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:
General Suspect Discussion: New suspect book. - by Simon Wood 1 minute ago.
General Suspect Discussion: New suspect book. - by cjmorley 9 minutes ago.
General Suspect Discussion: New suspect book. - by cjmorley 32 minutes ago.
Klosowski, Severin (George Chapman): Can George Chapmam reform himself to being a calculating poisoner seven years later?. - by rjpalmer 53 minutes ago.
Klosowski, Severin (George Chapman): Can George Chapmam reform himself to being a calculating poisoner seven years later?. - by Batman 2 hours ago.
Klosowski, Severin (George Chapman): Can George Chapmam reform himself to being a calculating poisoner seven years later?. - by Fisherman 3 hours ago.

Most Popular Threads:
Klosowski, Severin (George Chapman): Can George Chapmam reform himself to being a calculating poisoner seven years later?. - (56 posts)
Doctors and Coroners: Sedgewick Saunders ....... why did he say the things he said ? - (19 posts)
Non-Fiction: the victims werent prostitutes - (10 posts)
General Suspect Discussion: New suspect book. - (6 posts)
Motive, Method and Madness: Antisemitism as a diversionary tactic - (5 posts)
Abberline, Inspector Frederick: Hinting at something? - (3 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
  #1871  
Old 10-10-2018, 01:51 PM
Abby Normal Abby Normal is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 6,598
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wickerman View Post
Actually, that point was raised years ago.
The rebuttal to that was that Hutchinson may have been at the inquest.

It was then pointed out how small the room was, and that Abberline was present, so if Hutch had been there, among the only 'handful' of public, Abberline would have seen him.

The rebuttal to that was then, Hutch must have waited outside the inquest and picked up on gossip, or involved himself in gossip?, to learn what Lewis had seen.
This is how ridiculous these exchanges have become.

The anti-Hutchinson crowd just can't accept that Sarah Lewis told the court the same story as Hutchinson did.
That there was a man standing opposite the court, that he was watching a man & woman in Dorset street. That the woman was hatless & the worse for drink, and that this couple walked up the court together.

Lewis confirms Hutchinson, it's that simple.
wicky

Quote:
Actually, that point was raised years ago.
The rebuttal to that was that Hutchinson may have been at the inquest.

It was then pointed out how small the room was, and that Abberline was present, so if Hutch had been there, among the only 'handful' of public, Abberline would have seen him.

The rebuttal to that was then, Hutch must have waited outside the inquest and picked up on gossip, or involved himself in gossip?, to learn what Lewis had seen.
This is how ridiculous these exchanges have become.
he may have been at the inquest, outside the doors, talking to people on the streets, etc. or -He was staying at the victoria house a stones throw from the Kelly murder scene, he could have picked it up there.


even if he hadnt even heard of Lewis at the inquest, he may have simply wanted to wait until the inquest was over before coming forward, for obvious reasons if he wasnt telling the truth.

Quote:
The anti-Hutchinson crowd just can't accept that Sarah Lewis told the court the same story as Hutchinson did.
That there was a man standing opposite the court, that he was watching a man & woman in Dorset street. That the woman was hatless & the worse for drink, and that this couple walked up the court together.

again for the millionth time-NO. physically impossible for lewis to have seen the same couple hutch did. Aman and Mary were already inside by the time Lewis arrived. talk about "ridiculous"! give it up man.


The only thing Lewis corroborates is that hutch was standing out in the middle of the night, with no good explanation, waiting and watching "for someone to come out". creepy suspicious behavior if ive ever heard it.
__________________
"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
  #1872  
Old 10-10-2018, 06:22 PM
Roy Corduroy Roy Corduroy is offline
Chief Inspector
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,587
Default

Good evening Fisherman et al ..

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fisherman View Post
Not to dampen your enthusiasm, Roy, but the argument that Lewis would have had a few seconds only, in darkness to boot, to observe the loiterer had been presented many times before. ... etc
But I am excited, and I'm afraid nothing can dampen my enthusiasm at this point, because the simple straightforward way in which RJ explained it has set me free. As a non-Hutchinsonian, I have choices! I believe George Hutchinson was not Jack the Ripper and:

I. He came forward as a good citizen and told the truth. He knew Mary Kelly, and he did encounter and speak to her. He saw the well dressed man and stayed and observed after they entered her domicile together.

II. He was there, although his story is somewhat embellished, but he has the gist of it.

III. He wasn't there and none of this happened. Why come forward and tell this tale? Because he could, that's all, nothing nefarious. He was all worked up over the 'orrible murder.

