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:
Goulston Street Graffito: The GSG - Did Jack write it? POLL - by Elamarna 1 minute ago.
Fiction: Severin: A Tale of Jack the Ripper - by Matt Leyshon 10 minutes ago.
Maybrick, James: 25 YEARS OF THE DIARY OF JACK THE RIPPER: THE TRUE FACTS by Robert Smith - by Bridewell 22 minutes ago.
Goulston Street Graffito: The GSG - Did Jack write it? POLL - by Sam Flynn 25 minutes ago.
Goulston Street Graffito: The GSG - Did Jack write it? POLL - by Trevor Marriott 28 minutes ago.
Goulston Street Graffito: The GSG - Did Jack write it? POLL - by Bridewell 37 minutes ago.

Most Popular Threads:
Maybrick, James: 25 YEARS OF THE DIARY OF JACK THE RIPPER: THE TRUE FACTS by Robert Smith - (58 posts)
Goulston Street Graffito: The GSG - Did Jack write it? POLL - (34 posts)
Annie Chapman: Annie's scarf - (5 posts)
Non-Fiction: Ripper Confidential by Tom Wescott (2017) - (3 posts)
Witnesses: Israel Schwartz - new information - (2 posts)
General Discussion: Jacob Schikaneder - Murder in the house (1890) - (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
  #471  
Old 08-25-2017, 02:42 AM
Premium Member
caz caz is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 5,344
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Orsam View Post
Perhaps I haven't made myself clear to everyone. We need to know what the facts about these so called 'research notes' are. If they were typed we need to know it. If they were re-typed we need know it. If Shirley's memory was in a muddle in 1997 and/or 2003 that is one thing but what is the actual answer? What we don't need is uninformed speculation from someone who knows nothing about it.
Have you not sent that email to Keith Skinner yet? I only know what's in the final version because I have my own copy. The same may apply to Keith and Shirley but as you say that would be 'uninformed speculation from someone who knows nothing about' the original notes. What is the bloody point of repeating what 'we need to know' when there is nobody here to provide 'us' with the answers? Goodness me, David, what is the matter with you?

[If you have since been in touch with Keith, and have said so in a subsequent post I have yet to read, fair enough. If not, what is your problem?]

Love,

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


Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #472  
Old 08-25-2017, 02:58 AM
Premium Member
caz caz is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 5,344
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Orsam View Post
If the two individuals who are supposed to have found the Diary in Battlecrease are denying that they found any such thing it is going to be a little bit difficult to establish what they told Mike Barrett when they spoke to him, if they, in fact, ever met the man and gave him anything.

But it is rather hard to believe that that they did not tell him where it came from at the time. Well the whole thing is rather hard to believe. In Shirley's 2003 book we are told that one employee of Portus and Rhodes recalls picking up two employees from Battlecrease "At the end of one day" at which time one of them said "I've found something under the floor boards. I think it could be important". Well if it's the "end of the day" that they emerged from Battlecrease (and perhaps the timesheets will tell us the exact time they finished work), are we expected to believe they met up with Mike Barrett in a pub in Anfield, gave or sold him the diary, without telling him where they got it, and then he was able to get back home in time to look up the telephone number of the Robert Crew Literary Agency, call them and manage to speak to an assistant who was in the office? Was that person working late? And the impression we get from Inside Story is that Barrett rang back later that same day when he spoke to Doreen Montgomery.
'What we don't need is uninformed speculation from someone who knows nothing about it.'

Wait, David. Just wait.

Quote:
So does this mean he really DID spend time in Liverpool library researching the diary between 9th March and 13th April? It should of course be easy enough to find witness evidence of Mike doing some intense research during this period, er, if you are the police and have plenty of resources to spend time questioning people at the library, because it's in no way twisted logic to suggest that the absence of such evidence means that Barrett wasn't there.
The point is that some research must have been done at some point David, but the fruits of this were not handed over until the July or August. Shirley is the one to ask what Mike had managed to find out for himself by April 13th, assuming he was asked and he gave a straight answer. But if it's not twisted logic to suggest that the absence of evidence of Mike beavering away in the library means he wasn't there, that must apply as much to the 7 months from August 1991 to March 1992, as to the 4 or 5 months from March 1992 to July or August 1992.

