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:
Elizabeth Stride: For what reason do we include Stride? - by Observer 4 hours ago.
Hutchinson, George: Any updates, or opinions on this witness. - by rjpalmer 4 hours ago.
Elizabeth Stride: For what reason do we include Stride? - by Observer 4 hours ago.
Hutchinson, George: Any updates, or opinions on this witness. - by Sam Flynn 4 hours ago.
Elizabeth Stride: For what reason do we include Stride? - by Observer 4 hours ago.
Hutchinson, George: Any updates, or opinions on this witness. - by Abby Normal 5 hours ago.

Most Popular Threads:
Hutchinson, George: Any updates, or opinions on this witness. - (11 posts)
Elizabeth Stride: For what reason do we include Stride? - (9 posts)
General Discussion: The Weapon - (3 posts)
General Suspect Discussion: Kansas Physician Confirms Howard Report - (3 posts)
A6 Murders: A6 Rebooted - (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
  #681  
Old 07-25-2018, 10:09 AM
Sam Flynn Sam Flynn is offline
Casebook Supporter
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Wales
Posts: 10,454
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rjpalmer View Post
On another matter, considering that Hutchinson states that he believed he saw his suspect again in Middlesex Street on the 11th... how do we know that the details he recorded --eyelashes, etc.--were not largely based on the man he saw on the 11th in what may well have been broad daylight?
Given that Hutch only believed he'd seen the suspect, RJ, it strikes me as being a somewhat fleeting encounter. I also doubt that Hutchinson stared him straight in the face, as he claims to have done on the night of the murder.
__________________
Kind regards, Sam Flynn

"Suche Nullen" (Nietzsche, Götzendämmerung, 1888)
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #682  
Old 07-25-2018, 10:48 AM
Wickerman Wickerman is online now
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 9,645
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam Flynn View Post
Sorry, Jon. I was stuck on the 10th for some reason.

That notwithstanding...

Originally Posted by Sam Flynn
Besides, it's not all about the press. As you I think pointed out, Hutchinson apparently dozed in his lodgings and didn't wake up until the late afternoon. When he did, the lodging house and all the streets around it would have been buzzing with news of the horrendous events in (very) nearby Miller's Court, without need of the press reports at all
It was still Friday though Gareth.
If he did gain entry at the Vic. when they opened in the morning (4:00-5:00am?), and slept for several hours, he is still among people who are reading Friday's afternoon papers.
I don't see why that last paragraph changes anything - it was still Friday.
__________________
Regards, Jon S.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #683  
Old 07-25-2018, 11:08 AM
Wickerman Wickerman is online now
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 9,645
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by packers stem View Post

You're getting there
Barnett was certainly there before they broke down the door .
He heard of 'a' murder in Dorset street .
Do you think he tootled off to Dorset Street to find out what was going on ?
Not a chance .... he goes straight to the police station due to his obvious clairvoyance and is then promptly taken to Dorset Street where he was kept for 90mins? before being taken off for interview .
He was there the whole time waiting for the door to be broken down ....
We are given no timeline associated with Barnet's arrival at Millers Court, or Commercial St. Stn.
Only that the police interrogated him for four hours.
From the discovery at 10:45 plus four hours = 2:45 pm.
If the sequence of events we discussed earlier is correct, Barnet arrived after the medical investigation had began, so after 2:00 sometime.
__________________
Regards, Jon S.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #684  
Old 07-25-2018, 11:57 AM
Joshua Rogan Joshua Rogan is offline
Chief Inspector
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 1,842
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wickerman View Post
We are given no timeline associated with Barnet's arrival at Millers Court, or Commercial St. Stn.
Only that the police interrogated him for four hours.
From the discovery at 10:45 plus four hours = 2:45 pm.
If the sequence of events we discussed earlier is correct, Barnet arrived after the medical investigation had began, so after 2:00 sometime.
Did Barnett go to the police station first? Not according to his Penny Illustrated Press interview;

PIP 17 Nov
Next day I heard there had been a murder in Miller's court, and on my way there I met my sister's brother in law, and he told me it was Marie. I went to the court, and there saw the police inspector, and told him who I was, and where I had been the previous night. They kept me about four hours, examined my clothes for bloodstains, and finally, finding the account of myself to be correct, let me go free.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #685  
Old 07-25-2018, 12:19 PM
Sam Flynn Sam Flynn is offline
Casebook Supporter
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Wales
Posts: 10,454
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wickerman View Post
I don't see why that last paragraph changes anything - it was still Friday.
I think that the fact that the streets would have been buzzing with news of the murder makes every difference, in that Hutchinson - or anyone else in the locale - wouldn't have had to wait for, or rely upon, the papers as a source of news.
__________________
Kind regards, Sam Flynn

"Suche Nullen" (Nietzsche, Götzendämmerung, 1888)
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #686  
Old 07-25-2018, 01:42 PM
Wickerman Wickerman is online now
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 9,645
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joshua Rogan View Post
Did Barnett go to the police station first? Not according to his Penny Illustrated Press interview;

PIP 17 Nov
Next day I heard there had been a murder in Miller's court, and on my way there I met my sister's brother in law, and he told me it was Marie. I went to the court, and there saw the police inspector, and told him who I was, and where I had been the previous night. They kept me about four hours, examined my clothes for bloodstains, and finally, finding the account of myself to be correct, let me go free.
That's my understanding.
He went to the court, but it was closed off to the public. He would introduce himself and be whisked away to the station to give an account of himself.

