|
 |
 |
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
    
Gary Alan Weatherhead
Inspector
Username: Garyw
Post Number: 480
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Friday, January 16, 2004 - 8:05 am: |       |
Hi Robert and All
The Mountie Division eh. My parents back in Canada will be so proud. As the only member I'll be able to undertake my own investigations, as long as the horse co-operates. Best of all, I'll be able to act as a maverick cop. I must warn you though, If I'm issued a gun I'll be more likely to shoot myself rather than any suspected evildoers.
Many Thanks
Gary |
Alan Sharp
Inspector
Username: Ash
Post Number: 349
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Friday, January 16, 2004 - 8:33 am: | |
Exactly my problem Suzi. Or rather I see it as two questions. Why did he hang around for 45 minutes? And as importantly, having done so, why did he suddenly decide to give up and leave? The way I see it, the only way his behaviour is not suspicious is if he was her pimp. |
Caroline Anne Morris
Chief Inspector
Username: Caz
Post Number: 640
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, January 16, 2004 - 10:04 am: | |
Hi Robert,
How am I supposed to roll one trouser leg up when I’m not wearing trousers?
Hi Alan,
I’ve been wondering exactly the same thing – whether GH was her pimp.
If so, he would have had a good idea how long the average punter stayed, and how much he could expect to make from Mary for a trick, depending on the type of service each customer required.
Could he have got tired of waiting to collect that night, thinking he would come back first thing and catch a still sleeping Mary with a tidy sum on her for a hard night’s work before the rent man cometh?
He can’t wake her so he looks through the window, then panics at how it will look to have discovered her body – particularly if it came out that he was also one of the last men to see her alive, and anyone knew he was her pimp.
So he lies low, knowing her body will soon be found by someone else, and when sufficient time has passed for his worst worries to be over, he decides his best bet is to come forward with his account of the previous night's doings.
Love,
Caz
(Message edited by Caz on January 16, 2004) |
Sarah Long
Inspector
Username: Sarah
Post Number: 449
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Friday, January 16, 2004 - 10:17 am: | |
Alan, Caz,
GH being her pimp is a very good idea actually. Caz, you're right it does explain why he was hanging around and why he followed them back to the entrance of Millers Court.
I'm not sure about him finding the body though, if the client had taken longer maybe he didn't think anything of it, on the other hand I suppose time is money and so he may have wanted her to go out again. My only problem with this is that if he went and looked through her window surely he would have seen one of two things:-
1) the murder mutilating her body, or
2) nothing as it was dark outside and maybe there was no light from inside.
If he had seen the first one then surely he would have gond to the nearest police station asap. If he saw nothing due to the darkness and there was no answer he may have just thought that he would have "words" with her the next day or he may have worried, but then he would have gone to the police surely.
I don't know. I think I may just be rambling here.
Sarah
P.S Oi, Caz get some clothes on girl, honestly, what a disgrace!!  |
Frank van Oploo
Detective Sergeant
Username: Franko
Post Number: 146
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Friday, January 16, 2004 - 10:50 am: | |
Hi Caz & Allen,
I, too, have wondered whether GH was her pimp, but a couple of things keep bothering me. Wouldn't the police at some point during the investigation have found out Mary had a pimp? Is it likely that Barnett wouldn't have known about the pimp? If he did know, is it likely that he would have accepted this pimp?
All the best,
Frank |
Monty
Chief Inspector
Username: Monty
Post Number: 640
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Friday, January 16, 2004 - 11:08 am: | |
My experience...
....the boyfriends the pimp.
Decent idea though. Its the best explaination of Georges behaviour Ive heard.
Monty
 |
Frank van Oploo
Detective Sergeant
Username: Franko
Post Number: 147
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Friday, January 16, 2004 - 11:09 am: | |
Sorry Alan for misspelling your name - I was a bit too quick writing it and posting the message.
Proost! 
Frank |
Sarah Long
Inspector
Username: Sarah
Post Number: 450
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Friday, January 16, 2004 - 11:12 am: | |
Monty,
Your experience?? Hoe many girlfriends did you pimp out?
I don't see Joe being her pimp somehow since he hated prostitution.
Sarah
(Message edited by Sarah on January 16, 2004) |
Monty
Chief Inspector
Username: Monty
Post Number: 641
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Friday, January 16, 2004 - 11:20 am: | |
Sarah,
Yep my experience.
Only you. Seriously, none. But in my line of work I have to establish who the boss is.
Monty
|
Sarah Long
Inspector
Username: Sarah
Post Number: 454
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Friday, January 16, 2004 - 11:34 am: | |
Frank,
Why would Joe know if she had a pimp? I don't think she discussed it with him since she knew he hated it.
Monty,
I may have been listening with with my eyes closed here but what is your line of work then?