Love,

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


Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #473  
Old 08-25-2017, 03:20 AM
Premium Member
caz caz is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 5,344
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Orsam View Post
Now, why would anyone posting in this thread think that there is a "diary team"? I just can't work it out.
Because Adam posted it? Perhaps he knows what he meant by that, or perhaps he was using Robert's words, in which case you'd need to ask Robert, wouldn't you?

In any case they were not speaking for me and I doubt they were speaking for Keith Skinner either. My guess - uninformed speculation alert - would be that Robert's 'team' might include Shirley, James Johnston and Robert Anderson, but you would need to ask them, wouldn't you?

Tell me, David, when you last went to the doctor, did you find yourself asking the florist next door for a diagnosis, then whining to all her customers about getting uninformed speculation about your haemorrhoids from someone who knows nothing about them?

It might explain your discomfort.

Love,

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


Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #474  
Old 08-25-2017, 03:30 AM
Premium Member
caz caz is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 5,344
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Observer View Post
Paul Feldman thoughts on the matter were these

"My worst fear had been realised. My contact, and his fellow electrician would lie for the right price. I was no nearer the truth".

Seems a bit strange that 25 years after this incident took place, there are those who would cite this incident as being "proof" that the Diary came out of Battlecrease House.
That would be strange if anyone were to use this incident as "proof", Observer.

Do you believe Paul Feldman was bang on the money on this one occasion? That would be - interesting.

Same advice to you. Wait. Just wait. You may see, but do you really observe?

Love,

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


Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #475  
Old 08-25-2017, 03:41 AM
Premium Member
caz caz is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 5,344
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GUT View Post
The biggest problem I've got is there have been too many lies told about it, which lie am I meant to believe is the truth?
It's a very fair point, GUT.

The choice is of course your own. You are 'meant' to believe whichever option you find the least problematic.

For example:

A) Did Caroline witness her Dad on the phone pestering Tony Devereux for information about the diary in the May or June of 1991?

B) Did she witness her Dad on the phone pestering someone else for information about the diary in the March or April of 1992?

C) Did she witness her Dad and Mum transferring the diary text into the guardbook between the end of March and April 13th 1992?

D) Is there a D?

Love,

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


Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #476  
Old 08-25-2017, 04:29 AM
Premium Member
caz caz is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 5,344
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Orsam View Post
It's all very simple guys.

To understand anything that has been said on this matter, you just need to know that the exact opposite is true.

So when Mike, Anne and their eleven year old daughter all said in unison that Mike got the Diary from Tony, that of course means he didn't get it from Tony.
Does this mean you now believe he did get it from Tony after all and that Caroline did indeed recall Tony being pestered about it in the May or June of 1991? Well bless my tail!

Quote:
When the first document expert to examine the Diary said it's a fake and modern he meant to say it is genuine and very, very, old.
Just to clarify, the first two document experts to examine the diary visually were: the curator of 19th century manuscripts at the British Museum, Robert A.H. Smith, who said "it looks authentic" and saw 'nothing in it inconsistent with it being of a late nineteenth-century date'; and the owner of Jarndyce, the antiquarian bookshop opposite the museum, Brian Lake, a specialist on 19th century literature, who was 'enthusiastic' and later wrote saying 'there is nothing to indicate that the "Jack the Ripper" diary is not of the 1880s and, in my view, the writing is of the same period".

But of course, you were referring to the first forensic examination, by someone who made two, possibly three, major cockups and, contrary to your eccentric view that the correct practice is to accept the first expert opinion and be done with it, it was considered sensible, if not absolutely essential, to seek as many more opinions as was practicable and cost-effective, over as wide a range of disciplines as possible.

