Did Astracan kill Mary Kelly

[perrymason]

I was always bothered by that. They practically have a party for the guy. and Abberline is all 'this one can be believed...' Then a day or two later he disappears completely. I can only assume something clued them in to Hutchinson not being on the up-and-up. And they let him fade back into obscurity rather than note his statement as rubbish in the files so as not to cause embarrassment to a senior officer. What that something is I've no idea. I wonder if they got Sarah Lewis in to id him and she said something like 'no, no. The man I saw was considerably taller'...

Hi there Chava, long time no see .....

I think youre right in suggesting that something was discovered about the man himself that made the story invalid for them, and rather than explain how they fell for the story initially, they just let him go. Like he had no value from that point on.

To me, the only time they should have done that is after vetting his story and checking him out.....something that might take a few days, ...which is precisely how long he is considered viable for.

But why did they not then suspect him for an accomplice or even a loitering killer...since we have Sarahs sighting to match him to...loosely. They obvious felt that in this murder an accomplice was a real possibility. So why would they let him disappear with the link to the crimes themselves as being possible based on his placement of himself roughly in the shoes of the Wideawake Hat man?

My guess is........they believed they knew the identity of Wideawake, and it wasnt George. And they needed to keep that fact quiet.

All the best MsC

[Ben]

“But why did they not then suspect him for an accomplice or even a loitering killer...since we have Sarahs sighting to match him to...loosely.”

We don’t know that they didn’t entertain such suspicions at some point, Mike. The trouble is, if the police didn’t have the evidence to confirm or deny those suspicions, they couldn’t detain or arrest him. We don’t know that they let him “disappear” either. If they ever entertained suspicions about him, they could have used discreet surveillance to monitor him, as they apparently did with Kosminski. A discredited witness isn’t automatically a discredited suspect, and I’d suggest that the chances of Hutchinson not being the man seen by Lewis are very slim given the “coincidence” of his coming forward and admitting to loitering exactly where she described the wideawake man as soon as her evidence became public knowledge.

Best regards,
Ben

[perrymason]

We don’t know that they didn’t entertain such suspicions at some point, Mike. The trouble is, if the police didn’t have the evidence to confirm or deny those suspicions, they couldn’t detain or arrest him. We don’t know that they let him “disappear” either. If they ever entertained suspicions about him, they could have used discreet surveillance to monitor him, as they apparently did with Kosminski. A discredited witness isn’t automatically a discredited suspect, and I’d suggest that the chances of Hutchinson not being the man seen by Lewis are very slim given the “coincidence” of his coming forward and admitting to loitering exactly where she described the wideawake man as soon as her evidence became public knowledge.

Best regards,
Ben

Hi there Ben ,

Im not so sure we should place him in those shoes that Sarah left for him Ben. We do know that its possible he learned of Sarahs story before he came into the station, and we dont know if the Police had any ideas about who that man might have been before George showed up.

Im not so certain they "matched" the 2 stories to George, as we have done for the most part.

All the best mate

[Celesta]

Yet he fades out of the picture immediately after they revised the last man seen with Mary Jane back to the man that Mary Ann Cox saw. I find that strange. Why is no deeper look into this man documented?

Best regards

Could this be because the murders appeared to stop, Mike? I 've always wondered why there was no mention of any kind of line-up, showing him to any of the 'witnesses' from that night. Then of course the interrogation of Hutch was far from complete. If he was so important why isn't there more documentation, even if they did go back to Cox's suspect?

[Chava]

Could this be because the murders appeared to stop, Mike? I 've always wondered why there was no mention of any kind of line-up, showing him to any of the 'witnesses' from that night. Then of course the interrogation of Hutch was far from complete. If he was so important why isn't there more documentation, even if they did go back to Cox's suspect?

They didn't know that the murders stopped. There had been 6 weeks between Eddowes and Kelly. They could not assume the murders had stopped for a long while beyond Hutchinson. They went back to Cox's guy--who is now my main suspect--very quickly. So something clued them in that Hutchinson wasn't a genuine witness and damn' quickly too. Even though there's no mention of a line-up, I will bet they brought Lewis in to see if she recognized Hutch. That would be obvious and prudent. If they had found Mr A, and brought him to trial, Hutchinson would be chief witness for the prosecution. And the prosecution would want to identify him beyond question as the man seen loitering in the archway to Millers Court so that the defence couldn't suggest that Hutchinson made his statement up. Lewis would have been called to say that Hutch was the man she saw in the entry. If she wasn't called, and if I were defending Mr A, she would be a witness for the defence: Tell me, Mrs Lewis, can you identify the witness standing in the court back there as the man you claimed you saw when you testified at the inquest?' 'Ah, you say you cannot recognize the witness?' 'Can the prosecution bring forward any evidence to show that this man Hutchinson was in fact the man seen by this witness on the night of the murder? Or is he simply a fantasist or someone eager for any reward offered in the case...'

