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:
Witnesses: Our Charles Cross - by Roy Corduroy 13 minutes ago.
Witnesses: Mizen's inquest statement reconstructed - by Elamarna 53 minutes ago.
Witnesses: Our Charles Cross - by Elamarna 1 hours ago.
Witnesses: Our Charles Cross - by Elamarna 1 hour and 3 minutes ago.
Witnesses: Mizen's inquest statement reconstructed - by Fisherman 1 hour and 5 minutes ago.
Witnesses: Our Charles Cross - by Fisherman 1 hour and 10 minutes ago.

Most Popular Threads:
Witnesses: Our Charles Cross - (16 posts)
Witnesses: Caroline Maxwell Alibi ? - (12 posts)
General Suspect Discussion: Favorite suspect/s? - (9 posts)
Witnesses: Mizen's inquest statement reconstructed - (3 posts)
Witnesses: Pearly Poll's Husband - (3 posts)
Casebook Announcements: Casebook Outage May Occur - (2 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
  #21  
Old 08-29-2017, 02:24 PM
David Orsam David Orsam is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 7,916
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael W Richards View Post
I know you like these rude tennis-style written conversations
I don't know what you are talking about Michael. I've just been replying to posts in the normal way on a forum.

I criticised your first post in this thread and rightly so because you haven't been able to justify a single word.

As for rude I'm sure I haven't called you any names, but the same is not true for you unfortunately.
__________________
Orsam Books
www.orsam.co.uk
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 08-29-2017, 02:27 PM
David Orsam David Orsam is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 7,916
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael W Richards View Post
The accusations prior to the murders were that Piser was Leather Apron, fostered by Thicke himself, without any proof.
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.
__________________
Orsam Books
www.orsam.co.uk
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 08-29-2017, 02:32 PM
David Orsam David Orsam is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 7,916
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael W Richards View Post
IWhen this mythical Leather Apron fellow came to the forefront is when street women were interviewed after the first murder, at which point Thicke's baseless accusation that Piser was Leather Apron became an accusation of suspicion for the murders. He was tagged Leather Apron by Thicke before the first Canonical murder. One begat the other
You talk about "the first murder" but at the time it was just "a murder". A rumour started that Leather Apron, who was believed to ill treat prostitutes, was responsible for the murder of Nichols.

Jack Pizer was known in the neighbourhood as Leather Apron. He was forced into hiding. A search was instituted for him. Sergeant Thick found him, confirmed he was known as Leather Apron, but no evidence was offered that he committed any murders, and the police did not think he did.

There was no "baseless accusation" that Pizer was known as Leather Apron. Pizer accepted it himself. He was called that because he used to walk around wearing a Leather Apron.

It really isn't difficult.
__________________
Orsam Books
www.orsam.co.uk
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 08-29-2017, 02:36 PM
David Orsam David Orsam is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 7,916
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael W Richards View Post
Sorry again, I should have said NO Proof..again, my shameless manner of explaining things most of the other grown ups here would understand.
"Zero proof" and "no proof" are exactly the same thing.

It may be that what you are struggling to say is that it was never proven that Pizer was Leather Apron.

Well even that isn't true because it was proven in evidence by Sergeant Thick but if you mean that it wasn't proven to your satisfaction, that may be true but, you see, it never needed to be. There was no need to prove to anyone's satisfaction that Pizer was Leather Apron. It was sufficient that he was not the murderer of Nichols or Chapman.
__________________
Orsam Books
www.orsam.co.uk
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 08-29-2017, 02:40 PM
David Orsam David Orsam is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 7,916
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael W Richards View Post
I think I dealt with Fear for Safety as being a catalyst for accepting this moniker. Since they were there at the Inquest to clear his name. Since there were no charges pending against anyone nicknamed Leather Apron, it seems a small concession to escape possible physical harm.
That's very different from being coerced into agreeing he was Leather Apron which is what you originally claimed.

But if you think he agreed to be called Leather Apron to escape physical harm where is the evidence of that? Did Pizer say so? If not, are you not simply speculating without any evidence at all?

