Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Hutchinson and Blotchy

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by Abby Normal View Post

    of course you do. because you think that aman was bury!!!
    From the sketch, he doesn't look like Bury. He looks like Deeming.
    “Contrariwise,” continued Tweedledee, “if it was so, it might be, and if it were so, it would be but as it isn’t, it ain’t. That’s logic.”

    “Oh, you can't help that,” said the Cat: “we're all mad here. I'm mad. You're mad.” “How do you know I'm mad?” said Alice. “You must be,” said the Cat, or you wouldn't have come here.”

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by Abby Normal View Post

      of course you do. because you think that aman was bury!!!
      Aman was very well dressed Abby and Druitt was posher than Bury.
      Regards

      Sir Herlock Sholmes

      “It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into.”

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by Fleetwood Mac View Post

        And, I'm not convinced Mary went back out of her lodgings after midnight. There is good evidence there to suggest the agreement with Blotchy was more than a quick business proposition: the ale taken back, the singing for around an hour after shutting the door.
        I wonder if you had seen this press report.

        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 14th 1888.




        Regards, Jon S.

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by Fleetwood Mac View Post

          But, there is known evidence which is at odds with Hutchinson's statement. According to Mary Cox, she was very intoxicated at midnight, and other statements from people who saw her in the hour leading to midnight have Mary as drunk also. Blotchy has ale, I'd imagine Mary has some of that. How does she transcend to not drunk in the space of two hours?
          Subjective though isn't it.
          "Very much intoxicated" for one person may be "somewhat tipsy", to another.
          We can only judge opinions like that when they both come from the same person.
          I mean like if Cox saw her at midnight "very intoxicated", but then again at 2:00 rather "tipsy", we have a standard with which to judge.
          Regards, Jon S.

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by GBinOz View Post

            From the sketch, he doesn't look like Bury. He looks like Deeming.
            neither were jewish nor looked jewish. and the ripper wasnt jewish either.

            the only two pieces of evidence that mention the word jew is the gsg and hutch. hint hint
            "Is all that we see or seem
            but a dream within a dream?"

            -Edgar Allan Poe


            "...the man and the peaked cap he is said to have worn
            quite tallies with the descriptions I got of him."

            -Frederick G. Abberline

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post

              Aman was very well dressed Abby and Druitt was posher than Bury.
              lol. yes he was and an amalgam of previous witness descriptions, right down to the knife bag and red hanky. and according to hutch also jewish and a vaudeville villain. hes obviously a fig newton of hutchs imagination, although it took hutch a few days to get him just right. lol
              Last edited by Abby Normal; 07-24-2022, 09:55 PM.
              "Is all that we see or seem
              but a dream within a dream?"

              -Edgar Allan Poe


              "...the man and the peaked cap he is said to have worn
              quite tallies with the descriptions I got of him."

              -Frederick G. Abberline

              Comment


              • #22
                What exactly was a "pail" of beer in 1888 Whitechapel? When I hear about Blotchy's pail I think of a modern bucket with an opening as big around as the bottom with a handle to carry from the top. And it would hold over a gallon.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by The Macdonald Triad View Post
                  What exactly was a "pail" of beer in 1888 Whitechapel? When I hear about Blotchy's pail I think of a modern bucket with an opening as big around as the bottom with a handle to carry from the top. And it would hold over a gallon.
                  In her police statement, Mrs Cox described it as a "quart can of beer". So it probably held two pints.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by The Macdonald Triad View Post
                    What exactly was a "pail" of beer in 1888 Whitechapel? When I hear about Blotchy's pail I think of a modern bucket with an opening as big around as the bottom with a handle to carry from the top. And it would hold over a gallon.
                    It was a quart pail, which I believe is the equivalent of 2 pints.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by Wickerman View Post

                      I wonder if you had seen this press report.

                      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 14th 1888.



