|
 |
 |
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
    
Leanne Perry
Inspector
Username: Leanne
Post Number: 404
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, June 11, 2003 - 6:36 pm: | 
|
G'day Bob,
You said that 'GH doesn't appear in any official files.....Firstly anything appearing in the files managed to find itself in the papers double quick.' Is this implying that someone was leaking information from the official files to the press? If so, and they wanted to keep Hutchinson's observation secret, why does he appear in the files at all?
Sarah Lewis didn't give much of a description at all! Hutchinson could have been there in the public gallery and heard what she said, then came forward to clear suspicion from the man seen standing alone near the lodging House.
LEANNE
|
Robert Charles Linford
Inspector
Username: Robert
Post Number: 264
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, June 12, 2003 - 7:55 am: |
|
Hallo Bob
I certainly agree that these officers "completely dismiss Hutchinson as a witness." But they don't seem to have taken the step from dismissing him as a witness, to actually suspecting him. Macnaghten lists his trio, and Anderson plumps for a Polish Jew.
Then there's Monro. If Abberline communicated his suspicions about Hutchinson to Monro, who then dropped a hint to Sims, it seems odd that Monro doesn't say, in his note to the Secretary of State
on the day of the McKenzie murder, something to the effect "Enquiries are under way concerning the whereabouts at the time of the murder of a Very Important Suspect". This would have been a confidential way to put the matter. And at this point in time, Monro believed the McKenzie murder was another Ripper killing, so Hutchinson should have been in the frame at this point.
Abberline too seems to dismiss GH as a witness - in fact, in his "Pall Mall Gazette" interview, he even says "The people who alleged that they saw Jack the Ripper...state that they only saw his back" - which is a slap in the face to Hutchinson and his statement. But when it comes to a suspect, Abberline seems to have gone for Chapman!
I tend to agree with you about Hutchinson's "I told a policeman" yarn. If GH were here now, he'd need to explain why he was fobbed off so easily - particularly when there was a reward on offer, and he was claiming to have vital information.
I still don't see why he must have been a stalker though, Bob.
Robert |
Monty
Detective Sergeant
Username: Monty
Post Number: 103
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, June 12, 2003 - 8:14 am: |
|
Leanne,
I was only giving a possible reason to why Hutchinson adimtted to being there !!
With hindsight (and if George was Kellys killer), yes, its a daft move.
But Hutchinson had no hindsight...he didnt know who had spotted him. So best to nip it in the bud. Besides, this was no glancing moment a la Schwartz, Lewande ect. This was a very long obs compared to other sightings.
So who else was watching him ? as it turns out, no one....but did Hutchinson know this ??
What if it was Barnett there ??....changes the aspect completely eh ?? It would have been a cunning move by a dastardly killer wouldnt it ??
Monty
 |
Ron Taylor
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Thursday, July 17, 2003 - 2:02 pm: |
|
Bob Hinton,
Not challenging anything you wrote but I am curious about your statement that "After that it was a simple matter of going back to the original entry in the marriage register and comparing signatures"
Did you go back to Local Registrar or did you get entry from Parish Register ?
I ask because I've tried unsuccessfully to get sight of original entries from Local Registrars and would be interested to know that somebody found one who would co-operate.
|
Caroline Anne Morris
Inspector
Username: Caz
Post Number: 216
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, July 21, 2003 - 11:06 am: |
|
Hi Ron, All,
I too would be interested to know how straightforward it is, or should be, for a member of the public to get sight of an original entry.
Also, when copies of original entries are requested, is a record normally made of such requests, including details of who has been supplied with a copy and when?
Any advice would be appreciated.
Love,
Caz |
Richard Brian Nunweek
Inspector
Username: Richardn
Post Number: 203
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, July 21, 2003 - 12:41 pm: |
|
Hi everyone ,
I believe Hutchinson was a credible witness , for several reasons, the best being he was paid the sum of five pounds for patrolling with police for several nights and days, this I believe to be totally accurate for his son reg appeared on the radio in the early seventies, and mentioned this fact, also it always worried his father that he could not have been more assistance in catching the perpretator of these murders.
I know one can not believe everything in this baffling case, but in my mind Hutchinson was a honest straightforward person who voluntered his services to the police, because he believed he had seen her possible killer.
Regards Richard. |
Brad McGinnis
Sergeant
Username: Brad
Post Number: 17
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Monday, July 21, 2003 - 9:33 pm: |
|
Its too bad the courts didnt use fingerprint evidence until 1904. I understood Hutch remembered his prints too. |
Blue Violet
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 27, 2003 - 10:16 am: |
|
I did a little bit of searching about our man George and found that the artist on the 1881 census was the great-uncle of the poet Elizabeth Bishop, who in turn seems to have been greatly influenced by him & his work. Sandra Barry at Vasser has published a paper concerning their relationship and in the process has unearthed some rather intriguing details about his life and that of a friend, Israel Zangwill, who authored Children of the Ghetto,a novel about the Jewish community of London in 1892. (As a side note, Hutchinson was also the illustrator for the 1889 ed. of A Study in Scarlet.)
