Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Why Wasn't Hutchinson used to try to ID Kosminski?

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

  • Curious Cat
    replied
    At the inquest it does appear to be apropos of nothing for Sarah Lewis to be asked if she had seen any strange men in the area recently but the Mrs Kennedy story was published before the inquest. Maybe the question was asked as an act of side eye because she had gone to the press and given out details before the inquest. Or, had been talking to someone before the inquest and that person passed it onto the press but had mangled some of the details. Either way, it seems Sarah Lewis may have jumped the gun with her evidence.

    But again, if we go by what Hutchinson says, the drunk woman she sees on Dorset Street cannot be Mary Kelly. She either saw her outside The Britannia or missed her completely as she was already in her room before Sarah Lewis reached Miller's Court.

    Leave a comment:


  • harry
    replied
    Well Jon it is different,as in an above post you have both Kelly and Astrachan leaving Kelly's room seconds after Hutchinson departed.Where is evidence for this?

    Leave a comment:


  • Simon Wood
    replied
    Hi Wickerman,

    We are both Yorkshire lads?

    Kernow bys vyken!

    Simon

    Leave a comment:


  • Wickerman
    replied
    Originally posted by Simon Wood View Post
    Hi Wickerman,

    Your Post #261 was a cracker.

    Have you ever thought of writing Brian Rix-style farces?

    Stay safe.

    Simon
    You can be cruel sometimes!

    Though, we are both Yorkshire lads, born & bred.....

    Glory Glory Leeds United!

    Leave a comment:


  • Sunny Delight
    replied
    Originally posted by Trevor Marriott View Post

    Everyone seems to have forgotten Thomas Bowyer who was employed by McCarthy and what his input into all of this

    Bowyer, was spoken to by the press following George Hutchinson giving his statement about seeing Kelly with a man at 2 am. Bowyer's account is as follows from The Echo

    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.”

    There is, however, an 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 if true does go some way to corroborating Hutchinson’s statement.

    www.trevormarriott.co.uk

    I wasn't actually aware of this so thanks. Very very interesting. I will look into it a bit more and write a more detailed response.

    Leave a comment:


  • Sunny Delight
    replied
    Originally posted by Wickerman View Post

    What the police must have learned, as I've just posted, is that Kelly came back out, very likely within seconds of Hutchinson leaving. Perhaps Astrachan was watching Hutch from inside the dark court, wondering if Hutch was the Ripper, or at least fearing for his own safety.
    As soon as Hutch turned to leave, Astrachan made haste down Dorset St. in the opposite direction?

    Kelly must have left her room at the same moment and made her way up to Commercial St. to stand outside the Britannia and meeting up with this other man & woman. This is when Mrs Kennedy walked past and saw a man with two women on the corner.
    Kennedy described the 2nd woman as 'hatless', the article says it was Kelly.

    Mrs. Kennedy is confident that the man whom she noticed speaking to the woman Kelly at three o'clock on Friday morning is identical with the person who accosted her on the previous Wednesday.
    Evening News, 10 Nov.

    I have always been intrigued by Mrs. Kennedy and her sighting. Unfortunately it has not been possible to fully accept that she was not Sarah Lewis using an alias when speaking to the papers. However if ,and it is a big if, she is real then her statement to the press is absolutely crucial. In fact it may even be key to solving the case. The man who so scared her and Sarah Lewis on the Wednesday night must have been the killer. If only we found a document that co-orborated Mrs Kennedy everything would change and change utterly.

    As it is Hutchinson's suspect is in my opinion the best we have.

    Leave a comment:


  • Simon Wood
    replied
    Hi Wickerman,

    Your Post #261 was a cracker.

    Have you ever thought of writing Brian Rix-style farces?

    Stay safe.

    Simon

    Leave a comment:


  • Wickerman
    replied
    No-one witnessed a person leaving any of the crime scenes, so I don't see how Millers Court is any different.

    Leave a comment:


  • harry
    replied
    Hutchinson,Bowyer,and Kelly,were real people.Their existence has been firmly established.That is not the case with the person we know as Astrachan.Any reference to him doing anything can only be accepted,if the person himself is proven to have been real.
    The 3o'clock sighting is a sighting of Hutchinson,not of any one else.What happened after that time,is of little value.No one witnessed a person leaving Kelly's room.

