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: Caroline Maxwell Alibi ? - by Wickerman 6 hours ago.
Witnesses: Caroline Maxwell Alibi ? - by Sam Flynn 8 hours ago.
Witnesses: Caroline Maxwell Alibi ? - by Wickerman 8 hours ago.
Witnesses: Caroline Maxwell Alibi ? - by Wickerman 8 hours ago.
Witnesses: What EXACTLY did Maurice Lewis say? - by Joshua Rogan 9 hours ago.
General Suspect Discussion: Favorite suspect/s? - by Herlock Sholmes 9 hours ago.

Most Popular Threads:
General Suspect Discussion: Favorite suspect/s? - (13 posts)
Witnesses: Our Charles Cross - (8 posts)
Witnesses: Caroline Maxwell Alibi ? - (8 posts)
Witnesses: What EXACTLY did Maurice Lewis say? - (1 posts)
Motive, Method and Madness: What was occuring in 1888? - (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 > Suspects > Maybrick, James

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1151  
Old 02-22-2018, 10:59 AM
David Orsam David Orsam is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 7,916
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by John G View Post
Okay, maybe short pieces of writing would be more apt.
I can't see how that makes any difference. You seem determined to get the word "short" in there somewhere.

Quote:
Originally Posted by John G View Post
In fact, just out of interest, and bearing in mind that some articles can amount to several pages- particularly in scientific publications- what was the length of Mike's longest article? Was it as long as any of the articles in the latest edition of Riperologist, for instance?
It's a bit late to be asking me how long his articles are. I thought you already knew, considering you've been calling them "short". You will, I am sure, appreciate that I won't be wasting my time identifying Mike's longest article, counting up the words in it and then counting up the words in a Ripperologist article in order to make a meaningless comparison.

Quote:
Originally Posted by John G View Post
Interesting comment concerning Anne's knowledge of The Diary. Do we know what time period she claimed to be first aware of its existence? And who was the source of the information, i.e. from whose interview with Anne did this information derive?
Anne left a long message addressed to Doreen, Shirley, Robert and Paul Feldman on Paul Feldman's answering machine on 31 July 1994, setting out that she first saw the diary in about 1968 or 1969. She then gave additional information in a recorded interview.

Quote:
Originally Posted by John G View Post
This is obviously important, i.e. on the basis that the earliest known common usage of "one-off" appears to be from the 1960s.
I'm not sure what you mean by "earliest known common usage". Anne's story was that the diary was given to her father by her step- grandmother on Christmas Day 1950 in a suitcase containing various books and documents. I disagree with Sam Flynn, incidentally, that it is from the 1980s that the usage of the "one off" expression "really takes off in print". I think he is being misled by his methodology. It took off much earlier than that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by John G View Post
I would just add, in the "who was the author of the Maybrick diary thread" Chris George stated, "Anne claimed to have first seen the diary in the 1960s", 'but surely only at the behest of Paul Feldman who promulgated the fantasy that the diary came from Anne's family's. See post # 187.
I don't know what the word "behest" means in this context. There is no reason, as far as I am aware, to think she did not offer this story about the origin of the diary of her own free will. Post #187 in this thread was by me and relates to a different subject.
__________________
Orsam Books
www.orsam.co.uk
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #1152  
Old 02-22-2018, 11:59 AM
John G John G is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 4,289
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Orsam View Post
I can't see how that makes any difference. You seem determined to get the word "short" in there somewhere.



It's a bit late to be asking me how long his articles are. I thought you already knew, considering you've been calling them "short". You will, I am sure, appreciate that I won't be wasting my time identifying Mike's longest article, counting up the words in it and then counting up the words in a Ripperologist article in order to make a meaningless comparison.



Anne left a long message addressed to Doreen, Shirley, Robert and Paul Feldman on Paul Feldman's answering machine on 31 July 1994, setting out that she first saw the diary in about 1968 or 1969. She then gave additional information in a recorded interview.



