Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Help On Some Details

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Wickerman
    replied
    Originally posted by packers stem View Post
    At the point in time that Kelly was alleged to be at the entrance to the court with her red handkerchief waving ' come mug me' guy .
    Dear Hutchinson was at the corner of Commercial Street and Dorset Street ....nowhere near his dot
    Yes, I'm well familiar with this argument. Posters like to play one statement off against the other, his police statement against his press statement. They want to argue that one is right and the other is wrong. Or he told one story then contradicted it, or he told the truth in one but lied in the other.

    What needs to be done is interpret what he said in both statements, he was only telling one story. So everything he said must be consistent in both stories.

    To the police he told them that Astrachan & Kelly went into Dorset street, and he followed them (into Dorset street).
    "They both went into Dorset Street I followed them."

    To the press he said:
    "......they walked across the road to Dorset-street. I followed them across, and stood at the corner of Dorset-street."

    If he stayed at the corner, then he didn't follow them into Dorset street.
    So he lied?
    Rubbish, him stopping at the corner until they got a good distance away, then continued to follow them is quite consistent with both stories.

    Thats what you would do, it's what I would do, or anyone. When they go around a corner you would rush to that corner and watch, then when they're a good distance down the street continue to follow them.
    Thats what he did.

    Leave a comment:


  • Simon Wood
    replied
    Hi Jon,

    Still waiting for your first guess.

    Regards,

    Simon

    Leave a comment:


  • Wickerman
    replied
    Originally posted by packers stem View Post
    Nope the scale is fine and based on average male height for the time .In fact I've been most generous
    Kelly was no orangutan lol
    I was just having fun Nick.

    Bob Hinton built a full scale mock-up and physically tried it himself, he said it worked fine.

    At the time, back in the early 90's, I worked in engineering. At work I created a 3D computer model of that window & door around a corner.
    It worked fine.

    Both Bob & I used the size of the typical house brick & the cement line in use in the 19th century, as base for the scale. If you enhance that photo it is possible to count exactly how many bricks for both the height & width of both the window & door.
    It works Nick - trust me
    Or, trust Bob, either way.

    Leave a comment:


  • Wickerman
    replied
    Originally posted by Sam Flynn View Post
    Just a simple observation, that's all. A woman with nothing but historic/biographical info makes a statement to the police within a day or so of the news breaking, but an acquiaintance who tails a mysterious man - about whom he remembers a wealth of detail - and Kelly within hours of her murder doesn't come forward until the inquest is over. I don't think I'll ever stop finding that odd.
    We don't know if he didn't make any inquiries in the street or in local pubs, or among the lodgers in the home where he stayed. We only hear of him going to the police station to make his statement.
    Anyone interested in the murder is going to go to the scene of the crime. Maybe he did.

    Like I've mentioned before though, on Friday the evening papers only published claims she was last seen alive after 9:00 Friday morning. and there were only four brief passages on this; one in the Globe, in the Echo, in the Star & the Evening News.
    Coverage was spars.

    Then on Saturday we find 39 paragraphs or sentences specifically aimed at estimating her time of death. These are found across 12 different daily & Evening newspapers on Saturday, by far the majority all repeat that same "seen alive as late as 9:00am" or thereabouts, Friday morning.
    What reason would anyone have to go running to the police if you only spoke to her 7 hours before her assumed time of death?

    I'm sorry Gareth, it seems to me you are trying to make what would have been sad news into some sort of emergency. It just wasn't.
    He knew her, sure, but he had no idea about her death so many hours after he spoke with her.

    It's only on the Sunday when the first reports are published that the police suspect she was murdered around 3:00am after the autopsy.
    Interestingly, this is the day he says he approached a policeman to tell him what he knew.
    It looks like the constable may have told him to go to the station, but he didn't, not until his lodger friend urged him to do so on the Monday.

