Originally posted by Tom_Wescott
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Why did he lied?
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by Wickerman View PostRead this...
"Sarah Lewes, 24, Great Pearl-street, a laundress, said-I know a Mrs. Keiller, in Miller's-court, and went to see her on Friday morning at 2.30 o'clock by Spitalfields Church clock. 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. I also saw a man and a woman who had no hat on and were the worse for drink pass up the court."
Daily News, 13 Nov. 1888.
.Regards, Jon S.
i have never seen this before, or anyone else has ever mentioned this before, in all the years that we've studied MJK, IF THIS WAS SO, we would have been corrected years ago.....probably by Sudgen, or one of the founder Ripperologists here!
also i think you're wrong with regards to GH, you have no proof that he crossed the road and walked right up to the archway, he was seen standing on the other side of the road only.... you are quoting and manipulating information, that has never come to light before.
i now want to see all of what you have on a new thread and we'll go through it togetherLast edited by Malcolm X; 11-17-2011, 02:57 PM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Wickerman View PostHi Tom.
Yes, apparently Hutchinson did stand opposite Millers Court outside Crossingham's, and then moved across to stand outside the archway of the passage. Only then he takes a walk up the passage and stood at Kelly's door. Lewis saw him looking up/into the court (at the back of Kelly's room), for a moment.
Different news stories use different terminology. Some call the 'passage' the 'court', while others use 'passage' and refer to the open space behind Kelly's as the 'court', which technically is the correct use.
The passage leads to the Court, the passage is not the Court.
Here is what I think Lewis saw, a man (in red) standing outside Kelly's door looking into the dark court.
Regards, Jon S.
i'm a GH fanboy, but you're stretching the story too far, because this makes him look far too guilty, and unfortunately; her initial statement does not mention this at all..... and if this was to be interpreted like so, as you say back in 1888, then GH would have been far more of a suspect
do not go by what the tabloids say...... nowadays or even back in 1888, you can not believe anything they tell you and i would have thought that this was pretty obvious..... they have always told lies !!!!!
Comment
-
Originally posted by John Winsett View PostHe lied most likely For the same reason people confess to murders they didn't do: Recognition, money to tell his story to the press, insanity, etc. I used to think he was the killer of MJK, now I think he's full of it.
Its easy to just call him a liar..... its easy to call anyone a liar who you don't agree with.
Regards, Jon S.Regards, Jon S.
Comment
-
Originally posted by John Winsett View PostYou are correct but I don't agree or disagree with GH. I think he made it up. JMHO. As posted before no one else ever saw the AM and he doesn't fit the other descriptions. So you have to pick the witnesses you think are most believable. I don't believe GH, that's all. Good point though.
No-one else saw a man dressed like Astrachan, agreed.
Interestingly though, we don't even need Hutchinson's story.
Sarah Lewis saw the couple (ahead of Hutch) go up the passage, she also saw a man (Hutch) outside the passage in Dorset St., who eventually came to stand at Kelly's door.
Regardless what the male companion looked like, with or without the Astrachan coat, Lewis saw them in the passage heading towards room 13.
We don't need Hutchinson at all, especially if we discard the description he gave, what is left provides no value to the story.
Regards, Jon S.Regards, Jon S.
Comment
Comment