Hutchinson and Blotchy

[Abby Normal]

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).

Hutch-valid suspect
Bury-valid suspect, but not blotchy or Aman
Aman-fake

: )

[caz]

Hi All,

I'm wondering how JtR - if this had been Hutchinson - thought he could 'alibi' himself by voluntarily placing himself virtually outside MJK's door on the night before she was found murdered?

I assume Hutch's motivation for coming forward would have been influenced by what he had read in the papers or heard on the grapevine following the grisly discovery. It seems rather doubtful that he could have learned about Sarah Lewis's lurking man before his appearance at the police station on the Monday. But did he know, for instance, about the reported cries of "Murder" and when they had been heard? Putting yourself alone so close to the scene of crime until shortly before such cries were heard strikes me as being a pretty lousy way of trying to 'alibi' yourself, but maybe that's just me!

My personal hunch for Hutch remains that he was telling the basic truth about being there, because even if his intentions had not been entirely good [which might explain why he didn't brave the Inquest], at least he was no murderer, and didn't want to be suspected if he continued to avoid the police. He must have talked about his experience if his mates at the Victoria Home advised him to make a statement about it, so in a sense the cat was out of the bag, which might explain why he then went the extra mile and told his story to the papers, to underline that he had nothing to hide regarding the murder itself.

I just don't see the ripper - or an accomplice - feeling obliged to submit to this kind of scrutiny, which would then lead to the further obligation to put his murderous urges on indefinite hold.

If anything, the ripper would have been more likely to hold his horses if he found a decent witness description of himself in the papers.

Love,

Caz
X

[Wickerman]

No, I wouldn't agree with you. I think both individuals would have been capable of distinguishing drunk from tipsy.

One poster once suggested bitterness on behalf of Cox. That she may have exaggerated Kelly's condition out of spite, being bitter that Kelly could get any man at any time yet she (Cox) had been out all night in pouring rain, and got no-one.
The Star journalist described Cox by writing - "Mary Ann Cox, a wretched looking specimen of East-end womanhood,...", not very kind.

[Wickerman]

Hi All,


I assume Hutch's motivation for coming forward would have been influenced by what he had read in the papers or heard on the grapevine following the grisly discovery.

It's gone unnoticed that the Star, which came out mid afternoon, on the day of the inquest published a paragraph entitled - The Murderer Described, where the testimony was given by Cox concerning Blotchy with Kelly.
Hutchinson, or any friend of his could have made him aware of this and he would instinctively know they had it wrong. That he had seen her with another man 2 hours later......so, doing the right thing, he came forward to help the police.

[Fleetwood Mac]

I'm wondering how JtR - if this had been Hutchinson - thought he could 'alibi' himself by voluntarily placing himself virtually outside MJK's door on the night before she was found murdered?

Hi Caz,

I'm not saying i agree with the proposition, but I think I'm right in saying that in those days you would need to have been more or less caught red-handed. As a consequence, I'm not convinced a murderer implicates himself by volunteering that he was in the court (being in the court would not be sufficient to lead to a conviction as there was no way to link him to the crime through DNA and the like).

My personal hunch for Hutch remains that he was telling the basic truth about being there

'Difficult to say, I'm undecided. Assuming he was there and his presence was innocent, my guess would be he embellished the details for financial gain.

If anything, the ripper would have been more likely to hold his horses if he found a decent witness description of himself in the papers.

'Could go either way, 'depends on the individual and the thought process, and whatever else he knew that we don't.

[Harry D]

There is no need to embellish the truth. Hutchinson's description is so overelaborate that it stretches credulity and borders on caricature.

I don't believe that Sarah Lewis' sighting brought him out of the woodwork. She could barely describe the man she'd seen, and if Hutchinson had anything to hide he could've easily kept a low profile. The police had nothing to go on.

I don't question that he was there, but I suspect he was an attention-seeker or looking for a nice little earner. Another possibility is that he held a grudge against someone and was trying to fit them up for the murder.

[Fleetwood Mac]

There is no need to embellish the truth. Hutchinson's description is so overelaborate that it stretches credulity and borders on caricature.

I don't believe that Sarah Lewis' sighting brought him out of the woodwork. She could barely describe the man she'd seen, and if Hutchinson had anything to hide he could've easily kept a low profile. The police had nothing to go on.

I don't question that he was there, but I suspect he was an attention-seeker or looking for a nice little earner. Another possibility is that he held a grudge against someone and was trying to fit them up for the murder.

It may seem unbelievable to us all these years after and our view of how it must have been in the East End but local-man-on-the-spot Hutchinson clearly thought it to be reasonable, as did the like of Inspector Abberline who by all accounts was steeped in the knowledge of East End life.

I think the question is more one of whether or not Hutchinson's ability to remember that level of detail is plausible, as well as considering supporting evidence to the contrary such as Mary plausibly retiring for the night with Blotchy.

[Harry D]

It may seem unbelievable to us all these years after and our view of how it must have been in the East End but local-man-on-the-spot Hutchinson clearly thought it to be reasonable, as did the like of Inspector Abberline who by all accounts was steeped in the knowledge of East End life.

I think the question is more one of whether or not Hutchinson's ability to remember that level of detail is plausible, as well as considering supporting evidence to the contrary such as Mary plausibly retiring for the night with Blotchy.

Abberline is also said to have claimed "You've got Jack the Ripper at last!" when they arrested serial wife poisoner Klosowski. These men were not infallible or immune to Victorian prejudices. It is not exactly absurd to suggest that Hutchinson's description of a caricatured foreigner resonated with the police at the time.

