| Author |
Message |
    
Suzi Hanney
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Suzi
Post Number: 1580
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, December 07, 2004 - 12:04 pm: |       |
Thanks to Paul Begg for that information....am on the case of a potential' programme' will report back soon as I've go onto it
Suzi |
Suzi Hanney
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Suzi
Post Number: 1583
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, December 07, 2004 - 5:13 pm: | |
Have been in touch with the veritable BBC no records ! eeeeeeeeeek am off diving into the archive threads!
Suzi
|
Suzi Hanney
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Suzi
Post Number: 1584
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, December 07, 2004 - 5:20 pm: | |
Well have tried and and am still trying to get info on 'Other Victorians'.....''Who was Jack the Ripper?' a series by Michell Raper on BBC 1/6/72
Thanks Paul....still diggin!
Suzi} |
Suzi Hanney
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Suzi
Post Number: 1585
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, December 07, 2004 - 5:23 pm: | |
Bob!
Any luck????
There HAS to be something here?
suzi |
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 3612
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, December 07, 2004 - 6:16 pm: | |
Hi Suzi
Have looked up the "Times" radio listings for 1st June 1972, but all it does is list "The Other Victorians" as broadcast 8PM to 8.45PM on radio 4.
Robert |
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 3613
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, December 07, 2004 - 6:24 pm: | |
Apparently there was also a book called The Other Victorians, by Steven Marcus.
Robert |
Suzi Hanney
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Suzi
Post Number: 1586
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, December 07, 2004 - 6:38 pm: | |
Robert!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
As usual youre a STAR!!!!!!!!! Right dig out that Radio Times (which of course only you'd have!!!!) and scan the thing in!!!!!
Have just got up to check this board so had better be good or it's Matron's speciality tomorrow!
Seriously tho! Brilliant...be interesting to see what that programme was all about!!!!!!
Cheers
Suzi |
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 3615
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, December 07, 2004 - 6:42 pm: | |
Suzi, sorry, but as I said, it's just a bare listing. The title - nothing else.
Robert |
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 3616
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, December 07, 2004 - 6:55 pm: | |
The series seems to have run for ten weeks or so. The earlier listings say things like "The Other Victorians. False Prophets" or "Victoria's Other London" (I think that one was Part Four). Later on they just give the programme title, without any further comment. I think the June 1st one was Part Eight.
Robert |
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 3617
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, December 07, 2004 - 7:02 pm: | |
There are - or used to be - bound copies of the Radio Times at Broadcasting House. I once looked up what was on TV the night I was born.
Whether there was a special article in the mag about this particular programme of June 1st, I can't say.
Robert |
Bob Hinton
Inspector
Username: Bobhinton
Post Number: 254
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 08, 2004 - 9:01 am: | |
Whoa,
Hold everything. I obtained the script of 'Who was Jack the Ripper' in the Other Victorians series some time ago, but it contains nothing of any consequence to do with GH.
I did post that I had this and gave all the info.
However since it is the only radio programme to do with JTR broadcast at about the same time as Richards broadcast (that any trace has been found so far)I am pretty certain it is the one that Richard heard. His memory is just playing tricks with him as to the contents.
Bob |
Bob Hinton
Inspector
Username: Bobhinton
Post Number: 255
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 08, 2004 - 2:22 pm: | |
'Who was Jack the Ripper' was first broadcast on Radio Four 1st June 1972, which is as close to Richards memory as make no odds.
In the absence of any other contender I submit this was the play Richard remembers listening to. |
Suzi Hanney
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Suzi
Post Number: 1588
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 08, 2004 - 2:28 pm: | |
Bob
We've been through the same trail here! I did post that and said it was 1.6.72!
It was a play i'll go with that!!!! there are many Radio 4 palys I still listen to that are far too real!
Suzi
|
Suzi Hanney
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Suzi
Post Number: 1589
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 08, 2004 - 2:44 pm: | |
Right!
