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
    That would mean that the police deliberately lied about when he came to them and deliberately kept him from the inquest would it not ?
    Not knowing the circumstances makes it hard to judge. Police reports admit people were coming forward all the time with accusations and stories, we don't know what the exchange was between Hutchinson & this constable.

    If the constable was on point duty (likely, if this was at the market), then he might have suggested Hutch go to the station himself. Though, if Hutch was working there at the time (also likely, as he was in no regular employment), then he can't just walk off the job when he chooses.
    So, at the end of his work day he didn't go to the station after all, maybe he was too tired to be bothered.

    The police can't be accused of secrecy if they have not yet received a statement from the witness.
    There's nothing unique about a witness going to police with a, "I think I know something...." story.
    The constable may have taken down some notes, we'll never know. Hutch did decide to go to the station the next day.

    Leave a comment:


  • packers stem
    replied
    Originally posted by Wickerman View Post

    Interestingly, it was Sunday morning when Hutchinson said he first alerted the police to his story. Had he read, or been made aware of this Lloyds article?
    That would mean that the police deliberately lied about when he came to them and deliberately kept him from the inquest would it not ?

    Leave a comment:


  • Roy Corduroy
    replied
    Hi Wick,

    Originally posted by Wickerman View Post
    Who wants to join a thread just to whine about it?
    I do because I can only whine about "it" one thread at a time. I can't complain about the other twenty or thirty thousand Hutch threads I've sat through in the last ten years. You're right -"it"

    Roy
    Last edited by Roy Corduroy; 01-20-2019, 03:46 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Wickerman
    replied
    Who wants to join a thread just to whine about it?

    Leave a comment:


  • Roy Corduroy
    replied
    What's holier-than-thou is keeping George Hutchinson suspect discussions alive for no good reason.

    Leave a comment:


  • Wickerman
    replied
    Even Lawende (premier witness?) didn't come forward, like most witnesses he had to be sought out during a house-to-house search.
    The majority of witnesses do not come forward, whether they know the deceased or not.
    One of the most common reason's given is that they don't want to get involved. And those few who actually do know the victim are worried that they may become targets themselves - look how many tenants fled Millers Court following the murder.

    This holier-than-thou premise that an honest witness will waste no time in contacting police, oblivious of any potential threat to himself in doing so, is a myth.

    Leave a comment:


  • Sunny Delight
    replied
    Originally posted by Sam Flynn View Post
    We all do, I'm afraid. Imagining it to be the present, however, I still cannot gloss over Hutchinson's tardiness in coming forward after the butchering to death of a friend (for want of a shorter word) whom he'd left alone with an odd-looking man hours before. Hindsight or no hindsight, I still find hard to believe that Hutchinson should have waited so long, had his story been true.

    Should he have come forward earlier? Absolutely.
    Does his delay make him a model citizen? No.
    Do people do things and make decisions they latee regret? Yes.

    I think we can both agree Hutchinson not coming forward sooner does his character little favour. I am loathe to judge him though as I don't know who he was or anything about him. The best we can go on is Abberline. He believed him. Nothing official has ever come to light contradicting that belief. I would always be sceptical of referring to Hutchinson and Kelly as 'friends'. There is no mention anywhere of this being the case. It infers that they had an intimate enough relatiinship. I know many people but only a handful would be 'friends'. She was a prostitute. She asks Hutchinson for sixpence. Hutchinson tells Abberline he gave her a few shillings sometimes, he says he knows her three years. Maybe he was a customer on occasion? It would make sense.

    Leave a comment:


  • Roy Corduroy
    replied
    Hi Sam,

    Originally posted by Sam Flynn View Post
    ...I still cannot gloss over Hutchinson's tardiness in coming forward after the butchering to death of a friend (for want of a shorter word) whom he'd left alone with an odd-looking man hours before. Hindsight or no hindsight, I still find hard to believe that Hutchinson should have waited so long, had his story been true.
    An excellent analysis which which I agree 100%. After the tragedy which blew up Lord Mayor's Day surely it was his civic duty to come forward post haste. I don't believe his story, either. What is the most unvelievable of all is that he has been cast as Jack the Ripper. The polar opposite of logic.

    This has become a Hutch thread, there is another Hutch thread in sheep's clothing right now in Victims/Mary Kelly, and there are hundreds of threads under Suspects/George Hutchinson. Unbelievable.

