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:
Lechmere/Cross, Charles: So if you live in Bethnal Green, you won´t kill in Whitechapel? - by Trevor Marriott 2 hours ago.
Lechmere/Cross, Charles: So if you live in Bethnal Green, you won´t kill in Whitechapel? - by harry 4 hours ago.
Lechmere/Cross, Charles: So if you live in Bethnal Green, you won´t kill in Whitechapel? - by Abby Normal 5 hours ago.
Lechmere/Cross, Charles: So if you live in Bethnal Green, you won´t kill in Whitechapel? - by harry 10 hours ago.
Lechmere/Cross, Charles: So if you live in Bethnal Green, you won´t kill in Whitechapel? - by caz 17 hours ago.
Lechmere/Cross, Charles: So if you live in Bethnal Green, you won´t kill in Whitechapel? - by caz 18 hours ago.

Most Popular Threads:
Lechmere/Cross, Charles: So if you live in Bethnal Green, you won´t kill in Whitechapel? - (39 posts)
General Police Discussion: City of London Precincts and Divisions involved in the Investigation - (1 posts)
General Discussion: Mary Kelly Jack the Ripper celebrity ghost box session interview - (1 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
  #1221  
Old 08-15-2018, 04:32 AM
Premium Member
caz caz is offline
Premium Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: East Devon UK
Posts: 6,370
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Abby Normal View Post
Hi Caz
I would expect that if he got brushed off by the cop on the street he would have gone straight to the station.
Hi Abby,

If we could take a step back for a minute and imagine Hutch was just a reluctant witness with a story to tell, we could compare his claimed reactions with those of Robert Paul, in the wake of the Nichols murder.

As you know, Paul accompanied Cross to report the matter to a policeman, but then went to the papers afterwards with a scathing account of how PC Mizen brushed them off with a quick "all right" before continuing to knock up instead of immediately going to Buck's Row to attend to the poor woman lying there. Paul didn't go to the police station at all, but had to be sought out to attend the ongoing inquest - fashionably late.

Hutch may similarly have felt his Sunday morning cop had been less than responsive, but he wouldn't have known for sure that he hadn't passed on his account of seeing Mary Kelly on the last night of her life. The difference is that Hutch did at least put things right by presenting himself at the cop shop the following evening, before giving his account to a reporter. And let's face it, it was hardly Hutch's fault that the Kelly inquest was done and dusted with almost indecent haste and he may well have assumed it would take longer than that, giving him more time to decide what to do.

Had Robert Paul found Nichols alone, after Cross had scarpered [if guilty] or taken a different route to work [if innocent], and had still been at the scene when PC Neil had arrived, he'd have been in a far more precarious position now than Hutch, considering Paul's own track record.

As rj has repeatedly pointed out, witnesses were often very reluctant to come forward at all, especially if their own behaviour might invite unwanted scrutiny. Some theorists today insist that Hutch's behaviour was deeply questionable and his story highly implausible, making him an obvious suspect. But if we look at this another way, why would the ripper have behaved in such a suspicious manner when he had no need? But more than this, the police didn't immediately find Hutch's behaviour suspicious or his story incredible, did they? So Hutch presumably wasn't aware, or wasn't worried that they would.

If Hutch's behaviour and story really did 'stink to high heaven', and very obviously so back in 1888, then I submit it's highly unlikely that he had any involvement in the murders, because why the hell would he have come forward at all, if he couldn't do a much better and subtler job of feigning innocence? Why did he blab to the press? If he was just a liar and attention seeker he was skating on very thin ice but wasn't the ripper.

Love,

Caz
X
__________________
"Comedy is simply a funny way of being serious." Peter Ustinov


Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #1222  
Old 08-15-2018, 05:51 AM
Premium Member
caz caz is offline
Premium Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: East Devon UK
Posts: 6,370
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post
And I’d suggest Gareth that if Hutchinson’s story was true then we can almost certainly eliminate Astrakhan as a suspect. What kind of idiot would go on to kill Mary after having a guy stare at him to the point where he stooped down to look directly into his face and then watch as he disappeared into Miller’s Court with his victim?

It doesn’t say much for a Ripper suspect when we can say that he was either extremely unlikely or non-existent.
Hi HS,

I would suggest that if Flash Harry existed, he was not the killer but Kelly naturally jumped at the chance to pick up someone just like him, knowing the rent man was due in the morning. Would Hutch have known to invent someone who'd be Kelly's cup of tea?