Sarah |
Monty
Chief Inspector
Username: Monty
Post Number: 645
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Friday, January 16, 2004 - 11:42 am: | |
Sarah,
Ive mailed you....dont chuck it away !
Monty
|
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 1003
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Friday, January 16, 2004 - 12:54 pm: | |
Hi there,
I agree that this is one of the best explanations I've heard so far regarding Hutchinson's role in the Mary Kelly drama.
Frank, old sport,
"Wouldn't the police at some point during the investigation have found out Mary had a pimp?"
Not necessarily. It would be in the best interest for both Kelly and Hutch (if we consider this scenario) to keep a low profile on this -- I believe pimp activities were illegal (at least it was in my part of the world during this period). A lot of prostitutes had pimps, but these were fairly unknown to the police, and for good reasons.
"Is it likely that Barnett wouldn't have known about the pimp? If he did know, is it likely that he would have accepted this pimp?"
On the first question: maybe -- this could have been one of the issues surrounding their controversies, although Barnett maybe wasn't keen on letting this information come out. On the other hand, Monty is right -- it was usually the boyfriends who were their pimps. And it is not, as Sarah points out, very likely that Kelly would have told him about it, although I think it wouldn't have been easy to keep it from him in the long run.
On the second question: From what we know about him, NO!
All the best
Glenn L Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden |
Suzi Hanney
Inspector
Username: Suzi
Post Number: 331
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Friday, January 16, 2004 - 1:46 pm: | |
Ok chaps!!!
There's a lot of sense coming out here..good post Caz! pimps?? hmmmmmmmmm were they recognised as such in 1888 or were they someone who just 'looked after them',The 'Huchinson can you lend me sixpence ' line lends a certain familiarity between them..also suggests that mary knew to what he referred when he said 'I can't I've just been down Romford etc.' but the lurking for 45 mins is a bit odd if not creepy..come in Mr Hinton!!
suzi |
Leanne Perry
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Leanne
Post Number: 1069
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, January 16, 2004 - 4:22 pm: | |
G'day,
George Hutchinson as a 'pimp'......I like it! Something to think about today!
LEANNE |
Suzi Hanney
Inspector
Username: Suzi
Post Number: 336
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Friday, January 16, 2004 - 5:12 pm: | |
G'Day Leanne,
Well it is a thought isn't it!!..of course good old George was a lot youger than we tnink or imagine him to be could easily have had
Mary 'working' for him in some way..she obviously knew him..on friendly terms..enough to ask for 6d..thinking that if he had had it he would have given it to her..no questions asked..Food for thought here!
Cheers
Suzi |
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 1006
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Friday, January 16, 2004 - 5:21 pm: | |
Suzi,
They maybe were called something else in London than just "pimps". I don't know an old English word for it, but here in Scandinavia they were called exactly the same in the late 19th century as they are today. The police looked upon their occupation and "business" as a serious crime.
All the best
Glenn L Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden |
John Savage
Detective Sergeant
Username: Johnsavage
Post Number: 137
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, January 16, 2004 - 6:45 pm: | |
Hi Suzi
I think in those days a pimp was more likely to be known as a "ponce"
Regards,
John Savage |
Leanne Perry
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Leanne
Post Number: 1071
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, January 17, 2004 - 3:45 am: | |
G'day,
I'll try to find information about the beginings of 'Pimp-hood', but I thought about this today: why did he walk away after waiting for 45 minutes. Why didn't he at least walk past the window. Mary's singing may have been a code to let him know that things were alright!....No????
If that suggestion goes in the book, I'll give credit to whoever thought of it. I don't think it's ever been suggested has it?
LEANNE |
Leanne Perry
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Leanne
Post Number: 1072
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, January 17, 2004 - 5:17 am: | |
G'day,
Pimps were called: "Fancy Men".
LEANNE |
Suzi Hanney
Inspector
Username: Suzi
Post Number: 341
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, January 17, 2004 - 6:35 am: | |
Leanne-
"Fancy men" huh! I like that.. obviously where therm..for someone who may be not your husband at the time is known as your 'fancy man' I like that!
Suzi |
Alan Sharp
Inspector
Username: Ash
Post Number: 350
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, January 17, 2004 - 7:53 am: | |
Leanne,
If that suggestion goes in the book, I'll give credit to whoever thought of it. I don't think it's ever been suggested has it?
It's something I've been thinking of for my own  but this demonstrates the benefit of posting some of your ideas here and not keeping them to yourself, you get the benefit of everyone else's thoughts to add to your own. Anyway, this is from the Hutchinson's statement:
I went up the court and stayed there a couple of minutes, but did not see any
light in the house or hear any noise.
