A closer look at George Hutchinson

[barnflatwyngarde]

could be but i'm not a fan of theories that are a bit of a kop out - 'he got the dates wrong' being an example. Same goes for Maxwell - seems impossible that speaking to the police the same day she was mistaken.

On the dates wrong theory, also worth noting that Fisherman wrote that article, he thinks lech was the ripper, so it's in his interest to discredit hutch as Lech seems a hugely unlikely candidate for Aman.

Has anyone expressed an opinion as to why Hutchinson vanishes so quickly from the case?

One minute he's the witness who can positively identify the killer, and his very specific clothing. The next minute the police appear to drop him like a hot potato.

Surely the most likely explanation is that the police came to the conclusion that he was wrong.

[Sunny Delight]

One part of George Hutchinson being the killer that doesn't make sense is this. Do those who advocate that he was the killer believe he didn't meet Kelly but instead happened across her standing talking with AK man? And if AK man didn't exist was he standing at Crossingham's watching the Court in preparation of attacking Kelly? Lay out how this works. If he did meet Kelly as he said then why if he was the killer did he not immediately accept her proposition? Why turn her down and only when another man appears does he then proceed to follow them, hang around outside for a while and then enter the Court to do what- attack Kelly? Lay out the scenario.

[Aethelwulf]

Fair enough points Aeth, but the most telling point against Hutchinson's testimony is surely the fact that shortly after he claimed to have seen an individual who, if his statement was true and accurate, was probably Jack the Ripper, Hutchinson vanishes from all police attempts to track down the killer.

I think the likelihood is that after some searching questions from the police, the realisation dawned on them that Hutchinson had simply got his dates wrong.

Nothing dramatic, nothing conspiratorial, just a mistake!

could be but i'm not a fan of theories that are a bit of a kop out - 'he got the dates wrong' being an example. Same goes for Maxwell - seems impossible that speaking to the police the same day she was mistaken.

On the dates wrong theory, also worth noting that Fisherman wrote that article, he thinks lech was the ripper, so it's in his interest to discredit hutch as Lech seems a hugely unlikely candidate for Aman.

[Abby Normal]

Of course if Hutchinson was mistaken about the day, the whole thing falls apart.

Walter Dew certainly thought that Hutchinson was mistaken.

In issue five of "The Casebook Examiner", Christer Holmgren wrote an excellent article which raises very serious doubts about Hutchinson's story.

hi barn
yeah I think that was probably another of dews screw ups. Hutch was there- his story is corroberated by sarah lewis who saw him standing across the court-"waiting and watching as if he were looking for someone to come out". exactly what hutch said he was doing at the time.
he was there that night, but the aman part of it is probably BS.

[barnflatwyngarde]

i've read that article and seems a bit of a stretch as the crux of the argument seems to be hutch couldn't have made those observations because it was raining that night. What hutch saw probably spanned a very short amount of time, could have just been spotting with rain or have stopped at that time. I believe the heavy rain wasn't noted until later. That being said, hutch wasn't given hard labour or other sentence for time wasting like some others that came forward, so the police must have believed him to a certain extent but also had reason to question his statement for some reason

Fair enough points Aeth, but the most telling point against Hutchinson's testimony is surely the fact that shortly after he claimed to have seen an individual who, if his statement was true and accurate, was probably Jack the Ripper, Hutchinson vanishes from all police attempts to track down the killer.

I think the likelihood is that after some searching questions from the police, the realisation dawned on them that Hutchinson had simply got his dates wrong.

Nothing dramatic, nothing conspiratorial, just a mistake!

[Abby Normal]

I wonder what was meant by Hutchinson being of "military appearance"?

And does this conflict with Sarah Lewis's description of a short and stout man?

Hi Harry
i think it was "militarty bearing" whatever that means-I guess he gave the reporter the impression he was ex/military? but no I dont think it would preclude him from being short and stout.

[Aethelwulf]

Of course if Hutchinson was mistaken about the day, the whole thing falls apart.

Walter Dew certainly thought that Hutchinson was mistaken.

