A theory on GH for JtR

[Fisherman]

Abby Normal:

"Its a lot more subtle than "the jews did it", which you suggested, isn't it?"

That´s just the problem, Abby - we don´t know if it is subtle. Or dimwitted. Do we? For all we know it could be a lot less subtle that "The jews did it", depending on what it means. Which brings us back to the guessing again ...

The best,
Fisherman

[Scott Nelson]

Then why keep discussing it?

[Fisherman]

Because I have one wiew and Abby another. Unless you noticed, Scott, that is the normal fertilizer for discussions

If you can contribute a third wiew, by all means join in!

The best,
Fisherman

[Rubyretro]

Well personally I don't think JtR wrote the GSG.

I don't think that he had a light with him, and it must have been pitch black inside that doorway.

I can't see him scrabbling about with a bit of chalk, nor being a habitual writer
(I can't imagine him labouriously spelling out words or forming letters).

I CAN imagine that he wanted to get Kate's apron off his person very quickly
(unlike a kidney, there could be no doubt from where it came). So, I think that he just chucked it in the doorway sharpish.

Still, if it was GH the culprit, then it was on the way between Mitre Square and the Victoria Home. The building was one that GH would know, being a
stone's throw from his lodgings. It was a building mainly inhabited by Jews -
graffitti or not, it would be a pretty incendary thing for the apron bit to be found there.

It is possible that he had written the graffitti another time -or it's possible that he had seen it there. It's also possible that it was just the building that he targetted and not the graffitti : Who knows ?

Whatever it 'mean't' is not as important as all that -it had the words 'Juwes' and 'blame' in the sentence..that was provocative enough.

[Fleetwood Mac]

I have a theory on George Hutchinson for being JtR. Its more of a “connect the dots” idea then bringing up anything new. Two things jumped out at me right from the start about GH and these two things taken together really put up the red flag about him for me initially. First, is the highly improbable detailed description of A-man along with fact he said he was Jewish looking. Secondly, is his admission of standing, waiting outside Millers Court the night of MK’s murder.

Later, upon learning about other facts of the case, which I will get into as I explain what I think might have happened, I began to think of the coincidences and how they might be connected.
Let me just say, that I don’t think that GH was definitely JtR, but that he, along with a handful of other candidates, makes a viable suspect. If he was JtR, then my idea goes like this:

JtR kills his first victims (Tabram perhaps, Nichols, Chapman)without getting caught but also without being seen-or seen well. It is the night of the double event where, for the first time, in his mind witnesses get a good look at him. With a reluctant Stride, who is taking longer for him to manipulate into a secluded area, he is perhaps seen by several witnesses. However, it is the last of these, Israel Schwartz, that’s the one that makes an impression in JtR’s mind. He is the witness that not only gets the first real good look at him, but actually sees him in a very incriminating situation-i.e-attacking (or beginning to attack) a victim. JtR shouts “Lipski” to scare away the Jewish looking Schwartz and continues his attack on Stride. Then, after being interrupted (twice) with Stride and not being able to fulfill his true desire to mutilate and take organs, he quickly leaves that “hot” area in search of another victim.

He finds another victim in Eddowes and finally has his way with her, but once again, not without being seen by three witnesses together, and most importantly of the three, Joseph Lawende. After these events and once he is done with Eddowes, JtR thinks could these witnesses be his downfall in the near future? At this point he decides he needs to do something to throw off the police who may very well be soon getting his description from these witnesses. So he writes the GSG implicating Jews and leaves a portion of Stride’s bloody apron.

That night, with Stride, he is seen by the Jewish looking Schwartz and then later by Lawende and his companions. Knowing he has been seen well, by not one, but possibly two to four Jews, JtR decides to use them as the scapegoat (false) suspect. He probably knows of the prevailing thought in the public/police/press that a Jew may be responsible for the first murders and along with perhaps being angry by being interrupted by them (and knowing, obviously, that he himself is not Jewish) he uses them as a very convenient way to point the way away from himself.

