Did Hutchinson get the night wrong?

[lynn cates]

agreement

Hello Trevor. I tried hard to find a disagreement in our thinking here, but have failed. I think you sum up matters admirably.

But, lest one give credit where NOT due, permit me to say that having MJK alive, discover the body, cry "Oh, murder!" is hardly original with me. That said, your observation about the subsequent time lapse completely disposes (in my mind) of the possibility of Maxwell's sighting time being accurate. Indeed, I have interjected just about every bizarre/unlikely scenario known to the (devious) mind here--but nothing fits.

I must conclude, therefore, that Mrs. Maxwell was off by a day.

Nor should this be, I think, considered strange--as also Hutch, if he were off by a day. As Fish points out, some people have a great recall of fine detail but will forget something really broad like the day of the week. This happens to me much more frequently than I care to admit. But I suppose that such a phenomenon as this is alien to a good many posters. Hence the resistance to Fish's thesis vis-a-vis Hutch.

Thanks for a well thought out post.

Cheers.
LC

[The Good Michael]

Mike,
Have you never asked a poster to support a post by citing evidence?

Harry,

I never ask for evidence when something is so clear. In that case, it would be insulting to ask for evidence. Much like anyone asking for evidence that the police did their job when presented with a situation in the highest profile case in London for that year is insulting. Hence the sarcasm. To me it is as clear that Hutchinson's story was checked out as it is that today is the 23rd... or is it the 24th? Oops. Another point for forgetfulness.

Mike

[lynn cates]

et tu?

Hello Michael.

"To me it is as clear that Hutchinson's story was checked out as it is that today is the 23rd... or is it the 24th?"

Oh dear! You also?

Cheers.
LC

[The Good Michael]

"To me it is as clear that Hutchinson's story was checked out as it is that today is the 23rd... or is it the 24th?"

Oh dear! You also?

When did you say that? Yesterday or the day before? Oh, it happened again!

Mike

[Sally]

Checking out

Ok - I agree that of course the police would have checked out Hutchinson's story. However, I do think that some parts of that story would have been easier to affirm than others.
For example, it wouldn't have been hard to establish that Hutchinson was a regular residant of the Victoria Home - they kept records, I believe, and it was only around the corner from the station. And so on, and so forth.

But Romford - about that I'm not sure. Exactly how would the police have been able to corroborate that? Hutchinson may have told others that he was off to Romford in advance of actually going there, so that would add weight to his story. But as to him actually having been there - well, I think it depends entirely on what he was doing there, and how visible he was. If he had been in a situaiton whereby he had given his name, for example; then yes, it could have been confirmed that he was in Romford. But I can think of lots of scenarios whereby he would have been all but invisible.

I'm not sure this is all that important. We know that people travelled for the purposes of commerce, for work, and many other sundry purposes. The police would have been accustomed to this as part of the social milieu in which they operated. Would they have cared all that much where Hutchinson was on the day before? Or paid it all that much attention?

I think they would have wanted more to establish that he was who he said he was, and had been where he said he had been on the night of the 8th/9th.

The only interesting thing about the trip to Romford is why he took pains to come back so late at night when he could have stayed where he was until the nest day - and that is easily explained.

On another matter entirely - Mike, you arre either a comic genius, or you have a secret cache of previously undiscovered Jtr files. Now, which is it??

[The Good Michael]

- Mike, you arre either a comic genius, or you have a secret cache of previously undiscovered Jtr files. Now, which is it??

I'm a Cosmic Genus from an endangered species, Rippus Interruptus. By the way, you must either be a pirate or a Scot with your 'arre', though the two are never mutually exclusive.

Mike

[Sally]

I'm a Cosmic Genus from an endangered species, Rippus Interruptus. By the way, you must either be a pirate or a Scot with your 'arre', though the two are never mutually exclusive.

Mike

No, not a Scot, a pirate, quite possibly!

So, How much does a pirate pay to get his ears pierced?

A buck an ear!!

[The Good Michael]

Trick or treater dressed as a pirate captain rings the doorbell. A lady answers the door, "Oh aren't you cute? A little pirate captain. Say, where are your buccaneers?"

"They're alongside my buccan head, lady."

[Observer]

Hi Mike

Ever heard of the phrase "Resting on one's laurels"? I would have retired after the Abbeline comedy, very good it was too !!!

Regards

Observer

[Observer]

But Romford - about that I'm not sure. Exactly how would the police have been able to corroborate that? Hutchinson may have told others that he was off to Romford in advance of actually going there, so that would add weight to his story. But as to him actually having been there - well, I think it depends entirely on what he was doing there, and how visible he was. If he had been in a situaiton whereby he had given his name, for example; then yes, it could have been confirmed that he was in Romford. But I can think of lots of scenarios whereby he would have been all but invisible.

Hi Sally

Hutchinson was residing in Spitalfields, wouldn't a trip down to Romford a distance of about 13 miles suggest that he was intending to visit someone? I can think of far more scenarios whereby he was seen by, or contacted someone who knew him, than I can whereby he would be all but invisible.

Of course all the police had to do was ask him what his business was in Romford, they would have asked this question wouldn't they?

Observer

[Stephen Thomas]

Hutchinson was residing in Spitalfields, wouldn't a trip down to Romford a distance of about 13 miles suggest that he was intending to visit someone?

Maybe good Mr Crossingham who lived in Romford, perhaps

[richardnunweek]

Hi,
I love the Hutchinsons threads, simply because the majority of Casebook have decided that this individual , who to the majority, has no identity but the surname.
I have with great frustration, attempted to put foreward a name, but have received a cannot ''be proved reply.
I will state now.. that Topping was the witness, and I offer this information on a plate.
If any of you care to visit a establishment that has copies of the Radio times, from 1972-75, and look on the left hand side of the rear pages, one will find such a radio broadcast' that features the ' The man that saw Jack'.
It featured either personally Reg Hutchinson[ son of Gwth], or someone quoting on his behalf.
This you have my word on.
I spent two hours at Brighton University with my wife and daughter [ a couple of years ago] doing just that ie, looking at the relevant Radio Times, but silly me only looked at the front pages leading up to the radio lists, and it was only after.. once we returned home[ rather frustrated] that I remembered my error.
What would that prove?
If nothing else.. that I am a right/ in suggesting that the Topping saga was long before 1992 , and faircloughs contribution to Ripperology, came to the fore.
Regards Richard.

[lynn cates]

found

Hello Richard. You've finally located it then? Good job!

Cheers.
LC

[richardnunweek]

Hello Lynn,
I assume you have mistaken my post, I was remarking where the preview of that programme could be found, I have not seen it since my initial view in the 70s.
Basically.. I was giving all keen researchers on Casebook ,a map where the treasure can be found, as mentioned, my only visit had myself and two members of my family searching through the wrong sections of the magazines.
Regards , and Happy Xmas
Richard.

[lynn cates]

thanks

Hello Richard. Thanks for clarifying.

The same to you.

Cheers.
LC