|
 |
 |
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
    
Diana
Chief Inspector
Username: Diana
Post Number: 590
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, April 30, 2005 - 4:39 pm: | 
|
For years I have puzzled over:
1. Why GH hung around MJK's door so long.
2. Why GH peered into the customer's face and noted everything about his appearance so meticulously.
3. Why Abberline believed GH.
I had suspected as many others had that GH was possibly JTR and that may yet prove to be true. But another explanation has just occurred to me. Could George have belonged to the WVC? or one of the many other groups that sprang up?
Steven P. Ryder: Sorry about not putting this on the Hutchinson thread. I couldn't get it to work. |
Adam Went
Inspector
Username: Adamw
Post Number: 192
Registered: 12-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, June 02, 2005 - 11:00 pm: |
|
Hi Diana,
Just came across this thread of yours while I was browsing round the forum, and even though I'm about a month late, I'd like to just reply to a few things in your post.
I openly admit that I am among what seems to be getting fewer and fewer people that not only think George Hutchinson wasn't Jack the Ripper, but also that he was telling the truth in his statement, as he remembered the events. Some agree, more will disagree, but I do think his testimony was of importance.
So, just a few things I'd like to reply to:
"I had suspected as many others had that GH was possibly JTR and that may yet prove to be true. But another explanation has just occurred to me. Could George have belonged to the WVC? or one of the many other groups that sprang up?"
That's always a possibility. We know there was a fair amount of the public involved in such groups, so it's certainly possible that George belonged to one of them. But then the question is, would he have said so under questioning? Well, we don't fully know what he said, but whatever it was, Abberline believed him.
So yes, it's definitely possible. I'm neutral on that one though, I wouldn't say either way.
"1. Why GH hung around MJK's door so long."
Well, to be technical, he was on the opposite side from the Court, not actually at Mary's door, but that's really not important.
We must remember, it's pretty well known that George and Mary knew each other, had known each other for some time, and perhaps were 'closer' than just friends at times. Hutch had lent Mary a little money now and then before as well.
So think of it this way. (This is my scenario, anyway.)
The Jack the Ripper scare is still at its peak. Hutch is standing under the lamp he mentioned, when he sees his good friend Mary meet up with a man. Hutch, being suspicious, perhaps for more reasons than 1, decides to take a look at just who this man is. Not being able to satisfy his curiousity, he follows them on to Miller's Court, where he waits for someone to appear for around 45 minutes, then gives up and leaves.
I could of course be way off, but that's my guess of why he waited for MJK to re-appear.
"2. Why GH peered into the customer's face and noted everything about his appearance so meticulously."
This is one of the harder points to get past. I think a fair amount of it comes down to the fact that Hutch was leaning right against a gas lamp at the time, and may have been able to see him clearer. Hutch said the man "looked at me stern", meaning he turned his face towards Hutch, and therefore turned towards the bit of light coming from the lamp. Plus, Hutch was standing still, the man was walking past. He would have had more time to watch the man as he went past, and take in some facial features.
This has been discussed elsewhere before, and some say there wouldn't have been enough light coming from the lamp. But Hutch wasn't 5, 10, 15 feet away. He was leaning right against the thing.
Again, I know it's a difficult point to get past, though. And those are just my thoughts for it.
"3. Why Abberline believed GH."
Well, I think that would be simply because he acted proper, respectable and seemed like he was telling the truth to him. Abberline was an experienced detective, and surely would have known a faulty witness from a truthful witness. Whether he let his suspicions slip for Hutch because they were desperate for the kind of info Hutch could give, or whether Abberline really did whole heartedly believe Hutch, is another matter. I tend to pick the latter, though.
What do you think?
Sorry if this has been discussed elsewhere in the time since you brought this topic up, by the way. I haven't been here for a while, and have kind of lost track of where some discussions are at.
Regards,
Adam.
"Listen very carefully, I shall say this only once."
- Kirsten Cooke,"Allo' Allo'"
|
Dan Norder
Chief Inspector
Username: Dannorder
Post Number: 695
Registered: 4-2004
| | Posted on Friday, June 03, 2005 - 4:56 am: |
|
Hi Adam,
You wrote:
"We must remember, it's pretty well known that George and Mary knew each other, had known each other for some time, and perhaps were 'closer' than just friends at times. Hutch had lent Mary a little money now and then before as well."
We don't know that any of that is true. We know he claimed some of that, but we don't know that he was telling the truth.
The lending money part could have been a euphemism for paying for sex, or it could have been a lie to try to establish a friendship that didn't exist. If he were standing around for nefarious purposes (robbery, attempted murder, whatever) the whole part about being old pals is a natural excuse to come up with to explain why he was standing around spying on her door for so long.
Unless we have outside confirmation that he knew Mary or that he loaned her money previously, you can't assume it was true.
Dan Norder, Editor
Ripper Notes: The International Journal for Ripper Studies
 Profile  Email  Dissertations  Website
|
Harry Mann
Detective Sergeant
Username: Harry
Post Number: 93
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Friday, June 03, 2005 - 6:18 am: |
|
Adam,
Even experienced officers can be fooled by experienced liars.Certainly the Ripper was a persuasive person,and while the killer had three days since Kelly's murder to rest and reorganise himself,Aberline had been under immense pressure,and by the monday evening must have been a very tired individual.
