Hutch evidence

[TheTypeWriter]

I agree with this. I posted on another thread about officer Donald Fouke's description of a suspect (the zodiac) at night time in the Presidio heights area of San Fran in the 1960s. He description was detailed but no way as detailed as Hutch. The difference being is that Fouke was an experience police officer (Hutch is not. He's a Victorian labourer), it was a well lit area with modern lighting (compared to the dark Millers court/commercial road) and his patrol car headlamps were on. Fouke was on the look out of a suspect as Paul Stein's murder had been recently committed in that area. I have run Hutch's suspect description past a few friends who are serving police officers. Their responses were "this is absolute BS", "i've been working homicide for 4 years and usually when we hear stuff like that it sends up a big red flag"

Yes it's just too vivid to be taken seriously. The first time I read it I thought it sounded too good to be true. He was certainly lying, in my opinion, but I wonder why? Was he seeking the limelight like Packer or was there more to it? He seems a suspicious bloke altogether.

[Curious Cat]

I wrote "Mitre Square passage"? - what the hell was I thinking?

Hi Caz, yes I agree.
Hutch had this man in view for several minutes from his first eye contact, to Kelly & the man disappearing up the passage, so he had plenty of time to take it all in. I also think Hutch might have been a little ticked-off by this character effectively stealing a potential night of refuge with a friend. Although he claimed he couldn't afford her offer, to see her scooped away essentially from between his fingers by some foreigner might have raise his ire to some degree.

Loitering as he did for so long raises a question of intent on his part. It is always possible he considered mugging this foreigner as he came out following the liaison. However, although he said he had known Kelly for 3 years, we might be wrong to assume he knew Millers Court was her address. He may have assumed it was where the stranger lived, and was waiting for Kelly to leave.

BIB 1 - Hutchinson and Mary Kelly had already mutually parted company, without any discussion of him seeking a refuge for the rest of the night, before anyone else took up her companionship.

BIB 2 - Miller's Court was out of sight from Dorset Street unless directly viewed down the passage. Hutchinson says he stayed on the corner of Dorset Street before Mary Kelly and the man went into Miller's Court. They would've been in her room by the time he went into the court yet he knew which one of the residences to check for light or noises. He knew where she lived, but then, he only came forward with his statement after her residence had been plastered all over the press. Everyone following the news of the murder would know where 13 Miller's Court was when Hutchinson gave his statement.

[Wickerman]

....... But why then did he claim he was waiting to see the man again?

Caz
X

I don't see that Caz.

In his police statement, Hutch said this about the man.
They both then went up the court together. I then went to the Court to see if I could see them, but could not. I stood there for about three quarters of an hour to see if they came out they did not so I went away.

In his press statement he said the same thing.
I went to look up the court to see if I could see them, but could not. I stood there for threequarters of an hour to see if they came down again, but they did not, and so I went away.

I don't see anywhere that Hutch implies he was just watching for the man. Not until after he had spoken to police.

[caz]

Good point, Jon.

We have always simply assumed Hutch knew Kelly was taking Flash Harry back to her gaff, when he could have thought it was the other way round - until news of her murder reached his ears or eyes. Either way, Hutch could hardly have tried to interrupt their liaison, so he must have decided after nearly an hour that neither of them was going to show, so he may as well leave the court. But why then did he claim he was waiting to see the man again? Was it because it would have been unwise to admit it was the murdered woman he was waiting for?

How I wish we knew what else Abberline asked him!

Love,

Caz
X

[Wickerman]

Good post, Jon.

There is also the point that if Hutchinson was being truthful about his powers of observation, he probably did know MJK as well as he claimed, in which case he was much more likely than any random witness to have paid attention to her encounter with this Flash Harry and commit his description to memory. Not because it dawned on Hutch at the time that she might be in danger, but from natural curiosity concerning someone he knew and the man she was picking up.

Love,

Caz
X

PS: Miller's Court passage

I wrote "Mitre Square passage"? - what the hell was I thinking?

Hi Caz, yes I agree.
Hutch had this man in view for several minutes from his first eye contact, to Kelly & the man disappearing up the passage, so he had plenty of time to take it all in. I also think Hutch might have been a little ticked-off by this character effectively stealing a potential night of refuge with a friend. Although he claimed he couldn't afford her offer, to see her scooped away essentially from between his fingers by some foreigner might have raise his ire to some degree.

Loitering as he did for so long raises a question of intent on his part. It is always possible he considered mugging this foreigner as he came out following the liaison. However, although he said he had known Kelly for 3 years, we might be wrong to assume he knew Millers Court was her address. He may have assumed it was where the stranger lived, and was waiting for Kelly to leave.

