Hutchinson and Blotchy

[Dupin]

Hutchinson was interviewed by Abberline, who was likely used to finding out liars. He believed H for a while at least. Disbelief in H's detailed description, he an "ordinary" working man of no fixed abode, is like dismissing the Beatles' songs, since they were just ordinary lads from Liverpool. Or like denying that William Shakespeare, an ordinary man from the Midlands, could know so much and write metre so readily. Possibly Hutch had a photographic memory: one glance and a picture formed in his mind which for a few hours or days would remain to be looked at internally. I had such an ability when young (useful for my O levels) so it is not impossible. And the Whitechapel area had, and still has, some very fine middle class houses, one of which is open to the public as an art exhibition. These houses are not that far from Dorset Street.

[Fleetwood Mac]

What we don't know is how Abberline reached his conclusion, after 'interrogating' Hutch, that he was being truthful.

One of the questions put to Hutch might very reasonably have been to ask why he waited for so long just to see this well dressed man again, if he had no reason to think he meant MJK any harm. Giving up and walking away would be consistent with his claimed lack of suspicion about the man's intentions, but it wouldn't easily explain why he had been hoping to see him again, just because of his attire.

Incidentally, I suspect the man was more Del Boy than toff - an East End man-about-town who bought his clobber and bling from the second hand clothes stalls on Petticoat Lane [also known as the Jews's Market].

I also suspect Abberline was not a naive copper, and may have winkled out of Hutch that he was hoping Del Boy would emerge before too long, leaving a vacancy for himself - to doss down with this woman who had previously "borrowed" money from him, or even to have 'sloppy seconds' with her. Either might have been a powerful motivator for Hutch to wait 45 minutes, but when the room was still occupied he was forced to admit that the well dressed man was probably able to afford a fair bit more than a thrupenny knee tremble or sixpenny tumble, and was bedded in for a two and six all-nighter. A cut above Kelly's usual catches would have been about right.

There would have been a ring of truth about all the above, which Abberline would have appreciated if Hutch admitted to something of the sort: from an initial reluctance to spit it all out, and the long wait for the man to leave, to the better than average clothing which implied he could pay for a longer than average session.

In this context, the whole Astrakhan story would hang together rather well if it was made up of whole cloth.

Love,

Caz
X

Hi Caz,

Aye, plenty of unknowns and so we're left with Hutchinson's own words and other bits and pieces such as the description of him.

'Plenty of possibilities in terms of why he felt the need to relay an implausible stake-out given that by his own admission there was no discernible purpose.

But, and this is pure conjecture of course as opposed to any opinion with foundations, the fact he volunteered having no money on the night may well point away from robbery being the motive.

[Wickerman]

What is interesting, Jon, is that by his own admission, as reported by The Times, 14th November; he watched who went up and down Dorset Street and adjoining streets also, and in which direction they went and which property they entered into in Dorset Street.

So, in the event we leave aside all of the bits and pieces 'round the edges and the padding out of the statement, the following is the crux of the statement that Hutchinson delivered to the police and the press:

I followed Mary and another man to Miller's court, I watched the court for 45 minutes and I watched Dorset Street and adjoining streets also.

Furthermore, he could not give a reasonable motive for doing this, as by his own admission he had no suspicion of murderous intent on behalf of Mary's associate.

Right yes, we have no justification. If Hutch had no intent against Astrachan, then we wonder why wait so long?
Yet, if we look through photo's of Victorian street scenes we have no trouble finding pictures of people doing just what Hutchinson was doing. Idly sitting, or standing, in doorways watching the world go by.
In a time before radio and TV, what else did people who have nothing to do & nowhere to go, but stop and watch others?



Why are these people sat there?
I suspect we are asking a question that is more the result of our busy lifestyle. In the modern world we need a reason to just stop and do nothing. In our day if someone is watching others they are either nosy, or have some ulterior motive, it can't be merely that we have nothing else to do?
Abberline didn't seem to think it was out of the ordinary.

[The Macdonald Triad]

It's possible that if Hutch and Astrakhan were not one and the same he was waiting to rob Astrakhan on the way out. How else could he be so detailed? If Hutch was an alkie or just plain poor and hungry like his location suggested, it would be like a junky today instantly assessing everything Astrakhan possessed that could be sold. I'm reminded of The Terminator movie where you see from the Terminator's POV as he threat assesses the situation. Imagine Hutch doing the same lmao .

[mpriestnall]

You can tell Hutch gave an honest and accurate description of Astrakhan because he didn't appear at the inquest.

[Wickerman]

It's possible that if Hutch and Astrakhan were not one and the same he was waiting to rob Astrakhan on the way out. How else could he be so detailed? If Hutch was an alkie or just plain poor and hungry like his location suggested, it would be like a junky today instantly assessing everything Astrakhan possessed that could be sold. I'm reminded of The Terminator movie where you see from the Terminator's POV as he threat assesses the situation. Imagine Hutch doing the same lmao .

Hutch & Astrachan were not the same person.

If the depth of detail is one of the concerns, that maybe easy to explain. Have you ever seen the Suspect Description form used by the Met. Police?
Hutchinson was only able to methodically provide details like; complexion, eyes, eyelashes, moustache, hair, etc. because the Description form is very detailed.

This is a section of the form used by Sgt. Badham.

[The Macdonald Triad]

[QUOTE=Wickerman;n790678]

Hutch & Astrachan were not the same person.

If the depth of detail is one of the concerns, that maybe easy to explain. Have you ever seen the Suspect Description form used by the Met. Police?
Hutchinson was only able to methodically provide details like; complexion, eyes, eyelashes, moustache, hair, etc. because the Description form is very detailed.