Hutchinson's story,possibly the only documented police witness statement to survive,might at first reading give an impression of truthfulness,but the elements of that story,when scrutinised,leave a lot to be desired. |
Adam Went
Inspector
Username: Adamw
Post Number: 196
Registered: 12-2004
| | Posted on Sunday, June 05, 2005 - 10:45 pm: |
|
Hi Dan and Harry,
Dan:
"We don't know that any of that is true. We know he claimed some of that, but we don't know that he was telling the truth."
That's true Dan, good point, and I should have worded that differently, but to be honest, I accepted it as being true in my post because I can't see why, in Hutch's dangerous position at the time, he would have deliberately lied about knowing Mary, when he didn't. Surely that would have just been digging his own grave more, if it was found that he was lying. So personally I believe he was telling the truth about knowing Mary, but, I could be wrong.
"The lending money part could have been a euphemism for paying for sex, or it could have been a lie to try to establish a friendship that didn't exist."
Again, I can't see why Hutch would say that unless he was telling the truth, when it could land him in even more hot water if it was found that he was lying. Furthermore, Abberline believed his story, so it must have atleast been credible in his mind.
But yes, I agree with you that Hutch may have been a customer of Mary's previously. There are several possibilities.
"Unless we have outside confirmation that he knew Mary or that he loaned her money previously, you can't assume it was true."
Well we don't have outside confirmation, so it's left to each of us to form our own opinions. Mine is that Hutch did know Mary to a degree, and perhaps they were, or had been in some kind of relationship. Also bear in mind that Mary had split with Joseph Barnett just over a week before she was killed, so perhaps Mary went to Hutch for support after that. Who knows?
Harry:
"Even experienced officers can be fooled by experienced liars.Certainly the Ripper was a persuasive person,and while the killer had three days since Kelly's murder to rest and reorganise himself,Aberline had been under immense pressure,and by the monday evening must have been a very tired individual."
Well, how do we know Hutch was an experienced liar, first of all?
Are you suggesting that Hutchinson killed Mary himself?
As for Abberline, yes he would have been exhausted, but he would have already been exhausted long before and long after Hutchinson came forward. He still had a job to do, and in my opinion, he did it as best as he possibly could with what he had to work with.
Even if he believed Hutchinson at the time, what's to say he wouldn't have reconsidered what he'd said later on, and decided to interrogate him again? But he never did.
"Hutchinson's story,possibly the only documented police witness statement to survive,might at first reading give an impression of truthfulness,but the elements of that story,when scrutinised,leave a lot to be desired."
I'm not sure how you scrutinised it, Harry, but I have also previously scrutinised some of what Hutch said, as well as fully explaining why I think he was not the killer, and why I think he was telling the truth in his testimony, in an essay I wrote called "George Hutchinson: Victim Of The Truth". It's been posted elsewhere before, but perhaps you'd like me to post it up again on here? Or not?
Regards,
Adam.
"Listen very carefully, I shall say this only once."
- Kirsten Cooke,"Allo' Allo'"
|
Harry Mann
Detective Sergeant
Username: Harry
Post Number: 96
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Monday, June 06, 2005 - 5:21 am: |
|
Adam,
The statement that experienced officers can be taken in by experienced liars,was of course a general statement of fact.It has happened.
Whether Hutchinson was a liar,and whether Aberline was deceived by his statement,is a matter of opinion or belief.
For your information I have always been of the opinion that Hutchinson was the Ripper.
Why I came to this decision,is contained in posts to these boards,and while I cannot of course prove my belief,nothing yourself has said proves that he couldn't have been the killer.
When I say scrutinised,I am isolating parts of the report which,in my opinion and those of many others,appear to cast doubt on what he said.
You asked how I scrutinised it,and it's probable I did it the same way that you did.The fact that you may have come to a different opinion is neither here nor there,the question is who came to the correct one,and that we shall never know. |
Adam Went
Inspector
Username: Adamw
Post Number: 200
Registered: 12-2004
| | Posted on Monday, June 06, 2005 - 10:02 pm: |
|
Hi Harry,
"The statement that experienced officers can be taken in by experienced liars,was of course a general statement of fact.It has happened.
Whether Hutchinson was a liar,and whether Aberline was deceived by his statement,is a matter of opinion or belief."
Yes, I agree that it has happened, but I just don't think it happened with Hutchinson and Abberline. As I said, Abberline had the oppurtunity to re-interrogate Hutchinson, but he never did. IIRC, Hutchinson was even allowed to help out with police street patrols after he came forward.
"For your information I have always been of the opinion that Hutchinson was the Ripper."
Fair enough, and thanks for answering. My suspect is, and always has been, George Chapman - atleast our suspects have the same first name. ;)
"Why I came to this decision,is contained in posts to these boards,and while I cannot of course prove my belief,nothing yourself has said proves that he couldn't have been the killer."
Well that's probably because I haven't attempted to disprove Hutchinson as a suspect on this thread, Harry. Even though I can't disprove him either, there is certainly a strong case against him being a viable suspect. Perhaps I should just post up my essay that I mentioned in my previous post, so that you can fully see my case for Hutch being a truthful witness and not a killer, how about that?
"You asked how I scrutinised it,and it's probable I did it the same way that you did.The fact that you may have come to a different opinion is neither here nor there,the question is who came to the correct one,and that we shall never know."
That's true, but personally I believe Hutchinson can be dismissed to a certain degree as a viable suspect. Anyway, I agree that I probably scrutinised it the same way you did, just that we both came to different conclusions.
Regards,
Adam.
"Listen very carefully, I shall say this only once."
- Kirsten Cooke,"Allo' Allo'"
|
|
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.
|
|
|
|
