Leather Apron found at Hanbury Street

[David Orsam]

At the end of this exchange, Michael, you haven't explained:

1. how the leather apron found at the Chapman crime scene "was used as an excuse to exonerate Pizer by the police".

2. what evidence there is that the police "coerced" Pizer into agreeing that he was known as Leather Apron.

3. Why you claimed that Pizer was never known as Leather Apron by "anyone".

These were the things I criticised you for in your first post in this thread. You made those categoric statements as if they were established facts, not even saying that they were your opinions or beliefs or anything like that. Yet in your responses haven't even begun to offer a defence of those claims. You've simply created new and different arguments.

[Michael W Richards]

That is absolutely untrue. And bizarre. I mean, what possible purpose would anyone have had in accusing anyone of being Leather Apron prior to the murders?

The notion that Leather Apron was responsible for the murders only arose after the murder of Nichols. Sergeant Thick happened to know that John Pizer was known by the name of Leather Apron.

He didn't need "proof" of anything. It was his local knowledge.

It's not difficult to understand.

Someone called Leather Apron was terrorizing street women that Summer and Fall, and the rise of Piser as suspect in these first 2 murders was a result of his preceding reputation as a menace to street women in particular. There is no known evidence to connect any of these murders to anyone, so it is his preceding reputation...fostered by the conviction Thicke seems to have that Piser was this person, that drew him into this mess.

You seem to be convinced that Piser was Leather Apron, and I'm sure youre aware that this point has long been debated by students of the crimes. That's fine. I believe that there is no evidence that he was, and there is Thickes own statements that he merely "believed" Piser to be Leather Apron, without proof...like an ID by someone allegedly victimized or something of the like...and the statements of Piser and family regarding this name ever being applied to him, that lead one to conclude that its quite possible Piser was smeared by the rumours that Thicke seems to have "believed" and was unjustly being suspected of crimes he did not commit. In this example, harassing and threatening street women. We already know they discovered very quickly that he could not have committed the murders, which would be when they would reflect upon what drew them to him in the first place and how feeble the excuse was for suspecting him of anything.

I do know of someone that better fits the description of Leather Apron, complete with dangerous erratic behavior, and this suspect could only have committed the first 2 murders in the series...the 2 that most closely resemble each other in Victimology, Method/Pattern/Signature and a probable motive related to mental illness. I see none of this relating to Piser, I see a connection made by apron and false reputation.

[Michael W Richards]

Sept 10th, 1888, The Star:

"“The man arrested by Detective-Sergeant Thicke is now at Leman-street Station. He fits the description of “Leather Apron” exactly, and this similarity is the cause of his arrest. He denies, however, that he is the man wanted, and says he never wore a leather apron in the streets. He is waiting, however, to be recognised, or the contrary, by some people from Wilmot’s Lodging House who know “Leather Apron” well. He went along submissively with Detective-Sergeant Thicke. His stepmother and his stepsister deny in the strongest terms that he is “Leather Apron.”

David, do we have a positive ID recorded from the folks at Wimots? Nope. Can we assume one was done? Yep.

This proved to be cause for a 50L payoff by the Stars editor, to Piser to prevent Slander Charges against the paper, once it was proven that he could not have committed the murders. It was also the reason that Piser was given the opportunity via interruption of Annies Inquest, to clear his name.

Too many people had made too many accusations about Piser that proved without substantiation,...like the claim he was Leather Apron in the first place.

[Abby Normal]

Sept 10th, 1888, The Star:

"“The man arrested by Detective-Sergeant Thicke is now at Leman-street Station. He fits the description of “Leather Apron” exactly, and this similarity is the cause of his arrest. He denies, however, that he is the man wanted, and says he never wore a leather apron in the streets. He is waiting, however, to be recognised, or the contrary, by some people from Wilmot’s Lodging House who know “Leather Apron” well. He went along submissively with Detective-Sergeant Thicke. His stepmother and his stepsister deny in the strongest terms that he is “Leather Apron.”

David, do we have a positive ID recorded from the folks at Wimots? Nope. Can we assume one was done? Yep.

This proved to be cause for a 50L payoff by the Stars editor, to Piser to prevent Slander Charges against the paper, once it was proven that he could not have committed the murders. It was also the reason that Piser was given the opportunity via interruption of Annies Inquest, to clear his name.

Too many people had made too many accusations about Piser that proved without substantiation,...like the claim he was Leather Apron in the first place.

if pizer admitted he was leather apron under oath no less, than come on. everything else is fairy tails.