This is a section of the form used by Sgt. Badham.



[/QUOTE How do we know the description wasn't first given verbally? And what was the procedure? Did cops read from the form to the witness and write their response? Or did cops hand the form to the witness and have them fill it in? I'm inclined to the former, illiteracy must have been an issue back then in Whitechapel. So are you saying Hutchinson just wanted to please and have an answer for everything?

[Fleetwood Mac]

Right yes, we have no justification. If Hutch had no intent against Astrachan, then we wonder why wait so long?
Yet, if we look through photo's of Victorian street scenes we have no trouble finding pictures of people doing just what Hutchinson was doing. Idly sitting, or standing, in doorways watching the world go by.
In a time before radio and TV, what else did people who have nothing to do & nowhere to go, but stop and watch others?



Why are these people sat there?
I suspect we are asking a question that is more the result of our busy lifestyle. In the modern world we need a reason to just stop and do nothing. In our day if someone is watching others they are either nosy, or have some ulterior motive, it can't be merely that we have nothing else to do?
Abberline didn't seem to think it was out of the ordinary.

I think the two are incomparable, Jon.

Hutchinson wasn't watching the world go by, he was looking up the court and in the surrounding streets as a result of one 'well dressed man' whom he couldn't even see for the best part of an hour.

On the whole, I tend to agree with your general approach in that it's easy for us to find inconsistencies in witness statements, given that we're looking for them, and with a modern eye/mind and we don't have all of the source information at our disposal; some of which may corroborate said witness statements. I imagine that in the event we poured over witness statements relating to any murder that's ever been committed, we could find what appear to be problems with the statements.

On the other hand, however, these are Hutchinson's words. He has the chance to flesh out his account given to the police. He takes that chance and says a lot to the press. By comparison, John Richardson gives more details as to why he was sure Annie's mutilated body was not in the yard.

Hutchinson, however, does not explain his motive for watching the court and the surrounding streets, and it's difficult to lend him a hand and fill in the blanks because there appears to be no viable motive unless of course we take a leap of faith and deduce robbery or some such was the motive. An enquiring mind would certainly want to know why exactly Hutchinson felt it necessary to stake-out the place for the best part of an hour, and 'watching the world go by' simply wouldn't wash.

I think what we have here is a genuine hole in Hutchinson's account, which is not driven by a desire to find problems.

[caz]

An enquiring mind would certainly want to know why exactly Hutchinson felt it necessary to stake-out the place for the best part of an hour, and 'watching the world go by' simply wouldn't wash.

I think what we have here is a genuine hole in Hutchinson's account, which is not driven by a desire to find problems.

An enquiring mind like Abberline's, under interrogation?

As I said yesterday, we don't have the luxury of questioning Hutch about his motivations or any holes in his account, but Abberline did, and we don't know what he heard, from which he concluded that the witness had been truthful.

Why wouldn't Hutch have hung about for Mary's paying customer to emerge, if he didn't already have a place to sleep? She may have owed him a favour or a bob or two from previous borrowings, and she could hardly claim to be penniless if the well dressed man had just paid well for her services.

Robbery of the man himself wouldn't need to come into it in that case. Robbers tend to avoid the cops; they don't walk in willingly and give statements which are bound to invite awkward questions.

Not guilty!

Love,

Caz
X

[Herlock Sholmes]

I tend to favour that he was hoping for a bed for the night. Possibly with a game of ‘hide the sausage’ thrown in?

[caz]

Hi Herlock,

I expect Hutch was hoping MJK would be agreeable to a 'sausage in cider'.

Love,

Caz
X

[Abby Normal]

I tend to favour that he was hoping for a bed for the night. Possibly with a game of ‘hide the sausage’ thrown in?

more like hide the knife. lol.

no i pretty much agree with this. in all liklihood when this didnt pan out a few days later he hoped to cash in somehow on his unsuccessful trip to marys by trying to convince the police he saw the ripper.

[Wickerman]

How do we know the description wasn't first given verbally? And what was the procedure? Did cops read from the form to the witness and write their response? Or did cops hand the form to the witness and have them fill it in? I'm inclined to the former, illiteracy must have been an issue back then in Whitechapel. So are you saying Hutchinson just wanted to please and have an answer for everything?

You're correct, with the former.

The officer sits down opposite the witness, and either by knowing the form off by heart, which is quite possible, or reading from the questions, he writes down the answers from the witness.
The officer keeps questions down to a minimum, mostly only for clarification on a point, so as not to distract the train of thought of the witness.
At the end the statement is read back to the witness, thats when any corrections are made, then all present sign the statement, meaning the witness and any officers present.

Thats it in a nutshell.

What we don't have is the notes of Abberline's interrogation of Hutchinson which were taken later that night.

That would be where all the detailed questioning would take place, Abberline would use that initial statement to interrogate Hutchinson.

By the way, I should have said "type" of form used by Badham. The one I posted dates from that time, but we also have an example with Annie Chapman's physical details on it, and the form is slightly different, but equally detailed.
The Met. & Scotland Yard may have used the same form, or different versions of it.

The point I was trying to make is that the reason for the detailed replies (from Hutchinson) is partly due to the detailed questions on the interview form.

[Wickerman]

Hi Herlock,

I expect Hutch was hoping MJK would be agreeable to a 'sausage in cider'.

Love,

Caz
X

'scuse me Caz, I havn't had my bre'kfast yet!

[Herlock Sholmes]

Hi Herlock,

I expect Hutch was hoping MJK would be agreeable to a 'sausage in cider'.

Love,

Caz
X

Hi Caz,

Im surprised that a lady of your delicate and refined upbringing would know of such things.

Ive just got back from your neck-of-the-woods by the way. I was in Paignton.