A closer look at George Hutchinson

[Filby]

I just thought Id mention that the inverse of your preliminary conclusion is likely more accurate, it does indeed seem too elaborate and detailed to have not been at the every least embellished, if not an outright fabrication. As I mentioned before, the fact that we know of someone that moved in around the corner into Little Paternoster Row a few days before the murder then left abruptly the night of the murder, whose description is undeniably very similar to Hutch's Astrakhan Man, might lend credence to a suggestion that this report was intended to point to that same man. And intended to downplay any notion that Wideawake Hat Man was perhaps an accomplice. Hutchs story suggests it was simply one "friend" looking out for another. It would seem the Pardon for Accomplices offer, up until that time never really seriously considered a viable way to obtain information, must have been due to that loitering man seen by Sarah. There is nothing in the murder itself that indicates 2 men or more were likely involved.

I used the word intended above a few times, because I dont believe his intentions coming in Monday night, 4 days later, and after the Inquest had adjourned, were to provide the police with an important lead. Had that been the truth, he would have surfaced later Friday or Saturday knowing that as valuable time ticks away the value of his story diminishes.

4.....days....later.....

Good points. Sorry much for missing your post about the sighting and suspicious activity of possibly AK Man days before. But Hutch would have had to have a good memory for detail (under pressure to) to recall all this within Abberline's questioning. Seeing leaves quite more of an impression but Hutch having previous knowledge of AK Man sightinmg does give me pause to reconsider.

[JeffHamm]

Hi RD.
...

I would suggest the correct attribution is only a concern after the killer is caught, no killer that I have ever read about was concerned about him getting the true credit for his crimes before he was caught, to the extent that he would step forward and inject himself into the case. I maybe wrong, but none come to mind.

The one I can think of is Dennis Radar (BTK). The police had 3 fellows, either arrested for or under suspicion for, one of his crimes. He wrote to the police telling them they had the wrong people, and that he, and he alone, was responsible.

Of course, he did so by posting a letter, and didn't go speak in person to the police (he didn't want his name to be known, but he did want credit). I believe he also wrote to indicate he was not responsible for another crime that was being suggested might be by "BTK".

Now that being said, such behaviour is very rare. The vast majority of serial killers do not prefer the police to even link their cases, let alone to become the focus of public out cry. That sort of thing just makes it harder for them to commit their next offense after all. An unsuspecting public, combined with police not combining information over multiple cases, is all to the benefit of the serial killer after all.

Hmm, Zodiac is sort of the opposite in a way. He wrote multiple letters/post-cards, continuously claiming an ever increasing number of victims. However, I don't think the police ever found any credible information to link him to any murders beyond the one's he's known for (although some have suggested Cherri Jo Bates, much earlier, and also the abduction of Kathleen Johns (who he flashed his lights at to get her to pull over, claimed her tire was loose and he would fix it, then actually loosened it so her car's wheel fell off, then abducted her when he convinced her to get in his car to take her to a garage, etc). Kathleen escaped her abductor and when reporting to the police said the composite drawing of Zodiac that was on the wall was her abductor. Now, what is interesting, is that while it appears Zodiac was willing to increase his victim count (probably artificially), I don't think he ever wrote a letter claiming either of those. His objective appeared more about keeping his name in the press while at the same time misdirecting police (trying to get them to work out what other crimes he committed).

Anyway, I'm digressing. The important point is that while Dennis Radar would fit the bill, like you, I'm hard pressed to think of another example. That in turn implies that this sort of behaviour appears to be very rare, making it a pretty big stretch to presume that JtR just happens to be perhaps the only other person to do such a thing.

- Jeff

[Wickerman]

[I]... And even if it appears that Abberline "believed" his story we don't know if he simply believed it was more likely to be true than not or if he believed it to be true to such an extent that he would be willing to wager the souls of his wife and children on it...

We also do not know to the extent Abberline investigated Hutchinson's story.
Hutch was with the police for several hours after giving his statement to Inspector Badham, then Abberline was sent for and Hutch then sat with him and, in following procedure, Abberline would read through Hutchinson's statement and use it to further question him to obtain more details.

Abberline knew of Sarah Lewis and her statement seeing Wideawake man, the police had her address, they could have gone to find her and bring her to the station to identify Hutchinson.
Abberline could have brought beat constables who patrolled Dorset & Commercial St. to see if they can confirm any part of the story.

The press do report that following Hutchinson's appearance detectives were sent to Millers Court the following day to re-interview tenants and they obtained statements that confirmed Kelly was out after 2:00 am.

"Nothwithstanding that no evidence was produced at the coroner's inquiry to show that she left her apartment after one o'clock, at which hour she was heard singing, there is every reason to believe that she came out after that hour. This circumstance will account for the fact that no light was observed in the room after one o'clock, as stated by one of the witnesses at the inquest. The police have received statements from several persons, some of whom reside in Miller's-court, who are prepared to swear that the deceased was out of her house and in Dorset-street between the hours of two and three o'clock on the morning in question. It has been established to the satisfaction of the police that the unfortunate woman had been murdered at three a.m. or thereabouts on Friday morning."
Morning Advertiser, 14 Nov. 1888.

