Mjk

[Malcolm X]

the trouble is we dont know what GH looked like and until we do, we cant say that he didn't resemble the A.Chapman sighting, dont forget that she didn't see his face.

this JTR mystery is a dit of a disaster, we dont have nearly enough info on GH to nail him and no leads after MJK.... THE CASE GOES COLD.

we havent even got the basics right:-

1.... we have no idea exactly what any of the suspects looked like
2....No idea at all what GH looked like
3....Organs being removed is very odd
4....the mutilations suddenly stopping is very strange too
5....JTR did not carry on living in this area after 1889.

JTR is almost definitely not LE GRAND, he's still around and was not a major suspect at that time, so there's no need for him to stop mutilating is there !

i think the police got close and the killer maybe left, or he finished what he set out to do and moved on, it looks like he had enough of Whitechapel.

[lynn cates]

discourse

Hello Malcolm.

"1.... we have no idea exactly what any of the suspects looked like."

Surely we have photographs of both Druitt and Tumblety?

"2....No idea at all what GH looked like."

Perhaps a bit too strong? How about, "Although we cannot be sure of GH's exact likeness, the contemporary sketches may indicate his general features"? [If I were being a bit roguish, I'd say, "Go look at Toppy."]

"3....Organs being removed is very odd."

Yes. But:

1. Let's not dismiss too hastily Trevor's thesis.

2. Recall that a contemporary suspect THOUGHT he was working with sheep heads and internal organs. If, as I suppose, Kate were the one TRUE copycat, could organ removal, on some scale or other, be realistically avoided?

"JTR is almost definitely not LE GRAND"

In fact, I would claim that any token of the type:

"X was not JTR"

would be true for any value of X, simply because there was no JTR.

But this should not be conflated with the claim, "LeGrand did not kill any of the C5." I believe there is a good chance he killed one.

"[He] was not a major suspect at that time"

Neither were Druitt nor Kosminski.

Cheers.
LC

[Scorpio]

Post-homicide

It seems that something of a circus gathered outside of 13 Millers Court in the wake of the gruesome discovery. If her killer resided/ worked nearby or he/she had decided to remain in the neighbourhood ( i suggest a quick scrub in the Pub toilet, and then a few doubles to calm himself down ), did they join the excited crowds and saviour his/her achievements?.
Peter Kurten and David Berkowitz both enjoyed soaking up the post-homicide scene ambience.

[Scorpio]

Did Hutch play an unwitting role in MJK's death ?.

After considering the possible pre-Tabram scenario, it seems that MJK's accosting of George Hutchison may have been a factor in her subsequent murder. Did Astrakan man witness the exchange?. How would his surliness interpreted this event ?. Would a respectable woman approach men in the street at 2.00 AM ?. If the felt hatted fiend was looking for his special lady of the night, then he may have decided that he had a winner.

[Phil H]

Did Astrakhan Man exist?

There is a rule of thumb in intelligence work that if material seems to good to be true, it probably is. I think GH was describing his idea of a "toff" - possibly based on a shop window dummy. the description is too detailed to be true (IMHO) and wrong in details of the way clothes were worn in 1888. "Spats", for instance, were morning wear ONLY.

We have a pic of Ostrog too, if he is still considered a "suspect".

Phil H

[richardnunweek]

Hi Phil,
''Spats, for instance, were morning wear ONLY''
I agree, but we should take heed of the overall description, I would suggest that this man was intending to be at the Lord mayors show.
That being the case the ''spats'' were part of his dress, and furthermore he would have been unlikely to have been in a mutilating mood.
We must not forget that Mary was very young and apparently not unpleasant to the eye, and if she informed him of having a room...You will be comfy etc'', then why not shelter for a few hours as a paid guest?
He along with Blotchy could hardly present themselves at a later date..
Regards Richard.

[Phil H]

You are entitled to you view on AM, of course, Richard.

I think the whole description smells - too detailed and "wrong" in the context of the time and length of time when GH was supposed to have seen him.

Sorry to disagree.

Phil H

[Sally]

Hi all

Hutchinson's account is derivative in many respects. Several aspects of his account echo very closely other accounts which had already appeared in the press. Given that fact, I think we are faced with two possibilities regarding Astroman: that there really was a well-dressed man stalking the prostitutes of Whitechapel with a knife-shaped parcel in hand; or Hutchinson invented - or at the very least embellished, his Jewish suspect.

