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

[Wickerman]

I know he was coming from east to west from Romford and I know its location in relation to Whitechapel. What I wasn't getting was where you were placing Whitechapel Church as there wasn't a church called Whitechapel. Now I see you were referring to St Mary's I understand which church you mean. Where does Hutchinson reference using St Mary's as a time check.

He told the reporter in his press interview:
"...I am able to fix the time, as it was between ten and five minutes to two o'clock as I came by Whitechapel Church"

As you can see, the church is at bottom right, and the spot between Thrawl & Flower & Dean is at top left.
As you can see, there were two routes he could have taken, and looking at the distance it could easily have taken him 10 or more minutes to slowly walk from the church.

You seem to forget that by the time Hutchinson reaches Thrawl Street he doesn't need to guess it's 2am as he will have been able to hear the clock at Christ Church chime the time.

The Spitalfields clock is out of view from Thrawl St., and he makes no mention of hearing the 2:00 chime. Which is consistent with him arriving at that point sometime after 2:00am.

[Wickerman]

Hutchinson would easily see the time as being on the corner of Dorset Street meant he was able to clearly see the Christ Church clock. He doesn't need to estimate, he can see the time.

Why would he be looking? It's not like he knew he would be interrogated three days later.
This is not daylight, it's the darkest part of the night 2:00-2:30. Can you actually read the time from that corner? He is diagonal to the position of the clock tower. Remember, Spitalfields Church faces down Brushfield Street, not Dorset St.
He is concentrating on Kelly, not looking for evidence to justify a story.

You've switched Hutchinson's location and movements to fit it in a new timeline. You don't need to do that if you just accept the woman Sarah Lewis saw was not Mary Kelly when going by Hutchinson's account.

Switched?
I'm describing him walking down Dorset st., he doesn't say where he was when Kelly walked up the court. Are you assuming he was still at the corner of Dorset St.?
That is too far away for him to hear the conversation, obviously he had to be within listening distance - like opposite them outside Crossingham's.

If Hutchinson and Sarah Lewis walk down Dorset Street at the same time then the man stood opposite the passage entrance cannot be Hutchinson. Unless you're suggesting he's Billy Whizz.

Lewis doesn't see Hutch until she stops at the passage, so naturally he had to be walking slightly ahead of Lewis, on the south side of Dorset St.

Hutchinson says he waited in Dorset Street for three-quarters of an hour, leaving at about 3am. The latest those three-quarters of an hour can start is 2:20am. In those three-quarters of an hour Hutchinson says Mary Kelly did not leave the court. As Sarah Lewis came along after 2:20am, she cannot have seen Mary Kelly in Dorset Street. She also didn't see Mary Kelly in the court as she says there was no-one in the court when she entered.

I've already mentioned how unreliable the times are, and why query whether Kelly was in the court?, you know she wouldn't be, she went indoors.

Both Hutchinson and Sarah Lewis are going by the same single time piece - the clock of Christ Church, Spitalfields. Both will have see it and heard the chimes. Sarah Lewis makes a point of them as she was indoors when she heard them at 3:30am. She doesn't mention hearing the 2:30am chimes. She sees the time as she passes the clock.

Yes, and she didn't tell us what that time was, whether it was 2:28 or 2:26, she doesn't say. All she does say is she was at No.2 Millers Court by 2:30am.

This could be why she says she saw the man and woman outside The Britannia at "about 2:30am" as that exact time had slightly passed when she got there.

Or was not quite 2:30.

[Wickerman]

I find it interesting that you can get so much mileage out of Hutchs statement despite 2 very important facts....we have no proof he even knew the woman called Mary Kelly, and we have no proof Mary ever left her room after going inside at around 11:45 Thursday night. To argue the minutia within the statement without at least having something substantive to use as a foundation...like for example a corroborating witness that is trustworthy and who provably knew Mary Kelly and who saw her out of her room after 11:45pm, or someone that knew Mary who could validate Hutchs claim he even knew her.

There is not one shred of evidence that any of the witness statements that have Mary Kelly seen outside alive after 11:45pm Thursday night ever knew her. What she looked like. Where she lived.