The Daily News reported events of the day and placed Barnet's arrival after the medical exam. & photographer was mentioned, but before 4:00 when the body was removed.
It says, "Barnet was sent for....".
https://www.casebook.org/press_repor.../18881110.html

Given that we are told he turned up of his own accord to begin with, then to be "sent for" suggests to me he was at some known location. This only fits if he was in police custody.
That's the way I read it.

The police sent to the station for him to come and identify the body, sometime between the exam being undertaken and the hour the body was removed.
__________________
Regards, Jon S.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #687  
Old 07-25-2018, 02:19 PM
Wickerman Wickerman is online now
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 9,645
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam Flynn View Post
I think that the fact that the streets would have been buzzing with news of the murder makes every difference, in that Hutchinson - or anyone else in the locale - wouldn't have had to wait for, or rely upon, the papers as a source of news.
But wouldn't they have only been talking about what was in the press?
Prater is on record as telling the press she heard nothing in the night.
The police though had asked the witnesses to say nothing.

So no rumors are said to be circulating about Kelly being seen after Thursday evening. No talk about cries of murder. In fact the press repeat that the police are letting no detail out.
The story of the boy living at rm 13, his mother lodging there with the deceased is the only gossip being reported beside the early morning sightings of Kelly.
__________________
Regards, Jon S.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #688  
Old 07-25-2018, 02:32 PM
Wickerman Wickerman is online now
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 9,645
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ben View Post
Hi Jon,

If you’re suggesting that the dormitories at the Victoria Home were accessible free of charge during the day, you’re most assuredly in error.
Ben, where does this "free of charge" come from?
I don't recall suggesting that.

Quote:
They couldn’t have cleaned the rooms overnight with 400 lodgers sleeping in them!
The Act requires the common areas are to be cleaned, basically the kitchen/eating/lounging room.

Quote:
Your newly decided-upon theory, however, demands that Hutchinson only felt motivated into action after conducting an extensive press trawl, collating and stockpiling all available sources a la Jon, then randomly picking which time of death he fancied going with. Innocent witnesses emphatically do not think like that, Jon,....
Agreed, but that was your theatrical endeavour. You set up a ludicrous scenario only to shoot it down.
Nice to see you are able to entertain yourself.


Quote:
You even acknowledge now that there was “confusion” regarding the likely time of death, and that this “confusion” was reflected in the press.
I'm not sure you have been following the discussion.
The confusion is evident beginning in the Saturday press, until Monday morning.
__________________
Regards, Jon S.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #689  
Old 07-25-2018, 03:42 PM
c.d. c.d. is offline
Assistant Commissioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 3,604
Default

I have to say that I have never understood the obsession with Hutchinson. Let's say for the sake of argument that his behavior is extremely suspicious and that he is a proven liar. What can we conclude from this exactly? That he killed Mary? That he was most certainly the Ripper? That he fooled the police and that it never occurred to them that he could have been involved in Mary's death? That he was full of **** but completely innocent? Where are people going with this?

Attempts to discredit his story are fine but to what end is this supposed to lead us?

c.d.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #690  
Old 07-25-2018, 04:17 PM
Wickerman Wickerman is online now
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 9,645
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ben View Post
But then, disappointingly, Jon revisits his erroneous theory that Hutchinson was heading for lodgings other than the Victoria Home on the morning of the 9th.
Phil does a far better job as announcer, he's even funny.
Don't quit your day job.

Quote:
...The fact that the Victoria Home was given as Hutchinson’s residence informs us, beyond question, that it was his home at the time of the Kelly murder; otherwise a different or additional residence would have been listed. It’s that simple.
The address on the statement is his current address.

Quote:
Some have gone so far as to assert - without a scrap of evidence - that Hutchinson’s press interview occurred at the Victoria Home.
This, from a poster who has made a career out of making assertions "without any evidence".
The evidence is in the language used. It's that simple.

Quote:
Back on our planet, meanwhile, it is obvious that the press interview took place somewhere else, at a more sensible and less conspicuous location; the Princess Alice pub for instance, situated directly opposite the Victoria Home on Commercial Street, would have made an ideal venue.
What was that about assertions without any evidence?

Quote:
What relevance has the closure of the home, incidentally, if he had no money to get in anyway? Why did he cite “home closure” and not his lack of funds as his reason for “walking about all night”?
Are you claiming honesty from your liar now?
Which is it, was he a liar, or was he honest?
__________________
Regards, Jon S.
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 12:18 PM.


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