I thought about this for some time, because Hutchinson's behaviour seemed so self-contradictory, and his only coming forward three days later to explain himself to the police even more so. As you know from another thread, one explaination for this I have considered was that he himself was the Ripper, and Bob Hinton really does make an excellent case for this in his book. But then I had to also think, if he wasn't the Ripper then what else explains this behaviour? The only thing I could come up with was that even though he wasn't the Ripper he was nonetheless engaged in some illegal activity. We've already had the suggestion that he was a mugger, but frankly I would have thought there were plenty of people on the streets for a mugger to attack, they don't have to wait 45 minutes for a victim who may never appear. So what else illegal could he have been doing which would have required him to hang around, and to go up the court and peer into Mary's window to see if there was any light? It was obviously something which involved specifically checking up on her activities. Which would tend to suggest that he had a vested interest in those activities. Which led me to the idea that he was her pimp.
This leads to a second conclusion, which may be a bit more of a leap. Hutchinson's detailed description of the man, and how he could possibly have got so much detail from a brief glance in dark conditions. If he was her pimp then this customer may have been someone he had seen before, possibly many times, possibly some of them in daylight. He may even have known the man's name. But he couldn't say so to the police without revealing his own illegal activities, so had to make do with as detailed a description as he could in order to try to lead the police to him. |
Frank van Oploo
Detective Sergeant
Username: Franko
Post Number: 150
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, January 17, 2004 - 9:11 am: | |
Hi all,
If Hutchinson followed the couple because he wanted to mug the man – as has been discussed elsewhere on the boards, it wouldn’t have been very smart to give a description of an obviously wealthy punter. Likewise, it doesn’t seem to make much sense giving this description if he was Mary’s pimp waiting to be able to collect money, as I don't believe the police was completely ignorant of the existence of pimps. George surely would have seen and grasped the opportunity to have this obviously wealthy man pay some extra money for services rendered.
If Hutchinson the pimp really was concerned for Mary’s safety, then why didn’t he do something about it before the couple entered Mary’s room? Then why didn’t he protect his livelihood, like a pimp’s supposed to?
The story Hutchinson told remains a conspicuous one. If he was Mary’s pimp or had other illegal business in Miller’s Court, he could have told a story in which, for instance, he had known her for about three years and had recently had a quarrel with her and wanted to make up. So he spoke to her in the street when she was returning to her room, and then she said he could wait for her to finish with this punter if he wanted, but it took him too long, so he went away. Or he could have told a story in which he was in love with her and wanted to see her, so he spoke to her in the street, etc. Or that he was a friend, who had no place to sleep that night, etc. All these stories would have been much less suspicious.
Instead, he told a story in which the emphasis was clearly put on Mary’s punter and not on the explanation of his presence and 45 minute vigil there, whereas a strong explanation would be expected considering that according to his account, he had just defied cold and wet weather on a two or perhaps even three hour trip from Romford. In fact, as far as I know he didn't even give a real explanation, he merely said the fact that the man was so well dressed aroused his suspicions, he said he didn’t suspect the man to be the murderer, but he didn’t say what he did suspect and why he followed and waited.
All the best,
Frank
|
Julia
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Thursday, January 15, 2004 - 7:49 pm: | |
I'm a complete virgin at all this (as they would say at a Rocky Horror show) but if Hutch had some kind of suspicion (is that what we're to believe by his hanging around outside her room?) about the man who may not have existed, why would he stand outside while she was being possible murdered inside? Wouldn't it have made more sense to actually do something?
Jules |
Julia
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Friday, January 16, 2004 - 12:01 pm: | |
Naive question, but were there pimps in Victorian London? I've always imagined that being a prostitute in Whitehall in 1888 was something you did as necessary, and you did it alone. I don't know, but pimping seems a fairly recent occupation.
Anyone knowledgeable about that side of it?
Julia |
Julia
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Saturday, January 17, 2004 - 7:08 pm: | |
My posts are being posted a few days after I've sent them, so I'm sending another one, hoping it will be added while the topic is still relevant.
Hutch obviously had some relationship with Mary; either he was her pimp or just a friend or there was some other illegal connection between the two. If he worried for his own well-being after the murder and couldn't tell the real reason for being out in front of her building, I would think he still would be concerned about her murder and want to tell anything he could to find the killer. His strange story seems to implicate him more than explain his behavior. Is there any indication as to what the police thought of this detailed description of a man he saw by gaslight in the middle of the night, whose head was tilted downwards and in shadows, if not total darkness?
I don't know the whole story that Frank refers to...what is that about a long trip in cold wet weather from Romford?
Julia |
|
Use of these
message boards implies agreement and consent to our Terms of Use.
The views expressed here in no way reflect the views of the owners and
operators of Casebook: Jack the Ripper.
Our old message board content (45,000+ messages) is no longer available online, but a complete archive
is available on the Casebook At Home Edition, for 19.99 (US) plus shipping.
The "At Home" Edition works just like the real web site, but with absolutely no advertisements.
You can browse it anywhere - in the car, on the plane, on your front porch - without ever needing to hook up to
an internet connection. Click here to buy the Casebook At Home Edition.
|
|
|
|
