Hutch's Man

[Abby Normal]

Re Bowyer

The Echo, 14th November, reported him going “out at different times up Millers Court on the Thursday night for the purposes of getting water from a tap there—the only available supply. Indeed, Bowyer visited that spot as late—or, rather, as early—as three o'clock on the morning of the murder. This early visit to the water tap is by no means an infrequent (sic) thing, as Mr. McCarthy’s shop, which supplies the wants of a very poor and wretched locality, whose denizens are out at all “hours, late and early, does not at times close until three o’clock in the morning, while occasionally it is open all night. Early on Friday morning Bowyer saw a man whose description tallies with that of the supposed murderer. Bowyer has, he says, described this man to Inspector Abberline and Inspector Reid.”

This is another ambiguity in the overall evidence; in his official statement he does not mention this. As to whether or not he was again spoken to by the police following George Hutchinson coming forward after the inquest we may never know. But what he says in this article does go some way to corroborating Hutchinson’s statement, who stated he saw Kelly go with the man into her room at 2am and he hung around the area until 3am.

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

in hutchs newspaper interview-he says he went and stood by marys door-could bowyer be referring to hutch and not Aman?

[Michael W Richards]

Trevor, that quote appears on the day, or just before the day, where it is published that Hutchinson story has been discredited...Irish Times? I cant recall the specific paper. The "supposed murderer" referred to was still being based on Hutchinsons remarks...partly because they agreed with Lewis's statement about Wideawake. Hutch came forward 4 days after the event, with a story that claimed to include a friendship with the deceased, and assumed the role of Wideawake, in my opinion, because Lewis created that opportunity to insert a benign persona to Loitering guy. I don't believe whomever Wideawake was that he wanted to be known, and I also don't believe he was watching out for Mary either. I think he may have been a whistling lookout or something of that nature. He may have left because as time elapsed he suspected that what was going on in that room was very dangerous to be around.

[Sam Flynn]

Yes, if we put our personal bias aside (re: previous post).

Not bias. Objective logic.

[Trevor Marriott]

Hi Celee.

I certainly believe Hutchinson. I tend to believe all witnesses, unless we have a contrary story from someone else.
- Why would he lie?
- Why would he make himself the last person to see her alive?,
- Why would he place himself at the murder scene within the hour of her death?
- Why invent a suspect so different from every other suspect?
None of it make any sense, unless everything he said was true. There's a reason for the saying that truth is stranger than fiction.

When someone intentionally lies to police they usually make some effort to offer a reasonable suspect.

All that said, I doubt the man he saw had anything to do with her murder.

Hutchinson's story roughly plays out between 2:00 & 3:00 am. give or take any inaccuracies in the clocks referred to.
Yet, one witness a Mrs Kennedy claimed to see Mary Kelly outside the Britannia "about 3:00", she was standing close to a strange man who accosted Lewis & Kennedy the previous Wednesday evening.
So, if this sighting is true, I'm more inclined to think this stranger is the last man she took home that night - and he was the Ripper.

Re Bowyer

The Echo, 14th November, reported him going “out at different times up Millers Court on the Thursday night for the purposes of getting water from a tap there—the only available supply. Indeed, Bowyer visited that spot as late—or, rather, as early—as three o'clock on the morning of the murder. This early visit to the water tap is by no means an infrequent (sic) thing, as Mr. McCarthy’s shop, which supplies the wants of a very poor and wretched locality, whose denizens are out at all “hours, late and early, does not at times close until three o’clock in the morning, while occasionally it is open all night. Early on Friday morning Bowyer saw a man whose description tallies with that of the supposed murderer. Bowyer has, he says, described this man to Inspector Abberline and Inspector Reid.”

This is another ambiguity in the overall evidence; in his official statement he does not mention this. As to whether or not he was again spoken to by the police following George Hutchinson coming forward after the inquest we may never know. But what he says in this article does go some way to corroborating Hutchinson’s statement, who stated he saw Kelly go with the man into her room at 2am and he hung around the area until 3am.

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[phantom]

Hi all

This may be of interest to you
https://www.news.com.au/national/nsw...90f646921e93d7

When the Police were investigating the Belanglo Forest murders, Ivan Milat’s (the murderer) brother Alex Milat presented to the Police with a detailed story of seeing people with two of the murder victims in the forest.