On the night of Mary Kelly’s murder, he is seen again by a witness by Sarah Lewis, as he waits outside of Miller’s court. After missing the inquest-where he knows there will be witnesses-he decides to make the bold decision to go to the police (on his terms) this time in his plan of misleading them further and to give a reason of why he was there that night. Perhaps he recognized Lewis that night and feared she might know him as well (perhaps even his name) since by his own admission he had known Mary Kelly for a long time. If there was a good chance they might be looking for him as a suspect who was perhaps suspiciously waiting and watching outside the murdered woman’s court, perhaps it was a good calculated risk to come forward as a potential witness instead.

And who is GH’s “suspect”? a Jew. To me the implication of a Jew in the GSG, the shouting of Lipski and then the direct description of a Jew by a “witness” is the connection to me that may all point back to GH as being the killer. A man with the confidence (arrogance), risk taking and manipulative prowess to pull off a night like the double event is the same kind of man who could go to the police with the A-man story. And we never hear from him again.

“The greatest trick the devil ever played on man, was to convince him he doesn’t exist.”

Hi Abby.....

'Fraid a couple of holes in the theory....

If he is JTR and he thinks he's been spotted by Lawende....then why on earth would he turn up at the police station whereupon he may have been stuck in a line up to be picked out by Lawende?

Say the grafitti incriminated a Jew....then what Hutchinson is asking the police to believe is that JTR the Jew stopped in the middle of the street to tell the world he's a Jew......surely inconceivable....surely no one is that stupid that they believe the police would believe that? If he really wanted to incriminate a Jew I'm sure he could have found a much better way of doing it with a few seconds thought.....

I'll pass it on it Abby....and personally think it's one of the weakest theories around....no offence intended of course.....I mean the general Hutch = JTR idea.

The best bet is that he was a crank.....possibly motivated by money.

[Rubyretro]

If he is JTR and he thinks he's been spotted by Lawende....then why on earth would he turn up at the police station whereupon he may have been stuck in a line up to be picked out by Lawende?

I know that your reply is to Abby, Fleetwood, but since I'm 'online' at the same time as you and read it first...I can't resist replying.

First of all there is the thing that Lawende may have been way off in his description, and also said that he would not be able to identify the man he saw again. Hutch lived much nearer to Miller's Court than Mitre Square, and Mrs Lewis might have been someone that HE recognised (and so feared), whereas Lawende was a total stranger.

Another explanation is that Lawende never saw JtR at all. I was very taken with the logic in Richard's Post about the echoing footsteps in Mitre Square and the fact that Morris didn't hear anything, although he was awake with the door ajar. Also why JtR would cross the Square with (a strangely silent )Eddowes, when he could have murdered her just after the passage.

Could it be that JtR and Eddowes came in from Mitre street, never crossed the Square at all, and Lawende saw a couple that were nothing to do with the 'Event' ?


to far corner, instead of murdering her straight

[lynn cates]

thought experiment

Hello Ruby. I think you are on to something with your thinking here.

Try the following thought experiment. Take the double event and separate it from Polly and Annie on the one hand, and MJK on the other. Instead of 1 hand killing both, imagine 2 people, at work for the same entity, and each suggesting to meet Liz and Kate at about 12:30, one at a socialist club and the other in a heavily Jewish section of the city.

Question: How many items would now come together on this hypothesis? If you include the GSG and look at Sir Charles' letter of October 12, I'd say a good deal comes together.

Concerning the GSG you said:

"I don't think that he had a light with him, and it must have been pitch black inside that doorway."

But what if he DID have a light with him? Perhaps a policeman's lantern?

Cheers.
LC

[Observer]

Hi Abby.....

'Fraid a couple of holes in the theory....

If he is JTR and he thinks he's been spotted by Lawende....then why on earth would he turn up at the police station whereupon he may have been stuck in a line up to be picked out by Lawende?

Say the grafitti incriminated a Jew....then what Hutchinson is asking the police to believe is that JTR the Jew stopped in the middle of the street to tell the world he's a Jew......surely inconceivable....surely no one is that stupid that they believe the police would believe that? If he really wanted to incriminate a Jew I'm sure he could have found a much better way of doing it with a few seconds thought.....

