No announcement yet.

Hutchinson's mileage as a witness

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Hutchinson's mileage as a witness

    I read the two articles below. The Star reported that the blotchy faced man is more important and that Hutch was discredited. A day later Galloway follows the blotchy man and is told by a policeman they are looking for someone else. Would it not have been prudent to question this blotchy faced man? I do have difficulty getting my head around this contradiction. I am also surprised that neither Swanson, Big Mac, Anderson or Abberline mention Hutchinson in their memoirs or later statements. he seems like the type of witness you'd want to keep track of because he had the best look at the last man seen with MJK.
    By Thursday 15th November 1888, The Star newspaper had reported that Hutchinson’s statement was discredited and that Mrs Cox’s blotchy faced man was more important. I appreciate this is just a newspaper and should be viewed with caution
    16th Nov 1888 – Evening News reports that Mr Galloway (a clerk) witnessed a man resembling Mr’s Cox’s blotchy faced/carroty moustache man. Galloway followed the man up Whitechapel road and Commercial Street. The man looked like a villain and seemed to be aware he was being followed by Galloway. When they entered Thrawl Street, the villain saw a policeman and was startled by the cop’s appearance. Galloway informed the constable and said he looks like the description provided by Mary Ann Cox. The constable declined to arrest him because he was looking for a man of a very difference appearance. A day later on 17th Nov the police claim as reported in Daily News that the man Mr Galloway saw is a respectable citizen and that he was acting in “concert with them in his mysterious movements”
    Last edited by MrTwibbs; 10-01-2021, 02:18 PM.

  • #2
    I've added below some issues which I would like to hear your comments on.

    • We have not not been able to confirm his identity despite exhaustive searches. Not unusual because people did use aliases back then but I'd have expected the police to have checked and verified this but no record that his name was anything other than George Hutchinson unless of course the police failed to check him out properly?

    • He came forward after the inquest

    • His claim of reporting it to a policeman in Commercial Street is dubious and unsubstantiated. However I believe this account was in the newspapers not Abberline's interview at Commercial Street?

    • His reasons for standing outside Miller’s Court for 45 minutes is suspicious.

    • He waited until after the inquest to visit the police station and had an explanation for the delay

    • His description of the well dressed man he saw was far too detailed. Eg: being able to determine color of his eyelashes, handkerchief and stone. The mention of a red handkerchief, stone were in the newspapers not the Abberline interview so did he embellish it when he spoke to the newspapers? or did they add it in for fun? Is there any evidence to suggest he actually spoke to the newspapers? No other witness including Sarah Lewis saw this astrakhan man which is weird

    • There is no evidence to confirm his story that he knew Mary for 3 years. If he knew her so well how come he didn't provide more info about her?

    • It is suspicious that he claimed to give Mary jane Kelly shillings on occasion. A lot of money. 1 shilling would likely pay for a box of a dozen eggs or 3 days lodgings.

    • Within days of him being questioned by Abberline, he fades into obscurity and is never mentioned again or used as a witness.
    Last edited by MrTwibbs; 10-01-2021, 02:41 PM.


    • #3
      I agree the description is suspiciously extravagant. If the police believed him he should have been their best witness, with the best view of 'the last man seen with a victim' of any of the potential eyewitnesses, but there is no suggestion that the police used him in subsequent IDs.


      • #4
        Blotchy doped Mary Ann Kelly, and sailor man Hutchinson was a lookout for Henry Gawen Sutton who murdered her around 3am.

        There was no Astrakhan Man.He was based on Randolph Churchill.Guess who lived next door to him in Brook Street!
        Last edited by DJA; 10-01-2021, 04:29 PM.
        My name is Dave. You cannot reach me through Debs email account


        • #5
          Until Hutchinson came in the Loitering Man seen by Sarah is presumed, or questioned as, perhaps complicit in this murder in some fashion. It I believe is the basis for the Pardon for Accomplices signed that Saturday afternoon. This was an unusual and unprecedented action in all of these cases. My contention is that Hutchinson had an objective when he came in, and the press you posted in your first post seems to suggest if Im correct, it was met. Before Hutchinson Wideawake is suspicious and perhaps considered to be involved in the murder, for a time after his statement was submitted police evidently now saw Wideawake as a "friend" or Hutchinson, and the fact that Astrakan is created downplays the importance of Blotchy..."The constable declined to arrest him because he was looking for a man of a very difference appearance".