[Sunny Delight]

I just thought Id mention that the inverse of your preliminary conclusion is likely more accurate, it does indeed seem too elaborate and detailed to have not been at the every least embellished, if not an outright fabrication. As I mentioned before, the fact that we know of someone that moved in around the corner into Little Paternoster Row a few days before the murder then left abruptly the night of the murder, whose description is undeniably very similar to Hutch's Astrakhan Man, might lend credence to a suggestion that this report was intended to point to that same man. And intended to downplay any notion that Wideawake Hat Man was perhaps an accomplice. Hutchs story suggests it was simply one "friend" looking out for another. It would seem the Pardon for Accomplices offer, up until that time never really seriously considered a viable way to obtain information, must have been due to that loitering man seen by Sarah. There is nothing in the murder itself that indicates 2 men or more were likely involved.

I used the word intended above a few times, because I dont believe his intentions coming in Monday night, 4 days later, and after the Inquest had adjourned, were to provide the police with an important lead. Had that been the truth, he would have surfaced later Friday or Saturday knowing that as valuable time ticks away the value of his story diminishes.

4.....days....later.....

This is up there with some of the maddest thinking I have seen on this case. Remarkable. Over a century of investigations have shown us that 4 days is actually a really quick turnaround to make oneself available to the Police. But then I don't think you really care about that do you.

[Sunny Delight]

The point stands though that Hutchinson was not a person of interest at the time but rather appearing to actually be a valuable witness instead.

I don't think those two things are mutually exclusive.

c.d.

Wideawake Man was obviously a key person of interest once Sarah Lewis described him loitering outside Millers Court at 2am in the morning. Hutchinson for all intents and purposes appears to have been exonerated by Abberline as he said he believed his information was important. Nothing we have seems to suggest Hutchinson subsequently became of interest again at a later date.

[Michael W Richards]

This is up there with some of the maddest thinking I have seen on this case. Remarkable. Over a century of investigations have shown us that 4 days is actually a really quick turnaround to make oneself available to the Police. But then I don't think you really care about that do you.

I really dont care that you dont agree Sunny, correct. You didnt even distinguish between the various types of witnesses before proclaiming 4 days is a "quick turnaround". By all accounts there is nothing that would or should prevent George from coming in as soon as possible after hearing of the murder.

Since you seem to skip by any conventional thinking, what reasons do you imagine George Hutchinson would have to delay 4 days before coming forward with an eyewitness account of someone he calls a "friend" who he saw in the company of a man who by all intent and purposes would then likely have been her killer? You know that old thing....last person seen with the victim? Fear? Of whom? What changed on Monday to set his alleged fears aside? Fear of public speaking....I guess thats why he skipped the Inquest then.

Any salient person would know that a suspect sighting with the deceased would be very important to the authorities investigation. So, did he just not like cops then? Or did he figure he would give old A man fair head start out of the country?

It would be prudent to remember that George himself sought to establish a supposed friendship with the deceased, and he didnt have to come in at all if he wasnt her friend.

[Michael W Richards]

Wideawake Man was obviously a key person of interest once Sarah Lewis described him loitering outside Millers Court at 2am in the morning. Hutchinson for all intents and purposes appears to have been exonerated by Abberline as he said he believed his information was important. Nothing we have seems to suggest Hutchinson subsequently became of interest again at a later date.

"Wideawake Man was obviously a key person of interest once Sarah Lewis described him loitering outside Millers Court at 2am." As a potential Accomplice, apparently so.....hence the Pardon offer.

Heres another point it seems you didnt factor in......Sarahs story was known over the weekend, so why then would Hutchinson come in and place himself there at that time, risking being seen as that loitering possible accomplice? Gee....maybe it was to take Wideawakes place, and suddenly that possible accomplice is a "friend" of Marys just looking out for her. Albeit, creepily.

Hutchinson misdirected the investigation and negated looking for the possible accomplice, Wideawake Hat man. But only briefly.

[Wickerman]

Which only demonstrates how easy it is to create fiction when you select your own evidence.

[Michael W Richards]

Which only demonstrates how easy it is to create fiction when you select your own evidence.

Which is it that you object to Jon.....the fact that I pointed out that Hutchinsons suspect re-directed the attention that should have been given to Blotchy, the actual last person seen with Mary,.... or is it that old nagging issue about why Abberline saying he believed Hutchinson weeks later in a memo...(as he did for Israel, another winner witness), means essentially nothing when its reported by Nov 15th that Hutch was discredited?

Im shocked how much what Abberline states seems to carry more weight than contradictory reports about his "witnesses". He said no-one knew who the Ripper was, that only certain high ranking officials knew the truth, and a serial poisoner without any evidence linking him to any murders other than the 2 he poisoned and was being executed for, seemed to him to be the Ripper 15 years after the fact. The facts apparently "dovetailed" for him.