Anyway, here's the link: http://projects.vassar.edu/bishop/Barry.html
Blue Violet |
Chris.Morley
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Saturday, December 20, 2003 - 4:10 pm: |
|
Hi everyone, I've been doing a bit of searching on the census of 1901, and found William Hutchinson. Remember, George may not have been his first name. It may have been William George Hutchinson, who is the right age. Remember according to the newspapers, George was 33, in 1888,and according to some reseachers, not younger,} which would make him 45 or 46 in 1901.This William is 45,and a horse trainer, which fits. George was a groom, and was born in Canterbury, Kent. So theres also a Kent connection, and in 1901, was living in Westbere. I've hit a brick wall with this one. So if anyone can get any further, he may be worth looking into. The only other George who is the right age, is a butcher, age 45, which again is the right age. Born in Stepney, and in 1901 was living in Newington. Once again I'm stuck, so any help would be great. These two may be worth a check, thanks. |
Maria Howard
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Friday, April 09, 2004 - 11:37 am: |
|
The description of the man that George Hutchinson gave to the police did match a man. Lord Randolph Churchill. |
John Carey
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Friday, April 16, 2004 - 9:44 am: |
|
I am sure this has been mentioned before, but in an idle few moments I looked for a likely George Hutchinson, sometime friend of Mary Kelly, in the 1881 census. How about this one?
George Hutchinson, male, 15 unemployed, at 16 Langdale street, St Georges in the East (RG11 piece 0452 folio 43 page 10). His father was Ambrose Hutchinson, 43 Porter born Spitalfields, mother Ann Huthcinson 42 born St Georges in the East, and brother Ambrose, 26 also born St Georges in the East. Also living at the same address was mother-in law Ann Abbott, 72.
Bob Hinton has said he does not know what beceme of his suspect George Hutchinson. The above George Hutchinson does not show up in the 1901 census and he could well be the George Hutchinson who died in Whitechaple age 34 in the quarter to September 1900. (Death registers 1c page 208). He was about the same age as Mary Kelly, (Sugden surmises that Hutchinson may have shared a bed with Mary Kelly several times) and if he was not in regular employment in 1888 that would explain why he had walked to Romford and back on 9 November 1888 - looking for work, maybe? His father was a porter, and again could have known Joe Barnett in that capacity.
I appreciate this proves nothing but can any reader provide better info? And no I do not believe GH was the Ripper. |
brad kelley
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Monday, April 26, 2004 - 5:29 pm: |
|
Came across this on another site, is this in fact a photograph of GH? Thanks.
http://www.holmesonscreen.com/RipperSuspects.htm |
John Savage
Inspector
Username: Johnsavage
Post Number: 178
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, April 26, 2004 - 8:01 pm: |
|
Hi Brad,
The photograph you refer to is indeed of a man called George Hutchinson. It was first published in the book "The Ripper and the Royals, by Melvyn Fairclough.
However there is little evidence to show that it is the same George Hutchinson, who gave a statement to Inspector Abberline.
Best Regards
John Savage |
Paul Jackson
Inspector
Username: Paulj
Post Number: 176
Registered: 2-2004
| | Posted on Monday, April 26, 2004 - 8:44 pm: |
|
Hi Everyone,
That is interesting regarding the GH photo. The photo looks a lot more recent than 19th century though.
Paul |
John Savage
Inspector
Username: Johnsavage
Post Number: 179
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, April 27, 2004 - 5:07 am: |
|
Hi Paul
The photograph of George William Topping Hutchinson was taken when he was an old man, he died in 1938 aged 71. So looking at the photograph it would probably have been taken in the 1920's.
Best Regards
John Savage |
brad kelley
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Monday, April 26, 2004 - 11:51 pm: |
|
Thanks John, well it was worth a shot. |
Busy Beaver
Detective Sergeant
Username: Busy
Post Number: 61
Registered: 5-2004
| | Posted on Monday, August 30, 2004 - 6:46 pm: |
|
I'm a little worried. We've all speculated that the Ripper was a man unable to form (sexual)relationships with women. If the George Hutchison, who is believed to be Jack the Ripper, has a son Reg, then doesn't this rip apart our theories entirely?
Busy Beaver |
Thomas C. Wescott
Inspector
Username: Tom_wescott
Post Number: 161
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 31, 2004 - 12:14 am: |
|
Beaver,
That the Ripper couldn't have normal sexual relations is only an assumption, and probably a wrong one. That Reg Hutchinson's father was THE George Hutchinson is also an assumption, as it's not yet proven. The biggest assumption, though, and the one most likely to be wrong, is that George Hutchinson was the Ripper. Absolutely baseless. So, my point is that assumptions stacked one on top another don't make a fact, and if George WAS the Ripper, the other two points you mentioned don't rip it apart, because they're unproven assumptions.
