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:
Mary Jane Kelly: A theory about some injuries! - by Abby Normal 4 minutes ago.
Thompson, Francis: Francis Thompson. The Perfect Suspect. - by Abby Normal 13 minutes ago.
Thompson, Francis: Francis Thompson. The Perfect Suspect. - by GUT 3 hours ago.
Thompson, Francis: Francis Thompson. The Perfect Suspect. - by GUT 3 hours ago.
Thompson, Francis: Francis Thompson. The Perfect Suspect. - by Fisherman 3 hours ago.
Thompson, Francis: Francis Thompson. The Perfect Suspect. - by SuspectZero 10 hours ago.

Most Popular Threads:
Thompson, Francis: Francis Thompson. The Perfect Suspect. - (5 posts)
A6 Murders: A6 Rebooted - (5 posts)
Tumblety, Francis: Tumblety - Hermaphrodite. - (2 posts)
Shades of Whitechapel: Centenaries - whole and half - (2 posts)
Scene of the Crimes: East End Walk - (1 posts)
Mary Jane Kelly: A theory about some injuries! - (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
  #101  
Old 08-09-2017, 11:32 AM
David Orsam David Orsam is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 6,972
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AdamNeilWood View Post
It is time to make public why the diary team is confident it is a genuine Victorian document.
Now, why would anyone posting in this thread assume that there is a "diary team"? I just can't work it out.
__________________
Orsam Books
www.orsam.co.uk
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #102  
Old 08-09-2017, 11:36 AM
David Orsam David Orsam is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 6,972
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Orsam View Post
I've seen the exact same question asked on these boards to suggest that because no-one has been able to prove who forged it (and when and how) that this strongly suggests the diary is genuine.
Just to clarify that I didn't have anyone in particular in mind when I wrote this but I could equally have written:"I've seen the exact same question asked on these boards to suggest that because no-one has been able to prove who forged it (and when and how) that this strongly suggests the diary was written much earlier than 25 years ago". Another dreadfully bad argument.
__________________
Orsam Books
www.orsam.co.uk
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #103  
Old 08-09-2017, 11:39 AM
David Orsam David Orsam is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 6,972
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Orsam View Post
I think, following on from your earlier post, Henry, someone needs to write the book "Jack the Ripper Diary: The False Facts". Now that, I expect, would be a good read.
As I posted on another thread, one of the false facts that has been mentioned in connection with the diary is that a forger could not have known that Maybrick wrote lyrics. But this information was contained in Nigel Moreland's 1957 book (i.e. page 7 refers to "the strong religious and moral nature of his lyrics").

It's also been said that one of the false facts was that Barrett could not have dictated the diary to his wife in 11 days in front of his daughter but, when I asked in another thread how it is known this is a false fact (or fundamentally incorrect), no-one could tell me.
__________________
Orsam Books
www.orsam.co.uk
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #104  
Old 08-09-2017, 11:48 AM
David Orsam David Orsam is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 6,972
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Orsam View Post
Oh, and I'd also like to know why Mike Barrett attempted to acquire (and did acquire) a Victorian diary with blank pages in March 1992. Is that dealt with in the book?
I suppose one could ask Anne Barrett to tell us why her husband did this. Oh, but hold on a minute, there's an interesting paradox here: If the Diary was dug out of the floorboards of Battlecrease in March 1992 then it probably wasn't sitting in a big walk-in cupboard in Billy Graham's house in 1960, when Anne claims to have seen it, and that would mean that her entire "confession", in which she says it was, is a work of such fiction that one could almost imagine she was creative enough to assist in the writing of a diary by Jack the Ripper.

Then again, to know why Mike Barrett attempted to acquire (and did acquire) a Victorian diary with blank pages in March 1992 shortly before he presented Shirley Harrison with the Victorian Diary of Jack the Ripper, I don't think we need to trouble the living or the dead about it.
__________________
Orsam Books
www.orsam.co.uk
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #105  
Old 08-09-2017, 12:06 PM
Darryl Kenyon Darryl Kenyon is offline
Constable
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 84
Default

Phillip Sugden - The complete history of Jack The ripper - The Chapter A century of final solutions - The unacceptable provenance of the diary, the missing front pages, the factual inaccuracies and the implausibility of Maybrick as a Ripper suspect even without forensic tests we have learned enough to set a whole belfry of warning bells ringing. A reading of the diary still leaves me baffled as to how any intelligent and reasonably informed student of the Ripper case could possibly have taken it seriously. There were those well versed in the subject, men like Nick Warren, Tom Cullen and Melvin Harris, who saw through the hoax from the beginning. Yet it is astonishing how many experts were fooled and allowed their names to be used in the promotional literature. They remain there, preserved like flies in amber, warnings to the complacent and the credulous.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #106  
Old 08-09-2017, 12:30 PM
Abby Normal Abby Normal is online now
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 5,304
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kaz View Post
Hi Abnormal

nothing ruffled, just a query
Ok well, oh I don't know-spreading and proliferation of misinformation, conmen profiting off of lies, dead innocent men being besmirched, another nail in the validity of Ripperology's coffin.

maybrick
HH holmes
sickert

bring on the circus clowns
__________________
"Is all that we see or seem
but a dream within a dream?"