Why would he make him up? Well, anything is possible, but perhaps because he was the man seen by Lewis and decided to be proactive in case the finger of suspicion fell on him; or maybe because he hoped for financial gain.

I don't personally believe that Astroman was real, given all the known facts.

[richardnunweek]

Hi,
I have always maintained that we should believe the statement made by Hutchinson as a sincere account of his sighting.
To report to the police several days after the murder, with a description straight out of the ''penny dreadful'' would be rather risky does not one think?
If a bogus account , the police would never have accepted him as anything but a waste of space. and would have charged him with wasting police time, as since the 9TH,they were in no mood for ''time wasters''
They interviewed him , or rather interrogated him , and were satisfied of his account, if indeed a payment was allotted that would verify that.
As for that ''alleged '' payment..lets look at the time frame.
In the words of Reg Hutchinson[ son of Toppy] the payment was mentioned on at least three occasions.
From Topping himself prior to his death 1938
Either by Reg on audio tape[ or someone reading his words] on the radio in 1974[ approx]
To Fairclough which was used in his 1992 publication. The Ripper and the Royals.
No mention of any payment was ever mentioned in any UK newspaper at any time , the only mention came from the Wheeling article in 1888, a rare US publication , that would not have been in wide circulation on the streets of Whitechapel...
The sum mention ''Five times his normal salary'' would have corresponded with the figure mentioned by the Toppings ie.One hundred shillings [ five pounds]
So not only do we have the payment mentioned, but a sum which adds up.
To the doubters of the identity of Hutchinson give that real ''consideration''before dismissing not only who he was, but his honesty..
Regards Richard.

[Sally]

Hi Richard

To report to the police several days after the murder, with a description straight out of the ''penny dreadful'' would be rather risky does not one think?
If a bogus account , the police would never have accepted him as anything but a waste of space. and would have charged him with wasting police time, as since the 9TH,they were in no mood for ''time wasters''

Quite true. But - the description given matched that of the 'well-dressed' man circulating in the press to a substantial degree; which even if not true, obviously would have lent weight to his account. And of course, if he was a timewaster and the police didn't know it, there would have been little they could have done about it.

As for that ''alleged '' payment..lets look at the time frame.
In the words of Reg Hutchinson[ son of Toppy] the payment was mentioned on at least three occasions.
From Topping himself prior to his death 1938

Word of mouth. Allegedly is the word here in the absence of any proof.

Either by Reg on audio tape[ or someone reading his words] on the radio in 1974[ approx]

That is according to you, Richard. Truly, I mean no offence, but the claim for Toppy might be strenghened somewhat if this radio programme were to come to light.

To Fairclough which was used in his 1992 publication. The Ripper and the Royals.

Again, Allegedly. Fairclough' treatment of the Hutchinson story is often taken to be proof that he and Toppy were one and the same; but I think it should be remembered that the whole tale was a means to an end for Fairclough - namely to bolster the Royal Conspiracy theory. How much weight we should accord it in these circumstances is a matter of opinion.

No mention of any payment was ever mentioned in any UK newspaper at any time , the only mention came from the Wheeling article in 1888, a rare US publication , that would not have been in wide circulation on the streets of Whitechapel...
The sum mention

True enough, but wouldn't Fairclough have known that?

''Five times his normal salary'' would have corresponded with the figure mentioned by the Toppings ie.One hundred shillings [ five pounds]
So not only do we have the payment mentioned, but a sum which adds up.

I'm not sure how you reach that conclusion, Richard. How can 100s be '5 times' anybody's wage if we don't know how much they earned to begin with?

To the doubters of the identity of Hutchinson give that real ''consideration''before dismissing not only who he was, but his honesty..

I don't know about dismissing, Richard - questioning, yes. I think that's fair enough, and the perogative of anybody who wishes to do so.