I'm not sure what you mean by "earliest known common usage". Anne's story was that the diary was given to her father by her step- grandmother on Christmas Day 1950 in a suitcase containing various books and documents. I disagree with Sam Flynn, incidentally, that it is from the 1980s that the usage of the "one off" expression "really takes off in print". I think he is being misled by his methodology. It took off much earlier than that.



I don't know what the word "behest" means in this context. There is no reason, as far as I am aware, to think she did not offer this story about the origin of the diary of her own free will. Post #187 in this thread was by me and relates to a different subject.
I think I'm perfectly entitled to refer to the articles as "short", and I would take exception to any suggestion that I'm intentionally trying to mislead. In this context, everything's relative. For instance, there are articles in scientific journals which amount to dozens of pages, whereas I doubt any of Mike's articles amounted to more than a page or two. Still, if you're going to maintain that qualifies as medium size in comparison, which you're perfectly entitled to do, what more can I say?

The whole argument is academic anyway. The real point concerns quality. As I've noted, I believe the diary, if a hoax, was extremely well written, and this is a view that is clearly shared by the renowned criminologist Professor David Canter: in terms of demonstrating literacy skills, it certainly can't be compared with a few trivial celebrity articles, which in any event, could conceivably have been extensively edited by Anne.

By "earliest common usage", I meant the time period, i.e. the 1960s, in which the phrase entered the public consciousness and was generally used.

Last edited by John G : 02-22-2018 at 12:07 PM.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #1153  
Old 02-22-2018, 12:12 PM
David Orsam David Orsam is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 7,916
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by John G View Post
I think I'm perfectly entitled to refer to the articles as "short",
How are you entitled to do this if you don't actually know how long they are?

Quote:
Originally Posted by John G View Post
and I would take exception to any suggestion that I'm intentionally trying to mislead.
I haven't said that at all. I have said you seem determined to describe them as "short".

Quote:
Originally Posted by John G View Post
In this context, everything's relative.
Absolutely. That's why I asked you in #1121

"Why do you keep calling them short articles?

Short compared to what?"


You didn't answer other than to say War and Peace and Davina Commedia and then reference my forum posts.

Quote:
Originally Posted by John G View Post
For instance, there are articles in scientific journals which amount to dozens of pages, whereas I doubt any of Mike's articles amounted to more than a page or two. Still, if you're going to maintain that qualifies as medium size in comparison, which you're perfectly entitled to do, what more can I say?
I haven't made any comparison between Mike's articles and articles in scientific journals. You must be imagining that.

I said that Mike's articles were of average length for the type of magazine they were published in.

Quote:
Originally Posted by John G View Post
The whole argument is academic anyway. The real point concerns quality.
Well it's you that has repeatedly been calling the articles "short". I assume you had a reason for doing it. I wasn't saying anything at all about their length.

Quote:
Originally Posted by John G View Post
As I've noted, I believe the diary, if a hoax, was extremely well written, and this is a view that is clearly shared by the renowned criminologist Professor David Canter: in terms of demonstrating literacy skills, it certainly can't be compared with a few trivial celebrity articles.
I've never made any such comparison. Some time ago you asked for evidence that Mike was a journalist and I provided it.
__________________
Orsam Books
www.orsam.co.uk
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #1154  
Old 02-23-2018, 12:05 AM
Sam Flynn Sam Flynn is offline
Casebook Supporter
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Wales
Posts: 9,943
Default

Regardless of length, the diary isn't very well written, despite what Prof Canter might have said.
__________________
Kind regards, Sam Flynn

"Suche Nullen" (Nietzsche, Götzendämmerung, 1888)
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #1155  
Old 02-23-2018, 03:15 AM
John Wheat John Wheat is offline
Chief Inspector
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 1,725
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam Flynn View Post
Regardless of length, the diary isn't very well written, despite what Prof Canter might have said.
I agree Sam any random idiot could have written it and indeed did write it.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #1156  
Old 02-23-2018, 04:14 AM
Spider Spider is offline
Constable
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Cheshire
Posts: 89
Default