The Police were immediately suspicious because his statement was impossibly highly detailed considering the circumstances.

And while it was considered at one time that Ivan may have committed the murders with someone else i.e. one of his brothers, the Police are confident he acted alone.

Instead they think that Ivan told Alex about the murders and that Alex presented himself to the Police with his witness story as a smokescreen to deflect any future scrutiny of Ivan.

I’ve just finished the book by the lead Detective Clive Small Milat: Inside Australia’s Biggest Manhunt (highly recommended).

[JeffHamm]

Yes, if we put our personal bias aside (re: previous post) and just deal with the record as it has come down to us the picture can become clearer, alternatives do surface.

Hi Wickerman,

Well, the sighting is an "if it was true..." bit of evidence, and that means it might not be. There are good arguments for being cautious about it as well, so it's what I think of as a break point in lines of reasoning that get risky to travel beyond. If it's not true, what I suggested would fall down (which is why I started with the ever necessary "if this it was true ...", which you also rightly include). On the other hand, at least it's not necessary that Astrakhan man be "true", because Kelly would have been paid by Blotchy Face, and so at some point after that transaction may have gone out for her meal, for example.

But, returning to the "if it was a true sighting ...", and let's say it was by Lewis and she's mis-identified in this report. Lewis's testimony would move it closer to 2:30ish, and before her sighting of the man (Hutch probably) waiting at the end of Miller's Court. If the time is right but that wasn't Hutchinson, then Hutchinson's story is wrong or never happened, and the Britannia event was closer to 2:30 than 3:00. If Mrs. Lewis mis-read the clock and it was 3:30 and not 2:30, all things work again. A lot of these pieces don't fit together as they start to contradict each other, which tells us there's an error in the evidence somewhere. But that's the rub, figuring out what bits of the evidence are the wrong buts? Depending upon which piece we flag as wrong can change everything that follows, and they don't all lead to the same conclusions.

I tend to like to find these junction points, where different lines become reasonably possible, after which speculation allows us to formulate hypotheses, and sometimes those can be tested with existing data. If all reasonable hypotheses that follow are ruled out, it can suggest an answer to the previously unknown direction. Sadly, most times we're just left with more and more unconstrained possibilities.

- Jeff

[Wickerman]

AKA the Bethnal Green Botherer.
so in this scenario-hutch leaves at 3:00, Aman leaves shortly after and mary heads out again and runs in the BGB, the ripper.

Thats how I see it Abby. Which leaves us with a genuine suspect who demonstrably has presented himself as a creep who tries to lure women into dark alley's secured by wooden gates. A feature of several murders; those of Nichols, Stride & Eddowes (yes, there was a gate in the corner by the body).

or the BGB was Aman, and lewis is off slightly on her sequence of events.

The physical description between BGB & Aman is different though. Plus, that would entail Kelly & Aman leaving Millers Court to stand at the corner of Dorset street, only to return to her room again.

[Wickerman]

Hi Wickerman,

You know, if that sighting is true, and after leaving "astrakan man" and going to the Britannia, now with some money presumably, that could explain when and where she had her meal of fish and potatoes.

- Jeff

Yes, if we put our personal bias aside (re: previous post) and just deal with the record as it has come down to us the picture can become clearer, alternatives do surface.

[Wickerman]

Hello Celee

There was no "Mrs Kennedy", or if there was she was a liar. Her story of what she saw and did on the night of Kelly's death is so close to Sarah Lewis's that she can't possibly be another witness. She was either Lewis using another name; the result of a newspaper error; a product of distorted street gossip; or a chancer who passed off Lewis's story as her own.

See, here we go again. You rewriting the record by imposing your interpretation on the statement of a witness does not change the written record.

[JeffHamm]

...
Hutchinson's story roughly plays out between 2:00 & 3:00 am. give or take any inaccuracies in the clocks referred to.
Yet, one witness a Mrs Kennedy claimed to see Mary Kelly outside the Britannia "about 3:00", she was standing close to a strange man who accosted Lewis & Kennedy the previous Wednesday evening.
So, if this sighting is true, I'm more inclined to think this stranger is the last man she took home that night - and he was the Ripper.