I have spent most of the day on and off working on this and have come to the realisation that a play is probably the best way out here, I have spoken to people who had recourse to that programme and had no recall of a Reg Huchinson,
This I feel is an on -goer!(is there such a word?!) Anyone fancy a trip to London?!
Suzi
|
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 3622
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 08, 2004 - 4:28 pm: | |
Suzi, I feel the ball's in Richard's court.
Robert |
Suzi Hanney
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Suzi
Post Number: 1591
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 08, 2004 - 5:01 pm: | |
OUCH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Sadly.. I do too!!!!!! Think the PLAY 'scenario' [sorry about that sort of pun thing there ] may be the answer to all this....if there was a question?!
Thanks
Suzi |
Richard Brian Nunweek
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Richardn
Post Number: 1154
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 08, 2004 - 5:25 pm: | |
Hi.
Thanks for the effort guys, I Can give you my asurance that my mind is not playing tricks on me [ Bob]
I Heard what i Heard, for although to some people it may seem sad, i was intrested in this case some 15 years before that, therefore that edition aired was of great exitement to me.
Richard. |
Suzi Hanney
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Suzi
Post Number: 1594
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 08, 2004 - 5:48 pm: | |
Richard
No effort at all!!...Just a genuine concern to find out about this programme/play .It's still ongoing though and am sure we're all looking forward to getting something concrete here,one way or the other!
The game's afoot!
Suzi |
Edgard
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 08, 2004 - 4:18 am: | |
I have found this reference on the Net which includes the script of the 1972 BBC program :
0. RAPER, MICHELL. Who Was Jack the Ripper? [NP: n.p., n.d.]. First edition: paperbound original. A fine copy. 40 pp. An undated facsimile reproduction of a limited-edition pamphlet originally published in 1974 by Tabaret Press. The facsimile includes the limitations page for copy #67. It is the script for a program produced on B.B.C. Radio Four in 1972, part of a series called “The Other Victorians.” Although this is a reprint, it is still a scarce item of Ripperana. SOLD |
Suzi Hanney
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Suzi
Post Number: 1595
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, December 09, 2004 - 3:47 pm: | |
Edgard-
I understand Bob has a copy of this ,ref his previous post.
However...is there any reference to George /Reg Huchinson in the script? I feel not.
SOLD ??? who to??
Suzi |
Suzi Hanney
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Suzi
Post Number: 1596
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, December 09, 2004 - 4:17 pm: | |
Have just checked this Michell O Raper 'Who was Jack the Ripper' Tabaret Press 1974...selling for £100!
Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
Suzi |
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 3633
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, December 09, 2004 - 5:07 pm: | |
Hi Suzi
It's my belief this will find its way onto Bob's bookstall. He'll sell it to Richard for £200. 
Robert |
Bob Hinton
Inspector
Username: Bobhinton
Post Number: 256
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, December 10, 2004 - 6:02 am: | |
Robert you swine! Would I do such a thing!
Richard £150 and its yours! (open to offers here)
Bob |
Bob Hinton
Inspector
Username: Bobhinton
Post Number: 257
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, December 10, 2004 - 6:07 am: | |
I've jsut checked on Abebooks and they have one copy for $250 dollars. Ok first person with a good offer is in with a chance!
It does mention Hutchinson - although in the script he is called Hutcheson - but incorrectly gives the impression that he gave evidence at the inquest of MJK.
Bob |
Suzi Hanney
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Suzi
Post Number: 1598
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Friday, December 10, 2004 - 5:03 pm: | |
Bob!
I checked in the same place too and had it for £100 Hmmmmmm may have a go.. what do you reckon?
I dunno here seems an awful lot of ackers to waste on something thats a load of toot really!
Of course we know he didn't even get out of bed or where ever ..for the inquest so what is all that all about?!
get back 'eh?
Suzi |
Suzi Hanney
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Suzi
Post Number: 1599
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Friday, December 10, 2004 - 5:13 pm: | |
Bob
Just checked 'em again it's up to £133.66 !
Hmmm interest is obviously rising from some quarters!
