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:
Non-Fiction: the victims werent prostitutes - by Le Grand 11 minutes ago.
A6 Murders: A6 Rebooted - by OneRound 18 minutes ago.
Witnesses: Mizen's inquest statement reconstructed - by Simon Wood 57 minutes ago.
Mary Jane Kelly: Was Mary Kelly a Ripper victim? - by caz 1 hour and 18 minutes ago.
Mary Jane Kelly: Was Mary Kelly a Ripper victim? - by caz 2 hours ago.
Mary Jane Kelly: Was Mary Kelly a Ripper victim? - by caz 2 hours ago.

Most Popular Threads:
Elizabeth Stride: For what reason do we include Stride? - (41 posts)
Non-Fiction: the victims werent prostitutes - (16 posts)
Hutchinson, George: Any updates, or opinions on this witness. - (12 posts)
Witnesses: Mizen's inquest statement reconstructed - (9 posts)
A6 Murders: A6 Rebooted - (7 posts)
Emma Smith: The Tell-Tale Blade - Thoughts on the Knives Used on Martha Tabram - (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
  #321  
Old 12-29-2017, 06:19 AM
Wickerman Wickerman is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 9,613
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael W Richards View Post
Hello Jon,

I find that your arguments in many cases lack the insight into human nature and the logical reasoning that takes raw data and makes it into something readable, intelligible, and believable.
Hello Michael.
This is coming from the guy who believes in the Berner Street conspiracy among all the members at the Working Mans Club, and that Schwartz was just a decoy?
And, (drum-roll please!)..... that Mrs Mortimer is the only reliable witness that night?

People who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.

Quote:
Take for instance the assumption you made that Blotchy was never a suspect because we have no press issuance to that effect. Reason should tell you that as of Monday afternoon the ONLY suspect they had was the man last seen with Mary entering her room.
The importance of Blotchy only came out at the inquest. So you seem to be saying on the cab ride back to Scotland Yard - Blotchy was the prime suspect among those in the cab, yet come 6:00 pm, when Hutchinson walked in to Commercial St., Astrachan became the prime suspect.
That is about as childish as you can get.

No official 'suspect' release was issued by Scotland Yard concerning Blotchy. The first 'suspect' was Astrachan, and published first thing Tuesday morning.
Grow up Michael. All you are doing is circling the wagons (desperately) to defend a theory - you have no interest in what actually happened.


Quote:
That is briefly superseded by the story given by Hutchinson later that day. The officer who dismissed Galloway erred, and he erred based on the statement given Monday night which by the 15th, was then discredited.
YOU, want the constable to have erred - yet YOU choose to ignore the Echo (19th Nov.) who reported that both Blotchy & Astrachan are equally being pursued by the authorities.
Why the silence on this, oh - silly me, of course, because this report SHOWS the Star were WRONG!
Cherry-picking again!

Quote:
In my humble, untrained and inexperienced point of view, that is.
You weren't very "humble" when trying to promote Mrs Mortimer as the only reliable witness - why the change?
__________________
Regards, Jon S.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #322  
Old 12-29-2017, 07:00 AM
Michael W Richards Michael W Richards is offline
Assistant Commissioner
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 3,271
Default

Jon,..Jon,

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wickerman View Post

This is coming from the guy who believes in the Berner Street conspiracy among all the members at the Working Mans Club, and that Schwartz was just a decoy? And, (drum-roll please!)..... that Mrs Mortimer is the only reliable witness that night? People who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.

As I said, understanding human nature provides us with insight into the alleged events and timings. EVERY witness that stated Louis arrived after 1am and that they saw nothing until then had alliances to that club, and paychecks linked with its open or close status. PC Smith, Fanny Mortimer and Edward Spooner did not. Club members, not a staffer, also agreed with those earlier arrival accounts. Fanny saw and heard nothing on the street between 12:35 and 12:50am, during her intermittent visits to the door, and only Goldstein between 12:50 and 1am. She did not see or hear any approaching cart and horse, which according to Louis, arrived at precisely 1am. Israel Schwartz has been linked by friendship with Wolff Wess.

I don't know what you've determined by the above, but Ive determined that people lie to protect friends and jobs, that the club was already deemed a respite for "low men", and that no-one credible saw or heard anything of Israel's story.

The importance of Blotchy only came out at the inquest. So you seem to be saying on the cab ride back to Scotland Yard - Blotchy was the prime suspect among those in the cab, yet come 6:00 pm, when Hutchinson walked in to Commercial St., Astrachan became the prime suspect.
That is about as childish as you can get
.

You would have to have a learning deficiency to claim Blotchy was not the working primary suspect, whether a warrant had or had not been released or the press had confirmed it. He was the last person seen by credible witnesses with the victim. That's Investigation SOP. Hard to imagine you wouldn't know that.