How much mileage have you had out of Mrs Mortimer, Michael?
Was her story ever corroborated, did anyone claim to see her standing at her doorway?
Was there a reason she wasn't called to the inquest?
Maybe, she made the whole thing up?
Where's the proof of what she saw Michael?

[Wickerman]

I really don't know which way to lean on Hutchinson, but if he is indeed lying, I think the scenario above is likely WHY he would be lying.

Everything you say can be applied to Blotchy too, yet he never came forward, in spite of a more detailed description than was given of Hutchinson.
Realistically, the description of the 'loiterer' was in no way detailed enough to identify anybody - dark clothes, wideawake hat, thats it?

[Curious Cat]

I think if you feel Hutchinson is lying, that's the most logical scenario:

- He realizes he was in Mary Kelly's presence shortly before she was brutally murdered, apparently by the notorious killer the entire city is looking for.
- Days pass and he notices that some witnesses have mentioned seeing a man hanging out in Miller's Court shortly before her murder.
- He realizes those witnesses are probably describing HIM, and can probably identify him.
- Panicking, he goes to the authorities with this other guy, this elaborately detailed Astrakhan Man, who is definitely NOT him, to take the heat off of himself.

I really don't know which way to lean on Hutchinson, but if he is indeed lying, I think the scenario above is likely WHY he would be lying.

The story of a man being seen outside The Britannia with a woman was reported before the inquest so it could be Hutchinson read/heard about this and that's why he chose to wait to give his statement until after he inquest.

[Curious Cat]

Ok, then you have already assumed a fixed time for Hutchinson's arrival, in spite of everything leading up to that point being so vague & flexible.

I'd like to clear something up first. You say Hutch came back down about, or before 2:20?

Where does he say this?

If you recall, in both his police statement & press statement he makes no mention of coming back to Dorset St., yet you insist he must have.

From his police statement:
"...I then went to the Court to see if I could see them, but could not. I stood there for about three quarters of an hour"

Hutch clearly says he went into the court and stayed there for 3/4 hour, nothing about coming back.
Why do you assert he must have come back to Dorset St.?

I suspect the answer is, because you accept the need to align what Hutchinson is saying with the words of Sarah Lewis.
You are making an assumption in order to make his story fit with what we learn from another witness.

In the Pall Mall Gazette (14 Nov) Hutchinson says he stayed in the court for a couple of minutes. So he was only in Miller's Court for a fraction of the time he was in Dorset Street. It's in Dorset Street he waits for three-quarters of an hour as he goes to look in the court before he waits. If he's only in the court for a couple of minutes how can he be there for three-quarters of an hour? If he was in the court for three-quarters of an hour then Sarah Lewis would've seen him there. She says no-one was in the court when she arrived.

He says the same in The Star (14 Nov) with the addition that:

"When I left the corner of Miller's-court the clock struck three o'clock."

If he's in Dorset Street waiting for Mary Kelly to come out of her room for three-quarters of an hour then Mary Kelly is in her room by 2:15-2:20am. This is the absolute latest Mary Kelly still be stood either on Dorset Street or within Miller's Court outside her room. This is before Sarah Lewis comes along.
From 2:15am onwards, Hutchinson and Sarah Lewis are going by the same clock - Christ Church, Spitalfields. The time that passes is measured by the chimes. If Sarah Lewis is going by the chimes at 2:30am then Hutchinson is going by the chimes at 3am. How out of synch do you think the same clock can be in the space of half an hour?

Yet, a few words prior to this, where we read:
"They both then went up the court together. I then went to the Court to see if I could see them",

Again, an assumption is required here, that Hutch waited for a short time before following them up the passage. Not only would it be the natural thing to do, it would make both stories align, yet you refuse to admit this.

If an assumption is valid in the first case, why not the second?

It concerns me that this is intentional in order to disassociate the Kelly whom Hutchinson saw from the woman whom Lewis saw.
If you were being fair in your assessment of Hutchinson's story then an assumption is required in both cases, only then do you have corroboration.

Even if Hutchinson waits before going into Miller's Court, that still requires Mary Kelly and the man to have entered the court before him. If he waits that means Mary Kelly and the man going to her room earlier than 2:20am, so even more time before Sarah Lewis enters Dorset Street.

