Why did Abberline believe Hutch ?

[Fisherman]

Hi Fish - That's ok, you're welcome. It was a particularly wet Autumn that year. You might find this article from the Romford Recorder of interest:

http://www.romfordrecorder.co.uk/new...ring_1_2305546

I think that there are lots of explanations that Hutchinson could have given Abberline to account for his trip to Romford which would have been perfectly plausible. But as I said in my earlier post, I think the trip to Romford would have been a lesser concern. It wasn't unusual for people to walk from Romford to London.

Remember, Hutchinson gave his statement as a voluntary witness - there's no indication that he was under suspicion by the police for so doing. Would Abberline have been concerned with 'checking out' his story of walking from Romford [had it even been possible to do so]? I think it doubtful.

I donīt think it would have been Abberlines primary concern - that would have been pinning Hutchinson on the murder street and -night, and - of course - establishing as much confirmation/knowledge as possible about Astrakhan man.
Secondarily, however, yes, I do believe that if Abberline did not find out about why Hutchinsons story did not pan out before, he would have checked the Romford business too. If nothing else, it could help to establish a schedule. And establish, of course, whether Hutchinson had gotten the days right or not.

The best,
Fisherman

[Ben]

Would Abberline have been concerned with 'checking out' his story of walking from Romford [had it even been possible to do so]? I think it doubtful.

I agree entirely, Sally.

Another over-looked point here is that Abberline's first priority would have been to expedite the pursuit of Astrakhan man. That was the immediate concern. If the police had invested all their resources trying to determine how many cows Hutchinson saw on the way back from Romford, or if Freddie the fishmonger saw Hutchinson gazing at the Romford flood waters, they would have been wasting precious Astrakhan-collaring time, effectively allowing his trail to grow cold. Even if they suspected that the man might have been a fabrication, their first priority was to get that description out there and pursue that lead as soon as possible, as they couldn’t risk a lead slipping through their fingers on the assumption that it was false. It might not have been.

That would have been Abberline’s first investigative port of call – circulate the description and set the Astrak-hunt (still funny!) afoot before he has an opportunity to get spooked into fleeing the area or rapidly changing his hilariously conspicuous appearance. Fannying about with unverifiable aspects of Hutchinson’s story would have been a colossal waste of time and resources.

It is nonsense, as you point out, to argue that there were “checking” points associated with his Romford narrative. No there weren’t, or else he would not have been discredited. It would have taken a considerable length of time, in those days, for potential Romford-verifiers to be identified. Abberline would have had to send the wire, the Romford coppers would have been required to track down the individuals concerned, interview them, and wire back. By the time it would realistically have taken for a resolution of that issue to arrive on Abberline’s desk, Hutchinson’s statement had long since dropped off the map having failed "later investigations" for whatever reasons. If Hutchinson lied, on the other hand, there was nothing to verify, and nobody to wire, and all he needed to do in order to skirt round the issue of verification was make out that he was alone. Who was in a position to prove him wrong or lying? Absolutely nobody.

Hutchinson was unlikely to have plucked Romford completely at random. It’s possible that he did have some sort of connection there, and was accordingly familiar with the extent of flooding, and yet still lied about visiting the town on Thursday.

“So what you say in general might be true, but then we have to consider if Abberline would have given "every lead" such a glowing report to his superior as he did with Hutchinson.”

He didn’t give it a “glowing” report, Jon. What a weird thing to say. He simply expressed the faith-based, short-lived opinion that his statement is true. Nowhere near enough time had elapsed in which to verify the bulk his statement by the time Abberline came to write his report, which wasn’t the priority at the time anyway. The priority at the time was to circulate the description, hope for the best, and ask questions later if all didn’t pan out, which it didn’t.

“Any one of those could have reported seeing Hutchinson that night.”

No, you don’t get to plonk a load of strategically located Hutch-spotters on the streets or gazing out of their windows in the small hours, especially with no evidence. Hutchinson makes clear that he encountered nobody during his Dorset Street vigil, and since you take him at his word, you’ll just have to accept it. Oh, and it’s still not the case that the police never shared anything with the press – obviously, and provably not the case, in fact.

[Ben]

Youīve had your say, I have had mine. Letīs leave it at that, shall we?

Oh alright then, Fisherman.

I would have preferred a foul-tempered stamina war, but since I've successfully recruited Jon for that, I will respect your request. Just a very quick copy and paste on the subject of the "interrogation" business.

This time over you fail on one point - you claim that Lechmere would have been subjected to the same type of interrogation and investigation as Hutchinson, but we know that only the latter was described as having been interrogated, just as we have a good pointer (the name) that this never happened to Lechmere.

No, we do not have a "good pointer" in that regard.

As I've made clear on the other thread, there is no possibility - that's right, no possibility - of Lechmere's name remaining a secret if he went by that name socially, and at work. Abberline's interrogation of Cross could have amounted to a couple of lazy jars at the T̶e̶n̶ ̶B̶e̶l̶l̶s̶ B̶r̶i̶c̶k̶l̶a̶y̶e̶r̶s̶ H̶o̶r̶n̶ ̶o̶f̶ ̶P̶l̶e̶n̶t̶y̶ B̶r̶i̶t̶a̶n̶n̶i̶a̶ Queen's Head, and his identity would still have been discovered.

Hutchinson was no more "interrogated" than any other witness whose truthfulness, or otherwise, needed to be established. Abberline was bound to use the word "interrogate" when speaking to his bosses. "Had a cosy, marmalde-fuelled chinwag with..." doesn't create quite as favourable an impression

Regards,
Ben

[Fisherman]

I have nothing to add. You do the work for me.

Fisherman

[DVV]

Would you expect Abberline to stick his neck out if the various medical opinions could not provide any real consensus?

That's precisely what he did, Jon.

Cheers

[Wickerman]

That's precisely what he did, Jon.

Cheers

If it's a faithful representation of what he said, or verbatim, then perhaps. Though exaggeration in memoirs seems to be a consistency among the recently retired officials involved in the case.
As none of the doctors offered such a high commendation for the killer then we might be wise to be wary, Abberline was not qualified to judge himself, and he doesn't appear to be quoting anyone that we know of.

[DVV]

this pun is eternal

Now for sure you're getting saucy, son.

[pinkmoon]

Hi all,do you not think that if the police thought there was any chance at all of old hutch been our killer then they would have put him under surveillance and if they did that then it would be noted in the police files somewhere.Could it also be possible that if they checked him out he had perfect alibis for the other murders.

[DVV]

Could it also be possible that if they checked him out he had perfect alibis for the other murders.

Alibis ? One or two months after the murders ? Hope the police were serious enough not to ask. Hutch's alibi for Kelly is that he was there, but then decided to walk alone (he wasn't a Manchester supporter).

[Wickerman]

Alibis ? One or two months after the murders ? Hope the police were serious enough not to ask. Hutch's alibi for Kelly is that he was there, but then decided to walk alone (he wasn't a Manchester supporter).

Psst, Dave,... thats Liverpool, not Manchester.

I wouldn't put much store in the comment, "walk around all night", to the press.
First point, it was not included in his police statement.
Secondly, the phrase was not always taken literal, it was a euphemism because to admit to sleeping in doorways or on the property of others was to admit vagrancy.
He could have been fined, or worse.
Lastly, he may have met up with a friend, he doesn't say he was alone, only that he walked around. That friend may have confirmed that part of his story.

The tendency to use "I" instead of "we" when I am telling you what I did is common.
Diemschitz would also have us believe he ran alone along Fairclough St. but Kozebrodski was with him, but Diemschitz also uses "I", not "we".

[DVV]

Psst, Dave,... thats Liverpool, not Manchester.

Thanks Jon, I stand corrected.
And still hate football.
But I know Platini was a good fly.
Rugby is my sport, I confess, and Peter "Fleming" Crouch was a memorable Ethiopian second-row.

Cheers

[DVV]

Pork pun, part 3

I wouldn't put much store in the comment, "walk around all night", to the press.
First point, it was not included in his police statement.
Secondly, the phrase was not always taken literal, it was a euphemism because to admit to sleeping in doorways or on the property of others was to admit vagrancy.

As you like, my saucy son, but it doesn't make a better alibi.

Cheers

[GUT]

Thanks Jon, I stand corrected.
And still hate football.
But I know Platini was a good fly.
Rugby is my sport, I confess, and Peter "Fleming" Crouch was a memorable Ethiopian second-row.

Cheers

Well any 6' 7" er would go well in line outs but nowdays he'd probably be a bit short.

[Wickerman]

Thanks Jon, I stand corrected.
And still hate football.
But I know Platini was a good fly.
Rugby is my sport, I confess, and Peter "Fleming" Crouch was a memorable Ethiopian second-row.

Cheers

Oh dear oh dear, Dave.
How can anyone 'hate' football, it's the global game!

I could never get into Rugby, its all the 'huddle', the break and run, kick the ball, then another 'huddle, another break, another kick, and another huddle.....etc. etc.


Anyway, Hutchinson just may have been a Liverpool supporter, is what I'm saying...

[Wickerman]

As you like, my saucy son, but it doesn't make a better alibi.

Cheers

Agree, I concede it doesn't make for an alibi, that was after the fact, or after three o'clock, at least.