[Michael W Richards]

Hutchinson had only a fleeting glance of a few seconds under the light of the Public house.There after he had only the back of the person in sight,for those who believe him.No five minutes , no other close proximity,and no other direct lighting.Just a case of a person(Hutchinson) making up a story without first checking the possibilities.My opinion.

I think the most interesting part of all this is that by coming forward with a story that places him in Wideawakes shoes, he is risking being seen as complicit. To my eye there is no other justification for the issuance of the Pardon for Accomplices than Wideawakes presence there, established by witness Sarah Lewis's statement, and since this is the first murder that they chose to use that pardon offer to lure out confessions, they thought that it was likely more than 1 man was involved there. Which is significant when considering that all that late Fall they seemed content with the premise that they were looking for a lone killer.

Do we see that premise carried forward, that a lone killer was at large? I think they did. Which makes that pardon offer suggestive of the authorities belief that in Mary Jane Kellys murder it was probable that 2 or more men worked together.

So...why is she still on a lone killers list of victims?

[caz]

Conjecture, lets not make it up as we go along !

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

You may have missed that little word 'if' in my post, Trev, signalling to everyone else that it was conjecture, rather than just making stuff up.

Here you go:

There is also the point that if Hutchinson was being truthful about his powers of observation, he probably did know MJK as well as he claimed, in which case he was much more likely than any random witness to have paid attention to her encounter with this Flash Harry and commit his description to memory. Not because it dawned on Hutch at the time that she might be in danger, but from natural curiosity concerning someone he knew and the man she was picking up.

If, on the other hand, Hutch was just making stuff up, he probably lied about his relationship with MJK too.

You're welcome.

Love,

Caz
X

[caz]

I just wondered what kind of street lighting: until recently this would be sodium based where all cats are ginger toms. Hutch would be in gas light, which depends on the mantel used, but from my recollection of the Wandsworth Ram Inn (ouch) during the 1970s blackout (where they still had gas lights!) is that gas gives very accurate colouring.

I have no view on Hutch, but there does seem to be (in general) a view that he was just an ordinary chap, and as bosses tend to think, all chaps are interchangeable. In fact some chaps have undiscovered talents, and it is possible that Hutch had what used to be called a photographic memory, able to see an image in his mind. (Certainly I used to be able to do this, which I found to great advantage in my English Lit O level, being able to read off vast wodges of MacB. )

Oh my goodness, Dupin, I lived within walking distance of the Ram in Wandsworth from 1963 to 1973! I also had a bit of a photographic memory up to at least 1970, which is the only reason I got an A in my Latin O level that year! I learned translations off by heart the evening or two before the exam, then promptly forgot everything the day after I needed it, which freed up my memory banks for the next exam. It almost felt like cheating.

We did the Scottish play for English Lit O level in 1970, and it's the one I can still quote from more than any other.

Love,

Caz
X

[Trevor Marriott]

Good post, Jon.

There is also the point that if Hutchinson was being truthful about his powers of observation, he probably did know MJK as well as he claimed, in which case he was much more likely than any random witness to have paid attention to her encounter with this Flash Harry and commit his description to memory. Not because it dawned on Hutch at the time that she might be in danger, but from natural curiosity concerning someone he knew and the man she was picking up.

Love,

Caz
X

PS: Miller's Court passage

Conjecture, lets not make it up as we go along !

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[caz]

Steady on Mr. T.
Until Hutchinson is identified we do not know what his profession had been.
I'm not sure if you know this but a Groom (for horses) must have an eye for detail. A Groom represents the owner (at horse shows), he must be well dressed, polite, respectful and have the same standards as his boss - the owner of the stables.
If this was his true profession, as he claimed, then this explains why he was described as "of military appearance".

I'm not sure if you know Stewart Evans, career police officer, author of The Jack the Ripper Sourcebook, but he was on here for a few years and he saw no problem with the level of detail. Another policeman, writes under 'Bridewell', equally had no problem with what Hutchinson said.

I personally have no problem either, it's not like Hutch only caught a passing glimpse of the man. He passed right under his eyes, beneath a street light, and was in view for maybe 5 minutes or more, before the couple walked up Mitre Square passage.
If you stood and stared at a stranger for about 5 minutes or more I'll bet you could make a list of details too.

Good post, Jon.

There is also the point that if Hutchinson was being truthful about his powers of observation, he probably did know MJK as well as he claimed, in which case he was much more likely than any random witness to have paid attention to her encounter with this Flash Harry and commit his description to memory. Not because it dawned on Hutch at the time that she might be in danger, but from natural curiosity concerning someone he knew and the man she was picking up.