He told the reporter in his press interview:
"...I am able to fix the time, as it was between ten and five minutes to two o'clock as I came by Whitechapel Church"

As you can see, the church is at bottom right, and the spot between Thrawl & Flower & Dean is at top left.
As you can see, there were two routes he could have taken, and looking at the distance it could easily have taken him 10 or more minutes to slowly walk from the church.



The Spitalfields clock is out of view from Thrawl St., and he makes no mention of hearing the 2:00 chime. Which is consistent with him arriving at that point sometime after 2:00am.

He says he went from Whitechapel Road into Commercial Street so a straight walk west then north at the junction of Commercial Street appears to be the case. That's barely a 5 minute walk at a not particularly speedy pace to reach the point he says he met Mary Kelly. By the time he got to Thrawl Street he would have been able to hear the Christ Church clock chime for 2am. He didn't need to see it to know the time.

[Curious Cat]

Why would he be looking? It's not like he knew he would be interrogated three days later.
This is not daylight, it's the darkest part of the night 2:00-2:30. Can you actually read the time from that corner? He is diagonal to the position of the clock tower. Remember, Spitalfields Church faces down Brushfield Street, not Dorset St.
He is concentrating on Kelly, not looking for evidence to justify a story.

He noted the time at St Mary's Church clock when he wouldn't knew he'd be interrogated three days later. Why should it be any different with the clock at Christ Church? He has to be taking note of the time by the Christ Church clock to say he gave up his vigil at the strike of 3am. He wasn't going by St Mary's clock at that point.

The clock faces down Brushfield Street but it is visible either side of that and it would've been visible from the corner of Dorset Street. If you stand on the spot where the corner of Dorset Street was and look at Christ Church you can see the clock. But again, he didn't even need to look at the clock to know the time as the chimes sounded it out at least 3 times during the time he says he was in the area.

The clock was also illuminated so it could be seen in the darkest hours of the night. The clock at St Mary's wasn't illuminated.

Switched?
I'm describing him walking down Dorset st., he doesn't say where he was when Kelly walked up the court. Are you assuming he was still at the corner of Dorset St.?
That is too far away for him to hear the conversation, obviously he had to be within listening distance - like opposite them outside Crossingham's.

You are moving Hutchinson all over the place. He's gone from being on the corner of Dorset Street to walking down Dorset Street to outside Crossingham's to inside the court all at the same time. At what point does he leave Miller's Court - after only being there for a couple of minutes - to take up his 45 minute vigil in Dorset Street before leaving at 3am?

Lewis doesn't see Hutch until she stops at the passage, so naturally he had to be walking slightly ahead of Lewis, on the south side of Dorset St.
I've already mentioned how unreliable the times are, and why query whether Kelly was in the court?, you know she wouldn't be, she went indoors.
Yes, and she didn't tell us what that time was, whether it was 2:28 or 2:26, she doesn't say. All she does say is she was at No.2 Millers Court by 2:30am.
Or was not quite 2:30.

If Hutchinson is only slightly ahead of Sarah Lewis when walking down Dorset Street on the south side, how is he listening to Mary Kelly's conversation with the man if Sarah Lewis doesn't come along until 2:30am? He's still to go into the court to check up on them and then take up his 45 minute vigil before leaving at 3am. How can he squeeze 47 minutes into a 30 minute time frame?

[Wickerman]

In the Pall Mall Gazette (14 Nov) Hutchinson says he stayed in the court for a couple of minutes. So he was only in Miller's Court for a fraction of the time he was in Dorset Street. It's in Dorset Street he waits for three-quarters of an hour as he goes to look in the court before he waits.

Ok, so you are satisfied the man opposite was Hutchinson and that he was waiting in Dorset St.
So, as Hutchinson saw Kelly enter Millers court, but according to you Lewis came through approx. 15 minutes later.
And, you accept there was no-one in the court.
Then who was the hatless woman, the worse for drink, that Lewis saw enter the court with a man?

Whoever it was had to go inside one of the rooms. Yet who was left?
Mrs Cox was out, only returning at 3:00. Prater had gone to bed. Both Vanturney & Pickell were 'attached', living with a man.
Kennedy had not arrived yet, but came home alone anyway.