[Fleetwood Mac]

It is not exactly absurd to suggest that Hutchinson's description of a caricatured foreigner resonated with the police at the time.

I suppose it's possible, the decision to pay Hutchinson's expenses and cart him 'round the area could have been made by someone who believed the murderer was a Polish Jew (but then he believed he was: "low-class Polish Jew", 'don't know at what point low-class became part of his thinking).

I think the police were clearly keeping an open mind: PC Smith's man, Lawende's man and so on - clearly regarded as important sightings by the police - and it's more likely they felt that the supposed Mary TOD made this man a very good candidate (rather than going with him because he was of 'foreign' appearance).

[Wickerman]

Every so often someone suggests Hutchinson offered his story purely for financial gain.

I'd like to ask, where does this idea come from?
I understand there was a similar account in an American newspaper, but Americans did & still do things different.
More important, where do we read the English journalist, or for that matter the Met. police, ever offered money to a witness for a story?

[Abby Normal]

There is no need to embellish the truth. Hutchinson's description is so overelaborate that it stretches credulity and borders on caricature.

I don't believe that Sarah Lewis' sighting brought him out of the woodwork. She could barely describe the man she'd seen, and if Hutchinson had anything to hide he could've easily kept a low profile. The police had nothing to go on.

I don't question that he was there, but I suspect he was an attention-seeker or looking for a nice little earner. Another possibility is that he held a grudge against someone and was trying to fit them up for the murder.

your probably right Harry. as you know I think hes one of the least weak suspects, however, in all probability he was an attention seeker looking for fame and fortune.
which then puts Mr Blotchy right in the frame for the ripper. of course he nave came forward or was found.

[Wickerman]

Abberline is also said to have claimed "You've got Jack the Ripper at last!" when they arrested serial wife poisoner Klosowski. These men were not infallible or immune to Victorian prejudices. It is not exactly absurd to suggest that Hutchinson's description of a caricatured foreigner resonated with the police at the time.

If you recall a journalist wrote that Abberline exclaimed; "This is a big thing!", on Dec. 6th, 1888, after hearing of the arrest of Joseph Isaacs, a middle-aged Jew, who lived just off Dorset St. and fit the description of the man with an Astrachan coat.
Obviously, Hutchinson's suspect, as a viable character stayed with Abberline long after the murder.

[Fleetwood Mac]

Every so often someone suggests Hutchinson offered his story purely for financial gain.

I'd like to ask, where does this idea come from?
I understand there was a similar account in an American newspaper, but Americans did & still do things different.
More important, where do we read the English journalist, or for that matter the Met. police, ever offered money to a witness for a story?

Hi Jon,

I know you're well read on these things so perhaps you could fill in a few blanks for me.

From what I can tell from the reports I've read, Hutchinson was suspicious of this man because he was 'so well dressed' and he had no suspicion he was the murderer.

What exactly did he think the man was going to do? By his own admission, murderous intent did not cross his mind, so what does that leave: did he think the well dressed man was going to rob his friend Mary of her last slice of bread? What on earth was he assuming the man was capable of that demanded waiting around and actively looking for them? Not only that, but a policeman went down the street as he stood there: Hutchinson was suspicious enough to keep a 45 minute vigil, but not suspicious enough to mention his suspicions to a nearby policeman.

Furthermore, Hutchinson claimed his suspicious, well-dressed man lived in the neighbourhood. Why would he be suspicious of his attire in that location when he had seen this man in the neighbourhood previously?

Thanks in advance.

[Abby Normal]

Hi Jon,

I know you're well read on these things so perhaps you could fill in a few blanks for me.

From what I can tell from the reports I've read, Hutchinson was suspicious of this man because he was 'so well dressed' and he had no suspicion he was the murderer.

What exactly did he think the man was going to do? By his own admission, murderous intent did not cross his mind, so what does that leave: did he think the well dressed man was going to rob his friend Mary of her last slice of bread? What on earth was he assuming the man was capable of that demanded waiting around and actively looking for them? Not only that, but a policeman went down the street as he stood there: Hutchinson was suspicious enough to keep a 45 minute vigil, but not suspicious enough to mention his suspicions to a nearby policeman.

Furthermore, Hutchinson claimed his suspicious, well-dressed man lived in the neighbourhood. Why would he be suspicious of his attire in that location when he had seen this man in the neighbourhood previously?

Thanks in advance.

hi fleet
exactly. hutches reason for taking such a keen interest in the man is lame and pretty much non existant. like at the height of the ripper scare this friend of marys isnt going to be suspicious of his self described villainous character that looked at him surly and carried a knife sized package? cmon. everything about hutches story is dodgy.

theres something going on with hutch.

[Wickerman]

No, I wouldn't agree with you. I think both individuals would have been capable of distinguishing drunk from tipsy.

I've just been going over the inquest and, there is a clue that Cox may have exaggerated Kelly's condition.

Cox does say she first saw Kelly in Dorset street, that she followed her up the passage, but it was only when she spoke to Kelly that she noticed she was drunk.
So, apparently Kelly was walking fine, not staggering or bouncing off the walls of the passage as she walked down.

Cox said: "I did not notice the deceased was the worse for drink until I said 'good night' to her".
The Standard, 13 Nov. 1888.

So perhaps that "very much intoxicated" was nothing more than slurred speech?