Joran Van der Hutchinson?

[harry]

The only person ,that by information,might have been in the room was the midnight visitor,and it's hard to imagine that Hutchinson would have been there all that time without being seen before 2.30am.
I personnly am not in favour of a lookout for the ripper.I think the Ripper acted alone,and that pipeman had no relationship with BS.
But it's not impossible.

[packers stem]

If It wasn't Hutchinson standing outside Crossingham's,what are the chances of it being Tumblety,or Druit,or Ostrog or in fact any of the named suspects.Or do we wipe that man off as having any involvement in Kelly's death,and on what evidence?
For instance if it was Druit,why was he there alone,and how did he end up in Kelly's room?Same would apply to every other suspect.
So think about the situation minus Hutchinson.

Hi Harry
How about a lookout for the real murderer already in the room?
Similar to pipeman in the scwartz account perhaps?

[harry]

If It wasn't Hutchinson standing outside Crossingham's,what are the chances of it being Tumblety,or Druit,or Ostrog or in fact any of the named suspects.Or do we wipe that man off as having any involvement in Kelly's death,and on what evidence?
For instance if it was Druit,why was he there alone,and how did he end up in Kelly's room?Same would apply to every other suspect.
So think about the situation minus Hutchinson.

[packers stem]

Hi,
I find it incredible how many members of Casebook , reject two important witnesses, ie Hutchinson /Maxwell, as being most likely mistaken, or in the formers case a liar.
Hutchinson reported to the police on the monday, he would never had gone to the police unless he was absolutely certain he had the right morning, knowing full well that on thursday he walked from Romford.
As for Maxwell , described as a level headed woman ,of good character, she gave her statement on the 9th, just hours after her sighting, her story was verified.
Was she mistaken?, she knew Barnett , she knew they were a couple, kelly was distinctive looking, and she had the weekend to realise any mistake, I would say the murder would have been the talking point of Dorset street.
So if both these witnesses were being honest, what have we.?
Astracan was not her killer, and she met her death around 9am.
Its that simple isnt it?

Hi Richard
I totally agree with you about Maxwell.The reason most people will dismiss her is purely down to what type of killer they think they're looking for.
I go a step further than yourself in that i also believe the medical evidence (including the digestion of the 'fish and potatoes') which suggests,unless that was the victims breakfast ,that she was killed somewhere between 4 and 6.So i'm only left with 1 option.
I do find it slightly annoying that the same people who dismiss Maxwell will quite happily accept far less convincing testimony as ascertained fact.Think Cox,Sarah Lewis,Elizabeth Long,Lawende.None of these cause conflict issues so they've become hard facts.
Incidentally i believe Schwartz is star witness number 2 and no-one likes him either

[Rubyretro]

Richard : contemporary sketches (based on descriptions by people that knew her), and written descriptions concur that this young girl was a 'looker' , about 5'7"" with red hair (dyed ? strawberry blonde ?). She was big boned-which was described as 'Stout'.

I am basing the last bit of my ideas on seeing the photos of the body -she has long slender limbs...she may have had a voluptuous body (there was not much left of it) which was described as 'stout' compared to tiny, skinny, East End women...but she visibly wasn't "dumpy".

All I know about the clothes is that Mrs Maxwell said that she hadn't seen them before. I think that she describes a reddish shawl..and a different shade of red to the shawl in the room ( I haven't re-checked this, bit I remember,having done so in the past, that it proved nothing°.

All in all, the description of the Mary supplied by Maxwell did not correspond
to Mary Kelly.

I am as certain as you that Maxwell was sincere with the right date -but described the wrong woman (whom she didn't really even know).

[Fisherman]

I´m sorry if I came across as being rude, Ruby. And I´m glad that you weigh arguments by their own merits. That´s how it should be.

We shall see where that takes us in the future!

The best,
Fisherman

[Rubyretro]

Ruby, there are tasks that you don´t want to spend too much effort on, since you know the outcome in advance

I may perhaps yet sway others in times to come - who knows?

I think this is totally wrong (and after all, I can speak for myself). I always read and consider other people's arguments on their merits, and therefore I agree with you, Claire, and Mike sometimes, and not necessarily with Ben or Gary : each argument on it's merits.

I can't deny that, globally, I still think that Hutch was JtR.

I gave reasons as to why I think that Hutch wouldn't have mixed up the days
-they are logical to me , and not " he wouldn't have gotten the dates wrong...end of story".

[richardnunweek]

Hello Rubyretro,
I Wonder how many 25 year old women of striking hair , actually lived in Millers court at the time.?
Fiona grandfather recalled her as pretty, and with very distinctive hair.
Walter Dew described her as standing out amongst others of her kind.
Are we saying that despite all this , and one should add there is a little matter of identifying her clothes correctly, otherwise the police would never had her waste time at the inquest, especially as it went against their own police doctors reports.
And to top it all she swore on oath, despite being warned to think carefully what she was about to say.
The wrong day, her story was verified.
An attention seeker... this womans character was never an issue.
I have never doubted her honesty , and level headedness and she ticks all the right boxes for me.
Regards Richard.