                      I have Jon, thanks. While I don't discount it altogether, I'm not wholly convinced with the conclusion.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by Wickerman View Post

                        Subjective though isn't it.
                        "Very much intoxicated" for one person may be "somewhat tipsy", to another.
                        We can only judge opinions like that when they both come from the same person.
                        I mean like if Cox saw her at midnight "very intoxicated", but then again at 2:00 rather "tipsy", we have a standard with which to judge.
                        No, I wouldn't agree with you. I think both individuals would have been capable of distinguishing drunk from tipsy.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by Abby Normal View Post

                          of course you do. because you think that aman was bury!!!
                          ha ha yes, although I only said I lean towards Hutch being correct (I still reserve a bit for Maxwell being correct too!). It makes little difference to Bury as a suspect - he could equally have been blotchy (as well as drinking in pubs he was reported to take beer away with him, who knows, perhaps in a pail!).

                          Believe it or not my dismissal of Hutch actually as nothing to do with Bury, I just don't see any solid reasons to suspect him. He said he watched Kelly and Aman because it seemed unusual for her to be in the company of such a man. A man was seen watching the court, which seems to tally. Also, I don't buy the idea of hutch coming forward after the inquest to secure an alibi. an alibi against what? until he walks into the police station no one knows his name or that he was talking to kelly. Sarah Lewis didn't say she saw george hutchinson watching the court. and if he really wanted to come forward why not just say he saw her with a fairly unremarkable kind of man, not a man whose description would undoubtedly lead to scrutiny. I think if hutch had of been the ripper and was worried about a potential ID he would have just left the area.

                          So if we just assume Hutch wasn't lying, aman was the last person seen with kelly. It started raining hard at 3 so perhaps unlikely she left the house again. the scream of murder was around 4. aman must be the prime suspect. back to your original point, it does seem a fairly ridiculous idea on the face of it that Bury was aman but, bearing in mind Bury is the only suspect who was a lust murderer and had mutilated his wife in some ways entirely consistent with other victims (also used strangulation, blow to the head, carried knives and used prostitutes, known in whitechapel), what is Bury the drinking thug doing owning a silk sash, tall silk hat, black fur-lined cloak, kid gloves, white cuffs and with a fondness for flashy jewelry that his neighbours in Dundee remarked on?

                          I'm not saying i totally belive this, just that it is an interesting line of enquiry that is all. as i said, i still find it hard to dismiss maxwell.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Is'nt it a fact that Hutchinson did leave the area soon after?Knowledge of him,and his whereabouts is pretty scant.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by Aethelwulf View Post

                              ha ha yes, although I only said I lean towards Hutch being correct (I still reserve a bit for Maxwell being correct too!). It makes little difference to Bury as a suspect - he could equally have been blotchy (as well as drinking in pubs he was reported to take beer away with him, who knows, perhaps in a pail!).

                              Believe it or not my dismissal of Hutch actually as nothing to do with Bury, I just don't see any solid reasons to suspect him. He said he watched Kelly and Aman because it seemed unusual for her to be in the company of such a man. A man was seen watching the court, which seems to tally. Also, I don't buy the idea of hutch coming forward after the inquest to secure an alibi. an alibi against what? until he walks into the police station no one knows his name or that he was talking to kelly. Sarah Lewis didn't say she saw george hutchinson watching the court. and if he really wanted to come forward why not just say he saw her with a fairly unremarkable kind of man, not a man whose description would undoubtedly lead to scrutiny. I think if hutch had of been the ripper and was worried about a potential ID he would have just left the area.

                              So if we just assume Hutch wasn't lying, aman was the last person seen with kelly. It started raining hard at 3 so perhaps unlikely she left the house again. the scream of murder was around 4. aman must be the prime suspect. back to your original point, it does seem a fairly ridiculous idea on the face of it that Bury was aman but, bearing in mind Bury is the only suspect who was a lust murderer and had mutilated his wife in some ways entirely consistent with other victims (also used strangulation, blow to the head, carried knives and used prostitutes, known in whitechapel), what is Bury the drinking thug doing owning a silk sash, tall silk hat, black fur-lined cloak, kid gloves, white cuffs and with a fondness for flashy jewelry that his neighbours in Dundee remarked on?