As to your earlier post the Hutch name mismatch seems to be irrelevant doesn't it as he was
slumbering or shambling somewhere at the time!
Thats's a point though that I guess we all worry about...where the hell was he???!
Suzi |
Bob Hinton
Inspector
Username: Bobhinton
Post Number: 258
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, December 11, 2004 - 6:13 am: | |
Suzi,
Where are you looking on the internet? I can't seem to find it.
Bob |
Suzi Hanney
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Suzi
Post Number: 1600
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, December 11, 2004 - 6:53 am: | |
Bob,
Abebooks........The UK thing on Google seemed to get it
Suzi |
Suzi Hanney
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Suzi
Post Number: 1601
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, December 11, 2004 - 7:03 am: | |
Bob!
Send for the bloodhounds!!!!
Good hunting!!!(pass me my Persian slipper!)
Suzi |
Richard Brian Nunweek
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Richardn
Post Number: 1155
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, December 11, 2004 - 11:40 am: | |
Hi,
So as i see it , i was only listening to a play, which had as its climax a interview with son of Hutchinson.
The programme i heard was more of a documentary on Hutchinsons sighting of kelly.
My mind is not still playing tricks on me, amongst the last words of Hutchinsons[ son] was 'My father always regretted that the police were unable to act on the imformation he gave them'. and he however was paid the sum of five guineas, or five pounds for his efforts.
Richard. |
Suzi Hanney
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Suzi
Post Number: 1602
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, December 11, 2004 - 12:53 pm: | |
Hi,
Thanks to Paul Begg for this suggestion...but maybe someone should contact Melvyn re his association and/or collaboration with 'Hutch Jnr'on this programme/play?
Maybe the police didn't act upon GH's 'information' because they too, thought it a tad 'over elaborate'.
The £5/guineas payment...where did that come from?
Suzi |
Richard Brian Nunweek
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Richardn
Post Number: 1156
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, December 11, 2004 - 1:03 pm: | |
Hi Suzi,
According to son of George, his father told him he was paid the sum of five guineas for his efforts in assisting the police.
I have stated many times on the boards that this amount of money in 1888 was a tidy sum, and would not have been released from police funds recklessly.
Therefore we should assume that George Huchinson gave up a considerable amount of his time in assisting the police, we have always assumed that he gave only one interview to the police on the monday evening the 12th, however there is reason to believe that he had several interviews with the police over the coming days.
The suggestion that the police were looking for a more classy suspect is the main reason they may have overlooked the real culprit.
Richard. |
Suzi Hanney
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Suzi
Post Number: 1603
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, December 11, 2004 - 1:26 pm: | |
Richard
a) Where did Reg make this statement?
b) Yes indeed it was a tidy sum in 1888,were the police in the habit of doling out amonth's wages for information?
c) George probably gave up 'a lot of his time assisting the police' because it was a way of ensuring a day out with all meals provided ,hence no worries there.
d) Maybe the reason they overlooked the 'real culprit' was because he was leading them (literally) a merry dance around the streets of Whitechapel!!!
Suzi
|
Bob Hinton
Inspector
Username: Bobhinton
Post Number: 259
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, December 12, 2004 - 7:27 am: | |
Richard, Richard, Richard, (for best effect this should be said in a Cary Grant voice)
"Therefore we should assume that George Huchinson gave up a considerable amount of his time in assisting the police"
No we should not assume this because there is absolutely nothing to back it up.
Whatever Reg may or may not have said on the radio or elsewhere is absolutely irrelevant because we have zero information to back it up.
Reg says that his father is the 'real' George Hutchinson, yet his father was called George William Topping Hutchinson.
The statements signed by GH were signed "Geo and George Hutchinson" NOT Geo W T Hutchinson or George William Topping Hutchinson. ( don't forget statements have to be signed with either your full name or name plus initials to insure correct identification of witness.
The signature on the statement was compared to George William Topping Hutchinson's signature on his marriage certificate by the well respected document examiner Sue Iremonger and found to be different.
Therefore there is more evidence showing that they are two different people, than exists to show they were the same.