Had your chosen expert given the diary a glowing report, I have no doubt whatsoever that you would have called for the 'Diary Team' to be boiled in oil until their eyes popped if they had stopped there.

Quote:
When the electricians say that they didn't find the Diary under the floorboards, well, of course, that means they did.
Tricky electricians. They'll say anything but their prayers, eh David? Like your 'Diary Team', joined at the hip and all singing the same tune except for when they're all staying silent.

Love,

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



Last edited by caz : 08-25-2017 at 04:32 AM.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #477  
Old 08-25-2017, 04:37 AM
StevenOwl StevenOwl is offline
Constable
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 72
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by caz View Post
Does this mean you now believe he did get it from Tony after all and that Caroline did indeed recall Tony being pestered about it in the May or June of 1991? Well bless my tail!



Just to clarify, the first two document experts to examine the diary visually were: the curator of 19th century manuscripts at the British Museum, Robert A.H. Smith, who said "it looks authentic" and saw 'nothing in it inconsistent with it being of a late nineteenth-century date'; and the owner of Jarndyce, the antiquarian bookshop opposite the museum, Brian Lake, a specialist on 19th century literature, who was 'enthusiastic' and later wrote saying 'there is nothing to indicate that the "Jack the Ripper" diary is not of the 1880s and, in my view, the writing is of the same period".

But of course, you were referring to the first forensic examination, by someone who made two, possibly three, major cockups and, contrary to your eccentric view that the correct practice is to accept the first expert opinion and be done with it, it was considered sensible, if not absolutely essential, to seek as many more opinions as was practicable and cost-effective, over as wide a range of disciplines as possible.

Had your chosen expert given the diary a glowing report, I have no doubt whatsoever that you would have called for the 'Diary Team' to be boiled in oil until their eyes popped if they had stopped there.



Tricky electricians. They'll say anything but their prayers, eh David? Like your 'Diary Team', joined at the hip and all singing the same tune except for when they're all staying silent.

Love,

Caz
X
Love it! You're on fire this week Caz - keep 'em coming...
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #478  
Old 08-25-2017, 04:44 AM
Premium Member
caz caz is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 5,344
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Harry D View Post
And yet people still want to believe...
...that Mike wasn't telling porkies in his confession statements.

The innocent trust is almost touching.

More touching than all the frantic and wholly predictable efforts to undermine - using all the old arguments from the dawn of diary time dredged up, dusted off and trotted out again - whatever new information may shortly be coming to the surface. If the ship in which the Barrett forgery theorists sail - "The Saucy Sausage" - is as seaworthy as some people claim to believe, I'd have thought they could have sat back with a tot of rum, twiddling their thumbs or hugging themselves in joyous anticipation, in the certain knowledge that it won't rock the boat.

Love,

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



Last edited by caz : 08-25-2017 at 05:06 AM.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #479  
Old 08-25-2017, 05:10 AM
Premium Member
caz caz is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 5,344
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by StevenOwl View Post
Love it! You're on fire this week Caz - keep 'em coming...
Why thank you kindly, Steven. You're a wise owl for noticing.

To use one of my ex husband's lovely mother-in-law's expressions, I've got "fun up me 'ole" this week.

Love,

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


Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #480  
Old 08-25-2017, 05:30 AM
Premium Member
caz caz is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 5,344
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam Flynn View Post
Indeed, David, and I'm sure you haven't. I think it's a consequence of the fact that the use of "one off" to refer to an abstraction (e.g. an instance or an event) really is of comparatively recent origin. The beauty of facts is that they are out there to be independently discovered.
Hi Gareth,

A very apt observation, considering that several researchers over the years have independently been discovering facts which are relevant to the diary's emergence into our world.

When it was first buried I wouldn't like to say, but is it a 'fact' that Mike Barrett was in any way involved with its creation or burial?

Not a cat in hell's chance, I'd say.

Love,

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


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 08:03 AM.


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