I'll pass it on it Abby....and personally think it's one of the weakest theories around....no offence intended of course.....I mean the general Hutch = JTR idea.

The best bet is that he was a crank.....possibly motivated by money.

Why.......do ........you......use.......so......many........... ............full........stops..................... ............in your.............................................. ......posts.....................................?? ????...............??????......................... .?????????

[The Grave Maurice]

Those aren't full stops, those are pauses for....effect.

[Ben]

Hi Fleetwood Mac,

“If he is JTR and he thinks he's been spotted by Lawende....then why on earth would he turn up at the police station whereupon he may have been stuck in a line up to be picked out by Lawende?”

Because if he approached the police as a witness, the chances are that he would have been considered in that capacity only and not as a suspect, and if he wasn’t considered a suspect, there was no reason to parade him before Lawende. On the other hand, if he was hauled in as a suspect (possibly as a result of a subsequent encounter with Lewis) without having first nailed his colours to the “helpful witness” mast, there was obviously a greater risk of being compared to previous eyewitness descriptions.

“then what Hutchinson is asking the police to believe is that JTR the Jew stopped in the middle of the street to tell the world he's a Jew......surely inconceivable....surely no one is that stupid that they believe the police would believe that?”

But the whole point is that the police did believe the killer was hoping to implicate the Jews with the GSG. They could not, therefore, have considered the proposal “inconceivable”. The facts inform us that they could not have done.

If he really wanted to incriminate a Jew I'm sure he could have found a much better way of doing it with a few seconds thought.....

Such as…?

And you’re only allowed “a few seconds thought”.

...and personally think it's one of the weakest theories around....no offence intended of course.....I mean the general Hutch = JTR idea

Well you’ve done a truly catastrophic job of arguing against it.

No offence intended, of course.

[Observer]

Those aren't full stops, those are pauses for....effect.

Hi Mo

Oh is that what they are............they don't work.....In fact that post had about as much effect on me as those dodgy epsom salts I took one time for a bad case of constipation, boiled eggs I think. The chemist apparently was selling self raising flour instead of the said epsom salts, naughty man.

Observer

[Sally]

Hi All

This is an interesting discussion which I think raises some valid points.

However.

I am unconvinced by the argument that Hutchinson went to the police on 12th November because he read Lewis’ testimony and feared he would be identified as her mystery man. I will explain why.

Lewis, by her own admission - twice - didn’t observe a great deal about her Crossingham’s loiterer. Initially, she told the police that she couldn’t describe him. Subsequently, having had three days to think about it, talk about it, etc. - she did find a description in her memory for the jury at Kelly’s inquest - but it remained vague in some respects, even so - she couldn’t, for example, remember what he was wearing (this in contrast to her detailed description of the other man she had seen twice, and who she clearly suspected of being the Ripper).

I have no issue with Lewis’ testimony as it stands. She apparently didn’t notice very much about her loiterer in terms of physical detail, which is quite reasonable considering that it was dark, raining, and late; and that she had other things on her mind.

It is apparent from Lewis’ testimony that she did not recognise the man outside Crossinghams. Why should she - even if George Hutchinson was a local? She didn’t live in the immediate vicinity - she was visiting a friend.

I don’t think her recollection is precise enough to identify anybody specific - and I think that is clear from Lewis’ witness testimony at Kelly’s inquest.

I think the idea that Hutchinson went to the police as a pre-emptive move out of fear is, furthermore, incompatible with the highly confident, manipulative personality often attributed to him as a suspect in the case.

I don’t think we can propose an individual who, on the one hand, is confident, intelligent and devious enough to put himself forward as a witness and hoodwink the police into believing him, when all the time he‘s secretly the Ripper; but on the other hand, is sufficiently disturbed by having been seen by Lewis - who can barely remember him - that he panics to an extent where he feels compelled to explain himself to the police.

I'm not sure it can cut both ways.

Moving on, it is undeniable that Hutchinson did place a Jew at the scene, and it is indisputably the case that prior to his statement to the police, there was no implication of Jewish involvement in the Kelly murder so far as we know.

