Casebook: Jack the Ripper - Main
   

Introduction
Victims
Suspects
Witnesses
Ripper Letters
Police Officials
Official Documents
Press Reports
Victorian London
Message Boards
Ripper Media
Authors
Dissertations
Timelines
Games & Diversions
Photo Archive
Ripper Wiki
Casebook Examiner
Ripper Podcast
About the Casebook

Most Recent Posts:
Goulston Street Graffito: The GSG - Did Jack write it? POLL - by Wickerman 1 hour and 23 minutes ago.
Goulston Street Graffito: The GSG - Did Jack write it? POLL - by Wickerman 2 hours ago.
Goulston Street Graffito: The GSG - Did Jack write it? POLL - by harry 2 hours ago.
Goulston Street Graffito: The GSG - Did Jack write it? POLL - by Wickerman 2 hours ago.
Goulston Street Graffito: The GSG - Did Jack write it? POLL - by Wickerman 3 hours ago.
Goulston Street Graffito: The GSG - Did Jack write it? POLL - by Sam Flynn 3 hours ago.

Most Popular Threads:
Goulston Street Graffito: The GSG - Did Jack write it? POLL - (59 posts)
Maybrick, James: 25 YEARS OF THE DIARY OF JACK THE RIPPER: THE TRUE FACTS by Robert Smith - (11 posts)
Annie Chapman: Annie's scarf - (5 posts)
Non-Fiction: Ripper Confidential by Tom Wescott (2017) - (5 posts)
Witnesses: Israel Schwartz - new information - (2 posts)
Conferences and Meetings: American Jack the Ripper - True Crime Conference, Baltimore, April 7-8, 2018 - (1 posts)

Wiki Updates:
Robert Sagar
Edit: Chris
May 9, 2015, 12:32 am
Online newspaper archives
Edit: Chris
Nov 26, 2014, 10:25 am
Joseph Lawende
Edit: Chris
Mar 9, 2014, 10:12 am
Miscellaneous research resources
Edit: Chris
Feb 13, 2014, 9:28 am
Charles Cross
Edit: John Bennett
Sep 4, 2013, 8:20 pm

Most Recent Blogs:
Mike Covell: A DECADE IN THE MAKING.
February 19, 2016, 11:12 am.
Chris George: RipperCon in Baltimore, April 8-10, 2016
February 10, 2016, 2:55 pm.
Mike Covell: Hull Prison Visit
October 10, 2015, 8:04 am.
Mike Covell: NEW ADVENTURES IN RESEARCH
August 9, 2015, 3:10 am.
Mike Covell: UPDDATES FOR THE PAST 11 MONTHS
November 14, 2014, 10:02 am.
Mike Covell: Mike’s Book Releases
March 17, 2014, 3:18 am.

Go Back   Casebook Forums > Ripper Discussions > Scene of the Crimes

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #101  
Old 09-04-2017, 10:42 AM
David Orsam David Orsam is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 6,877
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scott Nelson View Post
Yes, if it was Pizer who was the one identified as Leather Apron in these early stories.
No, not really Scott, regardless of that there is no mystery.

If the original ladies who spoke to a reporter on 31 August were thinking of someone else it doesn't make any difference - because when the story was published in the Star it was clearly Pizer who the locals thought was Leather Apron which is why he was harassed in the street and forced into hiding. Then, while he was in hiding, the police independently identified him as Leather Apron in an internal report.

If those original ladies were thinking of a different person it was probably just another innocent Jewish man because there was never any actual evidence or good reason to think that Leather Apron had murdered Nichols.

However, bearing in mind the close similarity between the description of Leather Apron given in the Star of 5 September and the description of Pizer when he appeared at the inquest, it is very likely that they were the same person.

So, really, I do repeat there is no mystery here whatsoever.
__________________
Orsam Books
www.orsam.co.uk
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #102  
Old 09-04-2017, 11:06 AM
Paddy Paddy is offline
Sergeant
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 684
Default

"Keeping a Watch " then? Pat......
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #103  
Old 09-04-2017, 11:16 AM
David Orsam David Orsam is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 6,877
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Paddy View Post
"Keeping a Watch " then? Pat......
Well there are two sentences here:

1. Considerable activity is quietly being exercised in keeping a watch on suspected persons.

2. It is believed that the police attention is particularly directed to two individuals.

Read literally, it is only an assumption that the "two individuals" whose attention the police was directed towards are the same as the "suspected persons" on whom the police were said to be keeping a watch.

We know that police attention was certainly directed towards Pizer at this time. But we also know that they were not keeping "a watch" on him (because they didn't actually know where he was) .

That newspaper article changes nothing.
__________________
Orsam Books
www.orsam.co.uk
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #104  
Old 09-04-2017, 04:13 PM
Paddy Paddy is offline
Sergeant
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 684
Default

Sorry Dave I have to disagree with that.

You are saying the police suspected some people and were keeping watch on them but two in particular, Leather Apron and a Sailor were not included in the suspects being watched?

