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 Abby Normal 26 minutes ago.
Mary Jane Kelly: So what happened to that femur...? - by Batman 37 minutes ago.
Lechmere/Cross, Charles: So if you live in Bethnal Green, you won´t kill in Whitechapel? - by John Wheat 37 minutes ago.
Mary Jane Kelly: Was Mary Kelly a Ripper victim? - by Trevor Marriott 41 minutes ago.
Lechmere/Cross, Charles: So if you live in Bethnal Green, you won´t kill in Whitechapel? - by Abby Normal 43 minutes ago.
Mary Jane Kelly: So what happened to that femur...? - by Abby Normal 48 minutes ago.

Most Popular Threads:
Lechmere/Cross, Charles: So if you live in Bethnal Green, you won´t kill in Whitechapel? - (112 posts)
Non-Fiction: Jack and the Thames Torso Murders: A New Ripper? - (15 posts)
Mary Jane Kelly: Was Mary Kelly a Ripper victim? - (13 posts)
Mary Jane Kelly: So what happened to that femur...? - (6 posts)
Scene of the Crimes: The Bucks Row Project Summary Report. - (4 posts)
Tumblety, Francis: Patterns of behavior and Tumblety - (4 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
  #751  
Old 07-26-2018, 03:49 PM
Ben Ben is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,843
Default

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.

Last edited by Ben : 07-26-2018 at 04:00 PM.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #752  
Old 07-26-2018, 03:55 PM
Wickerman Wickerman is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 9,805
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joshua Rogan View Post
Weren't all those who claimed to hear a cry of murder corralled in the court until allowed out by the police? And so not in a position to tell the press anything until it was too late to get it into print that day. Leaving the daylight sighting claims of Maxwell, Lewis, etc (who were free to talk to whomever they pleased) as (seemingly) the most reliable indicator for time of death.
Maxwell was asleep, so perhaps not sequestered in Millers Court. The press got to her before the police, apparently. Lewis was the first source of that late morning sighting, confirmed by Maxwell later in the day.
Or, so it seems...
__________________
Regards, Jon S.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #753  
Old 07-26-2018, 04:03 PM
Wickerman Wickerman is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 9,805
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Abby Normal View Post

Is it context your struggling with today wicker or just in your world view everyone who debates you on hutch is one single minded monster?
The various accusations against him are sufficient to demonstrate how weak each individual accusation is. If it doesn't even carry the support of like-minded accusers, why should anyone else give them serious attention.
Hutch can't have been all things to every accuser - some clear picture needs to be demonstrated.
__________________
Regards, Jon S.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #754  
Old 07-26-2018, 04:04 PM
c.d. c.d. is offline
Assistant Commissioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 3,660
Default

"concisely stated and gets to the point of it. Friend, acquaintance, or even if they only had a strict client relationship-whatever-he knew her, apparently well-Three years!!!

any person with a modicum of morals would have come forward sooner."

Hello Abby,

But don't you think that the police would have asked him how he knew Mary and for how long? And also why he didn't come forward sooner?

It seems to me that anyone who wants to make a case for Hutchinson being Mary's killer needs to do so without the assumption that the police were complete idiots and totally incompetent.

c.d.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #755  
Old 07-26-2018, 04:20 PM
Wickerman Wickerman is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 9,805
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam Flynn View Post
Only in the context of my refutation of your insistence that the papers had settled the matter in respect of a later TOD, which is by no means clear-cut when the selfsame papers also report the earlier cries of "Murder!".
I don't ever remember saying it was "settled", that is your word.
There were sufficient stories to influence the public that she was alive late in the morning.

Quote:
Besides, the "cry of murder" is by no means the main thrust of my argument, just one aspect. As per my post immediately before this one, the mere fact that a woman had been 'orribly murdered in Miller's Court that morning should have been enough for Hutchinson to come forward, given that he'd seen Mary Kelly and a mysterious stranger enter, but not leave, her room that same morning.
Your insistence that he had to come forward seems to be based on some modicum of decency, but if he is a liar anyway, why doesn't any concern for self preservation kick in, and take priority?