I think it is quite reasonable to suggest that this may have been a deliberate move by Hutchinson - his agenda, if you like. I am undecided as to exactly why that might have been.

[Rubyretro]

It's impossible to know how often Mrs Lewis was in the area -she apparently knew her friends in Miller's Court well enough to go to their house for refuge
in the early hours of the morning, so that suggests that she knew them well, and saw them currently. It is also likely that Hutch, who lived around the corner, and may have been 'watching' Mary for a while (for all we know), may
have recognised Mrs Lewis and feared that her memory would be jogged on seeing him in the street. He may have suspected the Police of withholding
information, and Mrs Lewis of having seen alot more than she said in public at the inquest.

However, I agree that all that is very moot...We don't even need it as a reason for his going to the Police, because there is a better reason :

Serial killers apparently like to involve themselves in their own cases because
they like to keep the excitement of the killing upmost in their minds and prolong the thrills (including being shown the body again ). They are controlling people who like to feel that they can misdirect the investigation and don't imagine that they will be caught -they think that they are much too clever for the Police.

The Police recognise this nowadays and look upon volunteer witnesses as potential suspects, because a murderer often turns out to be someone
known to the Case.

Mrs Lewis's statement is still important, because it coincides with Hutch's
statement. Sketchy as Mrs Lewis's description is, it nevertheless fits the contemporary drawing of Hutch. If the Police did not believe that Hutch and 'wideawake' were the same person, then surely they would be looking for 'wideawake' as the most obvious suspect ?

The fact is that no attention was paid to 'wideawake' since, I believe, the Police thought that they had already accounted for him (and that he was Hutch), and that the fact that he had come forward voluntarily, had an 'innocent' reason for being there, and the 'right' reaction to the body, mean't that he was discounted as a suspect -even if they quickly disbelieved in his story of Astrakhan Man.

[Garry Wroe]

I am unconvinced by the argument that Hutchinson went to the police on 12th November because he read Lewis’ testimony and feared he would be identified as her mystery man.

Then why, Sally, if Hutchinson was a mere time-waster, did he not come forward sooner?

Lewis, by her own admission - twice - didn’t observe a great deal about her Crossingham’s loiterer. Initially, she told the police that she couldn’t describe him.

If, purely for the sake of argument, we assume that Hutchinson was implicated in the Whitechapel Murders, he would have had sufficient motivation to follow all aspects of the police investigation and would thus have been aware that certain elements of Joseph Lawende’s inquest testimony had been suppressed ‘in the interests of justice’. This, to his way of thinking, would have signified that the police had changed the rules of engagement, introducing the possibility that a similar strategy was being played out with Sarah Lewis. Whilst we, of course, are in a position to know that the police attached little or no significance to the Wideawake sighting and were therefore not playing mindgames with the killer, Hutchinson was not privy to such information. Consequently, the issue is not what Sarah Lewis did or did not see, it is what Hutchinson believed she may have seen, and what he believed the police might have done with such information.

It is apparent from Lewis’ testimony that she did not recognise the man outside Crossinghams. Why should she - even if George Hutchinson was a local? She didn’t live in the immediate vicinity - she was visiting a friend.

Sarah resided in Great Pearl Street, Sally, which lay a short distance north of Miller’s Court. Given the fact that she was a local, coupled with the possibility that she was also a regular visitor at Miller’s Court, it is certainly not beyond the bounds of possibility that Hutchinson recognized her even if she failed to recognize him.

Although it may appear that I’m attempting to push a theory here, I’m simply illustrating the potential pitfalls of viewing individual case-related elements in isolation rather than as part of a bigger picture. Once this broader spectrum of events is examined, the notion that Hutchinson came forward as a direct consequence of Sarah Lewis’s revelations is irresistible to my way of thinking. But you, of course, are perfectly at liberty to disagree.

Regards.

Garry Wroe.

[Scorpio]

Sorry, this theory is a handfull of chestnuts with George Hutchinsons name written on them. Poor George, you should of kept cake hole shut me old China.