So, who is left?

The police closed the court and interviewed all the residents, so they knew where everybody was. The only woman they could not interview, was Kelly.

You have invented an extra woman that you cannot account for, rather than accept the times are too vague and acknowledge the sequence of events:


1 - Hutchinson places himself outside Millers Court about 2:00-2:30am.
2 - Sarah Lewis saw a man standing outside Millers Court about 2:00-2:30am.

1 - At this time, Hutchinson described a man & woman walking in Dorset St.
2 - At this time, Sarah Lewis claims to see a man & woman walking in Dorset St.

1 - Hutchinson described the female as being affected by drink, and (according to Mary Cox), not wearing a hat that night.
2 - Sarah Lewis described the female as being affected by drink, and not wearing a hat.

1 - Hutchinson describes the couple as entering Millers Court, and then going into one of the rooms.
2 - Sarah Lewis described the man & woman entering Millers Court passage, and that there was no-one in the court when she got there.

A 10 minute discrepancy in the estimated times can easily be explained, the above comparison's are not so easy to explain away.

An argument that expects the same man to be watching two different couples enter Millers Court, within 10 minutes, where the female in both cases was 'the worse for drink' and hatless strongly suggests something is wrong with the theory.

[Wickerman]

He noted the time at St Mary's Church clock when he wouldn't knew he'd be interrogated three days later. Why should it be any different with the clock at Christ Church?

For that very reason. Do you check your watch every ten minutes?
He already knew what the time was.

The clock faces down Brushfield Street but it is visible either side of that and it would've been visible from the corner of Dorset Street. If you stand on the spot where the corner of Dorset Street was and look at Christ Church you can see the clock. But again, he didn't even need to look at the clock to know the time as the chimes sounded it out at least 3 times during the time he says he was in the area.

You know the clock chimed the quarter hour?
You have a reference for that?

The clock was also illuminated so it could be seen in the darkest hours of the night. The clock at St Mary's wasn't illuminated.

Illuminated? - by what?
It's illuminated today, I know that.

You are moving Hutchinson all over the place. He's gone from being on the corner of Dorset Street to walking down Dorset Street to outside Crossingham's to inside the court all at the same time.

He had to make those movements, which takes time you have apparently not allowed for.

At what point does he leave Miller's Court - after only being there for a couple of minutes - to take up his 45 minute vigil in Dorset Street before leaving at 3am?

I don't believe even he knew, he was guessing. My argument is based on a sequence of events, not an estimated time.

If Hutchinson is only slightly ahead of Sarah Lewis when walking down Dorset Street on the south side, how is he listening to Mary Kelly's conversation with the man if Sarah Lewis doesn't come along until 2:30am? He's still to go into the court to check up on them and then take up his 45 minute vigil before leaving at 3am. How can he squeeze 47 minutes into a 30 minute time frame?

In the Stride case, you should see the knots some theorists tie themselves up in because they insist on keeping rigidly to the estimated times.

This is the sequence of Hutchinson's movements, as I see it.

We know Hutch paused to wait at the corner of Dorset St. while Kelly & Co. walked slowly on ahead.
It is only natural he will follow on down towards Millers Court, even as they crossed to the north side.
As Kelly stopped at the entrance to talk, Hutchinson arrived at Crossingham's directly opposite, within hearing distance.
Lewis is walking towards Millers Court on the north side, she see's a man & woman enter Millers court ahead of her.
Lewis only noticed Hutch at the moment she arrived at Millers Court.
Lewis follows after the couple but noticed no-one in the court (obviously).
After several minutes Hutch crossed over and entered the court to see if he could hear anything.
He returns to Dorset St. to continue his vigil.

In my view the whole vigil is what he estimated as 45 minutes, not just the second half, which you seem to be thinking of.
From his point of view he began at the moment he stopped to watch Kelly talk with her client. It ended when he left the street at 3:00am. The fact he interrupted his vigil while he went up the court for a few minutes is irrelevant to him, it's all part of the vigil.
Thats how I see it.

Whether we agree or not it is necessary to understand each others arguments.

