Richardson's View

[Abby Normal]

Yes we are. But I can't let Fake News go...

theres nothing fake about what i posted and i dont appreciate you saying i post fake news. apologize and retract that statement. im serious.

[Observer]

lewis never said she saw kelly with the bethnal green botherer. she said she saw him with a woman and besides she didnt even know mary kelly. lewis statement has no reason to be disbeleived, she is actually one of the witnesses who dosnt have any discrepencies.

if she wanted to be fanciful or wanted fifteen minutes of fame she could have come up with something much more...like saying she saw the bgb with kelly or it was him lurking outside her house.

I'm working from memory here but didn't Kennedy aka Lewis say that she saw the BGB with two women one of whom was Kelly? She said she didn't know Kelly, if she visited the Keylers though she might have known Kelly by sight. In my opinion Lewis is very much an unreliable witness.

It's irrelevant though, we were discussing Richardson, and whether he would put himself at the scene of a murder to escape an ear bashing from his mother. The fact is his mother would have known that it was a regular "job" of his to check on the the stair well, the yard and the cellar. Would she have told the police this? In all probability yes, it would have emerged. So either way, Richardson whether he visited the yard or not, would have been questioned by the police. He had a reason to be there, it was no big deal therefore if he told a lie saying he was there, when in actual fact he was not. I doubt the police suspected he was involved in the murder for one minute.

There was no need for Hutchinson to come forward when he did. In effect, considering the unlikely story he presented to the police, I'd say he put himself into much more of a precarious situation than Richardson found himself in

[Observer]

lewis and hutch corroborate each other. she saw a man lurking outside kellys place as if waiting for someone to come out at the same time hutch said thats where and what he was doing.

All we can say is that Lewis claims she saw a man standing outside the lodging house looking suspicious, it doesn't follow that it must have been Hutchinson

[Curious Cat]

All we can say is that Lewis claims she saw a man standing outside the lodging house looking suspicious, it doesn't follow that it must have been Hutchinson

It's been a thought of mine recently that Hutchinson may have read the account of Mrs Kennedy in the paper over the weekend and saw the time of 3am given. Anticipating being identified at the inquest, he comes forward after the inquest has closed and gives his own account. He gives 3am as his leaving time...the same time given by Mrs Kennedy...but also claims to have waited in Dorset Street for 45 minutes before leaving. Sarah Lewis's inquest evidence is then published after Hutchinson made his statement and it only matches in regard to Hutchinson's position in Dorset Street and the time he was there. Everything else is separate information. Sarah Lewis doesn't identify Hutchinson as the man she saw. Hutchinson identifies himself as the man Sarah Lewis saw. Hutchinson is aware there is a least one other person around at the relevant time who could potentially identify him.

There are no witnesses to John Richardson being at/near the spot where Annie Chapman was found whereas there would be witnesses to his arrival at work at the market, which he went to immediately after leaving 29 Hanbury Street. He also gives his evidence before a time of death is given.

[harry]

The main difference ,as I see it,between Hutchinson and Richardson,is the element of truth.Hutchinson offers a situation of a person that cannot be identified or found,while Richardson offers a situation of a body being able to be seen if it was present.Of the two,only Richardson's account can be tested and found to be truthfull.

[Fisherman]

lewis man looked just like blotchy? dont think so fish, nothing like him

Dark clothes, not very tall, wideawake or felt hat? I disagree, Abby, they seem to match quite well.

[Fisherman]

lewis never said she saw kelly with the bethnal green botherer. she said she saw him with a woman and besides she didnt even know mary kelly. lewis statement has no reason to be disbeleived, she is actually one of the witnesses who dosnt have any discrepencies.

if she wanted to be fanciful or wanted fifteen minutes of fame she could have come up with something much more...like saying she saw the bgb with kelly or it was him lurking outside her house.

I can see the allure in thinking like this. But we cannot in retrospect decide for the witnesses what they would have said if they wanted a slice of the case. In essence, if she lied, we can see that she did make front page news regardless of how she worded herself.

[Observer]

It's been a thought of mine recently that Hutchinson may have read the account of Mrs Kennedy in the paper over the weekend and saw the time of 3am given. Anticipating being identified at the inquest, he comes forward after the inquest has closed and gives his own account. He gives 3am as his leaving time...the same time given by Mrs Kennedy...but also claims to have waited in Dorset Street for 45 minutes before leaving. Sarah Lewis's inquest evidence is then published after Hutchinson made his statement and it only matches in regard to Hutchinson's position in Dorset Street and the time he was there. Everything else is separate information. Sarah Lewis doesn't identify Hutchinson as the man she saw. Hutchinson identifies himself as the man Sarah Lewis saw. Hutchinson is aware there is a least one other person around at the relevant time who could potentially identify him.