                              I'm not saying i totally belive this, just that it is an interesting line of enquiry that is all. as i said, i still find it hard to dismiss maxwell.
                              hey wulf
                              hutch and his story have serious red flags. ridiculous detailed description of aman and script like movements and dialogue between him and mary. waits until just after the inquest to come forward. how convenient.
                              he directly implicates a jew (what a coincidence-just happens to be the murder right after the gsg, which implicates a jew).

                              if he was telling the truth, he should have been witness number one, and aman suspect number one. but he seems to quickly dropped by police, and no one seriously beleives aman was the ripper to this day.

                              hutch engages in stalking behavior, has no alibi and was in the immediate area during the corroberated screams around four am. did hutch return to marys room after his original vigil an hour later? perhaps after wandering about and finding no other victims?
                              if he was killer and came forward, perhaps he was worried that sarah lewis knew him and thought it better to come forward as a witness then be sought after as a suspect? and perhaps his personal circs didnt allow him to just flee.
                              any way you look at it hutch is a shady character.

                              re bury.. i have no doubt after reading some of nis well written letters that he could have come across as posh. but bury isnt jewish and wasnt he sporting a beard? and idont think he could be blotchy either, blotchy was VERY distictive looking and had red hair.

                              bury is one of tje strongest suspects out there, no need to try and shoehorn him into blotchy or aman.

                              in all liklihood aman was hutches way of convincing police he saw the ripper, either to deflect attention away from himself, but probably to get his fifteen minutes of fame.
                              "Is all that we see or seem
                              but a dream within a dream?"

                              -Edgar Allan Poe


                              "...the man and the peaked cap he is said to have worn
                              quite tallies with the descriptions I got of him."

                              -Frederick G. Abberline

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by Abby Normal View Post

                                hey wulf
                                hutch and his story have serious red flags. ridiculous detailed description of aman and script like movements and dialogue between him and mary. waits until just after the inquest to come forward. how convenient.
                                he directly implicates a jew (what a coincidence-just happens to be the murder right after the gsg, which implicates a jew).

                                if he was telling the truth, he should have been witness number one, and aman suspect number one. but he seems to quickly dropped by police, and no one seriously beleives aman was the ripper to this day.

                                hutch engages in stalking behavior, has no alibi and was in the immediate area during the corroberated screams around four am. did hutch return to marys room after his original vigil an hour later? perhaps after wandering about and finding no other victims?
                                if he was killer and came forward, perhaps he was worried that sarah lewis knew him and thought it better to come forward as a witness then be sought after as a suspect? and perhaps his personal circs didnt allow him to just flee.
                                any way you look at it hutch is a shady character.

                                re bury.. i have no doubt after reading some of nis well written letters that he could have come across as posh. but bury isnt jewish and wasnt he sporting a beard? and idont think he could be blotchy either, blotchy was VERY distictive looking and had red hair.

                                bury is one of tje strongest suspects out there, no need to try and shoehorn him into blotchy or aman.

                                in all liklihood aman was hutches way of convincing police he saw the ripper, either to deflect attention away from himself, but probably to get his fifteen minutes of fame.
                                i'd say hutch may have had a bit of thing for kelly, as per his checking out the competition, or he could have just wanted to rob him. i just don't buy him as a suspect i'm afraid. I still don't believe he has any reason to come forward as he did if he was the killer. no one knows who he is, no one at the inquest mentions his name, he is unknown. Before you say it, this is quite different from Bury, who was known to a range of people in Dundee and known as Ellen's husband - if he had done a runner the police would have only been looking for one man.

                                Although i don't agree with the bulk of Christer's essay on Hutch (that he essentially got the day wrong and couldn't have seen what he did as it was raining), he does make a good point that Hutch was treated differently from other timewasters who were given hard labour or a jail sentence. because he wasn't punished he wasn't just after a bit of fame, as per other nutters at the time.

                                As for those bury questions, I believe in August 1888 Bury is pictured with just a tash and the theory is he grew a bit of a beard to change his appearance. I just think if anyone wants to accept Hutch as genuine, given the Bury's other solid credentials as a suspect and his liking for seemingly fancy clothes, he could have seen Kelly and Bury. either a long planned ruse to win her trust or chance encounter after one of his smart outings (I prefer the first option).

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X