Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Acquiring A Victorian Diary

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by James_J View Post
    Passing this along from Keith.

    TO JOSHUA ROGAN

    Thank you Joshua. Itís not a silly question and perhaps the function of floorboard protectors were simply for that purpose of protecting the floorboards when heavy objects were dragged across them. I donít know. Iím not an electrician and have never installed storage heaters. I can only suppose if that had been the reason they were required as part of the materials for wiring the sockets and storage heaters, I would have been told by Colin Rhodes? But my supposition is not good enough and I thank you for highlighting this possibility. It shouldnít be too difficult for me to find out. Easier than posting messages for myself!

    Best Wishes

    Keith
    Well this is all very odd.

    James - You are obviously in contact with Keith Skinner. Do you read his posts before you post them?

    Leaving aside that you've posted the above response to Joshua twice, you told me earlier in this thread (as I re-posted just two days ago in response to Joshua's original post) that Colin Rhodes told you that the floorboard protectors were "essentially plates that were used to protect raised floorboards." Was that true? Did he actually say that? If so, why is it that you appear not to have informed Keith Skinner of this?

    Either way, could we have some clarity on this issue please?

    Comment


    • This is starting to feel like a dodgy seance.

      If you want to contribute on this site then it's probably better to join.
      My opinion is all I have to offer here,

      Dave.

      Smilies are canned laughter.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by David Orsam View Post
        Well this is all very odd.

        James - You are obviously in contact with Keith Skinner. Do you read his posts before you post them?

        Leaving aside that you've posted the above response to Joshua twice, you told me earlier in this thread (as I re-posted just two days ago in response to Joshua's original post) that Colin Rhodes told you that the floorboard protectors were "essentially plates that were used to protect raised floorboards." Was that true? Did he actually say that? If so, why is it that you appear not to have informed Keith Skinner of this?

        Either way, could we have some clarity on this issue please?
        Afternoon all - I have a response from Keith on this, but the confusion is clearly down to me and it is only right that I clarify and account for any mistakes or oversights which I've made over the past few weeks.


        I do of course read the posts which Keith sends to me, and always try to be as thorough and careful as possible when posting on his behalf. It is a responsibility which I take seriously and I am conscious that Keith devotes considerable time to compose his responses. I can only apologise for any mistakes or oversights which have occured during my posting of them.

        * Specific apologies for double posting the response to Joshua. Totally my mistake and I will be careful to ensure that this does not occur again.


        As for Colin Rhodes' assertion that floorboard protectors were essentially "plates used to protect raised floorboards" - that actually comes from one Keith's interviews with Colin, recorded in the summer of 2004 (which I am in the process of transcribing). Apologies if it was not clear where this information was sourced from in any of my previous posts. As mentioned previously, Colin sadly passed away shortly before Christmas.

        As Keith mentions in the copied post below - I have been sharing the fruits of my own investigation for a couple of years now. Initially, this was limited to Shirley Harrison and Robert Smith - who both offered valuable guidance and insight. I suppose it might also be worth stating that they were not the only individuals who I tried to contact and share information with. At the start of my involvement I also contacted Martin Fido, knowing that he took the position of the diary as being a modern hoax involving Michael Barrett. Unfortunately, Martin was unable to offer me much more than what he has already stated on previous occasions. As I am sure you are aware, Keith was unable to share his research with me due to the embargo with Bruce Robinson. That didn't stop me sending Keith, Bruce and Caroline various transcripts and conversations which I had collected, in the hope that something might assist or substantiate their investigation.

        Our long term aim is to digitise and transcribe the mass of audio/visual material and share this on the forums. It is a time consuming process - but with a clear historical value which is hugely motivating.


        Best, James.


        Now this from Keith :-


        David – just to swiftly give an explanation to your #946.

        The fault is all mine because of my inability to, at the moment, comprehend how to put up posts for myself on the Forum now that I am a member. I think I explained that the other night I spent three hours composing a message to you in a small rectangular box – only to see it disappear before my eyes after trying to send it - and then staring at a notice which said I wasn’t logged in and hadn’t been recognised! That defeated me and rather than go through all that ordeal again, I asked James whether he would very kindly continue posting on my behalf until I managed to work out what I was doing wrong. I know that James has been extremely busy over this weekend – in addition to having spent many hours formatting the Mike Barrett/Martin Howells interview and making it easy for people to read. We could have just posted the original transcript and let people work it out for themselves but our intention was to make it accessible to readers who might be interested in studying it. I know that you made no reference to the transcript in your post to James but the careful time consuming process of presenting it in a clear, easy to read format probably accounts for why James has double posted my response to Joshua, if that is what has happened. It cannot be easy for James to be concentrating on something else and have emails flying in from me. It’s also quite likely that James does not closely read the posts I send to him to post on my behalf if he is busy in the middle of doing other things. For the past couple of years James has very kindly shared with me the fruits of his own personal investigation. Not all of this have I fully ingested, including the many transcripts of conversations James has had with people. I would go so far as to venture the strong possibility that the information Colin Rhodes imparted about the function of floorboard protectors, could well be on one of my own taped conversations with Colin Rhodes in 2004. These cassettes James has copies of for the purpose of transferring to computer, digitising and preparing transcripts with an aim to putting up on both Forums.

        So, as I say David, the fault for any misunderstanding created is completely down to me.

        I hope this clarifies the issue.