    It seems to me it's possible Hutch became aware of the theory that Cox had seen the murderer (as reported in the Star following the inquest). That to my mind is sufficient cause for him to go to the police. He knew the theory was wrong.

    In this sequence of events I find nothing out of the ordinary, if it's reasonably accurate then no suspicion is warranted.

    Somehow, I don't think that "I'm Joe, the insane ex-boyfriend who used to beat Mary up" would go down well as an intro!
    Well, that was more tongue in cheek than anything. It is a fact though, people who are friends of a victim do not always go running to police.

    Remember Barnet's first inclination when he learned of the murder - he headed for Millers Court. Thats what people do, and that may be what Hutch did, but he is only going to learn what was in the press, that she was last seen alive about 9:00 Friday morning.
    He spoke to her at 2:00am, so why go to police?

    It's easy to claim he should have been more concerned if he knew her, but the reality is going to police is not the first action, it is going to the scene.
    We wouldn't know if he did that or not.

    Leave a comment:


  • packers stem
    replied
    At the point in time that Kelly was alleged to be at the entrance to the court with her red handkerchief waving ' come mug me' guy .
    Dear Hutchinson was at the corner of Commercial Street and Dorset Street ....nowhere near his dot

    Leave a comment:


  • packers stem
    replied
    Originally posted by Wickerman View Post
    If you think it's impossible, maybe your scale is wrong, you need to try again
    Nope the scale is fine and based on average male height for the time .In fact I've been most generous
    Kelly was no orangutan lol

    Leave a comment:


  • Abby Normal
    replied
    Originally posted by Sunny Delight View Post
    Of course it was hence he was interrogated about it by Abberline. Thst is where I stand on it. His behaviour was suspicious and creepy but Abberline I am sure felt that way too but was sufficently happy with his answers that he not only believed him but had other detectives accompany him to try and find the man again. I back Abberlines judgement.
    Hi sunny
    99 times out of 100 i would too. But not this time.
    I think wishful thinking and a good liar got the best of him on this one.

    To me its rather obvious that after initially beleiving hutch he probably soon came to question his credibility.

    Theres the story soon after in the press of his story being discounted.
    Abberline never mentions him again, and when he does mention suspects and witnesses he opts for those who go with peaked cap man.
    No mention of this should have been stellar witness again except from dew...who says he thinks he may have got the day wrong.

    Leave a comment:


  • Darryl Kenyon
    replied
    Originally posted by Wickerman View Post
    Right, thats what she did say, about the loiterer (Hutch?).



    Yes, but she is now talking about a couple on the same side as she is. For her to say "opposite", "across the street", or "on the other side", may understandably give the wrong impression.
    The couple is further on, ahead of her.

    The two red dots are Kelly & Astrachan (or Lewis's couple).
    The blue dot is Hutchinson (or Lewis's loiterer).
    The green dot is Lewis approaching Miller Court.

    Okay so why doesn't she say further on down the street as i was walking along, or in front of me and they turned into the court.
    Perhaps i should have added in my last post, Opposite from the man there was another man and woman, or, there was also a man and woman across the street from the man i saw, or, a man and a woman went in the passageway on the other side of the street from the man i saw.
    Wick you say that she is now talking about a man and a woman on the same side as her, how do you know they where on the same side?
    All i see in the various inquest testimony is further on or passing along.
    If the couple did go into the court it would be of the upmost importance. Yet the point/question does not seem to be pursued.
    Regards Darryl

    Leave a comment:


  • Sam Flynn
    replied
    Originally posted by Wickerman View Post
    Is that based on the premise that everybody is the same?
    Just a simple observation, that's all. A woman with nothing but historic/biographical info makes a statement to the police within a day or so of the news breaking, but an acquiaintance who tails a mysterious man - about whom he remembers a wealth of detail - and Kelly within hours of her murder doesn't come forward until the inquest is over. I don't think I'll ever stop finding that odd.
    As for people who know the victim well, do you recall reading that Joe Flemming dashed to Commercial Street at any time?
    Somehow, I don't think that "I'm Joe, the insane ex-boyfriend who used to beat Mary up" would go down well as an intro!

