Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Hutch's Man

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

  • Originally posted by Abby Normal View Post

    oops! I just saw something on the other forum!-aussie George ruled out?
    Don't ya hate "I told you so's"
    Regards, Jon S.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by John G View Post
      I totally agree, Abby. These women were not casual prostitutes because it was some sort of lifestyle choice, or vocation; it was something they did out of desperation, i.e. to avoid being thrown out onto the streets. In fact, do We even know for certain that Kelly was still involved in prostitution? I believe Barnett told a newspaper she was, but then gave a different account at the inquest?
      Barnett didn't tell a newspaper, he told Abberline in his police statement.

      That he left her last Tuesday week....."when in consequence of not earning sufficient money to give her and her resorting to prostitution, I resolved on leaving her."

      I have to wonder what it would take for some people to just accept she was a prostitute! It's all she had ever done.
      Regards, Jon S.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Abby Normal View Post

        "Although no evidence was produced at the inquest as to her having left her room after one o'clock,"

        LOL!

        Yes, and it's a justifiable criticism of Macdonald, and how narrow he conducted the inquest.
        Regards, Jon S.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Abby Normal View Post

          I totally agree, Abby. These women were not casual prostitutes because it was some sort of lifestyle choice, or vocation; it was something they did out of desperation, i.e. to avoid being thrown out onto the streets. In fact, do We even know for certain that Kelly was still involved in prostitution? I believe Barnett told a newspaper she was, but then gave a different account at the inquest?
          hi john
          IMHO it dosnt seem mary Kelly (or stride for that matter) was actively engaged in prostitution, especially on the nights of there death. I mean what person engaged in prostitution is going to hang out with a client for so long? And in kellys instance, there is zero evidence she ever brought clients back to her place. and with Blotchy she was hanging out with him, singing, drinking letting him stay in her place? IMHO it seems blotchy was someone she knew and was very comfortable with. he may have given her money or not that night but direct wam bam thank you mam prostitution act that night dosnt fit the evidence.[/QUOTE]

          Hi Abby,

          Yes, I absolutely agree. In my opinion Blotchy was not a client, for the reasons that you give, most likely a friend or acquaintance. And that's assuming Cox was a reliable witness, which she may not have been

          I also agree with you about Stride. Although she was registered as a prostitute in her native Sweden, there's zero evidence that she ever solicited in the UK.

          Inferences are sometimes drawn because she may have been sighted with a number of men by different witnesses-Marshall, Packer, Brown, PC Smith, Scwartz. However, extreme caution is required: some of these may have been false sightings, i.e. because there was a young couple wandering around the neighbourhood at the relevant time, who Mortimer spoke to.

          Some of the witnesses may have been unreliable: Packer, Scwartz (although I realise we disagree on the latter!)

          And didn't Eagle state that the neighbourhood, or at least Dutfield's Yard, didn't have a reputation for soliciting?

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Wickerman View Post

            Barnett didn't tell a newspaper, he told Abberline in his police statement.

            That he left her last Tuesday week....."when in consequence of not earning sufficient money to give her and her resorting to prostitution, I resolved on leaving her."

            I have to wonder what it would take for some people to just accept she was a prostitute! It's all she had ever done.
            She may have been a casual prostitute in the past, but it doesn't mean it was her dream job! In fact, Paul Begg argues in The Facts that whilst abroad, she may well have been forced into the life by a procurer, and detained as a virtual slave.

            Then we have the testimony of Marie Harvey: "She told me, too, that she was heartily sick of the life she was leading and wished she had money enough to go back to Ireland where her people lived. I don't believe she would have gone out as she did if she had not been obliged to do so to keep herself from starvation."

            There's also zero proof that she was soliciting on the night she was murdered. The only indication we have is from two witnesses: Hutchinson (a very questionable witness in my opinion), and Cox. However, as Abby points out Blotchy may been someone known to Kelly. And that's assuming he existed. I mean, the police don't seem to have focussed their subsequent investigations on blotchy-faced suspects (I mean, were, say, Druitt or Kosminski of blotchy complexion?) Moreover, Cox was never utilized for purposes of suspect identification.

            Cox also claimed Kelly was extremely drunk, even though the police could find no publican who remembered serving her with drink.