Yours truly,
Tom Wescott |
Busy Beaver
Detective Sergeant
Username: Busy
Post Number: 62
Registered: 5-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 31, 2004 - 5:14 am: |
|
Thanks Tom. There is so much information on these boards I wasn't quite sure if The "real" George Hutchison had been found as yet. I had George as one of my top suspects, mainly because I was not convinced of his eyewitness account and the time it took him to go to the police.
Busy Beaver |
Thomas C. Wescott
Inspector
Username: Tom_wescott
Post Number: 168
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, September 01, 2004 - 1:07 am: |
|
Busy,
I understand that, but keep in mind that Matthew Packer's evidence in the case of Stride is suspect and not only did he not go to the cops, but he lied (or did he?) when they first asked him and said he saw nothing. He then told two private detectives what he saw (or did he lie to them?). And in the case of Israel Schwartz, he took 9 days (as opposed to Hutchinson's 3) to go to the cops. But nobody suspects them of being the Ripper. Honestly, Hutchinson could have just been enjoying the publicity.
Yours truly,
Tom Wescott |
Restless Spirit
Police Constable
Username: Judyj
Post Number: 9
Registered: 2-2005
| | Posted on Thursday, February 17, 2005 - 6:29 pm: |
|
Hi again
I previously requested info. on The british Geo H. as opposed to the American Geo.H. Unfortunately I did not receive a response. Either my posts are out to lunch or I am being ignored, whatever. In Stan Russo's book on Jack the Ripper suspects, two Geo.Hutchinsons are discussed. Were there two,one a lunatic from the U.S. and the other Geo.Hutchinson from Britain. Is it possible that they were one and the same? I would greatly appreciate hearing from anyone with any information on the two George's.
cheers
Restless Spirit
|
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 4130
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Friday, February 18, 2005 - 5:52 am: |
|
Restless Spirit, yes there were two George Hutchinsons, and it is the British one who interests us.
Unfortunately what we know about this GH reduces to Abberline's report, GH's statement, and GH's Press comments. As far as I know, he has not been conclusively identified in the censuses or the BMD registers. His name unfortunately is a very common one, and we have little info to work with.
Try to get hold of "From Hell" by Bob Hinton for a statement of the case against him.
Robert |
Restless Spirit
Police Constable
Username: Judyj
Post Number: 10
Registered: 2-2005
| | Posted on Friday, February 18, 2005 - 3:59 pm: |
|
Hi Robert L.
Thank you for responding to my post. I have not read From Hell, I've read Letters From Hell. I will certainly take your advise and try to get this book. Hutchinson is a very interesting character for many reasons, it is unfortunate that we don't know much about him.
Knowing that there were indeed two George Hutchinson's, two different men, answers my question.
Tks again
Restless Spirit
|
John Carey
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Friday, February 18, 2005 - 5:13 am: |
|
Restless Spirit
Please see my post of 16 April 2004 on this page. This looks to me to be the best bet for the British George Hutchinson. He died in Whitechapel Infirmary in 1900 from cirrhosis of the liver – a medical condition resulting from excessive intake of alcohol, - and exhaustion.
|
Restless Spirit
Sergeant
Username: Judyj
Post Number: 12
Registered: 2-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, February 19, 2005 - 4:16 pm: |
|
John Carey
Thanks John, I read your post April 2004, and it was very informative.
I am going to try to get hold of Bob Hinton's book, " From Hell". I must hase missed this one, I think the only book I purposely did not purchase was the book by Cornwell on Walter S.
It received a lot of bad press on the old boards, and those who did read the book were less than impressed. I watched her interview on TV also, what a joke.
Thanks again for the information.
Talk to you again.
Restless Spirit
|
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 4139
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, February 19, 2005 - 5:17 pm: |
|
Hi John
Interesting. He is listed at the same address for 1891, age 26, living with Mary Abbott 85, and widowed mother Ann whose age has shot up to 60. These are the only family members. His occupation is mattress maker.
The problem is, if he had a home to go to, what was he doing walking around the east end all night because he had nowhere to sleep?
Robert |
Richard Brian Nunweek
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Richardn
Post Number: 1339
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, February 20, 2005 - 5:29 am: |
|
Hi,
Who was George Hutchinson?.
Answer.. Unless the late Reg Hutchinson told lies throughout his life , it has to be his father, for his father used to say that he knew one of the victims and was interviewed by the police, at the time he said that, it was the late twenties/ early thirties and there was not the commercial subject it has been in recent years, and it is extremly unlikely that anyone knew who George hutchinson was and how he was connected to the murder of kelly.
Only the actual George that was that person would say that he knew one of the victims.
Regs dad without a doubt.
Richard. |
|
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.
|
|
|
|
Closed: New threads not accepted on this page