By Popular Demand

[Roy Corduroy]

You can vote as many options as you want. Your choice(s) will appear. - So get out the vote! - Roy

[Roy Corduroy]

Sam, That's an interesting single vote - Did not see Mary Kelly with anyone. So you think he wasn't there that night and fabricated the whole story.

[sdreid]

I voted for #2 down. By unknown man, I do not mean the man who killed her.

[Roy Corduroy]

Thanks for voting, Stan, but I don't get your drift. If he did see her with a man at 2am, how could that man not be the murderer?

[sdreid]

I think the time of death was wrong.

[Sam Flynn]

Sam, That's an interesting single vote - Did not see Mary Kelly with anyone. So you think he wasn't there that night and fabricated the whole story.

Indeed, Roy, I think that's the most likely scenario. I didn't used to, as some who were with me at the 2007 Wolverhampton Conference may remember, but I do now.

[richardnunweek]

Stan,
You are not alone my friend, kelly died at the hands of Maxwells market porter, or someone waiting in her room for her return.
If not its back to the drawing board for me.....
Richard.

[sdreid]

High-fives Richard!

[perrymason]

Indeed, Roy, I think that's the most likely scenario. I didn't used to, as some who were with me at the 2007 Wolverhampton Conference may remember, but I do now.

I like it best when I can agree totally with an opinion. I didnt know you were predisposed as recently as 2 years ago to consider him potentially important Sam. Some aspects of some witnesses tales even today remain murky,... Schwartz, Lawende, Mrs Long to name a couple,...but this witness we can safely assume was considered credible and a breakthrough until his story was investigated.

I think its the drama of his Monday night appearance and that extraordinarily detailed story that forced their hand into immediate action, they knew each hour that elapsed enhanced the "killer with fur cuffs" chances of getting away.

When they deemed his credibility was not as first assumed, within 72 hours, that to me negates the probability that a single feature of his story, his loitering, was in fact the truth.

If Astrakan amounts to Public Mischief, then it seems likely so does his claim he even knew the deceased. Why would a semi close friend, one who in his story is hit up for a loan by Mary Kelly,...play with the authorities regarding her murder investigation?

My bet is he never met her.

All the best Sam

[Ben]

When they deemed his credibility was not as first assumed, within 72 hours, that to me negates the probability that a single feature of his story, his loitering, was in fact the truth

I'm not sure why it would negate any such thing, Mike.

It's very unlikely that Hutchinson lied about being outside the Kelly murder scene at 2:30am, since Lewis described someone loitering there at that time. Since false witnesses claiming to be real witnesses seen by other real witnesses has no historical precedent whatsoever, it would seem a more reasonable deduction - to me, at least - that Hutchinson realised he'd been seen and came forward with a bogus story desgined to vindicate his presence there.

Best regards,
Ben

[DVV]

Indeed, Roy, I think that's the most likely scenario.

So what about Hutch's status ? Was he a Packer, a Delbast, something else ?

Amitiés,
David

[perrymason]

I'm not sure why it would negate any such thing, Mike.

It's very unlikely that Hutchinson lied about being outside the Kelly murder scene at 2:30am, since Lewis described someone loitering there at that time. Since false witnesses claiming to be real witnesses seen by other real witnesses has no historical precedent whatsoever, it would seem a more reasonable deduction - to me, at least - that Hutchinson realised he'd been seen and came forward with a bogus story desgined to vindicate his presence there.

Best regards,
Ben

Hi Ben,

Heres my take...I think that if I am to assume by their comments that he was discredited, then it was the story he gave, not the person he was, that warranted that comment. If at least part of it was investigated and found without merit, then my feeling is that the story itself is without merit. Meaning, I dont believe that they believed he was Wideawake....if they did, then he would still be of interest even if lying about Astrakan. But it does not seem he remains of interest at all within 3 days.

Sarah Lewis's story gave him an opportunity to appear credible, I think because he used that detail to in effect authenticate himself. But his story in parts is ridiculous, mostly his intricate details, and that in and of itself suggests someone not giving a statement to help any investigation....but to be in the limelight himself..like his Monday night drama suggests.

Any real friend of Marys as he claimed wouldnt wait 3 days to give what amounts to the most specific sighting of any Canonical suspect.

I think he wanted to be famous, or make some dough...maybe both.

All the best Ben

[Ben]

Hi Mike,

If at least part of it was investigated and found without merit, then my feeling is that the story itself is without merit. Meaning, I dont believe that they believed he was Wideawake

You could well be spot on, Mike.

But the fact that they may have thought along those lines doesn't automatically make them correct to think so. They could easily have smelt a rat with his account but erroneously consigned him to the ever-burgeoning pile of false "witnesses" seeking money or publicity. Put simply, they may have spotted his lies but jumped to the wrong conclusion when considering his motivation for telling them.

Sarah Lewis's story gave him an opportunity to appear credible, I think because he used that detail to in effect authenticate himself

That explanation would only work (for me, at least) is he really was the man Lewis saw. If he wasn't (meaning he was false witnesses who assumed the identity of a real witness, and was seen by another witness!) we'd have to assume some decidedly strange behaviour on Hutchinson's part; the type that has no historical predecent, unlike the penchant some serial killers have for injecting themselves into police investigations under false guises. I don't consider it likely either that he'd put himself in such a vulnerable position without providing a genuine alibi for the generally accepted time of the murder.

Best regards,
Ben