Casebook: Jack the Ripper - Main
   

Introduction
Victims
Suspects
Witnesses
Ripper Letters
Police Officials
Official Documents
Press Reports
Victorian London
Message Boards
Ripper Media
Authors
Dissertations
Timelines
Games & Diversions
Photo Archive
Ripper Wiki
Casebook Examiner
Ripper Podcast
About the Casebook

Most Recent Posts:
Mary Ann Nichols: What Direction Was Polly Travelling When She Was Killed? - by Sam Flynn 13 minutes ago.
Klosowski, Severin (George Chapman): Can George Chapmam reform himself to being a calculating poisoner seven years later?. - by Sam Flynn 21 minutes ago.
Mary Ann Nichols: What Direction Was Polly Travelling When She Was Killed? - by Simon Wood 57 minutes ago.
Mary Ann Nichols: What Direction Was Polly Travelling When She Was Killed? - by John G 1 hour and 20 minutes ago.
Mary Ann Nichols: What Direction Was Polly Travelling When She Was Killed? - by Batman 1 hour and 23 minutes ago.
Mary Ann Nichols: What Direction Was Polly Travelling When She Was Killed? - by Simon Wood 2 hours ago.

Most Popular Threads:
Mary Ann Nichols: What Direction Was Polly Travelling When She Was Killed? - (54 posts)
Scene of the Crimes: The Bucks Row Project Summary Report. - (49 posts)
Klosowski, Severin (George Chapman): Can George Chapmam reform himself to being a calculating poisoner seven years later?. - (41 posts)
A6 Murders: A6 Rebooted - (3 posts)
Non-Fiction: the victims werent prostitutes - (2 posts)
Doctors and Coroners: Sedgewick Saunders ....... why did he say the things he said ? - (2 posts)

Wiki Updates:
Robert Sagar
Edit: Chris
May 9, 2015, 12:32 am
Online newspaper archives
Edit: Chris
Nov 26, 2014, 10:25 am
Joseph Lawende
Edit: Chris
Mar 9, 2014, 10:12 am
Miscellaneous research resources
Edit: Chris
Feb 13, 2014, 9:28 am
Charles Cross
Edit: John Bennett
Sep 4, 2013, 8:20 pm

Most Recent Blogs:
Mike Covell: A DECADE IN THE MAKING.
February 19, 2016, 11:12 am.
Chris George: RipperCon in Baltimore, April 8-10, 2016
February 10, 2016, 2:55 pm.
Mike Covell: Hull Prison Visit
October 10, 2015, 8:04 am.
Mike Covell: NEW ADVENTURES IN RESEARCH
August 9, 2015, 3:10 am.
Mike Covell: UPDDATES FOR THE PAST 11 MONTHS
November 14, 2014, 10:02 am.
Mike Covell: Mike’s Book Releases
March 17, 2014, 3:18 am.

Go Back   Casebook Forums > Ripper Discussions > Suspects > Hutchinson, George

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #481  
Old 07-20-2018, 09:49 AM
Abby Normal Abby Normal is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 6,613
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ben View Post
Hi RJ,

Douglas’s determination was based on his conclusion that the ripper was a disorganised offender, which in turn was based on the nature of the mutilations. In 1988 it was the conventionally accepted understanding that the killers who engaged in post-mortem evisceration on such a grotesque scale were the outwardly “crazy” ones. Since the profile was conducted, however, other serial killers were identified who had a penchant for just this type of crime scene activity, most notably the “organised” Andrei Chikatilo.

Other behavioural analysts and criminologists, such as Bob Keppel, do not agree that the killer was disorganised.

Interesting that you cite the 1988 profile, which ultimately angled for David Cohen, several more rungs down the social ladder than Hutchinson, and presumably even further away than Hutchinson is from your preferred type of ripper.



Fair enough, although I would counter-submit that the vast majority of prostitute serial killers - such as menially employed Sutcliffe, Shawcross and Ridgeway - have more in common with a local labourer than a pantomime villain.

It’s funny how resistant some people are to the commonsense deduction accepted by most; that the killer was, in all probability, an unknown nondescript local.
bingo. well said Ben
__________________
"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
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #482  
Old 07-20-2018, 09:52 AM
Abby Normal Abby Normal is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 6,613
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Simon Wood View Post
Dr. Thomas Bond profiled the Whitechapel murderer—

“. . . He must in my opinion be a man subject to periodical attacks of Homicidal and erotic mania. The character of the mutilations indicate that the man may be in a condition sexually, that may be called satyriasis . . .”

FBI agent John E. Douglas concluded that the Ripper had an absent father and was raised by a domineering mother given to drink. His pent-up desires and emotions were expressed by lighting fires and torturing small animals. By perpetrating these acts, he discovered increased areas of dominance, power and control, and learned how to continue violent destructive acts without detection or punishment.

Professor Canter stated that Jack the Ripper felt himself at odds with society, was withdrawn and difficult to relate to, and may have been James Maybrick, alleged author of the Ripper diary.