In issue five of "The Casebook Examiner", Christer Holmgren wrote an excellent article which raises very serious doubts about Hutchinson's story.

i've read that article and seems a bit of a stretch as the crux of the argument seems to be hutch couldn't have made those observations because it was raining that night. What hutch saw probably spanned a very short amount of time, could have just been spotting with rain or have stopped at that time. I believe the heavy rain wasn't noted until later. That being said, hutch wasn't given hard labour or other sentence for time wasting like some others that came forward, so the police must have believed him to a certain extent but also had reason to question his statement for some reason

[barnflatwyngarde]

Of course if Hutchinson was mistaken about the day, the whole thing falls apart.

Walter Dew certainly thought that Hutchinson was mistaken.

In issue five of "The Casebook Examiner", Christer Holmgren wrote an excellent article which raises very serious doubts about Hutchinson's story.

[Harry D]

hi harry
if aman did exist and entered into marys room with her as hutch described, then it seems that sarah lewis would have missed them and they were already in her room when sarah arrived because she describes the waiting man (hutch) in the spot he took up after aman and mary went into her room.

but all a moot point because aman probably didnt exist.

I wonder what was meant by Hutchinson being of "military appearance"?

And does this conflict with Sarah Lewis's description of a short and stout man?

[Abby Normal]

The idea of Aman actually being Bury is interesting. I believe in his original statement hutch described Aman as having a fair mustache. Bury was described with dark brown hair but with fair mustache/light sandy coloured facial hair. Some of the other witnesses describe a man with a fair mustache as well. Bury owned a fur-lined coat and black kids gloves, also noted in Dundee for his fondness for wearing jewelry. Seems to have been quite vain about his clothing. I've previously dismissed Aman as I didn't think there was a credible suspect that could have dressed like that, and been shabby genteel in other instances, but I think for Bury there is a case to be made. If it was Bury I think he'd either been at some smart do (e.g., one of his smoking concerts) and Kelly was a chance encounter, or given the high police presence and lack of opportunity of getting someone into a dark corner outside, it was planned to win her confidence.

intersting wulfy
I didnt know all that about bury.

[Abby Normal]

Hi Abby , youve made some interesting points thats for sure for your case , just a few things if i may , Firstly, how exactly does George Hutchinson fit the profile to a T ? If you look at what was done to Mary Kellys body and what George did for a living, and the fact very little is know about him , im just wondering what possible motive or what profile exist to match that of george that he could have had for such a barbaric act ?


Heres just a few more interesting points


''Hutchinson was paid the equivalent of a months wages by the police for his help in searching for his Ripper suspect, he was also paid by the press for his story. Could this be the real reason why an unemployed groom was so keen to help and perhaps why he elaborated on his statement description a little''.

This was from an article on casebook about George which im sure you know about . Just my opinion but i dont think the police of the day were paying jack the ripper to find himself [if that story if indeed true]



If George was the Ripper he certainly fooled Abberline and the whole entire Police force and Scotland yard , at such a young age 22 [i think could have been a bit more as know one really knows for sure ].

Abberline stated that he believed Hutchinson's statement was, 'Important and true'. If the police did not believe Hutchinson's statement description, why did they arrest Joseph Denny and Joseph Isaacs. Was it because they were foreign looking and wearing long Astrakhan trimmed coat's, exactly as Hutchinson had described.[Point 3 ?]Whos claim is it that its a ''fact'' he lied ?


Just my opinion on G.H. .... Too much circumstancial evidence and conjectour to rest my head on the pillow at night to convince me that he was jack the ripper . just sayin.....

cheers fishy

hi fishy

Hi Abby , youve made some interesting points thats for sure for your case , just a few things if i may , Firstly, how exactly does George Hutchinson fit the profile to a T ?

local lowlife average joe. would have known the area very well, as the ripper surely did. english gentile out of work--motive for not liking/blaming jews-described aman as jewish(hutch)-lipski! and GSG disparaging jews (the ripper).

''Hutchinson was paid the equivalent of a months wages by the police for his help in searching for his Ripper suspect, he was also paid by the press for his story. Could this be the real reason why an unemployed groom was so keen to help and perhaps why he elaborated on his statement description a little''.

This was from an article on casebook about George which im sure you know about . Just my opinion but i dont think the police of the day were paying jack the ripper to find himself [if that story if indeed true]

hutch if the ripper probably used to laugh himself to sleep with that one. Hutch if not the ripper probably did the same.