[richardnunweek]

Hi Sally,
Good response.
With reference to the man Hutchinson being a hoaxer , I may indeed have the same opinion, if I never heard that broadcast...but I did, and when I read the tale in the Ripper and the Royals , to everyone but me, that was news.
As for word of mouth, and the allegedly angle.
It is a fact, that such a article was printed[ Wheeling], and putting the radio show aside , the payment figured in Faircloughs book.
The wheeling article was a rare publication not found ,until recent years,. many moons after Radio broadcast/book.
Sally..As for the radio broadcast it is a extremely frustrating for all of us, that it has vanished into obscurity , I can only say hand on heart it very much existed, and the tale spoken on air , was precisely what figured in the book some 18 years after.
It definitely was in the Radio times, that's how I knew it was forthcoming.
As for the argument[ old] how does five times a salary = one hundred shillings.
The average labourers wage in 1888 was approx 21 shillings, so five times that, would as good as be a fiver.
If Hutch was doing casual work at the time, then the wheeling report simply timed the average wage , giving some importance to the sum given.
I could never grasp the mystery in that.
You are quite correct in calling it questioning ,
My whole take on Topping being Hutchinson , stems from the radio broadcast, its because of that, I place faith, in what Reg relayed to Fairclough , as it clearly was not first hand, anyone that tuned in at 8pm on the night of the broadcast would have the same opinion, but clearly no members of Casebook or JTR forums did...
Regards Richard.

[Phil H]

a well-dressed man stalking the prostitutes of Whitechapel with a knife-shaped parcel in hand

A knife wrapped up in a "parcel" is hardly the best way of carrying it for quick work.

"Oh, hold on Polly dear, while I just undo this parcel. String's a bit damp, fingers cold... Got something nice for you, though ... oh damn this knot! Oh.. aren't you gonna wait then?"

Phil H

[Sally]

Hi Richard, thanks for your reply

It is a fact, that such a article was printed[ Wheeling], and putting the radio show aside , the payment figured in Faircloughs book.

Yes, quite true, Richard. But my point is that Fairclough himself could have obtained the information from the Wheeling Register gossip. Because of that possibility, the two documentary sources - the press report and the reference in Fairclough's book - do not corroborate any fact. One may be derived from the other.

Sally..As for the radio broadcast it is a extremely frustrating for all of us, that it has vanished into obscurity , I can only say hand on heart it very much existed, and the tale spoken on air , was precisely what figured in the book some 18 years after.
It definitely was in the Radio times, that's how I knew it was forthcoming.

I'm sure it is frustrating, Richard. I don't disbelieve your recollection, but I'm sure you realise that a documentary reference to that radio broadcast would be very helpful to your case. Perhaps if that documentary evidence could be discovered, we might even be able to get hold of a copy of the tape with luck and a fair wind?

As for the argument[ old] how does five times a salary = one hundred shillings.
The average labourers wage in 1888 was approx 21 shillings, so five times that, would as good as be a fiver.

Yep, I understand your logic. I don't think, however, that a general 'average' wage is much use here as it varied considerably depending on which part of London you were in - where did that figure come from if you don't mind my asking? I have a dim recollection that the average wage of a general labourer in Whitechapel was coniderably less at the time - I'll see if I can find a reference.

I take your point about Hutchinson being in casual work at the time. I wonder though, how much reliance we should place on the Wheeling Register at all - the information isn't repeated in the British press, so where did it come from to begin with?

You are quite correct in calling it questioning ,
My whole take on Topping being Hutchinson , stems from the radio broadcast, its because of that, I place faith, in what Reg relayed to Fairclough , as it clearly was not first hand, anyone that tuned in at 8pm on the night of the broadcast would have the same opinion, but clearly no members of Casebook or JTR forums did...

I'm sure if I was you, Richard, I'd hold the same view.

[Sally]

a well-dressed man stalking the prostitutes of Whitechapel with a knife-shaped parcel in hand

A knife wrapped up in a "parcel" is hardly the best way of carrying it for quick work.

"Oh, hold on Polly dear, while I just undo this parcel. String's a bit damp, fingers cold... Got something nice for you, though ... oh damn this knot! Oh.. aren't you gonna wait then?"

Phil H

It's not, is it? Yet reports of the well-dressed, knife-shaped parcel carrying chap abound in the press at the time. It's quite possible that it can all be attributed to sensationalist press tittle-tattle - but who knows?

Then again, if he liked his parcels, perhaps he did go on to become the Torso Murderer. The Pimlico Parceller, perhaps...

[lynn cates]

acquainted

Hello Scorpio.

"Would a respectable woman approach men in the street at 2.00 AM ?"

Possibly. It might depend on whether she knew him.

IF Astrakhan man really existed, and IF Hutch reported the meeting accurately, then, given the exchange between "MJK" and "A-man," they may well have been previously acquainted.

Cheers.
LC