[Fisherman]

Ruby, I don´t have any problems realizing that most people would get the dates right in cases like these. What I am warning against, though, is the attitude "He would not have gotten the dates wrong - end of story" you displayed in your earlier post.
We know very little of George Hutchinson. He could have had as story of arriving at the wrong day to job interwiews, family gatherings etc - we just don´t know. In that respect, he is nothing but a person prone to make the occasional mistake, just like you and me.

"If you can convince me ..."

Ruby, there are tasks that you don´t want to spend too much effort on, since you know the outcome in advance

I may perhaps yet sway others in times to come - who knows?

The best,
Fisherman

[Rubyretro]

Ruby:

"I only said that he wouldn't forget when he did it"

Why? Because YOU would not forget it, doing the same? Most of us seem to agree that Maxwell erred about the day she saw Kelly. And Maxwell´s distance from the murder was timewise shorter than Hutchinsons.

I do not think that we may allow ourselves to detract George Hutchinson from the potential group of people who could be wrong on a date. Total dogmatism never had anything good to say about those who practice it.

The best,
Fisherman

It is a long hike, and it was in bad weather. I'm not disputing that a young fit man could do it, and I think that people at this date were used to walking long distances -however, they were only human, and they would be knackered afterwards. I think that they would remember it. This was a man with nearly no money, looking for a job, so I think that he would have in mind that the weekend was coming and what bearing that woud have on his job hunting. Furthermore, the day (early hours)that Mary was killed was the day of the Lord Mayor's show -which would surely help him situate the date as well. It is not logical that he made a mistake on when he watched Kelly's room
-and, for me, it is confirmed by Mrs Lewis's statement.

Neither is it logical that Mrs Maxwell would make a mistake on the date (Lord Mayor's Show). I believe that she was honest, but saw a different Mary Kelly.
Her description of the woman she saw does not accord with the descriptions that we have of 'our' Mary Kelly -a very common irish name, and people seemed to have used alot of aliases at the time.

I'm certainly not 'dogmatic' because I have changed my mind about many things since being on Casebook (the Toppy/Hutch debate being one of them).
If you can convince me that it is even probable that Hutch got the day wrong, or likely that it was just a 'coincidence' that his statement was bourne out by Mrs Lewis's, or some concrete evidence that the Police had to not to consider him a suspect -above and beyond 'they would have...', 'they must have..' *(taking into consideration that the Police made mistakes about witness/suspects in the past, and often enough that they now have a tendancy to look on all volunteer witnesses as potential suspects), then I will chuck him out as my favourite Suspect..

At the end of the day, I am not defending a book , nor planning to, and it makes not one iota of difference to me whether Hutch 'did it' or not -but reading around the Case and debating on Casebook STILL convinces me that
he is the best Suspect that we have.

* without even going into the conjecture on profiling, his lying, where he lived, the implications of possible former jobs and and the murders stopping after MJK etc etc.....

[Fisherman]

Richard:

"Hutchinson reported to the police on the monday, he would never had gone to the police unless he was absolutely certain he had the right morning, knowing full well that on thursday he walked from Romford."

If he was an honest man, Richard, he would never have gone to the police unless he BELIEVED that he walked from Romford on Thursday night. History tells us that people sometimes get these things wrong. We must allow for that happening in Hutchinsons case too, I´m afraid.

The best,
Fisherman

[richardnunweek]

Hi,
I find it incredible how many members of Casebook , reject two important witnesses, ie Hutchinson /Maxwell, as being most likely mistaken, or in the formers case a liar.
Hutchinson reported to the police on the monday, he would never had gone to the police unless he was absolutely certain he had the right morning, knowing full well that on thursday he walked from Romford.
As for Maxwell , described as a level headed woman ,of good character, she gave her statement on the 9th, just hours after her sighting, her story was verified.
Was she mistaken?, she knew Barnett , she knew they were a couple, kelly was distinctive looking, and she had the weekend to realise any mistake, I would say the murder would have been the talking point of Dorset street.
So if both these witnesses were being honest, what have we.?
Astracan was not her killer, and she met her death around 9am.
Its that simple isnt it?

[Fisherman]

Ruby:

"I only said that he wouldn't forget when he did it"

Why? Because YOU would not forget it, doing the same? Most of us seem to agree that Maxwell erred about the day she saw Kelly. And Maxwell´s distance from the murder was timewise shorter than Hutchinsons.

I do not think that we may allow ourselves to detract George Hutchinson from the potential group of people who could be wrong on a date. Total dogmatism never had anything good to say about those who practice it.

The best,
Fisherman

[Rubyretro]

Ruby,

I just got back from Kyrgyzstan yesterday where I walked around the city of Bishkek for 5 days or so, averaging about 18km of walking each day to various parts of the city. I am neither 22, nor am I a laborer or the son of a plumber. If I can walk that much, George could have skipped it.

Cheers,

Mike

I never said otherwise..I only said that he wouldn't forget when he did it

[harry]

Mike,
But did you walk a distance of 25 miles there and back from Kyrgyzstan.
Now we do not know the distance tramped by Hutchinson around Romford,or around whitechapel on his return,but at a slow rate of perhaps 3 kilometres an hour,one might think that Hutchinson covered a fair piece of ground in excess of the milage there and back.