Innocent, By George!

[Malcolm X]

Hello Malcolm. Given that Toppy is Hutch, I'm still not following why Hutch probably saw JTR. Why could MJK not have met a well dressed man, a man whom she knew, and had a visit with him? Why must he be either a killer or a client? There were certainly well dressed men in London--even in the East End. And even given MJK had resorted to prostitution after Barnett left, why could not a prostitute have a friend?

Cheers.
LC

well if what Toppy sais is the truth, then MJK went with LA DE DA because Toppy couldn't lend her any money, and thus this other man suddenly picked her up instead, and due to her behaviour, this looks like it's going to be sexual. Toppy describes him as highly suspicious, it's him that's making LA DE DA out to be the killer.... not the police!

this is what i was saying weeks ago..... how can GH accuse this guy of being the killer and the police too, because she could've gone out again at 3.05am.

we thus have no proof that this was anything other than a client, but GH doesn't mention this..... HE PAINTS A PORTRAIT OF HIM AS JTR. he is therefore shifting the blame to somebody else on purpose, who could be innocent !

GH is thus if innocent, still looking highly suspicious, i.e he never sais ``this might not be JTR though, because dont forget that i walked off at 3am, he could have left MJKs 5 mins later``...but no his description is bias and fully loaded.

finally, the cry of ``oh murder ``wasn't till 4am, so GH is pushing his luck anyway.

GH looks as guilty as any guilty person would do, but he also looks guilty if you try your hardest to imagine him as innocent.

i'm not being bias at all, he really does look like JTR to me, BUT this GH does not look like Toppy...... simply because if this Toppy was indeed there, then he cant possibly be JTR, so there you go.

we have 2 strong arguements here.

1..... GH looks like JTR..... definitely!
2.....JTR does not look like Toppy, not even starting to.

this is where GH is weak, he is linked directly to Toppy, rather than someone like W.Bury, because if so then you'd believe, but no; he's linked to a GOODY 2 SHOES with no criminal record or history of abuse and violence !

we have found no substitute for Toppy yet and because JTR has disguised his identity for sure, then we probably wont ever, simply because it's almost impossible that JTR went to the police using his real name, we are therefore screwed, because if any one ever finds this bloke, he'll be considered as another Maybrick that's all.

it is impossible for anyone on this forum to find JTR, because only a few will ever believe you.

[Robert]

Malcolm, finding JTR, and being believed, are two clean different things!

[lynn cates]

GH

Hello Malcolm.

“well if what Toppy says is the truth, then MJK went with LA DE DA because Toppy couldn't lend her any money”

I think I missed that one. It is true that GH claimed he could not lend her money. It is also true that he claims she then met A-Man. But I can’t find anything about A-man’s purporting to give her money. They simply met.

“and thus this other man suddenly picked her up instead"

Picked her up? Well, they met.

“and due to her behaviour, this looks like it's going to be sexual.”

Which behaviour would this be, then? They seemed on familiar terms. But, as I have conjectured, they may have been previously acquainted. Not sure if all male/female meetings must be sexual.

“Toppy describes him as highly suspicious”

Does he use those words? He certainly considers him so to be. But perhaps he is interpreting their meeting in a fashion similar to yours.

“ It's he that's making LA DE DA out to be the killer.... not the police!”

But does he do that? He has a suspicion, and, given the veracity of his statement, the police would like to chat him up.

“this is what i was saying weeks ago..... how can GH accuse this guy of being the killer and the police too, because she could've gone out again at 3.05am.”

Indeed, she could have. But how could GH accuse ANYONE of being the killer? Surely he had no such information?

“We thus have no proof that this was anything other than a client”

Indeed. But, conversely, we have no proof (or even good evidence) that he was.

“ But GH doesn't mention this..... HE PAINTS A PORTRAIT OF HIM AS JTR.”

Are you possibly reading a bit much into Toppy’s statement?

“He is therefore shifting the blame to somebody else on purpose, who could be innocent!”

Shifting the blame? From whom? Whom was being blamed?

“GH is thus, if innocent, still looking highly suspicious"

Well, I DO wonder about the possibility that someone was quite THAT nosy. Otherwise, how suspicious?