On the other hand, from my point of view. 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.
__________________
Regards, Jon S.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #756  
Old 07-26-2018, 04:20 PM
Joshua Rogan Joshua Rogan is offline
Chief Inspector
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 1,868
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wickerman View Post
Maxwell was asleep, so perhaps not sequestered in Millers Court. The press got to her before the police, apparently. Lewis was the first source of that late morning sighting, confirmed by Maxwell later in the day.
Or, so it seems...
Yes, that was my point Jon. Maxwell was at 14 Dorset Street, so when she awoke (probably at the same time as Hutchinson) was free to talk to the press, or anyone who cared to listen. Whereas Mrs Prater, Sarah Lewis and / or Mrs Kennedy were unable to leave the court until 17:30 (Lewis, anyway, the others being detained until then is my supposition)
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #757  
Old 07-26-2018, 04:31 PM
Joshua Rogan Joshua Rogan is offline
Chief Inspector
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 1,868
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ben View Post
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)..
I'm not sure it was detailed which PC or where abouts he was when Hutchinson claimed to speak to him. But if it was directly after the Sunday sighting of A Man, doesn't the boundary between Met and City police run along Middlesex Street (Petticoat Lane)? So it might easily have been a City PC who Hutch claimed to have spoken to, just to complicate things.

Perhaps Hutchinson's apparent "discrediting" was down to nothing more than the police prefering a later time of death?
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #758  
Old 07-26-2018, 04:35 PM
Wickerman Wickerman is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 9,805
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by packers stem View Post
I think it's the Kennedy statement Joshua may be thinking of Sam
She said nobody was allowed to leave the court until 5pm I think
It was Sarah Lewis - left at 5:30, spoken at the inquest.
__________________
Regards, Jon S.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #759  
Old 07-26-2018, 05:10 PM
Michael W Richards Michael W Richards is offline
Assistant Commissioner
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 3,361
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wickerman View Post
How does this lookout get a warning to Astrachan, at the other end of the passage, inside the room?
I am providing you with hypotheticals Jon because thats all we have after all these years and threads.

He could whistle. He could intercept someone entering the courtyard. I also suggested he might be watching for Blotchy to come out, when he would go tell someone else, the real killer, that the coast was clear. There is no need to place astrakan in this picture at all Jon, as I suggested, he could easily be misdirection intentionally inserted into the story.

I dont worry myself too much about tossing Hutch out with the bathwater, suspect-wise, he will still fascinate me though in terms of how this storyline was used. And by whom. Hutch was never there. No-one saw him, no-one had a chance to vet his identity with Marys real friends, the ones we know she knew. The timing of his arrival seemed to have prevented any potential naysayers from having a go at him.

His, like Israel Schwartz's story were not intended to provide evidence to aid the capture of a criminal, they were to "spin" elements of the other stories available into something more palatable, and perhaps less dangerous to people closely associated to the respective stories. Both were given at night, directly to police. There are no one on one interviews with Schwartz published later that I know of, nor with Hutchinson.

Israel gave the police a story where Jews were far less likely to have committed the crime, despite the fact she dies on Jewish property, after a Jewish meeting, in the passage of a club of Anarchist socialist Jews, when no-one is seen on the street sometime before the murder by witnesses interviewed within 1 hour of the murder. Fanny saw no-one but the young couple, as did Brown. Israel may well have owed his pal Woolf Wess a favour, or maybe he was was there that night, attending the meeting, and he came forward to move the suspicion from the Anarchists to the Antisemitic to help save a club he belonged to. Maybe someone knew that, a gentile, and he was so pissed off he wrote some antisemitic suggestion of guilt on a wall at an entrance to a building almost completely populated by German, Russian and other Eastern European Jews. Maybe Kates killer saw that and saw a chance to shuffle off the blame, tossing his rag down beneath the message.

Hutchinson turned a suspicious lurking malevolence into a casual friend looking out for the welfare of his pal Mary. And gave the most meticulous description of a suspect by any witness in these cases, someone seen on Dorset Street in the middle of the night. 4 days after he says he witnesses her with some man, 4 days after his friend is butchered, and 4 days after most all of the statements of courtyard witnesses and friends of Mary are printed and published, and hours after the Inquest into the manner of her death is completed. He knows about Wideawake, he knows about Blotchy, and he knows that the issue of the Pardon Offer on Saturday is almost certainly linked to the man in Kennedy/Lewis's story..Wideawake.
__________________
Michael Richards
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #760  
Old 07-26-2018, 05:10 PM
Wickerman Wickerman is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 9,805
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ben View Post
...... 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.
We do not know where this PC was located.
As I pointed out to Gareth, it could have been at the Spitalfields Market.
This is an obvious choice for an out of work labourer to go to earn some ready cash, both Saturday & Sunday.
A PC stationed at the market is not permitted to leave (as evidenced in the Chapman case). In fact, the Spitalfields Market is not on the list of Point Detail for the Met.
Therefore, it would appear this PC is contracted out (which was done) to the market.
That is one reason the PC did not take Hutchinson to the station.
Whether the PC made a note of what Hutchinson told him cannot be known.
__________________
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 10:26 AM.


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