itself means a few pounds to tote,and that might appear minimal to some,but believe me would make an impression even after the first mile,and have a very detremental affect on awareness after twelve or thirteen.Yet Hutchinson's Physical well being seems to have suffered not at all.Remarkable man!
The rules for the Victoria home may have stated closure at 1AM,but it's never been shown how these rules could be enforced,so that entry could not be effected after that time,or unseen exit not been achieved.
Almost everything of Hutchinson's statement can be challenged as to its truthfullness,and the ,"Iwas at Romford",is near the head of the list.