Witness statement Dismissed-suspect No. 1?

[Fisherman]

Garry Wroe:

I do, Fish. And I do so on the basis of what Abberline, newsmen and Hutchinson himself stated on the issue. Hutchinson even claimed to have told one of his fellow lodgers here about the Astrakhan incident. This, according to Hutchinson, occurred on the Sunday.

Yes, and "here" was reasonably the Victoria Home, since he was tagged as a lodger there by Badham, and since a reporter could sniff out where to find him.

But "here" in it´s turn must be contrasted to the "the place where I ususally stay" - no "here" there, is there? Here - the Victoria Home, and there - where I usually sleep.

Jon has unearthed a long hidden truth, Garry. He deserves recognition for it, and if you won´t admit that, I know I and most people who master the fine art of reading will.

Since we can reasonably infer that Hutchinson's claim that he returned to the Victoria Home as soon as it opened on the Friday morning was verified by detectives, and that all sources (Abberline included) refer to the Victoria Home as Hutchinson's normal abode, I think it safe to assume that Hutchinson was a Victoria Home regular.

The problem is that you are now conjecturing! Hutchinson never claimed any such thing. He never mentioned the Victoria Home in this context. He only spoke of "the place where I usually sleep". Not a word about the Victoria Home. Have a second look and you will notice this.
You cannot turn guesswork into facts, Garry. Others will perhaps try that, but we should not do so if we can avoid it.

How do you deconstruct "the place where I usually sleep" as being the Victoria Home, if he already WAS at the Victoria Home when he used that phrasing?
It cannot be done, can it?

The best,
Fisherman

[Wickerman]

From Garry's excellent book, Person or Persons Unknown:

“When I left the corner of Miller’s Court,” he goes on, “the clock struck three o’clock ... After I left the court I walked about all night, as the place where I usually sleep was closed. I came in as soon as it opened in the morning.” This establishment was the Victoria Home"

http://www.casebook.org/ripper_media...wroe_full.html

What was the point of hi-lighting Garry's opinion, tagged on to a quote from Hutchinson?

[Wickerman]

Jon has unearthed a long hidden truth, Garry. He deserves recognition for it, and if you won´t admit that, I know I and most people who master the fine art of reading will.

Hi Christer.

Thankyou for your energetic response

Actually, I thought I had asked this question a long time back, but I couldn't recall the reply. I guess there never was one.

If there was an acceptable response this time, Ben would have used it. As can be seen we just get the usual denial accompanied by the typical repetitive mantra "we would have known about it".

This pulls the rug out from under several of those accusations of "lying", thrown at Hutchinson.

Hutchinson was staying at a place which closed its doors early, but what was 'early'?, we cannot know. It doesn't need to be a lodging-house, an upstairs room at any one of the local pubs would suffice, they close at 12:30 am. The reality is, we do not know and we cannot expect to know.

The bottom line though is, and in his own words, Hutchinson tells us he was not staying at the Victoria Home up to the night of Nov. 8/9th.

[Fisherman]

Wickerman: Hi Christer.

Thankyou for your energetic response

No, Jon - thankYOU for pointing this out!

Actually, I thought I had asked this question a long time back, but I couldn't recall the reply. I guess there never was one.

I cannot recall ever having seen it - and if I HAD seen it, I would remember it. I must have missed it back then, I´m sorry to say.

If there was an acceptable response this time, Ben would have used it. As can be seen we just get the usual denial accompanied by the typical repetitive mantra "we would have known about it".

And that is what we DO now, thanks to your work! The suggestion that if Hutchinson did not provide a name, then the place never existed, is ludicruous. We are speaking of a newspaper article and not a police protocol.

This pulls the rug out from under several of those accusations of "lying", thrown at Hutchinson.

Swoooosch!

Hutchinson was staying at a place which closed its doors early, but what was 'early'?, we cannot know. It doesn't need to be a lodging-house, an upstairs room at any one of the local pubs would suffice, they close at 12:30 am. The reality is, we do not know and we cannot expect to know.

True!

The bottom line though is, and in his own words, Hutchinson tells us he was not staying at the Victoria Home up to the night of Nov. 8/9th.

This must be regarded as - and I quote a mutual aquaintance of ours - a near certainty. He was at the Victoria Home when interviewed, and he spoke of another place, where he USUALLY slept.

Once again, bravo Jon! Hats off!

The best,
Fisherman

[Fisherman]

What was the point of hi-lighting Garry's opinion, tagged on to a quote from Hutchinson?

Yes, actually putting Garrys opinion in bold, even ...?! As if it closed the case?

Dear me.

The best,
Fisherman

[Ben]

Have a lie-in on Saturday mornings, Fisherman. Don’t just bounce onto the computer first thing – that’s depressing.

“The suggestion that if Hutchinson did not provide a name, the place never existed is ludicruous. We are speaking of a newspaper article and not a police protocol.”