Love,

Caz
X

PS: Miller's Court passage

[Dupin]

To prove or disprove his story I carried out a controlled experiment using three different coloured pendants. I used a volunteer to wear each one separately in poor lighting conditions at night under a street light

I just wondered what kind of street lighting: until recently this would be sodium based where all cats are ginger toms. Hutch would be in gas light, which depends on the mantel used, but from my recollection of the Wandsworth Ram Inn (ouch) during the 1970s blackout (where they still had gas lights!) is that gas gives very accurate colouring.

I have no view on Hutch, but there does seem to be (in general) a view that he was just an ordinary chap, and as bosses tend to think, all chaps are interchangeable. In fact some chaps have undiscovered talents, and it is possible that Hutch had what used to be called a photographic memory, able to see an image in his mind. (Certainly I used to be able to do this, which I found to great advantage in my English Lit O level, being able to read off vast wodges of MacB. )

[harry]

Hutchinson had only a fleeting glance of a few seconds under the light of the Public house.There after he had only the back of the person in sight,for those who believe him.No five minutes , no other close proximity,and no other direct lighting.Just a case of a person(Hutchinson) making up a story without first checking the possibilities.My opinion.

[Trevor Marriott]

To be fair, we wouldn't know whether they did or not. All we know is they used Lawende.

You & I both agree they should have, so perhaps they did, an identity parade is not a public affair so the press wouldn't know if the PC was called to the cell as the witness for the ID.
No police paperwork has survived to tell us that part of the story, but the press had access to Lawende so maybe that is why we have his story in the papers. Lawende could have been the second choice of police, neither him nor the press would have known this.
It was mentioned in the press that reporters would often sit at the station watching who came and went, ready to pounce on the next chapter of the case as it unfolded.
If they saw Lawende walk in, they would pounce on him as he walked out, thats why we have the story. But, PC Smith worked there, so no pressmen at the front lobby of the station would think anything unusual was going on. So they wouldn't be aware of any ID parade involving PC Smith.

If Smith was used, as their first choice, his response must have been, "it isn't him" (Sadler). Otherwise, no need to use Lawende for a second opinion.

I believe a cell ID would not have been a legal ID in 1888 and would have been of no evidential value.

There were police codes in operation back then I only have the later version. Perhaps someone could post them in full that relate to ID procedures in 1888. If anyone has Montys book titled "Sir Howard Vincents Police code 1889" written in 1888 they are in there.

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Trevor Marriott]

Steady on Mr. T.
Until Hutchinson is identified we do not know what his profession had been.
I'm not sure if you know this but a Groom (for horses) must have an eye for detail. A Groom represents the owner (at horse shows), he must be well dressed, polite, respectful and have the same standards as his boss - the owner of the stables.
If this was his true profession, as he claimed, then this explains why he was described as "of military appearance".



I'm not sure if you know Stewart Evans, career police officer, author of The Jack the Ripper Sourcebook, but he was on here for a few years and he saw no problem with the level of detail. Another policeman, writes under 'Bridewell', equally had no problem with what Hutchinson said.

I personally have no problem either, it's not like Hutch only caught a passing glimpse of the man. He passed right under his eyes, beneath a street light, and was in view for maybe 5 minutes or more, before the couple walked up Mitre Square passage.
If you stood and stared at a stranger for about 5 minutes or more I'll bet you could make a list of details too.

Over the last 30 odd years, I have been directly involved in many criminal cases involving identification issues, and I have had real grave concerns about this identification and his statement to the police.

There are several reasons why his statement may be false, the first is that he described, amongst other things, the colour of the suspect’s eyelashes and the colour of the stone on the watch chain the man was wearing. All of these things would be very difficult to see in poor lighting conditions.

To prove or disprove his story I carried out a controlled experiment using three different coloured pendants. I used a volunteer to wear each one separately in poor lighting conditions at night under a street light and asked the volunteer to walk past me. I was unable to distinguish the different colours, all dark colours i.e. red and blue and black, all looked the same under my controlled lighting test. So based on that I would say that Hutchinson’s statement in its entirety is unsafe to be relied upon.

As to identifying the colour of eyelashes that is an absolute non-starter.

I also believe the police also had their doubts about his testimony, but due to the fact their investigation up until that time had proved negative, they had no choice other than to initially accept and act upon his statement.

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Curious Cat]

Hutchinson only talks of spending all his money going down to Romford and walking all the way from Romford, he doesn't say he walked both ways or spent his money on the way back. If he walked both ways, what's he spending all his money on?

It could be that he spend his money going to Romford by train, travelling from Liverpool Street Station, but didn't have enough for a return ticket so walked back instead.