    Leave a comment:


  • Sunny Delight
    replied
    Originally posted by Abby Normal View Post
    Hi sunny
    His behavior and story is suspicious whether you beleive him or not.

    Of course it was hence he was interrogated about it by Abberline. Thst is where I stand on it. His behaviour was suspicious and creepy but Abberline I am sure felt that way too but was sufficently happy with his answers that he not only believed him but had other detectives accompany him to try and find the man again. I back Abberlines judgement.

    Leave a comment:


  • Wickerman
    replied
    Originally posted by Sam Flynn View Post
    Especially when we consider that Elizabeth Felix ("Phoenix") went to Leman Street on 11th November to volunteer information about Kelly's background. Felix quite possibly hadn't seen Kelly for ages, and certainly hadn't seen her with a mysterious man on the night of her death, but she still went to the police before the inquest.
    Is that based on the premise that everybody is the same?
    Do you have a source for that belief?

    As for people who know the victim well, do you recall reading that Joe Flemming dashed to Commercial Street at any time?

    Leave a comment:


  • Wickerman
    replied
    Originally posted by packers stem View Post
    At no juncture did Barnett suggest he used to put his arm through the broken window .
    Abberline said it .
    Just saying .
    I've superimposed an average sized guy in front of the window though I can't post it here due to casebooks old technology .
    Wasted an hour just trying and gave up .
    Try it yourselves though , it's clearly impossible .
    It's easy to see when you make it visual .
    If you think it's impossible, maybe your scale is wrong, you need to try again

    Leave a comment:


  • Wickerman
    replied
    Originally posted by Darryl Kenyon View Post
    We may disagree Wick but if this did happen I would expect Sarah at the inquest to say something like - The man was looking up the court; he seemed to be waiting or looking for someone.
    Right, thats what she did say, about the loiterer (Hutch?).

    Opposite there was a man and woman, or, there was a man and woman across the street, or most likely, a man and a woman went in the passageway on the other side of the street.
    Not further on as she described
    Yes, but she is now talking about a couple on the same side as she is. For her to say "opposite", "across the street", or "on the other side", may understandably give the wrong impression.
    The couple is further on, ahead of her.

    The two red dots are Kelly & Astrachan (or Lewis's couple).
    The blue dot is Hutchinson (or Lewis's loiterer).
    The green dot is Lewis approaching Miller Court.

    Leave a comment:


  • Wickerman
    replied
    Originally posted by Michael W Richards View Post
    Which would make a four day delay in coming forward with possibly relevant information about a possible suspect despicable.
    Not in the slightest.

    Leave a comment:


  • Abby Normal
    replied
    Originally posted by Sunny Delight View Post
    It seems to me you don't believe Hutchinson for a second but because of that you view everything he did with suspicion. Everyone was astonished the Inquest lasted one day. When Hutchinson showed up at the Police station at 6pm would he have been aware the inquest had been closed- I doubt it very much. We will never be able to prove either way if he stood outside the inquest- I would say again that would be very unlikely. It all becomes so elaborate as to become untenable in my opinion. I admit following Kelly and the man was creepy. For all we know Hutchinson could have been the biggest slimeball on the east end. That doesn't mean you can't be honest.


    Yes Hutchinson told a Policeman on the Sunday. The policeman was on point duty as far as I remember. Something tells me Hutchinson was looking to get it off his chest. It was playing on his mind all weekend. Obviously telling the Policeman did nit expunge the guilt he felt about not saying something. He could have been in turmoil the whole weekend for all we know. If you suspect he may have even been guilty of the crime itself then surely Hutchinson thought the same himself. After all he was human just like me and you. I am sure he could see just how his actions could be misconstrued.
    Hi sunny
    His behavior and story is suspicious whether you beleive him or not.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X