[harry]

Nothing is vague as far as Hutchinson describes it.Admitted times may be out by a couple of minutes,but now we are expected to believe a whole half an hour could be in doubt.Hutchinson came to the police station with a prepared statement,in which time was an important element.He had had plenty of opportunity to self examine what he was going to report,so it's not a case of him being unsure or guessing.As he describes it,and taking Lewis's times as correct to a minute or so,it would be impossible for all four to have been in Dorset street at the same time,and the four I mention are Hutchinson,Kelly,her companion and Lewis.

[Fisherman]

This is the sequence of Hutchinson's movements, as I see it.

We know Hutch paused to wait at the corner of Dorset St. while Kelly & Co. walked slowly on ahead.
It is only natural he will follow on down towards Millers Court, even as they crossed to the north side.
As Kelly stopped at the entrance to talk, Hutchinson arrived at Crossingham's directly opposite, within hearing distance.
Lewis is walking towards Millers Court on the north side, she see's a man & woman enter Millers court ahead of her.
Lewis only noticed Hutch at the moment she arrived at Millers Court.
Lewis follows after the couple but noticed no-one in the court (obviously).
After several minutes Hutch crossed over and entered the court to see if he could hear anything.
He returns to Dorset St. to continue his vigil.

Okay. So Hutchinson followed Kelly and Astrachan man into Dorset Street, We know that this is what he said himself. What he did not say is that he took up position outside Crossinghams, he in stead says he went to the corner of the court, meaning he was on the northern side of the street, not the southern one.

That is one problem with your take on things.

The next is that Hutchinson never mentioned Lewis, who would have walked into the very passage he was supposedly watching at around 2.30.

This is a major problem.

You also say that Lewis saw a couple entering the court (which is not in evidence, what IS in evidence is that she said that there was another couple linked to these events, but where they were and where they were headed is not a 100 per cent clear).

More problems.

Finally, if Lewis saw a couple entering the court, then she would have arrived in Dorset Street at the exact time when the couple finished their three-minute conversation and walked into the court. They did not walk down the street and turn into Millers Court in one sequence, it was broken off by the chat outside the doorway. The couple must therefore have stood there as Lewis turned the corner and entered Dorset Street at around 2.30. And since Hutchinsons vigil lasted from around 2 AM to 2.45 AM, it makes no sense that this event was so late in the developments.

A hard nut to crack!

The problem you are having is that you are trying to make all the loose ends fit with the idea that Hutchinson must have been the man Lewis spoke of, although Hutchinson himself never professed to ever having been on the side of the road Lewis had her man at.

All the problems go away once we accept that the man Lewis said she saw was NOT Hutchinson. He was wrong, and this was why his story was dramatically graded down in importance once the police found out that this was so.

Yours is a valiant effort, Jon, but there are too many and too grave problems for it to be likely.

[Wickerman]

Nothing is vague as far as Hutchinson describes it.

The first vague point is his estimate of the time he met Kelly ("about 2:00"). The second point where we can only guess at is the time his vigil began. The only firm points of reference are his noting the time of the Whitechapel Church, and the time he left Millers Court at 3:00am. Everything in between is vague or flexible.

Admitted times may be out by a couple of minutes,but now we are expected to believe a whole half an hour could be in doubt.

The difference is 10 minutes, thats all it would take to make their stories align.

Hutchinson came to the police station with a prepared statement,in which time was an important element.

A prepared statement is one that is already written down. That is not the case. Hutchinson gave a story, that is true, but he also responded to questions.

He had had plenty of opportunity to self examine what he was going to report,so it's not a case of him being unsure or guessing.

No witness is able to anticipate all the questions an interviewer will ask.

As he describes it,and taking Lewis's times as correct to a minute or so,it would be impossible for all four to have been in Dorset street at the same time,and the four I mention are Hutchinson,Kelly,her companion and Lewis.

It's easy for you to say that, especially without pointing out exactly why you think it's impossible. Perhaps, if you are also taking the times as gospel this should be an indication your assumptions are wrong.
All that is necessary is that Lewis walked past the Spitalfields clock about 2:20-25, which puts her arrival at the Keyler's minutes before 2:30.
Her statement is quite consistent with this possibility, then there is no mystery.