When it comes to identifying Jack the Ripper, all this retro-analysis is about as useful as an ashtray on a motorbike.
yup-and LOL-good one!
__________________
"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
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #483  
Old 07-20-2018, 11:27 AM
Wickerman Wickerman is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 9,758
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam Flynn View Post
Indeed, and "hair" sounds a bit like "ear", especially when pronounced by an h-dropping Cockney. Also, as her long hair was one of Kelly's distinguishing features, it would be an obvious thing by which to identify her. Barnett undoubtedly recognised her by 'er 'air and eyes, and this was misheard by some reporters.
Absolutely!
Her most distinguishing feature.
__________________
Regards, Jon S.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #484  
Old 07-20-2018, 11:36 AM
Wickerman Wickerman is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 9,758
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RedBundy13 View Post
....
For me, he's the closest suspect yet. His whole police statement is just SOO difficult to buy. I mean seriously, his eyelashes?? Are you kidding me?!?!
The man with Stride in the doorway of the Bricklayers Arms, was described by one of the customers in the pub:

"The man was about 5ft. 5in. in height. He was well dressed in a black morning suit with a morning coat. He had rather weak eyes. I mean he had sore eyes without any eyelashes. I should know the man again amongst a hundred. He had a thick black moustache and no beard. He wore a black billycock hat, rather tall, and had on a collar. I don't know the colour of his tie."

If you have the Old Bailey website you can do a search on witness/suspects for "eyelashes". You will find it was a legitimate point of detail.
Strange to us, certainly, but not strange for the times.

Hutchinson did stare the man right in the face, it's not like he was on the other side of the street.
__________________
Regards, Jon S.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #485  
Old 07-20-2018, 11:59 AM
Wickerman Wickerman is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 9,758
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam Flynn View Post
Not in my case, Jon. I find Hutchinson dubious, but I'm neither a Wroe-ist nor a Hintonist.
The only potentially dubious part of Hutchinson's story, for me, is the waiting around for so long.
Hutch did pay a great deal of attention to this man, detailing all his 'bling'. I find it quite reasonable to allow that he had robbery in mind when the man left Millers Court.

The story he told police:
" I stood there for about three quarters of an hour to see if they came out they did not so I went away".
Begs the question, "why?"
What was he going to do once this man came out?
Abberline had to ask "why did you stay there for so long?"

I don't believe the reason would be to ask Kelly if he can stay the night. That would be like me taking a day off work so someone could rest in my house. It isn't going to happen, she has bills to pay, food & drink to buy, and the night is the most lucrative time for her to earn money. Especially, as she has a bed in a private room.

No, Kelly wouldn't be letting him stay. I would expect him to know that, if he knew her well enough. So what reason did he give Abberline?

On the other hand, look at Mortimer in Berner St. she stood at her door just watching the world go by.
Before radio's that is what the poorer people did for entertainment. So Hutchinson standing around, having nowhere else to stay, is not all that odd for the times.
Even in the 1900's it was common for people to stand or put a chair outside on the street and just sit watching everyone else.
Looking at certain aspects of this case from our 'modern' perspective can give a false impression. Today, we don't need to stand at the door for entertainment.
__________________
Regards, Jon S.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #486  
Old 07-20-2018, 01:00 PM
Wickerman Wickerman is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 9,758
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by harry View Post
Jon
Aberline's opinion leaves room for doubt,as does all opinions.
Yes, but among those who know as much as he did. Sadly, that generation has passed.
Having people from our generation cast doubt on him based on the little we know is hardly the same as an equally well informed contemporary of Abberline's casting doubt on him.


Quote:
Had he said I am convinced of the man's innocence,....
He's not likely to write that if Hutchinson was not officially a suspect, which he wasn't.
Being the last 'known' person to see the victim alive means he could be a suspect. Not that he automatically is a suspect.
That all depends on how the interrogation goes. If Abberline is not satisfied with his answers, they might suggest he stay the night - to help them with their enquiries
If Abberline had the slightest doubt, he is not about to let the worst known killer in British history walk out, into the night.


Quote:
Surely we have more information to work on than was available on the evening of the 12th when Aberline interviewed Hutchinson.What of all the newspaper articles that you keep referring to?
The police had all that too, plus all their own paperwork, which we don't have.
__________________
Regards, Jon S.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #487  
Old 07-20-2018, 01:47 PM
Wickerman Wickerman is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 9,758
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ben View Post
It’s a three-day delay because I assumed, evidently with some nativity, that no modern researcher worth his skin would be so cretinous as to accept that at the height of the murders; at the very zenith of the most significant manhunt in London’s history, that a member of London’s finest would have reacted with such total indifference to Hutchinson’ story - no escorting him to police station, no alerting of his superiors, not even making a note of his name and address.
The police do write about the number of time-wasting witnesses they have to deal with. We can only criticize the PC after we know from him (which we can't), as to what was actually said.
So, once again you are jumping to conclusions.

