George Hutchinson Shadowing Sarah Lewis' Statement

[c.d.]

Is it so hard to imagine that AM and Hutchinson were one and the same? Or rather the description was phony and Hutch was taking the focus off of himself? He admits to entering Millers Court and standing outside her room. That places him right outside of a murder scene, just in case! He totally alibied himself at every point.

Hello Mac,

Welcome to the boards.

If this is all so blatantly obvious are we to assume that it never even remotely occurred to the police that Hutchinson's actions were quite suspicious?

c.d.

[Darryl Kenyon]

I have been looking at The Daily News report of 13 Nov regarding Sarah Lewis's testimony.
Sarah Lewes, 24, Great Pearl-street, a laundress, said-I know a Mrs. Keiller, in Miller's-court, and went to see her on Friday morning at 2.30 o'clock by Spitalfields Church clock. In the doorway of the deceased's house I saw a man in a wideawake hat standing. He was not tall, but a stout-looking man. He was looking up the court as if he was waiting for some one. I also saw a man and a woman who had no hat on and were the worse for drink pass up the court.
This sounds to me that they are reporting that wideawake man was right outside Mary's door when Sarah saw him and he was looking into the open yard of the court?
This clearly does not gel with other accounts. If this is misreported perhaps the sentence regarding the man and the woman passing up the court was also?
Also Sarah seems to say, regarding the newspaper report that both of the couple were worse for drink? That differs from what Hutch said regarding the man he saw.
Regards Darryl

[rjpalmer]

If this is all so blatantly obvious are we to assume that it never even remotely occurred to the police that Hutchinson's actions were quite suspicious?

But Abberline never had the opportunity of watching CSI: Las Vegas, and was thus unaware of how easy it is to spot the murderer once we use the principles of 'profiling.' These cases are easy to solve. Just wait for the local non-descript bloke in his early 20s to insert himself into the investigation, and you'll be having dinner down at the pub by 6 p.m.

[Sam Flynn]

I have been looking at The Daily News report of 13 Nov regarding Sarah Lewis's testimony.
Sarah Lewes, 24, Great Pearl-street, a laundress, said-I know a Mrs. Keiller, in Miller's-court, and went to see her on Friday morning at 2.30 o'clock by Spitalfields Church clock. In the doorway of the deceased's house I saw a man in a wideawake hat standing. He was not tall, but a stout-looking man. He was looking up the court as if he was waiting for some one. I also saw a man and a woman who had no hat on and were the worse for drink pass up the court.

This sounds to me that they are reporting that wideawake man was right outside Mary's door when Sarah saw him and he was looking into the open yard of the court?

It says precisely that: "In the doorway of the deceased's house I saw a man in a wideawake hat standing"... Really?!! Perhaps Mr Blotchy stayed longer than we thought

The Daily News' report of Lewis's testimony is mangled, and not to be trusted.

[c.d.]

But Abberline never had the opportunity of watching CSI: Las Vegas, and was thus unaware of how easy it is to spot the murderer once we use the principles of 'profiling.' These cases are easy to solve. Just wait for the local non-descript bloke in his early 20s to insert himself into the investigation, and you'll be having dinner down at the pub by 6 p.m.

Yes, hard to believe that the police in 1888 were able to solve any crime having to rely on nothing but common sense and the basics of criminal investigations.

c.d.

[jerryd]

Evening Star (Washington, D.C.)
Wednesday, 14 November 1888

SAW THE WHITECHAPEL FIEND.

Important Testimony of a Groom at the Inquest in London Yesterday.

The London police are jubilant in the belief that at last they have obtained important clews to the identity of the Whitechapel fiend. At the inquest on the last victim of the murderer yesterday George Hutchinson, a groom, who had known the victim for some years and saw her with a male companion shortly before 2 o'clock on the morning of the murder, testified that he saw a well-dressed man, with a Semitic cast of countenance, accost the woman on the street at the house mentioned on Friday morning, and the circumstance of his acquaintance with her induced him to follow the pair as they walked together. He looked straight into the man's face as he turned to accompany the woman and followed them to Miller Court out of mere curiosity.
Hutchinson had not thought of the previous murders and certainly no suspicion that the man contemplated violence, since his conspicuous manifestations of affection for his companion as they walked along formed a large part of the incentive to keep them in sight. After the couple entered the house Hutchinson heard sounds of merriment in the girl's room and remained at the entrance to the court for fully three-quarters of an hour. About 3 o'clock the sounds ceased and he walked into the court, but finding that the light in the room had been extinguished he went home. During the hour occupied in standing at the entrance to or promenading the court he did not see a policeman.
There is every reason to believe Hutchinson's statement, and the police place great reliance upon his description of the man, believing that it will enable them to run him down. The witness who testified yesterday to having seen the woman enter the house with a man with a blotched face was evidently mistaken as to the night, as his description of her companion is totally unlike that of Hutchinson's in every particular. The bulk of the evidence taken fixes the time of the murder at between 3.30 and 4 o'clock. Another witness at the inquest gave an almost identical description of the man, although Hutchinson and he had no communication with each other.

