Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Why did he lied?

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

  • Tom_Wescott
    replied
    Lechmere,

    I'd like to read more about your ideas on Lewis and Hutch. Was this on one of your recent Hutch threads? Can you point me towards it?

    Yours truly,

    Tom Wescott

    Leave a comment:


  • Wickerman
    replied
    Originally posted by Lechmere View Post
    Morgana - Hutchinson can't have read about Lewis's testimony before going in to make his statemnet - the timings don't allow it. No one at the time made any connection between Hutchinson and Lewis's wide-awake hat man - which tells me there was no connection to be made.
    Morgana.

    And just to add a footnote, some have suggested Hutchinson was at the Inquest to hear the testimony of Sarah Lewis. After which he took fright because, they say, "he thought he was seen" (as Widewake-man).

    The trouble is, Broadshoulders was seen in Berner St., Redneck-man was also seen in Duke St. and neither of them thought to dash to the police with some kind of alibi, so why should we believe Hutchinson should?

    Also, Hutchinson sat with Abberline after he gave his story, and Abberline was at the Inquest. So how could Hutchinson offer some excuse for not showing up at the Inquest if he was right there among the public in full view of all the police officials.
    The Inquest was held at the Shoreditch Town Hall which was a very small room.

    Alternately, once the Inquest was adjurned (4 o'clock, 5 o'clock?) the story Sarah Lewis told is 'supposed' to have spread among the public, after which Hutchinson suddenly walked into Commercial St. police station and gave his 'alibi' by 6 o'clock.

    If the word 'strained' comes to mind don't be surprised, you're not alone.

    Regards, Jon S.

    Leave a comment:


  • lynn cates
    replied
    nuts

    Hello Steven. You are entirely welcome.

    "I thought I was going nuts or something."

    Well, nothing that I have said necessarily precludes that. (heh-heh)

    Cheers.
    LC

    Leave a comment:


  • Steven Russell
    replied
    Neil and Lynn,

    What a relief. Thanks for your comments - I thought I was going nuts or something.

    Best wishes,
    Steve.

    Leave a comment:


  • Lechmere
    replied
    It's very common for witnesses to appear late - and in those days the inquest was held very quickly - in this case on Monday when the murder was on Friday.

    Leave a comment:


  • Morgana LeFay
    replied
    Oh. Then it's even weirder. Why did he go to the police 3 days after the killing? Did other witnesses do the same?

    Leave a comment:


  • Lechmere
    replied
    Morgana - Hutchinson can't have read about Lewis's testimony before going in to make his statemnet - the timings don't allow it. No one at the time made any connection between Hutchinson and Lewis's wide-awake hat man - which tells me there was no connection to be made.

    Leave a comment:


  • Monty
    replied
    You don't want to listen to that episode Irene,

    Try episode 13, that's the best one.

    Monty

    Leave a comment:


  • Morgana LeFay
    replied
    Oh, thanks, I hope so too : )

    And....there's another "Morgana LeFay" out there? hehehe. My usual nick is Irene Adler.

    hey, I've just downloaded the Rippercast and will give the Hutchinson chapter a heard...

    Leave a comment:


  • Monty
    replied
    Apologies Morgana,

    I seem to have confused you with someone else.

    Hope you can make it back one day. And for a while.

    Monty

    Leave a comment:


  • Morgana LeFay
    replied
    Hi Monty : )

    No, sorry....sadly I live in Spain, and I've only been in that a-w-e-s-o-m-e city once, and less than a week

    Leave a comment:


  • Monty
    replied
    Morgana,

    Did you come on the London Job earlier this year?

    Monty

    Leave a comment:


  • Morgana LeFay
    replied
    I can prolly. only think of one reason of him going to the police, and that reason is he read Lewis' testimony. Innocent o culprit, that sure scared him.
    Now, about why he lied about the astrakan man:
    Maybe there wasn't a man and
    1) He didn't wanted to say he was the last man who saw Kelly alive. Wanted to make sure police didn't blame him. Or he himself was the killer.
    or maybe there WAS a man, and Hutchinson gave a false description. Why?:
    2) He was involved in something illegal while waiting outside Kelly's house and didn't want that man to be found. Hutchinson was a pimp? Wanted to robe a man who entered the room with Mary?
    3)He was an accomplice of the killer
    4)He was afraid that the killer will go after him, what with that rumor of Eddowes wanting to denounce the killer and getting herself killed

    What do you think?

    Leave a comment:


  • Lechmere
    replied
    One pebble in a tin can can make a lot of noise if you shake it about a lot.

    Leave a comment:


  • lynn cates
    replied
    hasten the day

    Hello Neil. Good point. 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.

    Cheers.
    LC

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X