No official 'suspect' release was issued by Scotland Yard concerning Blotchy. The first 'suspect' was Astrachan, and published first thing Tuesday morning. Grow up Michael. All you are doing is circling the wagons (desperately) to defend a theory - you have no interest in what actually happened.

Ive addressed that incredibly naÔve and uninformed standpoint above.

YOU, want the constable to have erred - yet YOU choose to ignore the Echo (19th Nov.) who reported that both Blotchy & Astrachan are equally being pursued by the authorities.
Why the silence on this, oh - silly me, of course, because this report SHOWS the Star were WRONG! Cherry-picking again!


You ignoring the fact that a suspect who preceded AMan to fame was still being considered as a suspect also diminishes your argument as to the actual importance of Hutch's story after the 15th is cherry picking, is it not? And your little article doesn't negate the one on the 15th, it is a single report...that by your own standards, we shouldnt accept, right?

You weren't very "humble" when trying to promote Mrs Mortimer as the only reliable witness - why the change?

I dont have to be humble when making a statement that is based on the facts and is eminently reasonable and logical. She is unbiased, she was at the site and the ONLY one who saw the street off and on throughout the vital period of 12:30 to 1, and she didn't see or hear Liz Stride or see or hear Morris Eagle or anything Israel said happened, or Louis's arrival "precisely" at 1.
As far as your condescending manner, I can assure you that Ive dealt with far brighter and far better informed posters here for years. Your opinion of your own intellect isn't all that relevant to the discussions.
__________________
Michael Richards

Last edited by Michael W Richards : 12-29-2017 at 07:03 AM.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #323  
Old 12-29-2017, 08:04 AM
Abby Normal Abby Normal is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 6,459
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wickerman View Post
There's nothing in Hutchinson's statement to indicate that - you are making that assumption.
1 - Due to the fact Hutch makes no mention of Lewis, we have no independent view of where Lewis was on Dorset St.
2 - Because Hutch makes no mention of Lewis does not mean he did not see Lewis.




Not "at the same time", but sometime in his 45 minute vigil.

From the above, it is clear to me you have adopted certain assumptions, and it is those assumptions that lead you to make incorrect conclusions.

From both statements by Lewis & Hutch it seems Lewis was following on behind this couple as they walked west along Dorset st. Therefore, this couple was "further on", but as they came to Millers Court, they stopped, then walked up the passage. As Lewis herself approached the court she then noticed a man standing opposite looking up the court.
Lewis entered the passage and noticed that the court was empty - there was no-one in the court. Which suggests this couple she saw must have gone indoors.
There is no reason to invent another "couple" to the couple (Astrachan & Kelly) seen by Hutch, as some have chosen to do.
Neither is there any cause to say Lewis's "couple" walked passed Millers Court - especially when Lewis clearly said they entered the court.

How you arrive at that convoluted interpretation you tried to explain is beyond me, but then you have no intention of accepting Hutchinson's story was true - that much is pretty obvious.

There is far too much ducking & weaving in attempts to avoid accepting the obvious, that Hutch seems to have been telling the truth - and as Abberline did see it that way then contrary views are the views which need justifying.
From what I've read, apart from a continuous barrage of misinformation, none of these anti-Hutchinson arguments stand up to scrutiny.

Second guessing the man in charge of this case, the man who interviewed Hutchinson, is not getting you guys anywhere - it never will.
Sorry wick,
There is no way you can pound Kelly and aman being followed and seen by Lewis going up the court into the scenario if hutchís story is true. Because like Iíve said a million times he had already followed them to the court and watched them go into the court and taken up his watching and waiting man position before Sarah Lewis appeared.

Instead of a long winded confusing response, per usual, why donít you try to explain, step by step, the positions of Mary and aman, hutch and Sarah Lewis in your scenario so everyone can clearly see how it could have happened?
__________________
"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
  #324  
Old 12-29-2017, 05:51 PM
Wickerman Wickerman is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 9,613
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Abby Normal View Post
Sorry wick,
There is no way you can pound Kelly and aman being followed and seen by Lewis going up the court into the scenario if hutchís story is true.
As Lewis is describing this couple doing the same as Hutchinson said, then what is there to explain?
Both stories complement each other, Abberline knew both stories, and he concluded Hutchinson told the truth.
It's a done deal, regardless how many choose to see it otherwise.


Quote:
Because like Iíve said a million times he had already followed them to the court and watched them go into the court and taken up his watching and waiting man position before Sarah Lewis appeared.
It's your "before Sarah Lewis appeared" that I don't get. It isn't possible to decide where Lewis was from what Hutchinson said. We can only guess where Lewis was from what she said.

