A closer look at George Hutchinson

[Wickerman]

No what we have are a set of very loose connections you seem determined to make.

The whole case is a series of loose connections, anyone who tries to make sense of any sequence finds themselves making a few assumptions. Nothing is complete, an example is the remark you make next...

We have Sarah Lewis saying she knew Mrs Keyler who lived at 2 Millers Court. She doesn't say- I know Mrs. Kennedy who lives at number 2 Miller's Court? Why not? She was going to this friends house according to you.

I imagine you are someone who only repeats the court record, as the only version you trust. Whereas, I see the value in collating all the press versions along with the court record, to get a more complete version of events.

Sarah Lewis does say "I visited a friend at Millers Court" reported in Irish Times & Western Mail.

The Press states that a family named Gallagher lived opposite Mary Kelly's lodging. They had a daughter named Mrs Kennedy. We knkw nothing about Mrs Kennedy. She is only recorded as speaking to the Press. We don't know under what conditions. We don't know if, due to the similarities with Sarah Lewis statement it wasn't a pseudonym.

People choosing to hide under a pseudonym do not give an address where the pseudonym actually lives.
You haven't yet explained why a pseudonym was necessary, also why give two versions on her arrival at Millers Court?
To what purpose?
If you think Lewis felt the need to invent another witness, we can't see why she would need to do that.

We don't know where the press got the name Gallagher from? Misheard perhaps from Sarah Lewis? Locals speaking about the house opposite and reporters mishearing that way..

Actually visiting Millers Court and talking to Mr & Mrs Gallagher?
The Evening News were on the scene, and the Press Association interviewed Mrs Kennedy.

You claim that many others used words like husband to describe people that weren't actually their husband. And she was probably a widow.

What do you mean "claim"?, Mary Kelly is precisely that, a widow who claimed to be married to Barnet, exactly what you claim to be unusual.

Their stories are remarkably similar on the Bethnal Green incident. You say well they should be as they were both there. Fair point. But these little differences add up to bigger issues overall.

You are making small issues into big ones.

We don't know Abberline spoke to Mrs Kennedy. The press said he did. There is no record. Kennedy aka Lewis may have told the Press, yes I have told this to the Police. But tell me how Mrs Kennedy can say she saw Kelly at 3am and yet when George Hutchinson tells Police he saw her at at 2am, it is him who is given precedence. It is him who the Police take around the district. It is him who is plastered all over the papers.

The Press Association:
Although no evidence was produced at the inquest as to her having left her room after one o'clock, at which time she was heard singing, the police have obtained statements from several persons who reside in Millers Court, that she was out of her house and in Dorset street between two and three o'clock. It appears almost certain that her life was taken about the last named hour.
Morning Advertiser, Nov 14^th 1888.

[Sunny Delight]

The whole case is a series of loose connections, anyone who tries to make sense of any sequence finds themselves making a few assumptions. Nothing is complete, an example is the remark you make next...



I imagine you are someone who only repeats the court record, as the only version you trust. Whereas, I see the value in collating all the press versions along with the court record, to get a more complete version of events.

Sarah Lewis does say "I visited a friend at Millers Court" reported in Irish Times & Western Mail.



People choosing to hide under a pseudonym do not give an address where the pseudonym actually lives.
You haven't yet explained why a pseudonym was necessary, also why give two versions on her arrival at Millers Court?
To what purpose?
If you think Lewis felt the need to invent another witness, we can't see why she would need to do that.



Actually visiting Millers Court and talking to Mr & Mrs Gallagher?
The Evening News were on the scene, and the Press Association interviewed Mrs Kennedy.



What do you mean "claim"?, Mary Kelly is precisely that, a widow who claimed to be married to Barnet, exactly what you claim to be unusual.



You are making small issues into big ones.



The Press Association:
Although no evidence was produced at the inquest as to her having left her room after one o'clock, at which time she was heard singing, the police have obtained statements from several persons who reside in Millers Court, that she was out of her house and in Dorset street between two and three o'clock. It appears almost certain that her life was taken about the last named hour.
Morning Advertiser, Nov 14^th 1888.

As an historian I find oral testimony problematic at the best of times. Yes I would take the court record as the main source of any information. I don't think that is infallible either. I also would see the Police records as a main source of information. Statements and the like. Press Reports have their place for sure, but can be subject to exaggeration, misinterpretation, misinformation- amongst other things. We have to note that the Police were very reticent to share anything with the Press. There may have been off the record exchanges with lower ranks but for the main the Police were hostile towards the media. Not great for verifying Press Reports is it?