[David Orsam]

Someone called Leather Apron was terrorizing street women that Summer and Fall

But is that true? It was certainly stated in the newspapers that Leather Apron had been ill-treating street women prior to September 1888 but, in line with your desire for proof that Pizer was Leather Apron, you must surely want proof that what was said in the newspapers was true. Where is that proof?

and the rise of Piser as suspect in these first 2 murders was a result of his preceding reputation as a menace to street women in particular.

Yes, but he was already a "suspect" after the murder of Nichols.

There is no known evidence to connect any of these murders to anyone

Yes, that is right and nobody is saying that there IS evidence to connect the murders to Pizer and, frankly, no-one was even saying this in 1888. It was always just conjecture.

So it is his preceding reputation...fostered by the conviction Thicke seems to have that Piser was this person, that drew him into this mess.

No, that's plain wrong, Thick's knowledge that Pizer was called Leather Apron had absolutely nothing to do with Pizer being drawn into the mess. He was drawn into the mess when he was accused of being Leather Apron in the street and had to go into hiding. Thick didn't get involved until much later. All Thick did, in effect, was to explain to the coroner WHY Pizer had been hiding and in fear of his life.

[David Orsam]

You seem to be convinced that Piser was Leather Apron, and I'm sure youre aware that this point has long been debated by students of the crimes. That's fine.

What I am convinced about is that Pizer had the nickname of Leather Apron in the local community. I don't care what has been debated - it's just so obvious that Pizer was known as Leather Apron because why else was he in hiding? Why did he fear for his life? Thick's testimony, as well as Inspector Helson's official report from before the Chapman murder, simply confirms why this was happening.

I believe that there is no evidence that he was, and there is Thickes own statements that he merely "believed" Piser to be Leather Apron, without proof

But that is just wrong and misrepresenting the evidence. Here is what Thick said at the inquest according to different reports:

Daily News

The Coroner-When people in the neighbourhood speak of "Leather Apron," do they mean Piser?

The Witness-They do, sir.

Daily Telegraph

I arrested Piser at 22, Mulberry-street. I have known him by the name of "Leather Apron" for many years.

When people in the neighbourhood speak of the "Leather Apron" do they mean Piser? - They do.

Evening Standard & Morning Advertiser

I have known him for many years under the nickname of "Leather Apron." When the people in the neighbourhood spoke of "Leather Apron" they referred to Piser.

Times

He had known Pizer for many years, and when people in the neighbourhood spoke of "Leather Apron" they meant Pizer.

Do you see the word "believed" in there Michael? I don't. Which means you were making it up. Presumably because you don't like the truth.

the statements of Piser and family regarding this name ever being applied to him, that lead one to conclude that its quite possible Piser was smeared by the rumours"

Well I've already provided an obvious explanation as to why Pizer and his family were unaware of this nickname. You've not even acknowledged it. Instead you have used it as your sole reason to disbelieve the sworn evidence of the police officer in court in circumstances where Pizer had spent five days in hiding. You haven't even mentioned him being in hiding! Why was he in hiding? It was obviously because he was known locally as Leather Apron and it was widely believed, mainly as a result of sensational newspaper reporting, that Leather Apron had murdered Nichols.

smeared by the rumours that Thicke seems to have "believed" and was unjustly being suspected of crimes he did not commit.

You are totally confused Michael. Thick knew from his own personal knowledge that Pizer was referred to as Leather Apron in the neighbourhood. He had known it for years. There were no "rumours" about it. The rumours were that Leather Apron mistreated prostitutes and murdered Nichols. There is no reason to think that Thick, or any other police officer, believed those rumours and the police report at the time made clear there was no evidence against Pizer.

In this example, harassing and threatening street women. We already know they discovered very quickly that he could not have committed the murders, which would be when they would reflect upon what drew them to him in the first place and how feeble the excuse was for suspecting him of anything.

Yes, it was feeble Michael which is precisely why Pizer was immediately released by the police and it was made clear that he was not suspected of any crimes.

[David Orsam]

I do know of someone that better fits the description of Leather Apron, complete with dangerous erratic behavior, and this suspect could only have committed the first 2 murders in the series...the 2 that most closely resemble each other in Victimology, Method/Pattern/Signature and a probable motive related to mental illness.

But the problem with what you say here is that it is based on Leather Apron having "committed the first 2 murders in the series". The whole point, and I think I need capital letters for this, is that LEATHER APRON WAS INNOCENT!!