“I.e he never says ``this might not be JTR though, because don’t forget that I walked off at 3am, he could have left MJKs 5 mins later”

But does he ever say he is?

“But no, his description is biased and fully loaded.”

But I wonder if your explication may not also be?

“Finally, the cry of ``oh murder ``wasn't till 4am, so GH is pushing his luck anyway.”

Two quick points here. Do we know the cry had anything whatsoever to do with MJK? In what way was GH “Pushing his luck?”

“GH looks as guilty as any guilty person would do"

Not to me. At most, he looks a bit silly.

“But he also looks guilty if you try your hardest to imagine him as innocent.”

Not to me. Sorry to be so terse.

“I'm not being biased at all, he really does look like JTR to me”

But in appending your “to me” codicil, is that not, ipso facto solo, indicative of bias?

“BUT this GH does not look like Toppy simply because if this Toppy was indeed there, then he can’t possibly be JTR."

A bit too strong? He looks less likely, given a certain type that some researchers seek.

“We have 2 strong arguments here.”

Indeed?

“1..... GH looks like JTR..... definitely!”

Sorry, but my perception does not coincide with yours here.

“2.....JTR does not look like Toppy, not even starting to.”

I think we are at one here.

“this is where GH is weak, he is linked directly to Toppy, rather than someone like W.Bury, because if so then you'd believe, but no; he's linked to a GOODY 2 SHOES with no criminal record or history of abuse and violence!”

I agree that he is weak, but perhaps for other reasons.

“We have found no substitute for Toppy yet and because JTR has disguised his identity for sure . . .”

Disguised? This assumes a good deal.

“ . . . then we probably won’t ever, simply [know] because it's almost impossible that JTR went to the police using his real name”

I agree. But that’s because I am far from persuaded that there ever WAS a JTR.

“We are therefore screwed”

Possibly.

“Because if any one ever finds this bloke, he'll be considered as another Maybrick that's all."

Why?

“It is impossible for anyone on this forum to find JTR, because only a few will ever believe you.”

Are you conflating ontology with epistemology?

Cheers.
LC

[Malcolm X]

of all our suspects, GH as someone else is by far the strongest..... but JTR as Toppy is one of the weakest around, but EITHER OF THESE TWO were almost definitely there as said, but if this was Toppy ( but he cant be JTR) then he probably saw JTR, but went overboard with his description and biased it towards a foreigner.

but the one thing you cant ignore is that the murders stopped because he either died, moved on or went insane and none of this happened to Toppy.

if he did move on, then he never mutilated again somewhere else in the U.K, so this rules out Toppy finding work in Liverpool and killing there etc, so it's curtains for him as JTR. .

Toppy is therefore silly to have gone overboard so much and especially to hint that this foreigner looked suspicious/ sullen. the police were pretty daft too, but not too daft, because his statement fooled me as well, 6 years ago.

unfortunately, his statement looks like this on purpose, he has got this just right over the previous 2 days, this is now a switch from TOPPY to JTR, he's inserting himself into this case

ANYWAY, it's time for me to get blind drunk happy Xmas

[lynn cates]

GH, take two

Hello Malcolm.

“Of all our suspects, GH as someone else is by far the strongest.”

Why? Is it because he can be placed near the scene of the crime? Same with Bowyer.

“But JTR as Toppy is one of the weakest around.”

Perhaps not as weak as Charles Dodgson—or Aaron Kosminski.

“But EITHER OF THESE TWO were almost definitely there”

As were the other ladies in the court and, as said above, Bowyer. McCarthy was not distant either.

“But if this was Toppy (but he cant be JTR) then he probably saw JTR, but went overboard with his description and biased it towards a foreigner.”

Why did he ‘probably see’ JTR? If he saw a posh chap, could he not have been foreign looking?

“But the one thing you can’t ignore is that the murders stopped.”

Well, the murder of Kelly stopped. After all, she was now dead. On the other hand, if we wish a series, perhaps they did NOT stop then? Why not add McKenzie and Coles?

“Because he either died, moved on or went insane and none of this happened to Toppy.”

I can think of several other reasons. How about, ‘Mission accomplished?’

“If he did move on, then he never mutilated again somewhere else in the U.K, so this rules out Toppy finding work in Liverpool and killing there etc, so it's curtains for him as JTR.’