    And yet there are posters here who are dead set on keeping the discussion of Suspect/George Hutchinson front & center 24/7 to infinity and beyond. One of those posters even announced he had come back to Casebook after a hiatus for the specific purpose of keeping the Suspect/George Hutchinson threads on the front burner for all time. And he and everyone are doing a fantastic job of it. Congratulations to all the Hutch enthusiasts, whether you are pro or con. This dead horse has been beat till its' atomized. Yet the beat goes on.

    Roy

    Leave a comment:


  • Wickerman
    replied
    The first firm indication we have that the police had a time of death to work with came on Sunday morning.
    Lloyds Weekly published this paragraph suggesting a time of death between 2:00 and 3:00 am.



    Interestingly, it was Sunday morning when Hutchinson said he first alerted the police to his story. Had he read, or been made aware of this Lloyds article?

    In the same publication Lloyds still repeated Maxwell's story & that of Maurice Lewis, both claiming Kelly was still alive late Friday morning, but now Hutchinson had reasonable cause to say something to police, which he did.
    There's nothing here of substance to criticise.

    Leave a comment:


  • Sam Flynn
    replied
    Originally posted by Sunny Delight View Post
    You are talking with hindsight.
    We all do, I'm afraid. Imagining it to be the present, however, I still cannot gloss over Hutchinson's tardiness in coming forward after the butchering to death of a friend (for want of a shorter word) whom he'd left alone with an odd-looking man hours before. Hindsight or no hindsight, I still find hard to believe that Hutchinson should have waited so long, had his story been true.

    Leave a comment:


  • Sunny Delight
    replied
    Originally posted by Sam Flynn View Post
    I stand by what I said. The last known man to have been in Kelly's company was the man Hutchinson left her with... and he was a weirdo with a stern countenance and an odd-looking parcel with a strap. Hutchinson should have come forward sooner, end of story.


    You are talking with hindsight. Mrs Maxwell a neighbour says she saw Mary that morning and Mr Lewis said he saw her at 10 o'clock in the pub. I see Wickermans point. Not 100% sure he is right but it can't be dismissed out of hand. It is also very easy to sit 130 years later and judge someone for not coming forward sooner. Abberline seemed content with his reasons. We don't know what they were but to judge someones actions now when we know so little about Hutchinson is very easy. There is an old saying where I come from- 'better late than never'. That is how I view Hutchinson.
    Last edited by Sunny Delight; 01-19-2019, 08:05 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Simon Wood
    replied
    Hi RJ,

    I agree.

    But over the years, Ripperology has hung its hat on a lot less.

    Happy MLK Day.

    Simon

    Leave a comment:


  • Sam Flynn
    replied
    Originally posted by Wickerman View Post
    The "9:00am" theory includes the fact Kelly was seen in the Britannia, and in Dorset st., in neither case was she with Astrachan.
    The public, including Hutch, will have known that.

    What Kelly was doing 6-7 hours before this was irrelevant.

    You're not looking at this through the eyes of the people at the time.
    I stand by what I said. The last known man to have been in Kelly's company was the man Hutchinson left her with... and he was a weirdo with a stern countenance and an odd-looking parcel with a strap. Hutchinson should have come forward sooner, end of story.

    Leave a comment:


  • Wickerman
    replied
    Originally posted by Sam Flynn View Post
    He saw her with a weird-looking man carrying a parcel with a strap, in whose company she still was at 3AM when Hutchinson departed. There was nothing to rule out this weirdo as the man who (allegedly) killed her after 9:00, and chopped her up with an implement he carried in said parcel.

    The alleged 9AM killing is no reason/excuse whatsoever for his not having made an official statement sooner.
    The "9:00am" theory includes the fact Kelly was seen in the Britannia, and in Dorset st., in neither case was she with Astrachan.
    The public, including Hutch, will have known that.

    What Kelly was doing 6-7 hours before this was irrelevant.

    You're not looking at this through the eyes of the people at the time.

    Leave a comment:


  • Sam Flynn
    replied
    Originally posted by Wickerman View Post
    There's a perfectly valid reason why he didn't go. It was widely believed over that first weekend that Kelly had been murdered after 9:00 am Friday morning.
    Him meeting her at 2:00 am has no bearing on that.
    He saw her with a weird-looking man carrying a parcel with a strap, in whose company she still was at 3AM when Hutchinson departed. There was nothing to rule out this weirdo as the man who (allegedly) killed her after 9:00, and chopped her up with an implement he carried in said parcel.

    The alleged 9AM killing is no reason/excuse whatsoever for his not having made an official statement sooner.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X