[Wickerman]

Okay. So Hutchinson followed Kelly and Astrachan man into Dorset Street, We know that this is what he said himself. What he did not say is that he took up position outside Crossinghams, he in stead says he went to the corner of the court, meaning he was on the northern side of the street, not the southern one.

That is one problem with your take on things.

The next is that Hutchinson never mentioned Lewis, who would have walked into the very passage he was supposedly watching at around 2.30.

This is a major problem.

You also say that Lewis saw a couple entering the court (which is not in evidence, what IS in evidence is that she said that there was another couple linked to these events, but where they were and where they were headed is not a 100 per cent clear).

More problems.

Finally, if Lewis saw a couple entering the court, then she would have arrived in Dorset Street at the exact time when the couple finished their three-minute conversation and walked into the court. They did not walk down the street and turn into Millers Court in one sequence, it was broken off by the chat outside the doorway. The couple must therefore have stood there as Lewis turned the corner and entered Dorset Street at around 2.30. And since Hutchinsons vigil lasted from around 2 AM to 2.45 AM, it makes no sense that this event was so late in the developments.

A hard nut to crack!

The problem you are having is that you are trying to make all the loose ends fit with the idea that Hutchinson must have been the man Lewis spoke of, although Hutchinson himself never professed to ever having been on the side of the road Lewis had her man at.

All the problems go away once we accept that the man Lewis said she saw was NOT Hutchinson. He was wrong, and this was why his story was dramatically graded down in importance once the police found out that this was so.

Yours is a valiant effort, Jon, but there are too many and too grave problems for it to be likely.

Christer, we know Hutch cannot hear their conversation from 125 ft away, from the corner of Dorset St. so he had to be closer.
I'm surprised you didn't explain your reluctance to accept the scenario, all your objections are predicated on your belief that Hutchinson got the day wrong.
I don't see anyone in this conversation accepting that theory.

[Sunny Delight]

Is it really all that important if Sarah Lewis did see Kelly and AK man? There is no way of confirming it now anyways. What is important is that she saw Hutchinson where he said he was at the time he claimed he was there. That is crucial. We hear mental gymnastics such as Hutchinson attending the inquest or standing outside hearing gossip. I think we can safely disregard such claims as extremely unlikely. The fact is that Hutchinson is corroborated by Lewis.

Now I don't neccessarily agree with Wickermans take on things- it is possible of course but it seems somewhat improbable. More likely is that Hutchinson is in situ as Lewis appears. He is standing outside Crossinghams around 02:20-02:25 looking up the court. Lewis walks down Dorset Street- probably quite quickly as she was alone at night and had just passed Britannia man which had frightened her. At the other end of Dorset Street is a man and woman- the latter being in drink. How Lewis knew this we don't know but maybe the woman was stumbling? Lewis enters the Court and Hutchinson leaves his spot later. Who was the mysterious young man and woman who passed though and where did they pass? Also why didn't Hutchinson see or mention them? Difficult to answer.

[Fisherman]

Christer, we know Hutch cannot hear their conversation from 125 ft away, from the corner of Dorset St. so he had to be closer.
I'm surprised you didn't explain your reluctance to accept the scenario, all your objections are predicated on your belief that Hutchinson got the day wrong.
I don't see anyone in this conversation accepting that theory.

I donīt mind if this is so, since Walter Dew, who was infinitely better suited to know, did hint at this precise thing. And it fits the bill on all levels - it explains why Hutchinson didnīt mention Lewis, and it explains why the police offered much less interest in his story without totally discarding it. Iīm fine with that.

The fact that a majority of people will not agree about things doesnīt mean much out here, for obvious reasons. Lechmere is by far the best suspect we have, but most out here disagree. The Ripper series and the Torso murders had the same originator beyond reasonable doubt, but people out here... well, you know, Jon!

The truth will out, and so I donīt worry about such matters.

By the way: PC Neil could hear PC Thains footfalls in Bucks Row from a 130 yards away, so why would not Hutchinson be able to hear parts of a conversation from less than a third of that distance? At the end of the day, it will boil down to ambient sounds and the volume of the conversation, of course, but it is not as if it would be impossible to hear it, Jon. Not in my world, at least.