-Edgar Allan Poe


"...the man and the peaked cap he is said to have worn
quite tallies with the descriptions I got of him."

-Frederick G. Abberline
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #107  
Old 08-09-2017, 12:34 PM
Phil Carter Phil Carter is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 4,134
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Darryl Kenyon View Post
Phillip Sugden - The complete history of Jack The ripper - The Chapter A century of final solutions - The unacceptable provenance of the diary, the missing front pages, the factual inaccuracies and the implausibility of Maybrick as a Ripper suspect even without forensic tests we have learned enough to set a whole belfry of warning bells ringing. A reading of the diary still leaves me baffled as to how any intelligent and reasonably informed student of the Ripper case could possibly have taken it seriously. There were those well versed in the subject, men like Nick Warren, Tom Cullen and Melvin Harris, who saw through the hoax from the beginning. Yet it is astonishing how many experts were fooled and allowed their names to be used in the promotional literature. They remain there, preserved like flies in amber, warnings to the complacent and the credulous.
Exactly.

Now I wonder if Adam Wood will name the "members" of this "Diary team"....all of them?

Or is that secret information only for those supposed to be in on this? (I use "in on this" to be read in whatever way one wishes to interpret it)

All this poster can see is a cynical..not clever..attempt to cash in on an anniversary of a subject that should..as Philip Sugden hints at..have been wiped off the face of the planet.

I do so hope this "Diary team" are proud of what they are doing. I know many that wouldn't want to be associated with this so called "truth".

Any JtR book title with "The True facts" in it will cause extreme doubt to start with.


It isn't often I agree with David Orsam. But this time time I do.



Phil
__________________
Chelsea FC. TRUE BLUE AND CHAMPIONS AGAIN. 💙


Justice for the 96 = achieved
Accountability? ....
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #108  
Old 08-09-2017, 12:40 PM
David Orsam David Orsam is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 6,972
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil Carter View Post
It isn't often I agree with David Orsam. But this time time I do.
I am changing my opinion forthwith.

hehe, just kidding Phil.
__________________
Orsam Books
www.orsam.co.uk
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #109  
Old 08-09-2017, 11:56 PM
Purkis Purkis is offline
Cadet
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 47
Default

So someone broke into Battlecrease and planted the diary under the floorboards in Maybrick's old room?

Last edited by Purkis : 08-10-2017 at 12:02 AM.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #110  
Old 08-10-2017, 12:46 AM
PaulB PaulB is offline
Inspector
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 1,460
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil Carter View Post
Now I wonder if Adam Wood will name the "members" of this "Diary team"....all of them?
Why wouldn't Adam Wood name the members of the "team"? Why wouldn't he name 'all of them'? You must have a good reason for asking whether he would name them? It hardly seems fair to insinuate that he wouldn't without having a good reason for doing so.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil Carter View Post
Or is that secret information only for those supposed to be in on this? (I use "in on this" to be read in whatever way one wishes to interpret it)
Why do you suppose that the names of the "team" is 'secret information'? Or might be secret information? What evidence do you have for thinking this? What do you mean by 'those supposed to be 'in on this'? Why don't you make it clear what you mean, rather than leave it open for people to interpret as they wish?

And isn't the "team" those appearing at the Liverpool conference? Haven't they been touted as such by the organiser?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil Carter View Post
All this poster can see is a cynical..not clever..attempt to cash in on an anniversary of a subject that should..as Philip Sugden hints at..have been wiped off the face of the planet.
I'm not aware that Adam Wood or Robert Smith have pretended that the book isn't a tie-in with the 25th anniversary, but why do you think an expensive-to-produce limited edition book is a cynical attempt to 'cash in', rather than a genuine response to those who would value a high-quality reproduction of the diary in their Ripper book collection?

Is the organiser of the Liverpool conference also cynically attempting to cash-in on the anniversary by using it to attract attendees to his conference?

Don't you think the diary would be 'wiped off the face of the earth' (which isn't anything Sugden hinted at) by proving it to be a modern creation? Is it wrong for researchers to try and do that? Isn't that what the "team" has tried to do?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil Carter View Post
I do so hope this "Diary team" are proud of what they are doing. I know many that wouldn't want to be associated with this so called "truth".
Why shouldn't they be proud of what they are doing? If they are prepared to give their time, effort and probably money to establishing the origin of the diary, why shouldn't they?

By referring to their conclusions as the "so called" truth, are you insinuating that their motives and intentions are dishonest? Are you calling them liars?

You are insinuating serious and rather nasty things about people, Phil. I hope it's unintentional, but I don't think you are so naive as to be unaware of the implication of your words. So can you be specific about why you think Adam wouldn't reveal the names of the team, or why you think the team is revealing "so called" truth?
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 04:03 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.