Doesn't it make far more sense that he was known as Leather Apron, as Thick testified, and he agreed that he was known by this name for that very reason?
__________________
Orsam Books
www.orsam.co.uk
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 08-29-2017, 02:45 PM
David Orsam David Orsam is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 7,916
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael W Richards View Post
Thicke acknowledged he had no evidence that Piser was Leather Apron, or the unnamed killer of Polly and Annie.
But that simply isn't true. Thick never "acknowledged" that he had no evidence that Pizer was Leather Apron. On the contrary, it was within his personal knowledge that Pizer was known by that name.

The inquest wasn't an inquiry to establish the identity of Leather Apron (someone who was not even the murderer) so what Thick said at the inquest was perfectly sufficient. The police didn't need to produce a string of witnesses to say they knew Pizer by that name.

You keep forgetting that Pizer had been in hiding for DAYS because virtually the whole of Whitechapel was after him. Why were they after him? Because they knew him as Leather Apron!!!
__________________
Orsam Books
www.orsam.co.uk
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 08-29-2017, 02:47 PM
David Orsam David Orsam is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 7,916
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael W Richards View Post
You and your imagination bs ......its so clear its transparent, and yet you choose to accept the opinion of Thicke as "evidence".
It wasn't an "the opinion" of Thick. He was speaking from his own personal knowledge. He knew Pizer as Leather Apron. Just like all the people that had forced Pizer into hiding in fear of his life for five days.

If he wasn't known as Leather Apron why do you think people were after him?
__________________
Orsam Books
www.orsam.co.uk
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 08-29-2017, 02:53 PM
David Orsam David Orsam is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 7,916
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael W Richards View Post

The fact that Thicke referred to Piser as Leather Apron before the murders...
That's not true as I've already said.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael W Richards View Post
without any evidence that he was
Sergeant Thick didn't need evidence because he knew Pizer's nickname was Leather Apron. And that was why Pizer had spent five days in hiding in fear of his life.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael W Richards View Post
and then imagined that this Leather Apron fellow was involved in the Whitechapel murders because some street whores said a Leather Apron fellow scared them constitutes only the very worst kind of policework by Thicke, not evidence of any kind
But neither Sergeant Thick nor the police "imagined" that Leather Apron was involved in the Whitechapel murders at all. It's there in black and white in Inspector Helson's report: "there is no evidence whatsoever against him". But they obviously had to find him because of all the hulabaloo in the press. Do you really not understand that?
__________________
Orsam Books
www.orsam.co.uk
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 08-29-2017, 02:57 PM
David Orsam David Orsam is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 7,916
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael W Richards View Post
As I said before, and none of which is disproven by your rude and contrite responses, is that there is ZERO PROOF that Piser was the person that street whores called Leather Apron, and enough proof that he didn't kill any street whores that Fall.
I don't think anyone is saying there is proof that Pizer killed anyone. I mean, that's the whole point.

There obviously is proof that Pizer was Leather Apron. I didn't give you any "rude and contrite" responses. I gave you the evidence from the inquest.

There is sworn evidence that Pizer was known as Leather Apron. And Pizer went into hiding because the population of Whitechapel believed him to be Leather Apron and they believed Leather Apron to have been the murderer of Nichols.
__________________
Orsam Books
www.orsam.co.uk
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 08-29-2017, 03:01 PM
David Orsam David Orsam is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 7,916
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael W Richards View Post
He denied being known by that name prior to his appearance at the Inquest...which was to his benefit...his family have never heard anyone refer to him by that name, and the fact that plenty of immigrant men in the East End wore leather aprons in the course of their work make his involvement in this affair simply a result of a policeman who judged without evidence and misidentification.
I've already explained why neither he nor his family would have known he was called Leather Apron. I doubt that "plenty" of immigrant men regularly wore leather aprons in the street but whether they did or didn't it was Pizer who obviously picked up the nickname.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael W Richards View Post
All cleared up at the Inquest. Except of course who Leather Apron really was.
It wasn't the business of the inquest to establish who Leather Apron "really was". But there was sufficient evidence that it was Pizer who was known by this name in the neighbourhood of Whitechapel.
__________________
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 09:39 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.