[The Macdonald Triad]

Hello Mac,

Welcome to the boards.

If this is all so blatantly obvious are we to assume that it never even remotely occurred to the police that Hutchinson's actions were quite suspicious?

c.d.

Hello. I think it would be safe to assume that, since Hutch himself came forward and the end result. Hutchinson also fled to Australia and interfered with two young lads, the crime so heinous that the judge wanted to whip him and refused to elaborate on details.

[The Macdonald Triad]

Yes it is hard to imagine since there is absolutely no evidence for it. As for Hutchinson the killer- well again absolutely no evidence. In fact it is probably insulting to the man. This was a real person and to be labelled such a monster on the basis of such poor thories is not right. As an aside I wonder could Hutchinson ever imagine that 130 years later his statement would still be argued over.

There's absolutely no evidence implicating anyone so someone's feelings are going to be "probably insulting" posthumously. As far as your other sanctimonious comments, I'm quite sure that this attitude you're displaying is what caused the case to never be solved in the first place. To much outrage over appearances and good form.

It might interest you to know that this "real person" as you call him fled to Australia and molested two boys after the Mary Kelly murder. Sounds like a monster to me. Have a nice day.

[Sam Flynn]

It might interest you to know that this "real person" as you call him fled to Australia and molested two boys after the Mary Kelly murder.

That was "a" George Hutchinson. Whether it was "the" George Hutchinson is another matter.

[rjpalmer]

fled to Australia and molested two boys after the Mary Kelly murder. Sounds like a monster to me.

Hi MT. Alas, if you were ever to confirm this, then Sailor George would be immediately stricken off the list of suspects, because, as every capable Ripperologist knows, those attracted to the same sex are incapable of harboring homicidal feelings towards women. As a molestor of males, Hutch would be allotted the same get-out-of-jail-free card we already see sticking out of the top breast pockets of Monty D. and Francis T. I took a course in college, so I can unequivocally state that human psychology is a very simple and straightforward affair and molestation is one of the best alibis one could ever hope to have when it comes to these murders. Best of luck, but you really ought to consider sticking with womanizers like Maybrick and Walter Sickert. All the very best.

[The Macdonald Triad]

Hi MT. Alas, if you were ever to confirm this, then Sailor George would be immediately stricken off the list of suspects, because, as every capable Ripperologist knows, those attracted to the same sex are incapable of harboring homicidal feelings towards women. As a molestor of males, Hutch would be allotted the same get-out-of-jail-free card we already see sticking out of the top breast pockets of Monty D. and Francis T. I took a course in college, so I can unequivocally state that human psychology is a very simple and straightforward affair and molestation is one of the best alibis one could ever hope to have when it comes to these murders. Best of luck, but you really ought to consider sticking with womanizers like Maybrick and Walter Sickert. All the very best.

As a general rule this is the case, however nothing is ever set in stone when it comes to an individual and their own psychosis. You are using a general template which is akin to bigotry or ethnocentrism imo.
And I took a few courses in college as well, I'm not sure how that qualifies you to belittle my opinion as a capable Ripperologist or point me in the direction of crackpot suspects or make 'unequivocal statements' like you are some kind of expert or something. Best of luck to you as well, try sticking suspects more your speed such as John Merrick and Lewis Carroll. All the most excellent best.

[The Macdonald Triad]

That was "a" George Hutchinson. Whether it was "the" George Hutchinson is another matter.

If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, it's a duck.
It's all a matter of gut feelings in this case. For everyone.

[Abby Normal]

If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, it's a duck.
It's all a matter of gut feelings in this case. For everyone.

I agree. and its kind of a hunch for me too-I had a visceral reaction to the mug shots of aussie George. totally fits the descriptions even the "weak eyes".

right age, from London, powerfully built, leaves right after McKenzie murder, laborer/seaman. it all fits.

[Sam Flynn]

right age, from London, powerfully built, leaves right after McKenzie murder, laborer/seaman. it all fits.

Boy-fiddler, so not Jack. Not even the witness George Hutchinson.

[Sam Flynn]

If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, it's a duck.

There is far, far more in favour of George William Topping Hutchinson being the Miller's Court witness.