We are “speaking” of both actually. If the “place where he usually slept” and his intended lodgings that night related to a different dwelling to that recorded on the statement, it would have been an act of appalling incompetence on the part of the police not to have recorded its name. Abberline’s superiors, reading that report, would have come away with the very clear impression that Hutchinson was a regular Victoria Home resident and that it was his intended destination on the night of the murder. If that did not reflect the truth, Abberline was guilty of an obvious dereliction of duty.

Hutchinson simply volunteered the detail that the place of the press interview was the place he normally slept, and in common with many people with limited education, was reductive in his phraseology – “the place where I usually sleep; that is to say, here” being reduced in this case to “the place where I usually sleep”. The press evidently understood this, which is why no enquiry was made as to the identity of this “other” establishment, and which is why we see none mentioned, anywhere, ever.

You can post as many cheerleading white blobs as you like, but Jon has no more “unearthed a hidden truth” on this issue than you have with Fetchbeer and the Dew Spew, and this brand new idea will receive even less support, if that’s even possible. The fact that we see no mention of any other lodging house than the Victoria Home by either the police or the press is an irrefutable indication that he lodged at only one building between the 9th and the 12th – the Victoria Home. Any conjuring-up of mythical “other” lodging house rely on police and press having been astonishingly lax in failing to record it for posterity. Placing a controversial and permanently unpopular new spin on existing material isn’t “work”, by the way.

“You can call Hutchinson a liar and a probable killer just the same, so don´t let it intimidate you on that point!”

Thanks. Well, ironically, the “liar and probable killer” scenario works even more plausibly if the lodging house in question wasn’t the Victoria Home, but I guess I’ll just have to go with the boring old evidence, damn it!

Anyway, it’s probably best you popped back to your Cross threads now and dealt with the mountain of criticism which that theory continues to receive, and not just from the same two people all the time, either.

All the best,
Ben

[Ben]

“Hutchinson was staying at a place which closed its doors early, but what was 'early'?”

You continue to miss the point. It doesn’t matter if one particular doss house “closed its doors early”. What was preventing him from using the money that you claim he had, and gaining entry to one of the many lodging houses in the area that hadn’t closed? No honest and sane person is suggesting that he chose a night outdoors in the miserable cold and wet just because his “usual” haunt was closed, so why didn’t he seek out alternative sleeping arrangements, in your scenario?

“It doesn't need to be a lodging-house, an upstairs room at any one of the local pubs would suffice”

What do you mean “suffice”?

Are you seriously suggesting that a whole room to himself above a pub was an inferior option to a bed in a lodging house dormitory that slept 50 others? These pub rooms would have been occupied by the landlord/landlady and family, and any lodger willing to pay very handsomely indeed for the privilege. They would have been full, and an irregularly employed labourer like Hutchinson could not have afforded such a luxury.

“What was the point of hi-lighting (sic) Garry's opinion, tagged on to a quote from Hutchinson?”

I was illustrating that Garry and I were in agreement with regard to the Victoria Home being the place where Hutchinson “usually” slept.

Complicated stuff, obviously.

Regards,
Ben

[Fisherman]

I was illustrating that Garry and I were in agreement with regard to the Victoria Home being the place where Hutchinson “usually” slept.
Regards,
Ben

Ah, yes! That must have been it! You obviously would not mistake it for proof...

Well, good of you to point this groundbreaking news out to us, so thanks for that!

Fisherman

[DVV]

Jon has unearthed a long hidden truth, Garry. He deserves recognition for it, and if you won´t admit that, I know I and most people who master the fine art of reading will.

Fisherman

This one was already magnificent...

[DVV]

Once again, bravo Jon! Hats off!

Fisherman

But that one really made my day.

[Fisherman]

But that one really made my day.

Mine too, David.

Good to agree for once.

Fisherman

[DVV]

La terra trema !

Jon should "offer his thoughts" to the next issue of Ripperologist, don't you think ?

[Fisherman]

Jon should "offer his thoughts" to the next issue of Ripperologist, don't you think ?

I would have thought that was up to Jon. It is surely a major revelation since it once and for all dissolves the certainty that Hutchinson generally stayed at the Victoria Home. So, all in all, an important and interesting find.

The best,
Fisherman

[DVV]

I would have thought that was up to Jon.

Certainly. And to the editors.

It is surely a major revelation

Let's not be mean. It's an Apocalypse.

So, all in all, an important and interesting find.

Don't tell.


Cheers

[Fisherman]

Certainly. And to the editors.

Let's not be mean. It's an Apocalypse.

Don't tell.

Cheers

I don´t understand, David, you seem to joke about this?

Did you know before that Hutchinson was in all probability not a regular of the Victorian Home. Yes?

Or are you trying in your familiar way to diminish the value of the information?

That won´t work, you know that. From this day forward, there will never be an opportunity when you unchallenged can say that Hutchinson lived in the midst of the murder territory.

He MAY have - but we don´t know. Not any longer.

He could just as well have lived in Bethnal Green.

Actually, you may fancy that idea? Bethnal Green, you know...? Fleming? One and the same - with one and the same address...?

I would have pounced on it if I were you.

Nudge, nudge, wink, wink.

The best,
Fisherman