Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Innocent, By George!

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Watch out Fleetwood Mac, put your tin hat on quick...
    The claim isn't that Hutchinson saw Lewis's testimony in the papers, but that he magically heard the detail of her testimony before it even appeared in the papers. I would find the link between the Lewis testimony and Hutchinson's appearance more believable if he had appeared at the police station the next day - after reading the papers. But Hutchinson actually appeared almost as soon as the inquest was over - probably after he had completed a day's labouring somewhere.

    Comment


    • And why not going to the police before ?
      Friday, Saturday, Sunday.....

      Comment


      • As has been pointed out before, itís not exactly a rarity for a witness not to come forward (Blotchy) or late - have you ever heard of Crimewatch?

        Comment


        • I was merely answering to your "labouring Monday" suggestion, as you've perfectly understood.

          Comment


          • DVV:

            "By your logic, the Ripper must have carried a gladstone bag, for you could find plenty in the press."

            Has it occurred to you, David, that the man Lewis spoke about as having acted suspiciously, was described as carring a shiny black leather bag - a Gladstone, by the looks of things. And still, we are asked to rely in all Sarah Lewis says? Well, not ALL; We are not supposed to believe that she could not describe the loiterer although she failed to do so when speaking to the police. We ARE, though, supposed to accept that she gave an adequate description of the man she did not see to the inquest.

            Dangerous things, Gladstone bags...!

            The best,
            Fisherman

            Comment


            • H Fish,

              I must admit that I did not take Mike's theory seriously enough, although I still don't accept it, you're right.

              All the best

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Lechmere View Post
                Watch out Fleetwood Mac, put your tin hat on quick...
                The claim isn't that Hutchinson saw Lewis's testimony in the papers, but that he magically heard the detail of her testimony before it even appeared in the papers. I would find the link between the Lewis testimony and Hutchinson's appearance more believable if he had appeared at the police station the next day - after reading the papers. But Hutchinson actually appeared almost as soon as the inquest was over - probably after he had completed a day's labouring somewhere.
                Hi Lechmere
                regardless of how(or even if) hutch heard about Lewis testimony, he still did not go to the police until after the inquest. Red flag right there in my book. I think for whatever reason, Hutch did not want to go to the inquest. Why?
                "Is all that we see or seem
                but a dream within a dream?"

                -Edgar Allan Poe


                "...the man and the peaked cap he is said to have worn
                quite tallies with the descriptions I got of him."

                -Frederick G. Abberline

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Lechmere View Post
                  Watch out Fleetwood Mac, put your tin hat on quick...
                  The claim isn't that Hutchinson saw Lewis's testimony in the papers, but that he magically heard the detail of her testimony before it even appeared in the papers. I would find the link between the Lewis testimony and Hutchinson's appearance more believable if he had appeared at the police station the next day - after reading the papers. But Hutchinson actually appeared almost as soon as the inquest was over - probably after he had completed a day's labouring somewhere.
                  Hi Lechmere
                  I also think that hutch need not have to even heard the details of Sarah Lewis testimony. Just the fact that she was there at the inquest.
                  That could have been enough to draw him out if he beleived she saw him waiting there.
                  "Is all that we see or seem
                  but a dream within a dream?"

                  -Edgar Allan Poe


                  "...the man and the peaked cap he is said to have worn
                  quite tallies with the descriptions I got of him."

                  -Frederick G. Abberline

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Abby Normal View Post
                    Hi Lechmere
                    regardless of how(or even if) hutch heard about Lewis testimony, he still did not go to the police until after the inquest. Red flag right there in my book. I think for whatever reason, Hutch did not want to go to the inquest. Why?
                    Why the red flag Abby? It was an inquest, not a trial.

                    There seems to be some confusion regarding this matter.

                    Monty
                    Monty

                    https://forum.casebook.org/core/imag...t/evilgrin.gif

                    Author of Capturing Jack the Ripper.

                    http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/aw/d/1445621622

                    Comment


                    • Monty,

                      Help me out please. Every book written about the Ripper says Hutch/Toppy didn't come forward until after the inquest. Where can I find definitive proof of this?

                      Mike
                      huh?

                      Comment


                      • I'm working from memory here but Abberlines report and Hutchinsons statement.

                        Monty
                        Monty

                        https://forum.casebook.org/core/imag...t/evilgrin.gif

                        Author of Capturing Jack the Ripper.

                        http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/aw/d/1445621622

                        Comment


                        • Thanks. I'll look. It's just that I've found 3 newspaper articles that say differently and I don't necessarily believe them. I just want to get to the source.

                          Cheers,

                          Mike
                          huh?

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Monty View Post
                            Why the red flag Abby? It was an inquest, not a trial.

                            There seems to be some confusion regarding this matter.

                            Monty
                            I agree with Abby -this was the latest killing (and most horrific in terms of mutilation), in a series of murders that had the East End, London, the Country, and the rest of the world in thrall.

                            Hutch not only knew (according to himself) the murder victim, lodged very nearby, but was standing outside the murdered woman's room (a putative
                            witness saw him) shortly before the killing.

                            It is impossible (IMPOSSIBLE) that he didn't hear of the murders on Friday, so why didn't he come forward for the inquest ? : He supposedly held the most
                            important and detailed description of Jack the Ripper going.

                            If Hutchinson was simply afraid of losing money by not looking for work, then it is amazing that he did not try asking for the reimbursement of the price of his bed and food for the time that he would have been at the Police Station ?

                            No wonder Abby starts seeing 'red flags'.....
                            http://youtu.be/GcBr3rosvNQ

                            Comment


                            • Ruby, why don't a huge percentage of New Yorkers and Londoners go to the police with information about a suspect immediately after a crime?

                              Mike
                              huh?

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Monty View Post
                                Why the red flag Abby? It was an inquest, not a trial.

                                There seems to be some confusion regarding this matter.

                                Monty
                                Hi Monty
                                no confusion. Surly Hutch had heard of the murders before then. And by his own account he said he told a policeman on Sunday. If she was his friend and he heard of her murder prior to the inquest, no reason not to get involved asap. Except of course if Hutch was going to be less than truthful. He seemed to be very interested in MK's/A-man's movements on that night. He seemed to want to be very helpful after the inquest.
                                A reasonable conclusion is that he had something to hide/lie about and therfor the inquest should be avoided as he could be immediately contradicted(or worse) by other witnesses. And of course, perhaps he wanted to wait and see if anyone had spotted him waiting there outside Millers court before coming forward at all.
                                "Is all that we see or seem
                                but a dream within a dream?"

                                -Edgar Allan Poe


                                "...the man and the peaked cap he is said to have worn
                                quite tallies with the descriptions I got of him."

                                -Frederick G. Abberline

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X