If Flash Harry promised more than he delivered, obliging Kelly to go out again after he'd left, to try and make a bit more, she could easily have met her killer at a similar time he was prowling when he found Nichols and Chapman. The double event had taken place earlier, but that was on a Saturday night, which could have presented different opportunities or more of them.

What kind of idiot would go on to kill Kelly after allowing himself to be seen by Sarah Lewis, closely enough for her to pose a danger to him later, if he didn't propel himself into the limelight before she did it for him?

What kind of idiot would then behave suspiciously while in the limelight for the express purpose of avoiding suspicion, and describe in implausible detail an even more implausible beau for Kelly, who shouldn't have fooled Abberline for a second, if we accept the arguments put forward by Hutch theorists that such characters - if they existed at all - simply never paraded the streets of Spitalfields?

Love,

Caz
X
__________________
"Comedy is simply a funny way of being serious." Peter Ustinov


Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #1223  
Old 08-15-2018, 06:02 AM
Premium Member
caz caz is offline
Premium Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: East Devon UK
Posts: 6,370
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Abby Normal View Post
If hutchs story is true than Aman is probably jack the ripper.
I disagree. What kind of idiot... etc etc?

Plus, what kind of idiot would have worn all that flashy gear, knowing his intentions were to get down and dirty and rip Kelly to shreds? How would he have known, when setting out to find his next victim, that she would have her own room this time, where he could - at a pinch - strip off to avoid getting blood on his clothes?

Bit of a faff, I'd have thought.

Love,

Caz
X
__________________
"Comedy is simply a funny way of being serious." Peter Ustinov


Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #1224  
Old 08-15-2018, 06:20 AM
Abby Normal Abby Normal is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 6,826
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by caz View Post
I disagree. What kind of idiot... etc etc?

Plus, what kind of idiot would have worn all that flashy gear, knowing his intentions were to get down and dirty and rip Kelly to shreds? How would he have known, when setting out to find his next victim, that she would have her own room this time, where he could - at a pinch - strip off to avoid getting blood on his clothes?

Bit of a faff, I'd have thought.

Love,

Caz
X
Hi Caz
Thanks for your well thought out and reasonable replies-I actually have no issue with anything you say.

I guess it all boils down to (for me anyway) whether you believe hutch or not. I do not.


and basically whether you think Abberline, at least initially could have been fooled by hutchs story. I think he was.
__________________
"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
  #1225  
Old 08-15-2018, 06:47 AM
Premium Member
caz caz is offline
Premium Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: East Devon UK
Posts: 6,370
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post
Let’s face it, prostitutes were plentiful and a very easy target. If one looked too risky it would have been no problem to move on and find another.
Hi HS,

I realise you were addressing Abby and applying this to Flash Harry as a suspect, but doesn't it also apply to Hutch? Why would he have sniffed round Kelly's room - a prostitute he later connected himself with personally [admitting, or claiming, to have known her for three years] - and then have had to wait there for nearly an hour before finally entering to do the deed, after having allowed himself to be seen there by Sarah Lewis? Why put himself through all that when similar victim types were ten a penny?

The only reasonable explanation would be that Hutch had some urgent personal reason that night for targeting Kelly, and not any other random unfortunate, like his previous victims had presumably been.

And this is the rub for me, because I don't see Kelly as 'special' compared with the others, let alone the ripper's ultimate goal. She was just someone who, by early November, was equally desperate for money, her previous regular provider - Joe Barnett - having recently moved out, leaving her vulnerable and available and just what the predator was looking for. If Hutch [or Barnett for that matter] had a special reason for wanting her dead, I don't buy that the others had to die first, to make Kelly look like part of a madman's series - in the days when serial killing was not on most people's radar. And of course, Hutch theorists don't all see Kelly as his ultimate goal either, but argue that he may have killed again when everything cooled down again after his fifteen minutes under the spotlight.

Quote:
I take your points Abby. For me though I just feel that it’s less likely that the ripper would have taken unnecessary risks. He wanted to remain at large to continue doing what he was doing.
Which again could apply to Hutch as a suspect. Once out in the open, of his own volition, he was no longer truly at large to continue his favourite game as if nothing had happened. He was a known entity who could not afford to be seen ever again at or near the scene of a murder. Either Sarah Lewis could have recognised him again or she couldn't. But Abberline surely would have done if he ever came to his attention again for any reason.