The only source of information we have to suggest they were the same is the story told by Reg. Was he telling the truth? Very possibly, but how to we then insure that his father was telling him the truth?
When I was about Regs age when he heard this tale from his Dad, my Dad told me there was a father Christmas. Shock horror - he told me a fib! I know what you are going to say Why would Reg's father tell him a lie? Thats what fathers do - they often tell tales where they are at the centre of something important to enhance their standing in their offsprings eyes.
A friend of my once told me that if all the people who claimed to be on the balcony at the Iranian Embassy Siege were actually there, it would amount to more people than in the entire SAS regiment!
If you have any evindence or suggestions that the two George Hutchinson's were the same - OTHER than Reg's tale - lets hear it. Otherwise for all our sakes stop banging on about it and insisting we accept as fact something for which there is not a shred of evidence.
Bob |
Suzi Hanney
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Suzi
Post Number: 1605
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, December 12, 2004 - 2:56 pm: | |
Succinctly put Bob,(Bob,Bob!),
The identity of THE George WT H should after all be beyond rebuttal.OK George Hutchinson itself was and more than likely still is a fairly common name,but ok,add the William....still fairly common but the Topping (of which he was either very proud or mortally embarrassed! makes all the difference!
WE need HARD INDISPUTABLE FACT here..not hearsay which lets face it this is!!
Suzi
(shame about Father Christmas tho,in that case my Father was a fibber too.....and he even stooped to dressing up to embelish his fib!! Shocking!) |
Richard Brian Nunweek
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Richardn
Post Number: 1157
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, December 12, 2004 - 4:16 pm: | |
Hi Bob,Suzi,
Unfortunetly Reg the suggested son of george is no longer on this earth to repeat his knowledge.
Lets look at the evidence[ circumstancial?].
According to the radio programme i heard early seventies, The son of the last person possibly to see Mary kelly alive in the early hours of the 9th Nov 88, claimed that it was his father that was the said person.
This same person named as Reg, repeated his knowledge in the publication 'The Ripper and the royals'.
To suggest that the person who made the radio broadcast and went on to repeat his knowlege in book form, is a fraud is not acceptable in my view.
His claim that his father said he knew one of the women that was murdered, and that he was interviewed by the police on several occassions and he always thought that the man resembled someone that resembled Lord randolph churchill, should be taken as memory fact.
The man seen at 200am that morning although [ according to Hutchinson was non menacing] was proberly exactly what the man saw.
The problem we have is to decifer what all of this means, the relevance . or non relevance of his evidence.
Richard. |
Natalie Severn
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Severn
Post Number: 1300
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, December 12, 2004 - 5:18 pm: | |
On reading all this I cant help but see anything and everything connected with George Hutchinson
being considered as "fibs", whether it is the "imposter" father of Reg or simply the George Hutchinson who Abberline is recorded as having interviewed.
Whichever way its put George Hutchinson cant be allowed a charitable thought---except by Abberline who was actually there at the time,knew numerous East Enders,was trusted with confidences by many at the time and has gone down with a sound reputation as a detective for his talent and perception as a detective and tireless through the night ripper work.
I know Bob that you have published a fine book[by all accounts]and I wish I could get hold of a copy and I know your view about Hutchinson but for me ,like Richard I guess,he comes across as who he says he is-a man who knew and quite liked Mary and would have lent her that sixpence if he wasnt also broke himself.Surely Abberline would have checked out his story-been obliged to as well by his superiors?
Natalie |
Suzi Hanney
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Suzi
Post Number: 1607
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Monday, December 13, 2004 - 4:15 am: | |
Call me over critical and and an over zealous conspiracy -theorist but I can't help but feel that for all his salt the earth qualities and quite obvious knowledge of and 'friendship' with Mary,this does paint a somewhat Two Dimensional of GH the man.However this may well have been the GH that Abberline interviewed,and was 'convinced' by before George disappears again.....albeit temporarily....before achieving some sort of immortality here!