Why would he have been identified at the inquest? Nobody knew who he was. That's my point, he had no need to come forward. Like I said, considering the extraordinary tale he told to the police, in my opinion it was a foolhardy risk he took.

There are no witnesses to John Richardson being at/near the spot where Annie Chapman was found whereas there would be witnesses to his arrival at work at the market, which he went to immediately after leaving 29 Hanbury Street. He also gives his evidence before a time of death is given.

But I'm suggesting he never paid a visit to 29 Hanbury Street that morning.

[Observer]

if she wanted to be fanciful or wanted fifteen minutes of fame she could have come up with something much more...like saying she saw the bgb with kelly or it was him lurking outside her house.

She claimed she saw him at the corner of Commercial Street, and Dorset Street, about 30 yards from Kelly's room. It's clear to me that she was insinuating that he might well have been responsible for Kelly's murder.

But lets take a look at the behavior of the BGB. At the height of the terror, he walks about Bethnal Green, top hat, and black bag in evidence, inviting women to go with him down some dingy back lane. Really? Did he have a death wish? I believe the BGB was nothing more than a figment of Lewis's imagination

[Observer]

.Richardson's account can be tested and found to be truthfull.

Really Harry? Was it corroborated?

[Abby Normal]

lewis unreliable? hmmm ok. guess she just happened to get lucky not only saying she saw hutch where, when and what he was doing(admitted by him) but also the screams of murder around four am thats corroberated by another witness.

cmon, shes one of the most reliable witnesses we have.

and if she made up the bethnal green botherer it must have been another conspiracy because she (needlessly) included another witness in this story, whom the police could have checked out.

[Fisherman]

lewis unreliable? hmmm ok. guess she just happened to get lucky not only saying she saw hutch where, when and what he was doing(admitted by him) but also the screams of murder around four am thats corroberated by another witness.

cmon, shes one of the most reliable witnesses we have.

and if she made up the bethnal green botherer it must have been another conspiracy because she (needlessly) included another witness in this story, whom the police could have checked out.

One week ago, Albert Cadosch was "one of the most reliable witnesses we have"...

And yes, her both seeing a man who could have been the killer and overhearing the "Oh, murder" outcry is a bit thick. Of course, Prater also overheard that outcry. And so did heaps of ladies in Millers Court. On various times. Reliable witnesses all of them, Iīm sure.

[Wickerman]

No they don't. Lewis's lurking man is not necessarily Hutchinson. If Hutchinson knew about Lewis's evidence he could have come forward to say he was that man. And if he was, why didn't he mention the woman who went right past him up Miller's Court? There is no mention of Lewis in Hutchinson's statement. And Lewis comes forward before Hutchinson does. So she does not corroborate him.

Hutchinson was interviewed by Abberline so Lewis may have been mentioned at that time. No record has survived of that interview, so we cannot say for sure.
However, the police statement that has survived is only concerned with what Hutchinson saw & heard concerning the victim, Kelly.
Badham, who took the statement is not concerned with any women passing in the street, especially poor women who were of no consequence to the police inquiry. Badham was also concerned with any men that Hutchinson might have seen in Dorset St., naturally, because the killer was obviously a man, not a woman.
Hutchinson had no need to mention any women passing, he also makes no mention of Mrs Cox who came home about 3 O'clock. Hutchinson is a witness, he is not required to prove himself, or defend himself to Badham.
A thorough examination of his story will be done by Abberline in due course.

[Fisherman]

Hutchinson was interviewed by Abberline so Lewis may have been mentioned at that time. No record has survived of that interview, so we cannot say for sure.
However, the police statement that has survived is only concerned with what Hutchinson saw & heard concerning the victim, Kelly.
Badham, who took the statement is not concerned with any women passing in the street, especially poor women who were of no consequence to the police inquiry. Badham was also concerned with any men that Hutchinson might have seen in Dorset St., naturally, because the killer was obviously a man, not a woman.
Hutchinson had no need to mention any women passing, he also makes no mention of Mrs Cox who came home about 3 O'clock. Hutchinson is a witness, he is not required to prove himself, or defend himself to Badham.
A thorough examination of his story will be done by Abberline in due course.

Nope. Didnīt buy it last time over, donīt buy it now. Hutchinson should, would and could have mentioned Lewis passing into Millers Court if he was there. Ergo, he was. not.

[Chava]

theres nothing fake about what i posted and i dont appreciate you saying i post fake news. apologize and retract that statement. im serious.

I was joking. Somewhat.
But I will say that asserting that Hutchinson and Lewis corroborate each other is a misleading statement. And I'm serious about that.