Love,

Caz
X
__________________
"Comedy is simply a funny way of being serious." Peter Ustinov


Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #1226  
Old 08-15-2018, 09:29 AM
Premium Member
caz caz is offline
Premium Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: East Devon UK
Posts: 6,370
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ben View Post
I, for one, have never assumed that Hutchinson’s alleged Sunday sighting and subsequent attempt to alert the copper were “unrelated”; far from it. I’m quite sure he was attempting to convey the impression that his encounter with the mystery PC occurred hot on the heels of his re-spotting of the suspect. Unfortunately, this makes an even greater nonsense of the PC’s bizarre inaction; not troubling himself to pursue or locate the suspect, and not even bothering to record Hutchinson’s particulars. What a negligent phuckwit.

Not lost on some, reassuringly, is the fact that Petticoat Lane had extremely obvious Jewish associations. I suggest it is far more likely that Hutchinson invented the Sunday sighting to reinforce suspicions against the Jewish community, and that he deliberately reserved the lie about the Sunday PC for the press knowing that they, unlike the police, were in no position to expose the fabrication by checking whether or not a constable actually was stationed where Hutchinson claimed. Constables patrolled meticulously delineated beats, which meant if Hutchinson’s tall tale didn’t correlate with any of them, the fabrication was easily exposed (which it clearly was, as evinced by Hutchinson’s discrediting shortly thereafter).

What’s this nonsense you keep repeating about serial killer statistics? Have you heard or read about a single study that utilises statistics garnered from all known serial cases in history? Can you show me where, when and how such information was quantified? A killer’s propensity to come forward or otherwise is entirely dependent on whether or not he even found himself in the type of compromising circumstance that might encourage such a preemptive strategy. If he does not inject himself into the investigation, it may owe simply to the absence of such a circumstance, as opposed to having an intrinsic disinclination to do so.
Hi Ben,

I've been trying to explore why Hutch the Ripper would have invented those extra details for the press, knowing that the police could - and almost certainly would - check for themselves and discover he had lied about alerting a copper on the Sunday, after allegedly seeing Flash Harry again in the Jews' Market [as Petticoat Lane/Middlesex St was also once called]. Was it really worth trying to 'reinforce suspicions against the Jewish community' in a way that would automatically undermine his credibility in the eyes of the police, when his purpose in coming forward was presumably to make them believe in his Jewish suspect and believe he was a truthful witness?

We know that PC Mizen didn't exactly leap into action when Cross and Paul reported a woman down in Buck's Row, just three weeks after Tabram's gruesome murder not a million miles away. So if Hutch did tell a copper his Flash Harry story, two days after Kelly's remains were found, is it not at least feasible in your universe that this policeman found the tale, shall we say, fanciful, or even thought Hutch was full of it? After all, it's your argument that nobody with two brain cells to rub together would accept such garbage at face value. But then it's also your argument that if the copper existed, his inaction at hearing said garbage was 'bizarre' - 'not troubling himself to pursue or locate the suspect, and not even bothering to record Hutchinson’s particulars. What a negligent phuckwit'! I'm not sure you can have it both ways. Why would he have done any of this if he was a man after your own heart and didn't believe a word of it?

Assuming the copper did exist and was not such a phuckwit after all, but was in fact as sceptical as you are about what he was hearing, did he perhaps make reassuring noises but take it no further, thinking, just as we are all meant to think today, that Hutch was a Jew-baiting liar? When he was asked later if Hutch had reported his sighting to him on the Sunday morning, did he deny it to cover his arse for not having passed on this 'implausible' sounding story? Much as PC Mizen before him seems not to have reported his encounter with informants Cross and Paul - until the latter 'outed' him in the press and slagged him off?

Love,

Caz
X
__________________
"Comedy is simply a funny way of being serious." Peter Ustinov


Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #1227  
Old 08-15-2018, 10:14 AM
Premium Member
caz caz is offline
Premium Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: East Devon UK
Posts: 6,370
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wickerman View Post
There were sufficient stories to influence the public that she was alive late in the morning...

...No amount of gossip is going to give him a guilty complex if these stories are accompanied by tales of her being seen alive after 9:00 Friday morning.

