Why did he lied?

[Tom_Wescott]

Stout vs Military?

In case anyone missed it, on Lynn's 'Hurlbert' thread, post #34 I believe, Simon Wood posts a description of Hurlbert, from British sources, that describe him both as 'stout' and as having a military appearance, proving that at least in this instance, both are not mutually exclusive. To a lower class person, they might see him as 'fat' or 'stout', but to someone with a more discerning eye, who perhaps might be a little 'stout' themselves, they'd notice the way such a man carried himself and determine he had a 'military' bearing or appearance.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Tom_Wescott]

Hi all. Without any form of employment, GH would not have been 'paid' for his help, though he would have been provided lodging and food expense, which would have been a big deal to him.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Wickerman]

The first one you say refers to Blotchy face, any others if true, refer to after 3am only...... but nothing is seen between 2 and 3am.

Not sure what you mean Malcolm, I didn't say the first one refers to Blotchy.
All four concern Hutchinson.
Both points made by Hutchinson are confirmed by Sarah Lewis and are timed between 2:30am - 3:00am.

Regards, Jon S.

[GregBaron]

Former or latter?

When we, hopefully, find out what was going on in 1888, ALL of us will be silent. I, for one, will be glad when that happens.

Hi Lynn,

I can't help but ask. Which will make you gladder?

A) When all of us are silent
B) When we find out what was going on in 1888?


I anxiously await your reply.


Greg

[Malcolm X]

I think it must be taken for granted that G H was present. Would a witness make the claims that G H made if he was not being entirely honest?

Hutchinson:
"They both then went up the court together."

Sarah Lewis:
"I also saw a man and a woman who had no hat on and were the worse for drink pass up the court."

Hutchinson:
"I went up the court and stayed there a couple of minutes, but did not see any light in the house or hear any noise."

Sarah Lewis:
"In the doorway of the deceased's house I saw a man in a wideawake hat standing. He was not tall, but a stout-looking man. He was looking up the court as if he was waiting for some one."

Hutchinson placed himself at Kelly's door at the critical time by his own volition. An extremely precarious admission for a 'killer', or for a 'liar' to make. Unless Hutchinson was simply the naively honest witness he claimed to be.

Regards, Jon S.

The first one you say refers to Blotchy face, any others if true, refer to after 3am only...... but nothing is seen between 2 and 3am.

could he be telling the truth and simply Naive, no his suspect description is too loaded and too clever for this, Abberline believed him because this GH did not seem to be anything like JTR, plus of course, he described EXACTLY what JTR might be like...... something straight out of a ``little shop of horrors``

the problem we have with GH is ?...... who the hell is he, because he definitely isn't Toppy, he's too young, plus still around for the rest of his life as a stay at home ``family guy``.

i dont think that we have any proof that Toppy even stayed at Victoria holmes, but i could be wrong; maybe Ben knows........ GH yes, but maybe not this imposter called Toppy.

all of this Reg stuff looks like a lie anyway, especially when he mentions the Royal Conspiracy.

[Wickerman]

to me this makes no difference, because it looks like he was there, reward or not.

I think it must be taken for granted that G H was present. Would a witness make the claims that G H made if he was not being entirely honest?

Hutchinson:
"They both then went up the court together."

Sarah Lewis:
"I also saw a man and a woman who had no hat on and were the worse for drink pass up the court."

Hutchinson:
"I went up the court and stayed there a couple of minutes, but did not see any light in the house or hear any noise."

Sarah Lewis:
"In the doorway of the deceased's house I saw a man in a wideawake hat standing. He was not tall, but a stout-looking man. He was looking up the court as if he was waiting for some one."

Hutchinson placed himself at Kelly's door at the critical time by his own volition. An extremely precarious admission for a 'killer', or for a 'liar' to make. Unless Hutchinson was simply the naively honest witness he claimed to be.

Regards, Jon S.

[Malcolm X]

It has always been mentioned on this forum that GH was after a reward or he was maybe given a reward etc..... this has been so for the last 10 years.

to me this makes no difference, because it looks like he was there, reward or not.

this Toppy is also too young for JTR

[Lechmere]

Well... I said it has been suggested – I didn’t say he had definately been paid for services rendered.

