Originally posted by Simon Wood
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Martin Fido discovery 2018
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by Simon Wood View PostI have no issue with any of that, but I don't see what it has to do with whether or not the Eye Witness incident—which was Leather Apron's world debut—actually took place.Last edited by MrBarnett; 10-28-2018, 01:27 PM.
Leave a comment:
-
Interestingly, Inspector Helson’s 7th September 1888 report makes no mention of the 2nd September 1888 Leather Apron incident involving the one—or possibly two—J Division constables.
Leave a comment:
-
I have no issue with any of that, but I don't see what it has to do with whether or not the Eye Witness incident—which was Leather Apron's world debut—actually took place.Last edited by Simon Wood; 10-28-2018, 01:01 PM.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Simon Wood View PostOr the Eye Witness incident was made out of whole cloth.
All part of the same bolt?
And where did this paragon of virtue prefer to live? With his poor, but respectable family, or among the dregs of London in the doss houses?
Have a look through the Census returns of the seedier London doss houses of the time (such as Crossinghams) and ask yourself why there are relatively few apparently Jewish names.Last edited by MrBarnett; 10-28-2018, 12:55 PM.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Simon Wood View PostHi Scott,
Thank you. I agree with Paul. I shall re-visit his Rip article. The whole Leather Apron story has an air of contrivance about it.
The name Leather Apron made its debut in the Sheffield and Rotherham Independent, and also the Sunderland Daily Echo and Shipping Gazette, 1st September 1888—
“The women in a position similar to that of the deceased allege that there is a man who goes by the name of ‘Leather Apron’ who has more than once attacked unfortunate and defenceless women . . ."
How on the following day, Sunday 2nd September, did the women in the Eye Witness incident know about Leather Apron?
London’s first introduction to the mysterious Leather Apron was a brief mention in the Star on 4th September 1888.
Regards,
Simon
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Scott Nelson View PostI don't think it was mentioned on this thread that Paul Begg wrote an excellent summary piece on the Pizer/Leather Apron/Eye-witness letter affair in the Ripperologist #109 (December 2009): Did Leather Apron Really Exist?
I've put the article up on the server.
JM
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by jmenges View PostRev. Walter Bourchier ran St. Olave's Church on the Southwest corner of Church (Hanbury) Street and King Edward (Kingward) Street. He actually wrote a letter, using his name, to The Morning Post in early October 1888, but I can't seem to find it. I would think most churches in the area had Sunday schools, and here is a local priest sending a letter to the press. Probably nothing, but would someone like Tyler in his position write to the press and not use his real name?
JM
Tyler was known as the 'Nonconformist Bishop of the East End', perhaps he was reluctant to pen criticism of an individual police officer in his own name.Last edited by MrBarnett; 10-28-2018, 11:58 AM.
Leave a comment:
-
Hi Scott,
Thank you. I agree with Paul. I shall re-visit his Rip article. The whole Leather Apron story has an air of contrivance about it.
The name Leather Apron made its debut in the Sheffield and Rotherham Independent, and also the Sunderland Daily Echo and Shipping Gazette, 1st September 1888—
“The women in a position similar to that of the deceased allege that there is a man who goes by the name of ‘Leather Apron’ who has more than once attacked unfortunate and defenceless women . . ."
How on the following day, Sunday 2nd September, did the women in the Eye Witness incident know about Leather Apron?
London’s first introduction to the mysterious Leather Apron was a brief mention in the Star on 4th September 1888.
Eye Witness's letter was first published on 9th September 1888.
Regards,
Simon
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Scott Nelson View PostThanks for the reminder Simon. There's a lot in there to digest. BTW, I don't think it was mentioned on this thread that Paul Begg wrote an excellent summary piece on the Pizer/Leather Apron/Eye-witness letter affair in the Ripperologist #109 (December 2009): Did Leather Apron Really Exist?
One of the points Paul made that struck me is that Pizer was never admonished at the Chapman Inquest by Coroner Baxter for being Leather Apron, who supposedly ill-used prostitutes. Pizer wasn't given any warnings or threatened with prison. Instead, he was silenced By Cornor Baxter as he tried to speak up at the Inquest and then cleared. Very strange.
Is it a coroner's role to chastise witnesses for behaviour that has nothing to do with the case he is looking into?
And was Baxter the sort of coroner who would allow witnesses to launch into monologues?
No and no, I'd say. Nothing strange there at all.
Gary
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by MrBarnett View PostThere's some interesting stuff here about the Trinity Congregational Church and schools (including Sunday schools) in Hanbury Street.
Wiilliam Tyler was the main man and he lived a 15/20 minute walk away from the church. His route home may well have taken him past where the Church Street incident happened on the day and at time it happened (he lived in Shoreditch).
I'm not saying that he was EW, just that it's far likelier that it was him or someone similar than an agent of a shadowy group involved in the commission and cover up of the WM or the police trying to spread fake news.
JM
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Simon Wood View Post"The 'Eye Witness' letter and the Pizer incident near the sugar refinery in Church Street are discussed in my book, Deconstructing Jack.
One of the points Paul made that struck me is that Pizer was never admonished at the Chapman Inquest by Coroner Baxter for being Leather Apron, who supposedly ill-used prostitutes. Pizer wasn't given any warnings or threatened with prison. Instead, he was silenced By Cornor Baxter as he tried to speak up at the Inquest and then cleared. Very strange.
Leave a comment:
-
I have my doubts about the incident actually having taken place.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Simon Wood View PostYes, siree. That's them.
I dread to think how the women involved span the story back in the doss house. And how it was subsequently spun far and wide.Last edited by MrBarnett; 10-28-2018, 11:22 AM.
Leave a comment:
Leave a comment: