Identifying Hutchinson

[Amanda]

Anyone who doubts that your signature can change over time need only look at their own signature 23 years ago.

That should suffice.

Hi Jon,
While I agree with you to a point, I still think that certain traits in a person's handwriting remain the same.

For example, whenever my 96 year old grandmother writes birthday cards she always begins with a curly 'D' in 'Dear' and finishes with a little zigzag flourish at the end.
This has been significant of her handwriting since she was a young girl, even though some of the other letters look a little different as her writing gets shaky with age.
I've got samples of Cream's handwriting, which are twenty years apart and can very clearly see that his style remains the same in certain letters.

Saying that, if all we have of Hutchinson are signatures, it would take a real expert to decipher which are from the same hand.

Amanda

[Wickerman]

Hi Jon,
While I agree with you to a point, I still think that certain traits in a person's handwriting remain the same.

For example, whenever my 96 year old grandmother writes birthday cards she always begins with a curly 'D' in 'Dear' and finishes with a little zigzag flourish at the end.
This has been significant of her handwriting since she was a young girl, even though some of the other letters look a little different as her writing gets shaky with age.
I've got samples of Cream's handwriting, which are twenty years apart and can very clearly see that his style remains the same in certain letters.

Saying that, if all we have of Hutchinson are signatures, it would take a real expert to decipher which are from the same hand.

Amanda

Hi Amanda.
One of the problems is, some can identify traits between those signatures, and others do not.
A person's signature changes more through the evolving years, like up to 30 years old, or thereabouts. Between 30 and 80 or so, it changes relatively little, assuming no physical disability.

The argument that they look different therefore they cannot be the same man, does not choose to admit the 23 years gap where signatures can change. And, especially if Hutchinson was in his late teens in 1888, then we should expect to see slight changes by 1911, especially in a person who's labours did not require him to sign documents on a daily basis, like a Lawyer, policeman, or Doctor.

[Bridewell]

You might be right about his age, but why would a younger person be hanging around Dorset Street late at night?

Because he wanted to sleep with MJK perhaps?

[Paddy]

George Hutchinson?

Southwark St George Workhouse, Mint Street, register of vagrants...Oct 22 1885....Ancestry.

George Hutchinson.. aged 30..Groom..was walking about the night before
This could be the watch stealer George Hutchinson. In my opinion this one is a good match for the MJK one.
There are a few other entrys that could be him.

There is also a record of a very young Geo Hutchinson b1846 being deserted by his parents in the same workhouse dated 1856. It says his parents deserted him and the address given was 17 Gun street, Friar street (Blackfriars) This could fit the following......
Some time back I found a George Hutchinson that was put on the training ship Arethusa. I am not 100% sure but think he was connected to a Keziah Hutchinson and had lived in Southwark at some point. He did have a Whitechapel connection too, if I remember correctly it was his birth place..


Pat.......

[Paddy]

George Hutchinson on training ship

I have just located the other George Hutchinson here are the details....

1881 census..
The training ship "Exmouth" at Grays Essex (oops)
George Hutchinson
Pauper
aged 15 (b 1866)
Born Mile End...

Having gone back to the 1881 census I found his mother was Kezia Hutchinsona widow and that he had a brother called Benjamin b1883. Kezia was born in Leytonstone.
So this was not the Groom one I found and being born 1866 I am not sure if he could be the right one. But who knows !

Pat,,,,,,,,

[Sam Flynn]

I have very little doubt - practically zero doubt, personally - that "our" George was none other than George Topping Hutchinson. The signatures were enough to convince me.

[Wickerman]

Southwark St George Workhouse, Mint Street, register of vagrants...Oct 22 1885....Ancestry.

George Hutchinson.. aged 30..Groom..was walking about the night before
This could be the watch stealer George Hutchinson. In my opinion this one is a good match for the MJK one.

I can see someone is confusing threads...

[Sam Flynn]

Om Toppy Toppy!

Have done this in haste so not sure how well it'll turn out. These are the three signatures from the Hutchinson statement, followed by that of a George Hutchinson from the 1911 census, although he would have been only 18 or 19 at the time of the Kelly murder.

That's George Topping Hutchinson's signature there, if I'm not mistaken. A few years back, I created various collages combining "Ripper" Hutch's signature and those of George Topping ("Toppy") from the latter's 1898 marriage certificate and 1911 census entry. For example, taking the "meat" of the signature ("utchinso") from each of these samples, there are remarkable similarities - even consistencies - from 1888, 1898 and 1911:



Here's some more significant chunks of the signature ("Geo" plus "utchinso"), with dates appended:



Ditto, but zooming in on common "triplets" within forename and surname:



Here are the three signatures in their entirety, with dates alongside:



And, just for jolly, here they are as an animated GIF, melting seamlessly into one another:



These comparisons were more than enough to prove to me that Dorset Street George and George Topping Hutchinson were one and the same. I have not wavered from that conclusion in the intervening years and, on the basis of the evidence, I see no reason to change.

Trust what you can see with your own eyes, and ignore potentially biased interpretations and opinions, my own included. Let the evidence speak for itself.

[Wickerman]

No argument there.

[Paddy]

Toppy

Trust what you can see with your own eyes, and ignore potentially biased interpretations and opinions, my own included. Let the evidence speak for itself.

With all due respect Sam. I am almost convinced by your great presentation.
Allowing for small changes as you have ie: the formation of the o in George and the upward slope after n at the end, leaving of the H in Hutchinson and the lack of upper loop in the h in middle of Hutchinson, wouldnt the following from 1911 census almost fit too? One is possibly your one?
Writing seemed to be so similar in those days.
Respect
Pat

[Paddy]

Even this one?

One of my past thoughts was that this Police Constable Harry Huchinson PC661A who lived in London and was in the police at time of the murders might have been George.

So I am 70% but not 100% convinced.
Pat.......

[Paddy]

Wickerman

I can see someone is confusing threads..

Hi John sorry dont understand? Is there another thread on the watch stealer Hutchinson then?
Forgive me as I tend to take things literally, so if its a joke I wouldn't see it.

Pat.....

[Wickerman]

I can see someone is confusing threads..

Hi John sorry dont understand? Is there another thread on the watch stealer Hutchinson then?
Forgive me as I tend to take things literally, so if its a joke I wouldn't see it.

Pat.....

No Pat, my mistake, I apologize.


It is surprising to see Toppy surfacing again after all this time.

[Debra A]

Hi John sorry dont understand? Is there another thread on the watch stealer Hutchinson then?
Forgive me as I tend to take things literally, so if its a joke I wouldn't see it.

Pat.....

Hi Pat

This might interest you:

http://forum.casebook.org/showpost.php?p=236979&postcount=2392

[richardnunweek]

Hi.
Surely we are not about to adopt the obvious conclusion that Hutchinson the witness was Topping..
I have maintained this since I joined Casebook..
Soon we will have a choice to make,
Was Topping being truthful...or was he fabricating.?
Regards Richard.