IV. Yes he was there and I. or II. occurred but he had the wrong night.

It doesn't matter which it was, because Hutch was not the serial killer we seek. (This is a suspect thread, you know) Further, I believe George Hutchinson was not Jack the Ripper and:

A. He was Toppy

B. He was not Toppy

No problem either way

In fact, I can even take joy in Simon Wood's proposal, because I believe George Hutchinson was not Jack the Ripper and:

1. There was a Jack the Rippper

2. There was no Jack the Ripper

All bases covered

Like the Denny's Grand Slam Breakfast *, I have choices and I feel great. I wish I could invite all of you for a free cyber breakfast and pick up the tab on PayPal or however that works. Have a nice evening,

Roy

* two eggs made to order, two strips of bacon, two sausage links, crispy hash browns and two fluffy buttermilk pancakes.
__________________
Sink the Bismark
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #1873  
Old 10-10-2018, 09:46 PM
rjpalmer rjpalmer is offline
Detective
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 420
Default

Hi Roy. Many years ago I used to work the swing shift and occasionally graveyard. Afterwards, I would sometimes swing by the Denny's in Glenwood, Oregon (just off I-5) for the grand slam breakfast.

They filmed a rather well-know scene in Jack Nicholson's film Five Easy Pieces in this particular Denny's:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wtfNE4z6a8

I've sat in that same booth many times. They changed the sign out front for the filming; otherwise it is pretty much the same. It is still operation, and is still serving up the Grand Slam. I think they changed the oil in the deep fryer once or twice since those days....

Have a good evening.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #1874  
Old 10-10-2018, 09:58 PM
Fisherman Fisherman is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 17,744
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Roy Corduroy View Post
Good evening Fisherman et al ..



But I am excited, and I'm afraid nothing can dampen my enthusiasm at this point, because the simple straightforward way in which RJ explained it has set me free. As a non-Hutchinsonian, I have choices! I believe George Hutchinson was not Jack the Ripper and:

I. He came forward as a good citizen and told the truth. He knew Mary Kelly, and he did encounter and speak to her. He saw the well dressed man and stayed and observed after they entered her domicile together.

II. He was there, although his story is somewhat embellished, but he has the gist of it.

III. He wasn't there and none of this happened. Why come forward and tell this tale? Because he could, that's all, nothing nefarious. He was all worked up over the 'orrible murder.

IV. Yes he was there and I. or II. occurred but he had the wrong night.

It doesn't matter which it was, because Hutch was not the serial killer we seek. (This is a suspect thread, you know) Further, I believe George Hutchinson was not Jack the Ripper and:

A. He was Toppy

B. He was not Toppy

No problem either way

In fact, I can even take joy in Simon Wood's proposal, because I believe George Hutchinson was not Jack the Ripper and:

1. There was a Jack the Rippper

2. There was no Jack the Ripper

All bases covered

Like the Denny's Grand Slam Breakfast *, I have choices and I feel great. I wish I could invite all of you for a free cyber breakfast and pick up the tab on PayPal or however that works. Have a nice evening,

Roy

* two eggs made to order, two strips of bacon, two sausage links, crispy hash browns and two fluffy buttermilk pancakes.
Then I am also excited. For you. Content ripperologists are uncommon. All cred to R J if he can accomplish that!

Last edited by Fisherman : 10-10-2018 at 10:25 PM.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #1875  
Old 10-11-2018, 02:42 AM
Batman Batman is offline
Chief Inspector
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 1,883
Default

Something doesn't add up.

Surprise!

Top cartoon. There is Hutchinson's mother of Jews description. You couldn't get much better than the details in that drawing. A fully fledged out composite of JtR with horseshoe necktie pin and all. Now look to left. There is Hutchinson looking surprised at this ghastly fellow picking up MJK. Now look below that drawing and there is an officer. His name is L.63. His real name still a mystery. Look at the L.63 is saying 'I was on duty all night and never heard a sound'.

So apparently Lambeth 63 wasn't present when Hutchinson's man picked up MJK and didn't see anything (never heard a sound).

L.63 is Hutchinson's corroboration... or at least should be. How is it that Hutchinson who claims to have been there for 45 minutes didn't see this PC on his rounds?

The PC should have seen him twice.
__________________
Bona fide canonical and then some.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #1876  
Old 10-11-2018, 02:59 AM
Fisherman Fisherman is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 17,744
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Batman View Post

The PC should have seen him twice.
Not if Hutchinson was not there on the night, he wouldn´t.