So it sounds to me like you've found a good suspect for the murders of Nichols and Chapman. Well done!

I see none of this relating to Piser, I see a connection made by apron and false reputation.

False reputation yes but the connection had nothing to do with the apron discovered in Hanbury Street, which is what you were telling us at the start.

And, yes, Pizer was innocent of the murders and he quite possibly didn't ill-treat prostitutes but that doesn't change the fact that he was known in the neighbourhood as Leather Apron.

[David Orsam]

David, do we have a positive ID recorded from the folks at Wimots? Nope.

Michael, do we have a negative ID recorded from the folks at Wilmots? Nope.

And if Pizer on the 10th September was "waiting to be recognized, or the contrary" yet admitted that he was Leather Apron when he gave his evidence at the inquest two days later, doesn't that suggest that he was indeed recognized as Leather Apron?

[Michael W Richards]

Daily News

The Coroner-When people in the neighbourhood speak of "Leather Apron," do they mean Piser?

The Witness-They do, sir.

Daily Telegraph

I arrested Piser at 22, Mulberry-street. I have known him by the name of "Leather Apron" for many years.

When people in the neighbourhood speak of the "Leather Apron" do they mean Piser? - They do.

Evening Standard & Morning Advertiser

I have known him for many years under the nickname of "Leather Apron." When the people in the neighbourhood spoke of "Leather Apron" they referred to Piser.

Times

He had known Pizer for many years, and when people in the neighbourhood spoke of "Leather Apron" they meant Pizer.

The same quote published a few different places doesn't make it fact, nor does Thicke saying he "knew him as". Not one person, including the folks I mentioned previously, specifically identified John Piser as the person they knew as Leather Apron.

Piser said he never wore a Leather Apron in the streets, and the Star printed this "He is a character so much like the invention of a story writer that the accounts of him given by all the street-walkers of the Whitechapel district seem like romances".

It seems like you've taken the bait too.

I'm forgoing any further responses to posts on this thread David, you are quite welcome to take Thickes unproven and therefore unfounded hunch anyway you want.

Ill continue to look beyond people opinions.

[David Orsam]

The same quote published a few different places doesn't make it fact, nor does Thicke saying he "knew him as".

Well perhaps not but I quoted those extracts for the sole purpose of showing that Thick is nowhere recorded as using the word "believed" or "belief".

You saying that he did certainly doesn't make it fact.

Without any supporting evidence it is mere fantasy.

[David Orsam]

Not one person, including the folks I mentioned previously, specifically identified John Piser as the person they knew as Leather Apron.

But that's just not true. Sergeant Thick identified Pizer as the person he knew as Leather Apron. Sergeant Thick was a person wasn't he?

[David Orsam]

Piser said he never wore a Leather Apron in the streets.

Did he? That is what was reported in the Star of 10 September (but not a direct quote).

On the other hand, the Star of 12 September carried a Press Association interview with Pizer in which Pizer was directly recorded as saying:

"I have been in the habit of wearing an apron. I have worn it coming from my employment, but not recently."

[Joshua Rogan]

do we have a positive ID recorded from the folks at Wimots? Nope. Can we assume one was done? Yep

Timothy Donovan, the deputy at Crossingham's lodging house (35 Dorset St) where Annie Chapman last lived, also claimed he knew Leather Apron well, having thrown him out for threatening a woman. He expressed surprise to the Times that he hadn't been asked to identify Pizer. If only they'd both appeared at the inquest on the same day. However, he was called to identify Stanley as the Pensioner.

Incidentally, for cap fans, Donovan also claimed that the last time he'd seen him, Leather Apron had been wearing a double peaked deerstalker type hat....

[David Orsam]

I'm forgoing any further responses to posts on this thread David

Yeah, you said that earlier and you still never got round to explaining how the leather apron found at the Chapman crime scene "was used as an excuse to exonerate Pizer by the police" or what evidence there is that the police "coerced" Pizer into agreeing that he was known as Leather Apron or why you claimed that Pizer was never known as Leather Apron by "anyone".

you are quite welcome to take Thickes unproven and therefore unfounded hunch anyway you want.

I truly find it absolutely extraordinary that after all these posts you refer to Thick's "hunch". There was no hunch! He personally knew that Pizer, who had spent five days in hiding in fear of his life, was known as Leather Apron. That's it. That's all he ever said.

[Scott Nelson]

I agree with your points, Michael. The whole Leather Apron saga is very confusing. There was a theory (Neil Bell?) that Piser was a police informant working with Thick.