__________________
‘There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact’ Sherlock Holmes
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #1157  
Old 02-23-2018, 05:03 AM
Sam Flynn Sam Flynn is offline
Casebook Supporter
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Wales
Posts: 9,943
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Orsam View Post
I disagree with Sam Flynn, incidentally, that it is from the 1980s that the usage of the "one off" expression "really takes off in print". I think he is being misled by his methodology
I was merely reporting the objective result of my methodology, which showed that there was indeed a proliferation of those phrases in print from the 1980s onwards... at least in terms of those publications digitised by Google at the time I conducted my survey. Bearing that constraint in mind - and I've never pretended that the method was anything other than indicative - I can't see why the findings shouldn't in some way reflect what was happening in the real world. Google have, after all, digitised an enormous amount of publications, and a larger sample would be very hard to find.
__________________
Kind regards, Sam Flynn

"Suche Nullen" (Nietzsche, Götzendämmerung, 1888)
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #1158  
Old 02-23-2018, 05:33 AM
Premium Member
caz caz is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 6,217
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam Flynn View Post
It still works, Caz: "Three years ago, I found an old photograph in an album. It was of a donkey standing by a grave". In fact, it works with even shorter time-scales: "I found an old photograph in an album this morning. It was of a donkey standing by a grave".

In neither case does it mean, or suggest, that I no longer possess the photograph.
Yes, Gareth. But my point was - and is - that if if if Mike still had that photo in January 1995, why did he never produce it so it could be examined for evidence that it had once been in the guardbook?

And if it had by then gone the way of all his other 'evidence' [apart from the little red herring - sorry, diary, which he willingly handed over to Anne, who willingly passed it on to Keith], how does it help with anything now?

Love,

Caz
X
__________________
"Comedy is simply a funny way of being serious." Peter Ustinov


Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #1159  
Old 02-23-2018, 05:41 AM
Sam Flynn Sam Flynn is offline
Casebook Supporter
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Wales
Posts: 9,943
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by caz View Post
Yes, Gareth. But my point was - and is - that if if if Mike still had that photo in January 1995, why did he never produce it so it could be examined for evidence that it had once been in the guardbook?
Perhaps he no longer owned it after all, Caz, but why would he pretend that this very distinctive photograph was found in the book in the first place? If you're going to make stuff up, a photo of a donkey standing next to a grave is hardly the first thing that's going to spring to mind.
__________________
Kind regards, Sam Flynn

"Suche Nullen" (Nietzsche, Götzendämmerung, 1888)
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #1160  
Old 02-23-2018, 06:14 AM
Premium Member
caz caz is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 6,217
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Abby Normal View Post
Hi Caz

let me ask you something. why would barrett go through the trouble of taking out an affidavit admitting he hoaxed it if he didn't?
Hi Abby,

Sorry for the belated response!

And sorry for putting it into another question:

Why would Mike have admitted it if he was knowingly involved in a hoax?

Nobody asked him to confess to anything, the previous June, yet he suddenly came out with his claim to have created the diary all by himself. What do you think he had to gain from doing that? The royalties had recently begun to come in very nicely thank you, then wham! He does that and pisses on his own cornflakes. Why, if the point of it all had been to make lots of lovely money out of his discovery of Jack the Ripper's identity?

And since he was very angry and bitter towards Anne at the time for leaving him and taking their daughter with her, why did he wait until the following January [a year after she had gone] to say she had helped him hoax it, if this was true? Had he produced any hard and fast evidence of a joint enterprise none of us would be here now.

Why would he have needed to swear an affidavit if he had proof of what he was claiming? Aren't these kind of things done when there is no proof, and the swearer has to hope his word will be good enough?

Love,

Caz
X
__________________
"Comedy is simply a funny way of being serious." Peter Ustinov



Last edited by caz : 02-23-2018 at 06:20 AM.
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 09:35 PM.


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