[perrymason]

Hi again,

Chava gave what would be my answer too Celesta, there was no indication that the murders were over, in fact after that lull, Mary Janes death reminded them that he was still a danger to the women of that area.

And no-one seems to have known he was finished even into the next summer when Alice is killed in very much the same manner as the Canonicals.

My beste, Celeste

[Chava]

Hi Mike!

Hey, No Snow
The best,
Chava

[Celesta]

Mike,

Yes, I know there was no indication that the murders were over. What I meant is that there is no paper trail related to Hutchinson, that we know of, after the point where they lost interest, or appeared to lose interest, in his story. If there was a line-up and Lewis didn't pick him out, then they lost interest---obviously---but we don't have anything that says it! If there was no line-up, did they completely lose interest in him, in any capacity? We have no record of him being shadowed either. He was such a darling, then they dropped him like a hot potato, with no explanation. With the passage of time and there being were no more murders right away, he eventually drifted out of their focus.

I would not have let him out of my sight, but they got so many nutcases and were so stressed that maybe they just dismissed him, out of hand, as witness or suspect.

Anyway, Blotchy is my man, mostly. Whether Hutch should have or shouldn't have seen him is another argument.

Did Astrakhan kill her? Not sure I believe in Astrakhan.


Welcome back, Chava. Hope you're well.

[Chava]

Did Astrakhan kill her? Not sure I believe in Astrakhan.

I'm sure I don't believe in Astrakhan. And Blotchy is my favourite suspect.

I'm convinced the reason we don't hear about Hutchinson any more is found in Abberline's infamous comment on his statement. Abberline believed him and wrote that down. If Hutchinson then turns out to be a fraud, putting such a thing in the files wouldn't benefit Abberline at all. And he was the senior Plod on the investigation and was under a horrible amount of pressure already. If Abberline hadn't written those fatal words, I think we would know much more about what happened to Hutchinson than we do know. But I strongly suspect that Hutchinson was exposed very quickly. And right afterwards was told to get out of Dodge. He left immediately for places unknown, and any embarrassment to Abberline left with him. What's interesting to me is that the press don't follow him up either. If the police go back to circulating Blotchy-Face's description, why don't the journalists ask questions? I'm guessing some damage-control went on whereby they agreed not to pursue this line of inquiry.

Thanks for the good wishes, Celeste. I'm fine, but unfortunately my husband isn't Although he is responding well to treatment and so things are looking better than they did a few months ago.

[Celesta]

That seems very reasonable and easy to believe, and I think you're probably right, Chava. The reason there was no record is that he was dismissed pretty much completely. What a strange man.



I hope your husband improves and gets well completely. You have my good wishes and prayers.

[c.d.]

Hi Chava,

I think that we need to keep in mind that if Abberline believed his story, he did so based on the information available to him at the time. If Hutchinson did not appear drunk or mentally unbalanced or immediately start asking about a reward, I see no reason why Abberline would doubt his story. It is also possible that he had some minor doubts which he intended to discuss with his superiors. I also think it was a case of first things first in that he wanted to use Hutchinson to help find the man who could quite possibly be the Ripper.

c.d.

[Chava]

Hi Chava,

I think that we need to keep in mind that if Abberline believed his story, he did so based on the information available to him at the time. If Hutchinson did not appear drunk or mentally unbalanced or immediately start asking about a reward, I see no reason why Abberline would doubt his story. It is also possible that he had some minor doubts which he intended to discuss with his superiors. I also think it was a case of first things first in that he wanted to use Hutchinson to help find the man who could quite possibly be the Ripper.

c.d.

I don't question Abberline believing Hutchinson. He must have been extremely plausible. Nor do I question Abberline making that notation in the margin. I have no complaint whatsoever with Abberline's behaviour. However once the words are noted--and in a place where they cannot be erased--Abberline has a problem if Hutchinson is afterwards proven to be a liar.

[perrymason]

Hi again all,

I second the best wishes to Chava and her husband....and her delight at the lack of snow this November in Toronto.

I think Celeste that you see good reason why we should see more investigative records of George Hutchinson, if only for the fact his story places him in a very suspicious place if he was, or was thought to be, the man Sarah saw.....and I agree.

I think that one reason we might not see that kind of follow-up by the police is because they discovered something about him or his story that even makes his appearance at that location suspect, and therefore their early support of him invalid. I think one reason as I said may be because they thought they felt that they knew the identity of Wideawake, and that as soon as Hutch placed himself there, they had only to confirm or reject their own suspicions to make a call on his story.

Did they believe their own ideas, or Hutchs new story? I think within 2 days they made that call.

Best regards all.

[Chava]

Thanks for the good wishes, guys. It's been a bit of a rocky few months...

But it's so nice to be back on the board!
xxxxChava

[c.d.]

I have to wonder if Hutchinson might have confessed to making up the story so that he could sell it or gain notoriety. Maybe he admitted that he was simply in it for the reward. If he could produce a verifiable alibi for where he actually was that night, he would be off the hook as far as the murder goes.

c.d.