Quote:
Instead of a long winded confusing response, per usual, why donít you try to explain, step by step, the positions of Mary and aman, hutch and Sarah Lewis in your scenario so everyone can clearly see how it could have happened?
It couldn't be much simpler.
__________________
Regards, Jon S.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #325  
Old 12-29-2017, 07:05 PM
Varqm Varqm is offline
Sergeant
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 520
Default

Where is the timeline? On this one without it it's nonsense.
__________________
Clearly the first human laws (way older and already established) spawned organized religion's morality - from which it's writers only copied/stole,ex. you cannot kill,rob,steal (forced, otherwise people run back to the hills,no towns).
M. Pacana

Last edited by Varqm : 12-29-2017 at 07:14 PM.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #326  
Old 12-29-2017, 08:29 PM
Abby Normal Abby Normal is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 6,459
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wickerman View Post
As Lewis is describing this couple doing the same as Hutchinson said, then what is there to explain?
Both stories complement each other, Abberline knew both stories, and he concluded Hutchinson told the truth.
It's a done deal, regardless how many choose to see it otherwise.




It's your "before Sarah Lewis appeared" that I don't get. It isn't possible to decide where Lewis was from what Hutchinson said. We can only guess where Lewis was from what she said.



It couldn't be much simpler.
Didnít think so
__________________
"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
  #327  
Old 12-30-2017, 12:41 PM
Wickerman Wickerman is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 9,613
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Abby Normal View Post
Didnít think so
And that's the main problem.
__________________
Regards, Jon S.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #328  
Old 12-30-2017, 01:18 PM
Varqm Varqm is offline
Sergeant
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 520
Default

Excluding Cox who came in at 3:00 am,what happened to Hutch,Kelly,Astra,Lewis..

2:00 AM: Hutch saw/meet Kelly..

(up to)..

Time: Hutch went away from Miller's court/Dorset St..

...fill in the blanks,educate me/us.The witnesses/newspapers stated times so there is a timeline.Don't escape.
__________________
Clearly the first human laws (way older and already established) spawned organized religion's morality - from which it's writers only copied/stole,ex. you cannot kill,rob,steal (forced, otherwise people run back to the hills,no towns).
M. Pacana

Last edited by Varqm : 12-30-2017 at 01:39 PM.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #329  
Old 12-30-2017, 01:23 PM
Abby Normal Abby Normal is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 6,459
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wickerman View Post
And that's the main problem.
The main problem is you canít reconcile Lewis seeing Aman and Mary pass up the court and hutchís story of seeing them also.

And after repeated attempts to ask you to try explain how, you wonít.
Because you canít.
__________________
"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
  #330  
Old 12-30-2017, 06:50 PM
Wickerman Wickerman is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 9,613
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Varqm View Post
Excluding Cox who came in at 3:00 am,what happened to Hutch,Kelly,Astra,Lewis..

2:00 AM: Hutch saw/meet Kelly..

(up to)..

Time: Hutch went away from Miller's court/Dorset St..

...fill in the blanks,educate me/us.The witnesses/newspapers stated times so there is a timeline.Don't escape.
Ah, you need a timeline from all the reports and press articles?

Ok, well, we have Hutchinson passing Thrawl st. and meeting up with Kelly "about 2:00 am".

- 2:00-2:15 (approx).
Hutch see's Astrachan approach Kelly.
Sarah Lewis passed the Britannia on the corner and noticed another man & woman standing talking outside the Britannia.
Hutch stands still outside the Queens Head pub, the Kelly & Astrachan pass him, then cross the road to Dorset St., Hutch waits at the corner of Dorset St., while Kelly & Astrachan walk towards Millers Court.
Sarah Lewis is following some distance behind them on the same side of the road, they walk further on ahead of her.
Then Hutchinson walks down the south side(?) of Dorset St. to stand opposite Millers Court, as Kelly and Astrachan enter the passage.

- about 2:15 Sarah Lewis arrives at Millers Court and also enters the passage.
- Lewis noticed a man standing on the south side, opposite Millers Court, as she enters the passage - he is looking up the passage.
- Lewis walks up the passage to room No. 2, and noticed the couple are not in view - there is no-one in the court (meaning they must have gone indoors?).
Lewis is there at No.2 when the clock strikes 2:30.

2:15 - 3:00 am.
Hutchinson waits in Dorset St., at some point he walks across the road and up the passage to stand outside Kelly's room - listening. Then returns to the street to take up his position again out in Dorset St. and waits until "about" 3:00, when he leaves.

"About" 3:00.
- Mrs Kennedy arrives at the Britannia, on the corner of Comm. St. & Dorset St., where she saw Kelly & another man & woman standing talking.
Kennedy walks on passed, down Dorset St. and enters room No.2, Millers Court.

At 3:00 or in some sources 3:10, Cox returned to Millers Court, room 13 was dark & quiet.
- - - - - - - -

All times can be adjusted a few minutes either way as none of the witnesses had watches, and all seem to be relying on the chimes of the Spitalfields Clock. All their times seem to be estimates except where noted otherwise.
__________________
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 09:33 AM.


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