In support of this suggestion:
It was reported in the Wheeling Register.
We know for a fact that witnesses who went around with the police looking for suspects were often paid. Hutchinson did this for at least two days. There is a reported case of this practice in Islington around the same time.
We have Toppy’s sons saying his father George was paid – if Topy’s was Hutchinson of course.

I think it is very plausible to suggest that Hutchinson may have been paid for this activities.

[Wickerman]

....Anyway the suggestion is that Hutchinson may have benefitted from this form of payment.

Even though you don't know what it was, or even if he was paid?

[Lechmere]

I hasn't been suggested that Hutchinson was angling to get a reward. The police paid informants to go around looking for the culprit the say they saw or if they claim to know what the person of interest looked like.
This did not depend on the witness being in a job - and being paid money in lieu of their wages.
Anyway the suggestion is that Hutchinson may have benefitted from this form of payment.

[Wickerman]

Hi Malcolm,
Hutchinson viewed the body on the Tuesday morning.

One wonders what was left for Hutchinson to identify seeing as there was nothing for Barnett to identify either.

Regards, Jon S.

[Malcolm X]

A reward would only be paid if an identification resulted in the killer being discovered.If Hutchinson was presenting an untrue account,and the person didn't exist,then he would be unable in future to identify anyone.So he is either telling the truth,or is not coming forward with reward in mind.

ok, so everyone saying he came forward to claim a reward is wrong, this has fooled me too.... unless he thought that he could get a reward, but i'll opt for no reward as a reason, he identified the body, plus JTR or not, he knew what she was wearing.

if he wasn't there, he would not have known or been sure enough what she was wearing, also he would not have been sure enough about what she looked like, because we aren't either!..... Abberline would have tripped him up for sure, he would have been hesitating like crazy.

i think it's odd that if he was interrogated well and i expect that he would have been, that Abberline believed his description of LA DE DA, there is so much here that we're missing.

1.... this suspect passed right by him at close range.... very easy to see him well
2.... the street lighting might have been good enough.
3.... GH had a long time to look at him.

to me the most likely is that he was there and thus he didn't break down under interrogation, especially if the police were already well used to eyewitnesses lieing.

he therefore either saw the killer or he is the killer.

nobody like this suspect has been seen close to a victim, because he only fits a few of the others if this guy dressed up to kill MJK, thus disguising himself ... but he is definitely not the Eddowes suspect and this one is crucial....
NOW THEN :-

he fits the description of a nighmarish Jew from Petticoat lane, that in JTRs mind, also fits the graffiti/ Dutfields

he has accused this guy of murder, without even knowing that the killer is him, he has also made him look as guilty as possible with reference to his clothing..... this is DEFINITELY ON PURPOSE.

to me JTR is on an anti-semetic hate campaign and LA DE DA fits perfectly, in respect to Eddowes/ Stride, LA DE DA does not fit at all, the only person seen close by to a victim is BS/ SAILOR BOY and later on GH.

GH is probably BROAD SHOULDERS, who changed slightly to suit a Sailor boy, and finally changed back to be outside Millers court, but the person JTR must not look like is Sailor boy.

JTR for some reason does not describe a ``joe barnett``or a ``Tumblety``, no he goes way OTT and describes a Jew.

the word ``Lipski``.... the location of Dutfields, the graffiti, the description of LA DE DA, it all looks far too much the same, this culminated with JTR inserting himself into the case.

GH whoever he is, is amost definitely JTR.

There are a few hitches and blips that make me wonder, but not enough to throw him off course, he just looks way too guilty, there is no other suspect even close

[richardnunweek]

Hi Malcolm,
Hutchinson viewed the body on the Tuesday morning.
As for the non description of Mary's clothing, we surely can take it as fact that he would have been asked to describe what she was wearing at 2am, even if that is not mentioned in the official statement.
I am sure the whole of Hutchinson's '' interrogation'' [ as Abberline phrased it] did not consist of just the words issued in the statement...
Regards Richard.

[richardnunweek]

Hi Harry ,
You are absolutely correct, how can Hutchinson claim a reward on a made up account?
Indeed he had a good reason for coming forward...how about ''good intentions''
Regards Richard.

[harry]

A reward would only be paid if an identification resulted in the killer being discovered.If Hutchinson was presenting an untrue account,and the person didn't exist,then he would be unable in future to identify anyone.So he is either telling the truth,or is not coming forward with reward in mind.