Why on earth is Maybrick the most popular suspect on this site???

[Ben]

I'd agree that neither Fleming's insanity nor the reports of his ill-use against Kelly should automatically assign him ripper status, but on the other hand, it isn't as if a life-long confinement in an asylum would consistute normal behaviour for a man whose loved one had been brutually murdered. Like you, I'd be extremely hesitant to convict on the basis of his "ill-use" and insanity, but he does appear to be one of the better suspects, as you note.

Best regards,
Ben

[Mascara & Paranoia]

Regarding Fleming being institutionalised for life, the same thing happened to Cutbush (who I also don't personally think was the Ripper), and 'all' he did was stab girls in the, uh, arse. So I'm not sure whether the authorities genuinely saw a real danger in these men or if they were locking them up for life to be on the safe side just in case one of them did happen to be the Ripper. Either that or they were very strict!

That said I've gone right off-topic so sign me up for the anti-Maybrick squad.

[Phil Carter]

Hello all,

The Maybrick theory seems to have partly imploded in on itself for various reasons. Some more obvious than others.

Nope, Mr. Maybrick gets the thumbs down from me.
But it's horses for courses!

Any more votes for Sooty, the gloved puppet?

best wishes

Phil

[LongLiz]

You are so right... It's kinda pathetic actually...

[Roy Corduroy]

Alucard asked -

Why on earth is Maybrick the most popular suspect on this site???

Maybrick is so popular because Shirley Harrison wrote a very entertaining, exciting book. A book with a hook, the Diary. Her suspect already had a scintilating history and she built on it. A sort of "top this if you can" approach, which was a smashing commercial success.

Roy

[Soothsayer]

Alucard asked -



Maybrick is so popular because Shirley Harrison wrote a very entertaining, exciting book. A book with a hook, the Diary. Her suspect already had a scintilating history and she built on it. A sort of "top this if you can" approach, which was a smashing commercial success.

Roy

Call me crazy (many do!), but I suspect that Maybrick's popularity is largely driven by the fact that a journal exists which rather neatly dobs him in (rightly or wrongly so), and that in now 17 long years, the journal has never actually been outed, nor its target categorically proven to not possibly be Jack the Lad.

In the land of evidence vs. wistful opining, the man with the tattered journal must be King. The one-eyed man - encumbered as he is by his otherwise ascendant affliction - is here in the wrong courtroom, perhaps led so by that very fact.

Diego Laurenz is your man, good folk of the ether. Hea culpa!

[Roy Corduroy]

Oh but it has been outed. That was not James Maybrick's handwriting.

I was commenting on the formula used by Ms Harrison to great success. Besides the diary hook, there was another strand working on the reader's imagination in the book - Florence. She was convicted of killing James. So it makes you wonder, did she know or suspect he was Jack the Ripper.

Long time, no see, Sooth

Roy

[j.r-ahde]

Hello Roy!

You may correct me, but;

If I remember correctly, the ink on the "diary" was from the beginning of the 20th century?!

All the best
Jukka

[Roy Corduroy]

The one-eyed man - encumbered as he is by his otherwise ascendant affliction -

One eyed Jack
The King with the Axe
Deuces are wild
Pimento cheese mild

Now that's a hand to play

If I remember correctly, the ink on the "diary" was from the beginning of the 20th century?!

That could be Jukes, I don't rightly know. But James Maybrick didn't pen it.

If you are driving around on dirt roads, you may not know the name of those roads. They may not have names. But when you get back to the asphalt and the sign says Route 66, you know where you are.

Roy

[caz]

Hello Roy!

You may correct me, but;

If I remember correctly, the ink on the "diary" was from the beginning of the 20th century?!

All the best
Jukka

I'll correct you if I may, Jukka.

The ink used for the diary has yet to be dated with any accuracy. It has certainly not been identified as a specific ink from a specific period of time.

But Rendell and his team in 1993 finally settled on 'prior to 1970' for when the ink met paper - which gives it plenty of scope.

As for Maybrick's supposed 'popularity' as a suspect, you could have fooled me. I note that even those who find Sickert and Gull credible as suspects think it's pathetic to finger a wife-beating, prostitute-using, London-frequenting drug abuser for the murders.

So I guess it all depends on the credibility of the person expressing an opinion.

Me, I don't think the diary was even written for the purpose of fingering Maybrick seriously for the Whitechapel murders. I suspect the underlying theme was more: if Florie deserved to be charged with Jim's murder and hanged for it, for the "horrible" wife and mother she was, then he deserved to be called Jack the Ripper, for the ghastly husband and father he turned out to be.

Love,

Caz
X

[jerrip]

Is not Maybrick a JTR suspect base solely on the diary?

Didn't Barrett confess it (the diary) was a forgery?

http://www.casebook.org/suspects/james_maybrick/mb-con.bjan25.html

The diary is a fake (by the admission of Barrett), then shouldn't Maybrick be removed from any and all list?

I never have or will believe the diary is real. The explanation on the way it was produce is unacceptable or even reasonable to believed. I am surprised anyone took it seriously.

Jer

[caz]

Yes, Maybrick got his suspect status solely on the back of the diary, so I agree that he is not a legitimate ripper suspect. There may be a few other names on the list who similarly lack any legitimate reason to be suspected of murder.

Yes, Michael Barrett once claimed he had written it himself, but that means as little as the claim that Maybrick wrote it. He may as well have said the cat did it. He was never able to substantiate any of his various conflicting forgery claims, even though there was, and is, money to be made by anyone doing so.

I don't believe the diary is 'real' either. But quite frankly, anyone who trusts Barrett to tell them what's real or not real may as well put their money on a real Royal conspiracy.

Love,

Caz
X