Why? Could he not “take the pledge?”

“Toppy is therefore silly to have gone overboard so much and especially to hint that this foreigner looked suspicious/sullen.”

Or, very accurate?

“The police were pretty daft too.”

Not necessarily. Some of Monro’s lads doubtless were familiar with Frank Millen’s description.

“Unfortunately, his statement looks like this on purpose, he has got this just right over the previous 2 days, this is now a switch from TOPPY to JTR, he's inserting himself into this case.”

Just as D’Onston did. But what of that?

Cheers.
LC

[Lechmere]

Haus Frau Retro
I hope you have managed to uncurl you lip. That would be a most unfortunate disfigurement to one so fair.
I do hope you have not been sneaking over large gulps from the family Pernod cellar this Yuletide.
On those damn grooms – we can fairly deduce as you say that most working horses were ‘groomed’ by their users – the Carmen etc. This in turn implies that ‘grooming’ when done as a stand alone job was not one that required excessive training or special skill. Certainly not such that it would need be a childhood vocation.
I don’t think I did post on this forum about the cat meat business – you must be confusing things a little – but now you say it there was a big trade in dead horseflesh used to feed cats – a veritable cottage industry. There are possible interesting links between cat meat cutters and JtR – I’m thinking Pinchin Street here.
This doesn’t hold many implications for Toppy being long term misty eyed about the old nags he groomed though.
Back to the letters – it would be remarkable indeed if any of Toppy’s letters ever survived. How many Victorian letters survive? None of Maybricks seem to have done for example and he must have written many many more.

[DVV]

Malcolm, do you realize you are making Hutch's cadidacy something completely cranky ?

You keep saying Toppy isn't Hutch because Hutch is JTR and Toppy can't be JTR.

Are you really expecting people to accept such reasonings ?

[Lechmere]

No more than most...

[Malcolm X]

Malcolm, do you realize you are making Hutch's cadidacy something completely cranky ?

You keep saying Toppy isn't Hutch because Hutch is JTR and Toppy can't be JTR.

Are you really expecting people to accept such reasonings ?

that's plain stupid, i've never said those exact words, but it is hard to explain i must admit.

it's time for me to stop talking about this now anyway, and try and get these signatures checked again

[lynn cates]

examiner

Hello Malcolm. Long ago I suggested that a forensic handwriting examiner have a go at those signatures. To date, we've had 2--one thinks same; other, different.

What do you think? Maybe subscribe a sum and hire someone?

Cheers.
LC

[DVV]

Hi Lynn, I may have missed something but I think only one expert examined the original documents.

[DVV]

that's plain stupid, i've never said those exact words, but it is hard to explain i must admit.

That was what you meant, now it's up to you to think it's stupid. That, I did not say, I just told you not to make Hutch theory something bizarre.

it's time for me to stop talking about this now anyway, and try and get these signatures checked again

Good. But if we ask more and more experts, we will undoubtebly obtain conflicting conclusions.

I'd rather check how Toppy's relatives were "discovered" and involved in the ripper case. This is the only way to prove Toppy wasn't the man - or was.
That's all those fake stories related to Fairclough that matter.

[Rubyretro]

.

[QUOTE]I'd rather check how Toppy's relatives were "discovered" and involved in the ripper case. This is the only way to prove Toppy wasn't the man - or was.
That's all those fake stories related to Fairclough that matter.[/QUOTE

I think that Fairclough is alive and living in Surrey. It might be possible to contact him via his publisher (address available on the net). Why don't you try ?

I spent some time one day looking for a 'phone number, but couldn't find one -if I had, I'd probably have 'phoned him and simply asked him.

[lynn cates]

the other

Hello David. Well, in addition to Iremonger, there was a Swedish chap, I believe, who looked them over and declared that he'd be surprised if they were not the same.

If I recall properly, there was the usual row on the boards about what the examiner "really meant," his credentials, his status as compared to Iremonger's, etc, etc.

Cheers.
LC

[Garry Wroe]

The 'Swedish chap' was Frank Leander, Lynn, and he was presented with only one of the three Hutchinson statement signatures - the one bearing the greatest similarity to the Toppy specimens. Thus the exercise had zero scientific validity.