Quote:
Please try to exercise just a modicum of common sense with this one. Has it ever occurred to you why Hutchinson related such a transparent whopper to the press and not the police?
You keep forgetting, we don't have the whole story he gave to police. That is the interrogation by Abberline where every line of the statement will be gone over with a fine tooth comb.
I've tried to help you understand this in the past.
Compare the brief statements given to police by witnesses in Millers Court, with their eventually more detailed testimony at the inquest.
That's the difference a few searching questions can make.

Quote:
Because Abberline would have asked him precisely where and when this policeman encounter occurred, with a view to cross-referencing any answer given with the meticulously recorded beat times for patrolling constables.
Certainly, he likely did just that.

Quote:
Even if a patrolling or fixed beat copper was predisposed, for whatever reason, to be negligent or complacent, he wouldn’t have dared risked being so in those circumstances, as he know he could be tracked down by his superiors. It is against this obvious reality that Hutchinson’s ridiculous claim to have informed a policeman (who totally ignored him) are pitted.
I think you are missing something that might be quite relevant.
We don't know where Hutchinson saw that policeman on Sunday morning.
Given that he was a labourer and out of work, and Spitalfields Market is just around the corner. It is quite possible Hutchinson was working at the market on Sunday morning - labouring.

He can't just quit and go to the station when he feels like it.
The constable may have been on duty at the market, so he can't leave either.
You probably don't know this but constables were hired out to private businesses for a fee.

As the Point-duty listing does not include Spitalfields Market, but we know a constable was stationed there (Chapman case). It is possible that this constable was working for the market, and as such can only advise Hutchinson to go to the station. He can't leave and take him there himself.

Quote:
Any wonder then that the police discredited Hutchinson shortly after his unsanctioned account appeared in the press?
Still speculating he was discredited are we


Quote:
Sorry Jon, but of all the “explanations” I’ve read for Hutchinson’s failure to come forward earlier, yours is by far the trickiest to get one’s head around.
And here's me thinking it was you who had no intention of ever accepting it.

Quote:
It’s the mindsets you project onto Hutchinson that make me quite giddy. Even if he clung with irrational tenacity to the reports of a later morning time of death, on what planet would his account be in the slightest bit irrelevant or unimportant?
This one.

Quote:
Hutchinson claimed to have left the court at 3.00am, at which point Kelly and Astrakhan were still inside #13 Miller’s Court. Are you seriously suggesting that upon reading of a later morning time of death (ignoring or unaccountably overlooking numerous reports of an earlier one), he concluded the man he left Kelly with couldn’t possibly have killed her a few hours later??
Obviously. Even Swanson himself was not convinced ("not clearly proved") that the Schwartz suspect (Broad-shouldered man) was the killer, as the sighting was only 15 minutes!!! before the murder of Stride.
And you think 7 hours is important????
S-e-v-e-n h-o-u-r-s ?
Thats funny Ben, too funny.


Quote:
Are you seriously suggesting that Hutchinson gathered about him every newspaper available throughout Friday and Saturday,.....
Why would he need to do that?
The late morning assumption for a ToD was so widespread it didn't matter which paper he picked up - it was there right in front of him. Or, any fellow lodgers told him what they had read. Either way.

Quote:
This is craziness, Jon.
It was your interpretation, not mine.
__________________
Regards, Jon S.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #488  
Old 07-20-2018, 01:57 PM
Joshua Rogan Joshua Rogan is online now
Chief Inspector
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 1,854
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Trevor Marriott View Post
Whether or not the police believed Hutchinson at the time or not is irrelevant, they had to believe him. They could not disprove anything he was saying with regards to what he allegedly saw, and to publicly call him a liar would have done them no favors with the press, or the public, who by this time had lost confidence in the police and their ability to catch the killer.

However what they believed off the record is another matter.
I believe Abberline's words "I am of opinion that his statement is true" are part of his internal CID report on the inquest and Hutchinson's evidence, not anything released to the public. As such, even if Abberline was unable to find any obvious falsehoods in the story, he would be perfectly justified in expressing a negative opinion to his superiors if he had any doubts about it's veracity.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #489  
Old 07-20-2018, 02:28 PM
rjpalmer rjpalmer is offline
Detective
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 420
Default

Hi Ben. Refresh my memory. Did Sutcliffe, Shawcross and Ridgeway inject themselves into the investigation?
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #490  
Old 07-20-2018, 02:33 PM
Trevor Marriott Trevor Marriott is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 5,089
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joshua Rogan View Post
I believe Abberline's words "I am of opinion that his statement is true" are part of his internal CID report on the inquest and Hutchinson's evidence, not anything released to the public. As such, even if Abberline was unable to find any obvious falsehoods in the story, he would be perfectly justified in expressing a negative opinion to his superiors if he had any doubts about it's veracity.
And how do you know he didnt do that verbally, because I have no doubt that senior officers would have asked that question of him

www.trevormarriott.co.uk
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 11:24 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.