I gave some possible reasons why a pseudonym might have been used. One was that Sarah Lewis didn't want her name plastered all over the papers. Or the Police had asked her or even told her not to speak to the Press. But she did so anyways. Who knows? We can't ask her. Only offer ideas.

You haven't explained why George Hutchinson was given precedence over Mrs Kennedy by Police. Mrs Kennedy saw Kelly alive and well at 3am. Hutchinson's suspect was still important to be traced but should have not got precedence over Kennedy. That makes me think that Kennedy didn't actually exist, it was Sarah Lewis telling the Press this story under the name Kennedy. It was garbled however and that can be an issue with Press Reports all over.

Again you supply a Press report where we dont know how they got that information. How did they know the Police had those statements when the Police didnt speak with the Press? Did any other papers report something similar on the same day, that can go someway way to co-orborating this, as them also receiving such info independently? A single Press source with nothing to back it up is useless quite frankly.

[Wickerman]

As an historian I find oral testimony problematic at the best of times. Yes I would take the court record as the main source of any information. I don't think that is infallible either. I also would see the Police records as a main source of information. Statements and the like. Press Reports have their place for sure, but can be subject to exaggeration, misinterpretation, misinformation- amongst other things. We have to note that the Police were very reticent to share anything with the Press. There may have been off the record exchanges with lower ranks but for the main the Police were hostile towards the media. Not great for verifying Press Reports is it?

Agreed, for the most part. It's just some take the holier than thou approach towards press statements, yet they will spend hours debating the times stated by witnesses in the Stride case. All of which came from press sources.
Some here just reject Kennedy entirely, some for reasons you state, she was either an invention of the press, or the alter-ego of Sarah Lewis. What is really behind this dismissive view is they don't want to believe Kelly was out of her room after she met Blotchy.
These posters reject both Hutchinson & Kennedy out of preference for their own personal suspect.

As I mentioned above, if we reject information from the press, we might as well throw out almost everything to do with the Nichols, Chapman & Stride cases.
There is no indication Lewis used a pseudonym, that is a guess in order to dismiss her statement, and that is the honest truth of the matter.

I gave some possible reasons why a pseudonym might have been used. One was that Sarah Lewis didn't want her name plastered all over the papers.

Then why use a name traceable directly back to Millers court, and to a house where an actual Kennedy was reported to have lived?
She could have chosen absolutely any name that lead nowhere, but no, she picks the name of a woman that lived right opposite the room where the murder took place - astonishing!

I know you can say - we don't know Kennedy lived there, we only have the press to believe for that statement, sure. How large do you want this conspiracy to be?
Some posters have tried to invent all kinds of conspiracies, rather than just admit a statement in the press is perfectly acceptable.

As Kennedy, on Saturday, she claims to have seen one female with a male outside the Britannia, and Kelly was stood with them.
She then walks down Dorset St. and arrives home about 3:00 am.

But at the inquest, as Lewis, she claims to have seen one female with a male outside the Britannia, a half hour earlier, about 2:30 am, then another couple walking westward down Dorset St., and finally noticing a man loitering opposite Millers Court.

Explain the sense in one woman offering two quite different stories, two different times, involving different people?

Or the Police had asked her or even told her not to speak to the Press.

Which they actually did, but there again, we only know this from another press statement, not from any official sources.

You haven't explained why George Hutchinson was given precedence over Mrs Kennedy by Police.

Precedence?
We have no official file dealing with either witness.
We only have one opinion from Abberline, and one statement taken by Badham, but numerous columns in the papers, some trying to cast him as a suspicious character.
The press certainly made him into a near celebrity, but not the police.
This was all to sell newspapers.

I wouldn't say the police gave preference to Hutchinson over Kennedy, we simply have no paperwork with which to judge.

Mrs Kennedy saw Kelly alive and well at 3am. Hutchinson's suspect was still important to be traced but should have not got precedence over Kennedy.

Even if Kelly was seen alive about 3:00 am, that doesn't change the time of the cry of murder, between 3:30-4:00 am.
It also doesn't conflict with the medical exam that determined the time of death to be around 3:00 am or soon after.

Again you supply a Press report where we dont know how they got that information. How did they know the Police had those statements when the Police didnt speak with the Press? Did any other papers report something similar on the same day, that can go someway way to co-orborating this, as them also receiving such info independently? A single Press source with nothing to back it up is useless quite frankly.

Well, we know how the press got their information. Warren complained to the Home Office about those touts following our detectives while out on their investigations, and then interviewing the same people our officers had just interviewed.