Suzi |
Bob Hinton
Inspector
Username: Bobhinton
Post Number: 260
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, December 13, 2004 - 11:26 am: | |
Richard you still don't get it do you?
You say:
"To suggest that the person who made the radio broadcast and went on to repeat his knowlege in book form, is a fraud is not acceptable in my view."
I have never accused him of being a fraud. In fact if you bothered to read my last post you will read:
"Was he telling the truth? Very possibly, but how to we then insure that his father was telling him the truth?"
Now do you grasp the blindingly obvious!
Then you go on to say:
"His claim that his father said he knew one of the women that was murdered, and that he was interviewed by the police on several occassions and he always thought that the man resembled someone that resembled Lord randolph churchill, should be taken as memory fact."
I'm quite willing to conceed that he remembered correctly what his father told him - but that is irrelevant. What is relevant is that we have absolutely no proof or iota of evidence that what his father told him was the truth!!!
There are many indications to show that Reg's father was not the GH. I have already mentioned the difference in names and handwriting facts that I notice you carefully avoid.
I doubt very much whether Reg ever made a broadcast in the early seventies where he said what you said he did. My reason for saying that is that I believe that when Melvyn and Joe Sickert went to see him and interview him for the book, he asked to see a copy of George Hutchinsons statement as he did not know what he had said!!
Here is the situation Richard. It is not known whether or not Reg made a broadcast in accordance with your assurances. The likelihood is that he didn't as despite the best efforts of many competant researchers absolutely no trace of this programme can be found.
It doesn't matter whether he did or not as anything he may or may not have said came from a source whose veracity is impossible to check.
Bob
|
Suzi Hanney
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Suzi
Post Number: 1608
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Monday, December 13, 2004 - 12:35 pm: | |
I love the fact that Reg's father described 'Jack' as 'a man that RESEMBLEDsomeone that RESEMBLED Lord Randolph Churchill'!!What,large,dark,well dressed moustached cove???
The double 'resembling' worries me a tad..I'm sure I could describe many people as resembling a man who resembles another......gives you a pretty long rein I think because here you get into the bits inbetween like,'Resembles a man(except for) and (with lighter hair than') or whatever and so the original man slips further and further away.
As to the 'statement' made by Reg's Dad when seeing GH's statemnet to the police, this most definatley odd! "Memory jogging" seems to be the most likely scenario I agree leading to a "Oooooooooooooooooooooooh yes (phew!) 'Thats exactly what Dad said'moment! (much to Melvyn and Joe's delight no doubt!)
It would as has been suggested, GREAT if Melvyn could come in here ,to although never 'verify' the 'facts',may be able to give his views on this.
Suzi |
Suzi Hanney
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Suzi
Post Number: 1612
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Monday, December 13, 2004 - 5:30 pm: | |
OK have just re- read an awful lot of 'The Ripper and the Royals' which at some point in my chequered Ripper career thought to be of some interest..It seems to be the only tome bearing the REG pic tho (oddly).
The paragraph from Appendix 9 bears a read...
"I remember",said Reg,"he mentioned several times (!) that he knew one of the women(!) and was interviewed by the police...........and this is the BEST BIT............"But I'd never seen his ACTUAL STATEMENT until today,when you two came round.But if that's what he said that's what he saw'
This seems to me the voice of a man who realised that his 'some' minutes of fame were about to arrive for him and made the most of it.........!!!!
Suzi
|
Richard Brian Nunweek
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Richardn
Post Number: 1158
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, December 14, 2004 - 4:57 pm: | |
Hi Suzi.
I can see nothing wrong with Reg saying i had never seen his statement before 'You came round'
It is very unlikely he had.
We must remember us folk are fascinated by the Ripper saga, but not everyone is.
Reg simply remembered that his father claimed that he knew one of the victims and was interviewed by the police regarding it.
Which is true if his father was the said George Hutchinson.
Poor George has been labled a stalker, a pimp, a mugger, and a murderer.
What absolute cotswollop.
He just happened to meet up with MJK. on the last morning of her life, and recalled his observa tions to the police.