    Leave a comment:


  • Trevor Marriott
    replied
    Originally posted by harry View Post
    Yes Trevor,that information would help with accepting that Hutchinson did tell the truth about being near the court the morning Kelly was killed.Two other stalements of his can also be accepted as true,because both would be easy to validate.The first is that he would be an aquaintance of Kelly,the other that he was an unemployed labourer resident at the Victoria Home.Beyond that,his statement contains elements that would have no proof,only his word.
    Bowyer worked for McCarthy that is common knowledge, it was he who found the body of Kelly in the first instance. He clearly knew Kelly

    Hutchinson states he was there until 3am. Bowyer says he saw a man around the same time, he does not describe the man.

    People can accept or reject what he says it is their choice.

    www.trevormarriott.co.uk

    Leave a comment:


  • Wickerman
    replied
    Originally posted by Sunny Delight View Post

    What I find interesting about Hutchinson is Sarah Lewis statement. She coorborates him yet it is so often dismissed or overlooked. So if he really was there and he actually is truthful was the Ripper after all one of the middle class businessmen so prevalent on Commercial Road. In regards Hutchinson:
    What the police must have learned, as I've just posted, is that Kelly came back out, very likely within seconds of Hutchinson leaving. Perhaps Astrachan was watching Hutch from inside the dark court, wondering if Hutch was the Ripper, or at least fearing for his own safety.
    As soon as Hutch turned to leave, Astrachan made haste down Dorset St. in the opposite direction?

    Kelly must have left her room at the same moment and made her way up to Commercial St. to stand outside the Britannia and meeting up with this other man & woman. This is when Mrs Kennedy walked past and saw a man with two women on the corner.
    Kennedy described the 2nd woman as 'hatless', the article says it was Kelly.

    Mrs. Kennedy is confident that the man whom she noticed speaking to the woman Kelly at three o'clock on Friday morning is identical with the person who accosted her on the previous Wednesday.
    Evening News, 10 Nov.

    Last edited by Wickerman; 07-30-2020, 03:43 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Wickerman
    replied
    Originally posted by Trevor Marriott View Post

    Everyone seems to have forgotten Thomas Bowyer who was employed by McCarthy and what his input into all of this
    I posted that very interview a number of times, some just don't want to know.

    There is another, this time it's Mrs McCarthy who mentioned an early morning customer who saw a funny looking man in the court.

    Mrs McCarthy herself gives a slight clue as to a person who was seen in the court early on Friday morning, as one of her customers remarked to her – before the murder was known - “I saw such a funny man up the court this morning”. Mrs McCarthy says she has been so worried by the shocking affair that she cannot now remember the customer who thus spoke to her.
    The Echo Wed. Nov. 14 1888

    Some would say Astrachan was dressed 'funny' for that part of town.



    Also, after the police had interviewed Hutchinson (12th Nov.), it seems they decided to go back and re-interview the residents of Millers Court.

    Nothwithstanding that no evidence was produced at the coroner's inquiry to show that she left her apartment after one o'clock, at which hour she was heard singing, there is every reason to believe that she came out after that hour. This circumstance will account for the fact that no light was observed in the room after one o'clock, as stated by one of the witnesses at the inquest. The police have received statements from several persons, some of whom reside in Miller's-court, who are prepared to swear that the deceased was out of her house and in Dorset-street between the hours of two and three o'clock on the morning in question. It has been established to the satisfaction of the police that the unfortunate woman had been murdered at three a.m. or thereabouts on Friday morning.
    Morning Advertiser, 14th Nov.


    Leave a comment:


  • Wickerman
    replied
    Originally posted by Simon Wood View Post
    Hi Wickerman,

    I do believe that I have been thus wrongly characterised.

    My feet are firmly on the ground, with a revelation in the offing, but only once the Is have been dotted and the Ts crossed.

    In the meantime, stay safe.

    Simon
    I trust every word you say Simon, the correction is much appreciated.
    Keep safe.

    Leave a comment:


  • harry
    replied
    Yes Trevor,that information would help with accepting that Hutchinson did tell the truth about being near the court the morning Kelly was killed.Two other stalements of his can also be accepted as true,because both would be easy to validate.The first is that he would be an aquaintance of Kelly,the other that he was an unemployed labourer resident at the Victoria Home.Beyond that,his statement contains elements that would have no proof,only his word.

    Leave a comment:


  • Simon Wood
    replied
    Hi Wickerman,

    I do believe that I have been thus wrongly characterised.

    My feet are firmly on the ground, with a revelation in the offing, but only once the Is have been dotted and the Ts crossed.

    In the meantime, stay safe.

    Simon

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X