            And it's worth remembering that pilar of the community Caroline Maxwell also claimed to have known Kelly, and to have seen her in broad daylight at 8:30 in the morning; but not many people give this account much credence.

            Frankly, little is what it seems in this saga.
            Last edited by John G; 06-06-2019, 12:19 PM.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by John G View Post

              hi john
              IMHO it dosnt seem mary Kelly (or stride for that matter) was actively engaged in prostitution, especially on the nights of there death. I mean what person engaged in prostitution is going to hang out with a client for so long? And in kellys instance, there is zero evidence she ever brought clients back to her place. and with Blotchy she was hanging out with him, singing, drinking letting him stay in her place? IMHO it seems blotchy was someone she knew and was very comfortable with. he may have given her money or not that night but direct wam bam thank you mam prostitution act that night dosnt fit the evidence.
              Hi Abby,

              Yes, I absolutely agree. In my opinion Blotchy was not a client, for the reasons that you give, most likely a friend or acquaintance. And that's assuming Cox was a reliable witness, which she may not have been

              I also agree with you about Stride. Although she was registered as a prostitute in her native Sweden, there's zero evidence that she ever solicited in the UK.

              Inferences are sometimes drawn because she may have been sighted with a number of men by different witnesses-Marshall, Packer, Brown, PC Smith, Scwartz. However, extreme caution is required: some of these may have been false sightings, i.e. because there was a young couple wandering around the neighbourhood at the relevant time, who Mortimer spoke to.

              Some of the witnesses may have been unreliable: Packer, Scwartz (although I realise we disagree on the latter!)

              And didn't Eagle state that the neighbourhood, or at least Dutfield's Yard, didn't have a reputation for soliciting?
              [/QUOTE]

              or the men all seen with stride that night where the same man-peaked cap man. seen by marshall, Schwartz, smith.(perhaps brown and packer) any way its not really classic prostitute/client behavior is it? meandering about, chit chatting, spending alot of time with etc?
              Last edited by Abby Normal; 06-06-2019, 12:33 PM.
              "Is all that we see or seem
              but a dream within a dream?"

              -Edgar Allan Poe


              "...the man and the peaked cap he is said to have worn
              quite tallies with the descriptions I got of him."

              -Frederick G. Abberline

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Abby Normal View Post
                or the men all seen with stride that night where the same man-peaked cap man. seen by marshall, Schwartz, smith.(perhaps brown and packer) any way its not really classic prostitute/client behavior is it? meandering about, chit chatting, spending alot of time with etc?[/QUOTE]

                Hi Abby,

                Yes, that's certainly possible. And a quiet stroll around the neighbourhood is definitely not classic prostitute/client behaviour!

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Wickerman View Post

                  The "A-man" is the man seen by Hutchinson - aka Astrachan.
                  The Bethnal Green Botherer is the same as Britannia man. He accosted women in Bethnal Green road then was seen on Friday morning loitering outside the Britannia pub.
                  Bethnal Green Botherer/Britannia Man would not have been the Ripper. I reckon the Ripper was only out doing "business" from 0.00am to about 0.530am at the latest. Aaron Kozminski could have been the BGB.

                  Comment


                  • Mr. A: I insist the cachous are the key to Liz's murder and the Double Event.

                    Mr. B: No, no, a thousand times no. She was found holding a Fanny Mortimer's@ Chicken Bullion Cube.

                    Sink the Bismark

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by richardnunweek View Post
                      Hi
                      Toppy is flavour of the month Yippee.
                      Regards Richard.
                      So it was Randolph Churchill after all .....
                      You can lead a horse to water.....

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Sam Flynn View Post
                        No it didn't, and I am being objective. Toppy and Witness both consistently had a long crossbar on the "t" which touched, if not bisected, the stem of the lower-case "h" - Aussie George never does this. Toppy and Witness both consistently displaced the dots on their "i"s way off to the right - Aussie George's dots his "is" in line with the stem. Toppy and Witness consistently wrote their "G" with the lower loop extending below the line of the signature - Aussie George's "G"s were written entirely above the line, lower loop and all. The only difference - the only one - between Toppy and Witness is the use of one flowery "H" on one page of the witness statement, and even Witness doesn't use the same capital "H" again on the next two pages... whose capital "H"s match those of Toppy, too.