I have been reading about Pizer and more and more he fits the man that my Henry was watching. I always thought it could have been Kosminski but Pizar fits well too.

Jewish
South of Whitechapel Rd
several shops (temp shoemaker?)
In care of Brother.
Cant find on census in 1891 (away?)
Dead in 1897

The Carbuncle affliction interests me (Mr Blotchy?)

Pat......
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #105  
Old 09-05-2017, 12:03 AM
Debra A Debra A is offline
Superintendent
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Yorkshire England
Posts: 2,817
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Paddy View Post
Sorry Dave I have to disagree with that.

You are saying the police suspected some people and were keeping watch on them but two in particular, Leather Apron and a Sailor were not included in the suspects being watched?

I have been reading about Pizer and more and more he fits the man that my Henry was watching. I always thought it could have been Kosminski but Pizar fits well too.

Jewish
South of Whitechapel Rd
several shops (temp shoemaker?)
In care of Brother.
Cant find on census in 1891 (away?)
Dead in 1897

The Carbuncle affliction interests me (Mr Blotchy?)

Pat......
Pizer had been convalescing at the Jewish Convalescent Home, Norwood, after his surgery for a ruptured carbuncle at Paddington Infirmary in May/June 88 IIRC, entry organised through an establishment in the City. The Norwood Home also had a seaside branch in Brighton. Maybe he went there again?
__________________
,,`,, Debs ,,`,,
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #106  
Old 09-05-2017, 03:58 AM
Henry Flower Henry Flower is offline
Inspector
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Hackney Wick
Posts: 1,038
Default OT but cute

Name:  IMG_20170901_152352.jpg
Views: 123
Size:  120.5 KB
__________________
What should I do at Rome? I have not learnt
The art of lying


Decimus Iunius Iuvenalis - Satire III
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #107  
Old 09-05-2017, 08:34 AM
Michael W Richards Michael W Richards is offline
Assistant Commissioner
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 3,014
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Abby Normal View Post
Well since you brought up anyone else who debates with david on this forum and are arrogant enough to presume to speak for them, let me just say that not only do I don't think he's a waste of time to debate with but it's posters like you, who can't admit they're wrong, act like a two year old when proven wrong, and rehash the same old ambiguous conspiracy theories ad nauseum. Or whatever nebulous bs you sling.

And if you weren't so thin skinned you migt pay attention to what people like david have to say. You just might learn something for once.
I wouldnt expect someone like yourself to understand why "I said so" isn't a reasonable argument, which is Mr O's style, since you seem to spend inordinate numbers of posts contributing your opinion on others posts. I'm not thin skinned, I just prefer to debate with people who have an argument to make without the condescension...something you are familiar with I trust.
__________________
Michael Richards
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #108  
Old 09-05-2017, 12:08 PM
David Orsam David Orsam is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 6,877
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Paddy View Post
Sorry Dave I have to disagree with that.

You are saying the police suspected some people and were keeping watch on them but two in particular, Leather Apron and a Sailor were not included in the suspects being watched?
No I'm not saying that at all. We are not talking about what the police were doing, we are talking about what a newspaper reporter thought the police were doing. That is very different.

It would appear that the reporter had an understanding that the police were keeping watch on some suspects and he also understood that they had a particular interest in Leather Apron and a sailor - so he wrote an ambiguous report about that. He might have assumed they were the same people or might have kept his options open, hence the ambiguity. That's as far as it goes.

We know exactly what the police were doing in respect of Leather Apron at the time because we have Inspector Helson's report on 7 September which says:

"...careful search has been, and is continued to be made to find this man.."

We don't, therefore, need to rely on an ambiguous and uninformed newspaper report.
__________________
Orsam Books
www.orsam.co.uk
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #109  
Old 09-05-2017, 12:18 PM
David Orsam David Orsam is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 6,877
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael W Richards View Post
"I said so" isn't a reasonable argument, which is Mr O's style
Actually, Michael, that is the very opposite of my style. My style is invariably to provide supporting evidence of my claims in my posts, even at the risk of those posts being overlong. You would have appreciated this had you actually taken the time to read my posts rather than trying to avoid responding to them.

In this thread for example, I repeatedly mentioned Inspector Helson's report as evidence that Pizer was known as Leather Apron, something which you all but ignored until you wrongly claimed, for some reason, that it didn't mention Mary Ann Nichols, and then got all upset when I pointed out you were wrong about that.

If you want an example of someone making a post without any evidence in support look no further than your own at #7 in this thread:

"Since we have known all along that the apron was owned by someone who used leather aprons from that same house...with only a brief period after its discovery where this fact was unknown...the fascination should be over with this artifact. The only way it remains interesting is that it was used as an excuse to exonerate Pizer by the police...by coercing him into stating that a name that was never known to be used to describe him by anyone, was indeed his anyway."

Why should we believe any of that? Because you said so?
__________________
Orsam Books
www.orsam.co.uk
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 07:00 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.