His 2-2:30 am liaison has no bearing on this presumed late morning, after 9:00 am, murder. That!, is what all the gossip had to be about.
Plus the fact that all the recent murder victims had apparently been discovered very shortly after their killer had departed. News of Kelly's murder would not have entered anyone's consciousness until around 11am on Friday at the earliest, so the first local gossip mongers - even before the medical men got their act together and well before the first newspaper story appeared - could be forgiven if they had assumed that she too was found not long after the killer had done his work.

How would Hutch have known any different, if the first he heard was that Kelly had been found murdered around mid-morning on the Friday? It might have taken a fair while to sink in that she could have been dead for several hours by then.

Love,

Caz
X
__________________
"Comedy is simply a funny way of being serious." Peter Ustinov


Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #1228  
Old 08-16-2018, 05:23 PM
Ben Ben is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,843
Default

Hi Busy,

Quote:
yet if he was the killer why would he be jumping up and down in the face of the law like a court jester
Possibly for the same reason various known serial killers have inserted themselves into the investigation as witnesses; because it affords then the opportunity to “explain away” potentially incriminating connections to the victim or crime location, to keep track of the investigation, and to perhaps send police on a false scent.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #1229  
Old 08-16-2018, 05:25 PM
Ben Ben is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,843
Default

Quote:
Much like the assumption that the lighting was bad where Kelly and her client were standing, because the Hutchinson theory otherwise dies on the vine
I didn’t say the lighting was “bad” at that location, RJ. I’m quite sure it was standard illumination for the locality in 1888, perhaps even a cut above. I’m saying that Hutchinson was very unlikely to have witnessed and memorised all he alleged, given the time and conditions. This determination is based on factual data, such as the distances involved and the amount of light a Victorian gas lamp was capable of emitting, as opposed to “experimenting” in the garden.

What “Hutchinson theory” is any of this supposed to affect, anyway? Unless it escaped your notice, the majority of people who suspect Hutchinson of having lied about the above (and other details) generally dismiss him as a money-seeker or fame-grabber who probably wasn’t anywhere near the court that night, as opposed to a killer covering his tracks.

Knee-jerk dismissals of “inconvenient” evidence is indeed antithetical to good detective work, but then again so is swallowing whole transparently bogus accounts that were dismissed as such by the police at the time, all for the sake of defending our preference for a titillating toff as the ripper.

I see you’re quite happy to accept that a negligent “slacker” policeman didn’t bother taking Hutchinson’s story remotely seriously, and presumably went straight back to his doughnuts, despite a) just receiving a crucial lead at the height of the largest manhunt in history, and b) knowing full well that his superiors could track him down if Hutchinson later complained about his inactivity? I guess everyone else must wear the black hats for Hutchinson to wear a white one.

You don’t find it all problematic that he mentioned nothing of this encounter during his first “interrogation” with Abberline (who would certainly have quizzed Hutchinson on the time and location of this policeman encounter, had it truly occurred). Would a policeman on beat really have risked being that lazy and incompetent, even if predisposed that way, when he knew how quickly and easily his identity could be traced?

But no, we must accept the existence of some grossly incompetent, lazy, self-incriminating copper before we accept that Hutchinson lied about him in a transparent attempt to justify his failure to alert the police earlier. One would expect a combination of extraordinary gullibility and nativity to be the driving force behind these sorts of arguments, but in reality, they’re just further attempts at eschewing the “unknown local” killer in favour of the educated top-hatted celebrity.

It’s interesting also that according to this theory, senior detectives such as Abberline are utterly immune from criticism, whereas the lowly bobbies on beat were apparently a bunch of callous, lazy slackers.

Last edited by Ben : 08-16-2018 at 05:30 PM.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #1230  
Old 08-16-2018, 05:32 PM
Ben Ben is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,843
Default

Robert Sagar’s watch chain was visible in your photo because he was in a seated position and only wearing a suit jacket. If he was standing up, wearing an Astrakhan overcoat, and walking “sharply” along Commercial Street at 2.00am (as opposed to being frozen permanently in time, perfectly illuminated, for everyone to gloat at for eternity), no chain would have been visible, less still with a “red stone seal” attached.

I’m sorry to hear about your car accident. I’m afraid I’m not aware of any socioeconomic criminal profiling statistics for dink drivers, and therefore have no idea if home ownership constitutes some sort of deviation from “the profile”.

All the best,
Ben
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 03:49 AM.


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