Abberlines credibility is not accepted without question....unless of course you want to use what he claimed regardless.

[Sunny Delight]

I really dont care that you dont agree Sunny, correct. You didnt even distinguish between the various types of witnesses before proclaiming 4 days is a "quick turnaround". By all accounts there is nothing that would or should prevent George from coming in as soon as possible after hearing of the murder.

Since you seem to skip by any conventional thinking, what reasons do you imagine George Hutchinson would have to delay 4 days before coming forward with an eyewitness account of someone he calls a "friend" who he saw in the company of a man who by all intent and purposes would then likely have been her killer? You know that old thing....last person seen with the victim? Fear? Of whom? What changed on Monday to set his alleged fears aside? Fear of public speaking....I guess thats why he skipped the Inquest then.

Any salient person would know that a suspect sighting with the deceased would be very important to the authorities investigation. So, did he just not like cops then? Or did he figure he would give old A man fair head start out of the country?

It would be prudent to remember that George himself sought to establish a supposed friendship with the deceased, and he didnt have to come in at all if he wasnt her friend.

I think any right minded person recognises that getting witnesses to come forward is challenging- even nowadays. There is always a certain apprehension of going to the Police with information- add in the fact that the MET were not the most trusted of forces in 1888 and I think it is fairly obvious why Hutchinson was reticent to run straight for the nearest Police station. One must take into account that it wasn't like he could just pick up the telephone and call crimestoppers anonymously. Why would people call anonymously to report information anyways. Maybe they are afraid of public speaking too.

It really is pretty obvious although you appear to tie yourself in knots.

[Sunny Delight]

"Wideawake Man was obviously a key person of interest once Sarah Lewis described him loitering outside Millers Court at 2am." As a potential Accomplice, apparently so.....hence the Pardon offer.

Heres another point it seems you didnt factor in......Sarahs story was known over the weekend, so why then would Hutchinson come in and place himself there at that time, risking being seen as that loitering possible accomplice? Gee....maybe it was to take Wideawakes place, and suddenly that possible accomplice is a "friend" of Marys just looking out for her. Albeit, creepily.

Hutchinson misdirected the investigation and negated looking for the possible accomplice, Wideawake Hat man. But only briefly.

Sorry you have lost me completely. Once again rather than tie yourself in knots with a convoluted and confusing narrative- maybe, just maybe Hutchinson came forward because he had information that he felt might be useful.

[rjpalmer]

Then he says this..."...Morland claimed that Abberline told him that the case was shut and that "I've given my word to keep my mouth permanently closed about it."

For those that don't know, this is a reference to Nigel Morland.

Hi Michael,

What would say to people who think that Morland wasn't the most trustworthy of people?


The Passing Tramp: The Many Mysteries of Mr. Morland: Was He Really Edgar Wallace's Secretary, Did He Really Know Sir Arthur Conan Doyle and Did He Really Sit on Dr. Crippen's Knee--and What about that Business Concerning Jack the Ripper?

[Michael W Richards]

Sorry you have lost me completely. Once again rather than tie yourself in knots with a convoluted and confusing narrative- maybe, just maybe Hutchinson came forward because he had information that he felt might be useful.

That isnt credible if... as he said she was his friend for some time before then, and that he didnt have something which prevented him from coming in right away. Are you aware of anything inhibiting George from coming forward immediately upon learning of his "friend" being butchered a few hours after he says he spoke with her? Me neither, nor did he offer any reason to Abberline for the delay.

You can accept a premise that George wanted to help but cant accept that waiting 4 days effectively erases any value his "sighting" might have had. Interesting.

[Michael W Richards]

For those that don't know, this is a reference to Nigel Morland.

Hi Michael,

What would say to people who think that Morland wasn't the most trustworthy of people?


The Passing Tramp: The Many Mysteries of Mr. Morland: Was He Really Edgar Wallace's Secretary, Did He Really Know Sir Arthur Conan Doyle and Did He Really Sit on Dr. Crippen's Knee--and What about that Business Concerning Jack the Ripper?

Id say rj, (without knowing much about him beyond an essay by Peter Underwood which is on here, "Jack the Ripper and ME", which mentions Morlands "information" confirmed by a Dr Stowell), that I am reticent about extending complete trust to anyone who has an "opinion" that the cases were solved and it was just covered up.

Just the facts m'am. Thats all, just give me the facts. An opinion and 5$ can get me a Starbucks Cap...but I can get the Cap without the opinion.

[Wickerman]

That isnt credible if... as he said she was his friend for some time before then,..

Michael, you make these things up in your head, then create arguments to justify what you invent.
Hutchinson never once claimed Mary was a "friend".
He never refers to her as Mary, not once.
You have invented this close relationship, then try your best to shoot it down. That's what is called a "straw-man argument".

All that was said, and that was by Abberline, is Hutch occasionally gave her a few shillings, and that he had known her about 3 years.

But you misrepresent those words to try make George & Mary best pals, as if he should go running to police the minute he heard she was murdered.
Your argument is a complete fabrication.