Hi Wickerman,

You know, if that sighting is true, and after leaving "astrakan man" and going to the Britannia, now with some money presumably, that could explain when and where she had her meal of fish and potatoes.

- Jeff

[Abby Normal]

Hello Celee

There was no "Mrs Kennedy", or if there was she was a liar. Her story of what she saw and did on the night of Kelly's death is so close to Sarah Lewis's that she can't possibly be another witness. She was either Lewis using another name; the result of a newspaper error; a product of distorted street gossip; or a chancer who passed off Lewis's story as her own.

and I pretty much agree with this, but leaving the slight chance that kennedy is legit. very slight.

[Sam Flynn]

Hello Celee

There was no "Mrs Kennedy", or if there was she was a liar. Her story of what she saw and did on the night of Kelly's death is so close to Sarah Lewis's that she can't possibly be another witness. She was either Lewis using another name; the result of a newspaper error; a product of distorted street gossip; or a chancer who passed off Lewis's story as her own.

[Abby Normal]

Hi Celee.

I certainly believe Hutchinson. I tend to believe all witnesses, unless we have a contrary story from someone else.
- Why would he lie?
- Why would he make himself the last person to see her alive?,
- Why would he place himself at the murder scene within the hour of her death?
- Why invent a suspect so different from every other suspect?
None of it make any sense, unless everything he said was true. There's a reason for the saying that truth is stranger than fiction.

When someone intentionally lies to police they usually make some effort to offer a reasonable suspect.

All that said, I doubt the man he saw had anything to do with her murder.

Hutchinson's story roughly plays out between 2:00 & 3:00 am. give or take any inaccuracies in the clocks referred to.
Yet, one witness a Mrs Kennedy claimed to see Mary Kelly outside the Britannia "about 3:00", she was standing close to a strange man who accosted Lewis & Kennedy the previous Wednesday evening.
So, if this sighting is true, I'm more inclined to think this stranger is the last man she took home that night - and he was the Ripper.

AKA the Bethnal Green Botherer.
so in this scenario-hutch leaves at 3:00, Aman leaves shortly after and mary heads out again and runs in the BGB, the ripper.


or the BGB was Aman, and lewis is off slightly on her sequence of events.

[Wickerman]

George Hutchinson may be the most significant witness. Mary Kelly was the last ripper victim. If Hutchinson is to be believed he may have seen the ripper. So, his discription of the man he saw with Mary is very important. Something happened after the Kelly murder to make the ripper stop killing. Did Hutchinson's description bring unwanted police attention to him, causing him to leave the area?

Hi Celee.

I certainly believe Hutchinson. I tend to believe all witnesses, unless we have a contrary story from someone else.
- Why would he lie?
- Why would he make himself the last person to see her alive?,
- Why would he place himself at the murder scene within the hour of her death?
- Why invent a suspect so different from every other suspect?
None of it make any sense, unless everything he said was true. There's a reason for the saying that truth is stranger than fiction.

When someone intentionally lies to police they usually make some effort to offer a reasonable suspect.

All that said, I doubt the man he saw had anything to do with her murder.

Hutchinson's story roughly plays out between 2:00 & 3:00 am. give or take any inaccuracies in the clocks referred to.
Yet, one witness a Mrs Kennedy claimed to see Mary Kelly outside the Britannia "about 3:00", she was standing close to a strange man who accosted Lewis & Kennedy the previous Wednesday evening.
So, if this sighting is true, I'm more inclined to think this stranger is the last man she took home that night - and he was the Ripper.

[Abby Normal]

Hi Abby,

Considering the other thread, do you think it plausible that Astrachan man could feasibly have been Druitt? I'm not saying I think Druitt was JtR, I don't. However, it seems to me that he's one of the few major suspects who could conceivably been AM.

hi john
Absolutely-although I think IF (BIG IF) aman was real I would go more with he was the bethnal green botherer who still could be druitt I suppose.
or possibly Koz. not chapman (eventhough the description is very similar) because of accent.

Druitt, though viable, just dosnt seem right to me as the ripper. first of all because of location/geoprofile, but also he dosnt really fit the short stout description, and personally druitt sounds like a very sensitive intelligent diligent type. and serial killers rarely if ever commit suicide and only seem to do so when capture is inevitable.