Richard. |
Suzi Hanney
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Suzi
Post Number: 1614
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, December 14, 2004 - 5:39 pm: | |
Richard-
Re the Statement being produced!!!...this worries me.........
I assume that Reg invited Melvyn and Joe around for this 'viewing'?.. Surely he must have known what they were bringing when he brought out the tea and biscuits!!!!!!
I still cannot believe that Reg was THE George's son....maybe he was...who knows??? maybe he had a son??
(Oh god the plot thickens!!!)
The one "fact" here I feel is that ONE GEORGE HUTCHINSON met up with ONE MARY KELLY at some point on that night and rather too late for non argument(!) went to the police on the Monday and spoke to Abberline .That,s the fact isn't it?...the statement re THE MAN we have but essentially THATS IT!
....Exit Mr H stage Left!!!Into obscurity I assume!.....(ISH!)
As to your phrases re GH I'm sure in his chequered career he was most of those at some time!!!!!!!
Suzi |
Richard Brian Nunweek
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Richardn
Post Number: 1159
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 15, 2004 - 3:58 am: | |
Hi Suzi,
If we believe that George H at some time in his chequered career was most of them , we are inventing a person that did not exist.
There is reason to believe that the real Hutchinson was a grafter, who married a few years after the murders , loved to ice skate with his wife, learnt to play the violin and was accomplished .
He also worked way past retirement age, and his work was well recommended.
That type of man does not appear a pimp, his hobbies do not imply a ex mugger, and i would suggest that only stalking he ever did was when skating round the ice rink.
The murder phrase is out of the question.
Richard. |
Suzi Hanney
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Suzi
Post Number: 1618
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 15, 2004 - 4:32 am: | |
Richard-
George William Topping Hutchinson,was the rather splendid ice-skating grafter,married to Florence Jervis the yodeller and skipping rope artiste..fascinating!
George Hutchinson - associate of Mary Kelly and statement signatory- may well have been a different character altogether....
Suzi |
Richard Brian Nunweek
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Richardn
Post Number: 1161
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 15, 2004 - 4:39 am: | |
Hi suzi,
In my assumption that Reg was not a fraud and was giving a honest recollection of his father when he said ' He used to say whenever the subject cropped up that he new one of the victims, and made a statement to the police. then surely the father of Reg has to be the actual GH.
Only one Hutchinson saw Mjk...
and i believe that was Regs father.
Richard. |
Suzi Hanney
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Suzi
Post Number: 1619
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 15, 2004 - 1:07 pm: | |
Richard
I love this thing about 'whenever the subject cropped up'.....wonder how often it did?
Suzi |
Richard Brian Nunweek
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Richardn
Post Number: 1162
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 15, 2004 - 2:44 pm: | |
Hi Suzi,
I would have imagined that in the east end ever since the murders in 1888, the subject never went away, it is part of their folklaw.
I would readily admit that proberly George used to mention that he saw the last victim shortly before her death , exspecially if a pint of ale was on the menu whenever these occassions occured.
However the subject of Jack in the twenties and thirties, was not the informed norm like it is today, and people were less educated then present times.
Richard. |
Bob Hinton
Inspector
Username: Bobhinton
Post Number: 261
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, December 16, 2004 - 5:48 am: | |
Richard,
If you are to retain any credibility on these pages you must start giving us something more to go on than what you believe.
Also it would help your case enormously when someone makes very valid points about your theory, hand writing different, name different etc, that you answer them not simply ignore them and fall back on ' Well I believe so and so'
You also fall back on assuming Reg was not a fraud - as I have said countless times it matters not one jot if Reg was a fraud - what matters is whether his father told the truth - and the indications are that he didn't.
Bob
|
Suzi Hanney
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Suzi
Post Number: 1621
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, December 16, 2004 - 6:04 am: | |
Richard-
'Less educated'in the twenties and thirties maybe- but no less savvy I would venture to suggest .
Also with all our 'knowledge' we don't have the advantage of living within 35 odd years of the event!
Think back 35 years....1969....clear as day!
Suzi |
