His so-called Diary

[downonwhores]

I may have missed this so forgive me. I was reading Melvyn's book about the royal ripper theory and he mentioned and had a photo of Abberline's Diary and letter about JK Stephen. Does anyone know anymore about this. Was the journal and letters fake or what do you think about it?

[Sam Flynn]

I may have missed this so forgive me. I was reading Melvyn's book about the royal ripper theory and he mentioned and had a photo of Abberline's Diary and letter about JK Stephen. Does anyone know anymore about this. Was the journal and letters fake or what do you think about it?

Fakes without question.

If you haven't finished reading Fairclough's book, might I suggest you do so now and read something a bit more useful instead. The Ripper & The Royals is great fun, and a good read - but the "Abberline Diaries" etc should not be taken seriously. Not even semi-seriously.

[Mike Covell]

Fake

Looking up the diaries in the "A to Z" it states they are full of errors and Abberline spells his name wrong!

[Monty]

The diaries have the signature 'G F Abberline'.

Pretty basic error. If memory serves me right, wasnt Joseph Gorman Sickert a holder of these items? Imagine what Pasty would have done if she knew!

[DVV]

She would have given it to Bower for analysis...

[j.r-ahde]

Hello you all!

Ho do w now, hat Abbrline wan't a dyslexic?!

All right, I have been one myself...

Then, seriously; had there been a diary with an essential information relating to this case, it would probably have been published already after a few years following mr. Abberline's death!

All the best
Jukka

[Simon Owen]

Abberline's diaries were taken from Joe Sickert by a Cardinal of the Catholic Church and they are now in storage in the Vatican. I knew Joseph Sickert before he died , and thats what he told me. Make of that what you will !

[Simon Wood]

Hi All,

The "Abberline Diary" aside, my favourite howlers in Melvyn Fairclough's book are the spelling mistake on the "official" Crown Prosecution Service "receipt" for Sickert's documents and its Switchboard number 01 273 3000.

In 1989 this was the telephone number of the Cabinet Office, 70 Whitehall, London SW1A 2AS.

Regards,

Simon

[Chris]

Just out of curiosity, can anyone explain why there isn't a little group of "Abberline Diary" aficionados popping up every five minutes to tell us there is no absolute evidence it's a fake, we shouldn't be dogmatic about it, every avenue should be explored and so on?

The more I think about it, the more convinced I am that this is an Important Question for Ripperology...

[Simon Owen]

Just out of curiosity, can anyone explain why there isn't a little group of "Abberline Diary" aficionados popping up every five minutes to tell us there is no absolute evidence it's a fake, we shouldn't be dogmatic about it, every avenue should be explored and so on?

The more I think about it, the more convinced I am that this is an Important Question for Ripperology...

I think its more surprising that there is still a group of Maybrick Diary aficionados who keep popping up and telling us they believe there is no absolute evidence the Diary is fake ad nauseum. Why ??? What more can anyone do to disprove the bloody thing ?

[Vanillaman]

I may have missed this so forgive me. I was reading Melvyn's book about the royal ripper theory and he mentioned and had a photo of Abberline's Diary and letter about JK Stephen. Does anyone know anymore about this. Was the journal and letters fake or what do you think about it?

We keep hearing that the Abberline Diaries are fake. The major problem with "Ripperology" is that all those who have written books about the case are so utterly arrogant, with the exception of Melvyn Fairclough and to some degree Stephen Knight. These shameless charlatans are nothing more than a bunch of extremely arrogant academics, who will immediately jump on anyone who tries to pursue the Royal connection. Even if the identity of Jack The Ripper was revealed tomorrow, they'd still insist that it wasn't credible. Yet, they refuse categorically to address the most obvious questions. One of them, who just because he is an ex policeman has the ordacity to state that just because "one" doctor said that is there was no evidence of medical knowledge in the murders, that this stupid assumption is true. The actual "Fact" is that Dr Bagster Philips stated categorically that the killer had medical expertise. However, aside from that, what these so-called "ripperologists" conveniently avoid is that:

1. How did the killer know where to locate Kate Eddowes kidney? And when he sent part of it to George Lusk, how did he even know it was a kidney??
2. On each case, the victims intestines were described as being "placed".
3. How the hell can anyone in under 5 minutes, possibly lure Kate Eddowes into an "echoey" Mitre Square, silence her, murder her, mutilate her, take the time to carve slits on her, locate her kidney, "all" in absolute pitch blackness, And under the very noses of 2 patrolling bobbies on the beat, who had passed through the Square within those 5 mins, and also under the nose of a night watchman overlooking the scene, who was also an ex policeman????

And, these so-called ripperologists will try to sell you that "mad man" turkey. Yeah, right. The reason why they so vehmentally attack Melvyn Fairclough and Stephen Knight is because these b******s are so bloody arrogant, with their heads up their own a***s, they cannot abide the idea of anyone outside their own pathetic little circle proving them wrong.

If you've read Melvyn Faircloughs book, The Ripper & The Royals, look at how they tried to intimmidate and bully Fairclough, even to the point where they totally destroyed the man. Paul Begg and the rest are ruthless parasites, who want to continue to steer everyone away from the facts, without a shred of any credible evidence of their own, and conveniently avoiding the most obvious questions. If any of them answers this, I will gladly tear holes in their ridiculous theories for all to see.

[Vanillaman]

Fakes without question.

If you haven't finished reading Fairclough's book, might I suggest you do so now and read something a bit more useful instead. The Ripper & The Royals is great fun, and a good read - but the "Abberline Diaries" etc should not be taken seriously. Not even semi-seriously.

Idiot!!

[DVV]

I salute you, Vanillaman.

It's not often that an idiot makes a coming out just as you did.

You're great.

[tji]

I salute you, Vanillaman.

It's not often that an idiot makes a coming out just as you did.

[Sox]

We keep hearing that the Abberline Diaries are fake.

It is this simple, show the evidence to the world, submit it for independent tests, or it is a fake.

You mention the word 'parasites' in relation to proven researchers on this subject, at the same time as defending a book that has almost no basis in fact. Flawed logic there my friend.