Just my opinion on G.H. .... Too much circumstancial evidence and conjectour to rest my head on the pillow at night to convince me that he was jack the ripper . just sayin.....

no worries fishy, I just think hutch makes one of the least weak suspects along with a handful of others. gun to head i would probably say no not the ripper. but id wince when saying it. he was probably just a lying attention seeker.
but maybe not. the lurking/ stalking behavior/anti alibi/ troubles me most.

[Aethelwulf]

but all a moot point because aman probably didnt exist.

The idea of Aman actually being Bury is interesting. I believe in his original statement hutch described Aman as having a fair mustache. Bury was described with dark brown hair but with fair mustache/light sandy coloured facial hair. Some of the other witnesses describe a man with a fair mustache as well. Bury owned a fur-lined coat and black kids gloves, also noted in Dundee for his fondness for wearing jewelry. Seems to have been quite vain about his clothing. I've previously dismissed Aman as I didn't think there was a credible suspect that could have dressed like that, and been shabby genteel in other instances, but I think for Bury there is a case to be made. If it was Bury I think he'd either been at some smart do (e.g., one of his smoking concerts) and Kelly was a chance encounter, or given the high police presence and lack of opportunity of getting someone into a dark corner outside, it was planned to win her confidence.

[Abby Normal]

If "Astrakhan Man" did exist, wouldn't he have caught Sarah Lewis' attention? She described seeing a couple, but nothing about the male was noteworthy enough for her to comment on. It's already been pointed out that such a figure would've stood out like a sore thumb.

hi harry
if aman did exist and entered into marys room with her as hutch described, then it seems that sarah lewis would have missed them and they were already in her room when sarah arrived because she describes the waiting man (hutch) in the spot he took up after aman and mary went into her room.

but all a moot point because aman probably didnt exist.

[Harry D]

If "Astrakhan Man" did exist, wouldn't he have caught Sarah Lewis' attention? She described seeing a couple, but nothing about the male was noteworthy enough for her to comment on. It's already been pointed out that such a figure would've stood out like a sore thumb.

[Sunny Delight]

In my honest opinion and analysis i still think hutch is most likely to be jack the ripper:

1. he was there with mary kelly near time of death.
2. he engaged in stalking behavior.
3. he lied and made up a ridiculous suspect in aman.
4. he waited until the inquest was over to conveniently come forward.
5. his presence lurking was corroborated by sarah lewis
6. he has no alibi at probable time of death, and indeed by his own account , was walking about.
7. he accused a jew. the gsg incriminated a jew.
8. he fits general profile to a t.
9. was staying at the victoria house. a stones throw from dorset street and in tje heart of ripper territory.
10. fits the general witness descriptions
11. unlike bury, druitt and others the mackenzie murder dosnt rule him out.
12. only ripper suspect that was both a "witness" with an actual physical connection to the case and a police person of interst.
13. Changed story from police deposition to press story now saying he stood outside her window indicating he knew not only where she exactly lived but placing himself even closer to her place of death.

According to witnesses, Four men were seen to be in mary kellys presense the night of her murder. so one of them is most likely to be her killer and therefore jack the ripper.

Joe Barnett
Blotchy
George Hutchinson
Astrakan man

Joe Barnett has an alibi and was cleared by police.
Blotchy was seen earlier with the victim than the usual time of ripper murders and hutches account exonerates him.
Aman is more than likely a de facto false suspect.
George hurchinson was the last credible person seen with mary kelly. he places himself in her company around tod, engaged in stalking behavior and has zero alibi. IMHO George Hutchinson is most likely to be Mary Kellys killer and therefor Jack the Ripper.

We don't know enough about Hutchinson. I am happy that Abberline interviewed him, spoke with him and was satisfied by his story and his explanations. Does that mean he couldn't have done it? Of course it doesn't but Abberline absolutely has my trust. The thing is we do not have all the information. We know what Hutchinson said to the Police and Press but his absolutely key interview with Abberline did not survive. All we have is the snippet that Hutchinson knew Mary Kelly for three years, has sometimes given her a few shillings and had watched her with AK man as he was suprised to see such a well dressed man with her. That is it. Everything else I see is innuendo or as I say negligible stuff.