          2 huge mistakes. Downplaying the importance of Blotchy, no one ever sees him leave and he is the last person seen with Mary, and accepting Hutchinson on his word and using Sarahs sighting as a makeshift confirmation. Intentional errors, or desperate police?


          • #6
            I believe the possibility of Hutch being JTR should not be discounted. Anyone who inserts themselves into an investigation should be properly questioned but unfortunately there's not enough information to prove or disprove this happened.
            Blotchy man was carrying a pint of beer and didn't seem to be too bothered about being seen by Cox. It's likely he had been in the pub with mary and no doubt seen by others so unlikely to have been the killer. Blotchy man was seen at around 11.45pm with Mary. She sang until 1am. Estimated she was dead around 3:30am to 4am so unlikely Blotchy waited up to 4 hours to kill her. My opinion.


            • #7
              Originally posted by DJA View Post
              Blotchy doped Mary Ann Kelly, and sailor man Hutchinson was a lookout for Henry Gawen Sutton who murdered her around 3am.

              There was no Astrakhan Man.He was based on Randolph Churchill.Guess who lived next door to him in Brook Street!
              I've honestly not come across this theory before but will read up about it. thank you.


              • #8
                • If you take away the ostentatious garb, what are you left with: a man in his mid 30s, 5’6” to 5’7”, light moustache, hat, Jewish look. Sounds a little familiar. Also, a red handkerchief – Lawende’s man had a red necktie.
                • Why would JtR feel the need to get dressed up? Perhaps after his close call with Stride-Eddowes he realised the chance of keep doing what he was and not being caught were slim. Logical answer: go inside. A good way to secure this would be to get dressed up as someone above suspicion (very smart).
                • Considering the smart clothes, the full conversation that Hutch heard a part of could have been:
                AMAN: ‘I’m going to the lord mayor’s show and can’t find a bed for the night’
                KELLY: ‘Don’t worry, I will make you comfortable’
                • So did Kelly take him back, get into bed and not leave. I’ve always thought the crime scene of boots by fire, clothes folded up says: ‘I’m done for the day, going to bed’. At some point, after they were in bed, he then attacked her.
                • The only other similar example of the above I can think of is the farmer incident. They go to bed and then at some point he, allegedly, attacks her. Perhaps the difference could be explained by Kelly maintaining a fire and candles in her room, to give light, whereas in the lodging house room perhaps these weren’t available, hence the fumble and botch job? Also, famer’s attacker knew her from 12 months previous so he wouldn’t need the flash clothes to secure her confidence (even if he had beaten her). I also wondered if the necktie on lawende’s man was hiding the abscess/scar on farmer’s man's neck?
                • Overall, I’m not inclined to totally write-off Hutch’s statement, although I have these caveats: what was the source of hutch’s statement being written off? Aberline said he believed him. Also, how solid is the later Kelly Britannia sighting? Although this doesn’t exclude AMAN – he could have been tucked up in Kelly’s bed with his hob-nob and hot milk. Also, having being inspected so closely by Hutch, would her killer really have continued?
                • One of the issues with AMAN is that it writes off a lot of popular suspects: can’t see Koz having the means to pull off a smart (clever smart and clothes smart) deception; Druitt could have; Lech would need his Sunday very best, but with 12 kids was there the spare money for such a get-up? Bury could have done it through Ellen’s 300 quid (40K today) – and we know he used considerable deception to lure ellen away.
                • If I was going wild, I might stretch to 50:50 or even 51:49 in favour of his statement being real. But, I have issues with the boots with white buttons – really?