                        Academic now, because - as you've discovered - Stephen Senise's diligence has shown that Aussie George wasn't in the country during the Autumn of Terror.
                        Only in ripperology, could three different capitals of a surname on three different pages of a statement , be perfectly acceptable lol
                        You can lead a horse to water.....

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by packers stem View Post

                          Only in ripperology, could three different capitals of a surname on three different pages of a statement , be perfectly acceptable lol
                          It's only different on the first page - the one page where, oddly enough, there's another, very similar "H" written by a copper at the top to indicate "H" Division. The "H"s are exactly the same on the next two pages of the Witness Statement, and there are several other examples of the same matching "H" on George Topping Hutchinson's marriage certificate and the 1911 Census. In short, we have at least 11 "H"s in later documents that were signed by Toppy which match the "H"s on pages 2 and 3 of the Witness Statement. All the other letters match, too.
                          Kind regards, Sam Flynn

                          "Suche Nullen" (Nietzsche, Götzendämmerung, 1888)

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by John G View Post

                            She may have been a casual prostitute in the past, but it doesn't mean it was her dream job!
                            How do you define 'casual prostitute'? - was Kelly a seamstress or laundress, who turned to prostitution only when she had to?
                            What other work do we know she did?
                            When in the West End she lived in a brothel, the same story in Breezers Hill, she co-habited with prostitutes.

                            Then you add the testimony of Mrs Harvey....
                            .... "She told me, too, that she was heartily sick of the life she was leading and wished she had money enough to go back to Ireland......
                            What life was she leading John?
                            What was the occupation noted on her death certificate?

                            Is this like Nelson's "I see no ships!"

                            There's also zero proof that she was soliciting on the night she was murdered.
                            Why do you reach for that old "proof" card?

                            The only indication we have is from two witnesses: Hutchinson (a very questionable witness in my opinion), ....
                            Why do you trust your own opinion above that of Abberline?
                            What do you know that he didn't?
                            Or conversely, have you ever considered the question - "what did Abberline know that I don't"?
                            And, between the two of you, who is likely to know more about Hutchinson's encounter, you or Abberline?

                            .....and Cox. However, as Abby points out Blotchy may been someone known to Kelly. And that's assuming he existed.
                            Abby is promoting the Peak-cap man.

                            I mean, the police don't seem to have focussed their subsequent investigations on blotchy-faced suspects ...
                            We have press reports that counter that argument - the police were still looking for Blotchy & Astrachan on 19th Nov., a full ten days after the murder, as reported in the Echo.

                            Cox also claimed Kelly was extremely drunk, even though the police could find no publican who remembered serving her with drink.
                            Cox followed Kelly down the passage, she couldn't tell Kelly was drunk by the way she walked. Only by the way she spoke when she said goodnight. most people who are "very much intoxicated" can't walk straight.



                            Regards, Jon S.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Busy Beaver View Post

                              Bethnal Green Botherer/Britannia Man would not have been the Ripper. I reckon the Ripper was only out doing "business" from 0.00am to about 0.530am at the latest. Aaron Kozminski could have been the BGB.
                              The Britannia-man was out on the street at 3:00 am.

                              Do you know what Aaron Kozminski looked like?
                              Regards, Jon S.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Sam Flynn View Post

                                It's only different on the first page - the one page where, oddly enough, there's another, very similar "H" written by a copper at the top to indicate "H" Division. The "H"s are exactly the same on the next two pages of the Witness Statement, and there are several other examples of the same matching "H" on George Topping Hutchinson's marriage certificate and the 1911 Census. In short, we have at least 11 "H"s in later documents that were signed by Toppy which match the "H"s on pages 2 and 3 of the Witness Statement. All the other letters match, too.
                                So you prefer to believe that Badham wrote the H in the first signature ??
                                Do you know anyone else who would use an ornate capital letter of their surname , then a bog standard one a while later?
                                Second and third aren't the same at all .
                                The third one is messy ,
                                although I bet the pen will get the blame
                                You can lead a horse to water.....

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X