Last edited by Fisherman : 10-11-2018 at 03:28 AM.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #1877  
Old 10-11-2018, 02:00 PM
Wickerman Wickerman is online now
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 9,757
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Abby Normal View Post
wicky



he may have been at the inquest, outside the doors, talking to people on the streets, etc. or -He was staying at the victoria house a stones throw from the Kelly murder scene, he could have picked it up there.


even if he hadnt even heard of Lewis at the inquest, he may have simply wanted to wait until the inquest was over before coming forward, for obvious reasons if he wasnt telling the truth.
Maybe this, maybe that...if's, but's & maybe's.
There's no maybe about what Hutchinson said, no maybe about what Lewis said.


Quote:
.......again for the millionth time-NO. physically impossible for lewis to have seen the same couple hutch did. Aman and Mary were already inside by the time Lewis arrived. talk about "ridiculous"! give it up man.
Rubbish.
Lewis tells us where she was at 2:30, Hutch doesn't tell us where Aman & Kelly were at 2:30.
So your dogmatic claim is pure speculation.

Quote:
The only thing Lewis corroborates is that hutch was standing out in the middle of the night, with no good explanation, waiting and watching "for someone to come out". creepy suspicious behavior if ive ever heard it.
There was a lot of 'creepy' men reported in the press, that doesn't make them all killers. The East End was a creepy place.
__________________
Regards, Jon S.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #1878  
Old 10-11-2018, 02:05 PM
Wickerman Wickerman is online now
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 9,757
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Batman View Post
Something doesn't add up.

Surprise!

Top cartoon. There is Hutchinson's mother of Jews description. You couldn't get much better than the details in that drawing. A fully fledged out composite of JtR with horseshoe necktie pin and all. Now look to left. There is Hutchinson looking surprised at this ghastly fellow picking up MJK. Now look below that drawing and there is an officer. His name is L.63. His real name still a mystery. Look at the L.63 is saying 'I was on duty all night and never heard a sound'.

So apparently Lambeth 63 wasn't present when Hutchinson's man picked up MJK and didn't see anything (never heard a sound).

L.63 is Hutchinson's corroboration... or at least should be. How is it that Hutchinson who claims to have been there for 45 minutes didn't see this PC on his rounds?

The PC should have seen him twice.
We spoke about PC L 63 last year. Monty identified him, the name escapes me at the moment, but I think he was on duty in Commercial Street, not Dorset Street.
__________________
Regards, Jon S.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #1879  
Old 10-11-2018, 02:15 PM
Wickerman Wickerman is online now
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 9,757
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by packers stem View Post
....

The whole Hutchinson story is a nonsense
As is the Lewis story which altered dramatically between statement and inquest and the constant cloak changes between Kennedy and Lewis .
Yes , I know you think both existed and were sisters
Evidence required ,as if so , Kennedy's was the last sighting and she should have been at the inquest
It was George Sims who called them sisters. I think they were just friends, but no matter. Kennedy will turn up, she is being looked for.

Maxwell was the last sighting, not Kennedy.

Why do you think Maxwell was called, it wasn't for pantomime.
It's been pointed out for months now, the most prevalent theory over that first weekend on this murder was that Kelly was killed after 9:00 on Friday morning.
That, is why Maxwell was called - the last person to see Kelly alive.
__________________
Regards, Jon S.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #1880  
Old 10-11-2018, 02:34 PM
packers stem packers stem is offline
Sergeant
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 962
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wickerman View Post
It was George Sims who called them sisters. I think they were just friends, but no matter. Kennedy will turn up, she is being looked for.

Maxwell was the last sighting, not Kennedy.

Why do you think Maxwell was called, it wasn't for pantomime.
It's been pointed out for months now, the most prevalent theory over that first weekend on this murder was that Kelly was killed after 9:00 on Friday morning.
That, is why Maxwell was called - the last person to see Kelly alive.
Apologies ..... of course Maxwell was the last sighting, inquest wise anyway .
That honour should really go to the unknown woman in the times .
What I should have said was that the Kennedy sighting should have rendered Sarah Lewis' sighting as irrelevant .
It is unfortunate that she has no credibility due to not being able to come up with the same story twice .

You pointing out your own thoughts does not make them factual .
....They may appear to be to you .
I believe Maxwell but there are other options than an after 9 murder , which I have pointed out .....
We make our choices

As for Kennedy turning up because she is being looked for .... that may or may not be but Kelly has been looked for for many years
__________________
You can lead a horse to water.....
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 01:31 PM.


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