        Best Wishes, Keith
        Last edited by James_J; 02-11-2018, 09:10 AM.
        Now you're looking for the secret, but you won't find it, because of course, you're not really looking. You want to be fooled.

        Comment


        • That's the spirit Keith....head towards the light!!!
          My opinion is all I have to offer here,

          Dave.

          Smilies are canned laughter.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Keith Skinner

            ...The fault is all mine because of my inability to, at the moment, comprehend how to put up posts for myself on the Forum now that I am a member. I think I explained that the other night I spent three hours composing a message to you in a small rectangular box – only to see it disappear before my eyes after trying to send it - and then staring at a notice which said I wasn’t logged in and hadn’t been recognised!

            Best Wishes, Keith
            Hi Keith,
            Quite frankly, I've been having the same problem. And when I log back in, I lose everything I had written. Frustrating.
            What I now do is write it out, copy it, then repost after I'm immediately signed in again. Apparently, there is a time out after being online for a certain time. Been here for years and this is the first time this has become a recurring problem. Thought it might be my computer at first.
            Best Wishes,
            Hunter
            ____________________________________________

            When evidence is not to be had, theories abound. Even the most plausible of them do not carry conviction- London Times Nov. 10.1888

            Comment


            • To James and Keith - thank you for the clarification and I look forward to reading the transcript.

              To Keith (and Hunter) - Are you ticking the "Remember Me" box when you sign in? If you don't do that you will be logged off after a short period of time, usually when in the middle of a long post!

              Another tip is to regularly click "Preview Post" when in the middle of typing a long post. It means that if you lose the page you can usually retrieve the last preview by clicking the back button.

              Before clicking Preview or Submit Reply, however, it's always a good idea, I think, to copy what you've written and paste it into a Word document (if you haven't created your post in a Word document already). A warning here, however: since I've had Windows 10 and Microsoft Edge this doesn't work and, in fact, the act of pasting a draft post into a Word document unbelievably causes the post to disappear and the paste to fail. Unbelievably annoying. But it works fine in Google Chrome.

              Finally, one other thing to avoid serious frustration. Support a team other than Chelsea.

              Comment


              • Considering the possibility that the diary could have been discovered at Battlecrease by the electricians. Can anyone think of a sensible explanation, or even a not very sensible explanation, of how Mike could have acquired, possibly authenticated to his satisfaction, and viewed the diary on the same day, prompting his call to Doreen?
                Last edited by John G; 02-11-2018, 11:00 AM.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by David Orsam View Post
                  To Keith (and Hunter) - Are you ticking the "Remember Me" box when you sign in? If you don't do that you will be logged off after a short period of time, usually when in the middle of a long post!
                  I believe you have there, David. When I used to post more regularly I kept that box clicked. When I'm intermittent, I don't, but will from now on.

                  Thanks!
                  Best Wishes,
                  Hunter
                  ____________________________________________

                  When evidence is not to be had, theories abound. Even the most plausible of them do not carry conviction- London Times Nov. 10.1888

                  Comment


                  • The remember me box. You learn something new every day! I also copy every post when I've composed it.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by David Orsam View Post
                      To James and Keith - thank you for the clarification and I look forward to reading the transcript.

                      To Keith (and Hunter) - Are you ticking the "Remember Me" box when you sign in? If you don't do that you will be logged off after a short period of time, usually when in the middle of a long post!

                      Another tip is to regularly click "Preview Post" when in the middle of typing a long post. It means that if you lose the page you can usually retrieve the last preview by clicking the back button.

                      Before clicking Preview or Submit Reply, however, it's always a good idea, I think, to copy what you've written and paste it into a Word document (if you haven't created your post in a Word document already). A warning here, however: since I've had Windows 10 and Microsoft Edge this doesn't work and, in fact, the act of pasting a draft post into a Word document unbelievably causes the post to disappear and the paste to fail. Unbelievably annoying. But it works fine in Google Chrome.

                      Finally, one other thing to avoid serious frustration. Support a team other than Chelsea.
                      I always make long posts in a .txt file. Windows comes with Microsoft's Notepad in which you can make .txt files. Personally I use a 3rd party program called Notepad++. But it does the same thing.
                      .txt is a text file type with very little formatting.
                      In Windows 10 I think Notepad can be found under Windows Accessories.
                      These are not clues, Fred.
                      It is not yarn leading us to the dark heart of this place.
                      They are half-glimpsed imaginings, tangle of shadows.
                      And you and I floundering at them in the ever vainer hope that we might corral then into meaning when we will not.
                      We will not.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by John G View Post
                        Considering the possibility that the diary could have been discovered at Battlecrease by the electricians. Can anyone think of a sensible explanation, or even a not very sensible explanation, of how Mike could have acquired, possibly authenticated to his satisfaction, and viewed the diary on the same day, prompting his call to Doreen?
                        This has been discussed at length in one of the Maybrick threads. You can probably guess as to the outcome of the exchanges.

                        Comment


                        • Evening all, passing this along from KS

                          Originally posted by John G View Post
                          Considering the possibility that the diary could have been discovered at Battlecrease by the electricians. Can anyone think of a sensible explanation, or even a not very sensible explanation, of how Mike could have acquired, possibly authenticated to his satisfaction, and viewed the diary on the same day, prompting his call to Doreen?

                          Passing this along from KS

                          TO JOHN G.

                          Thank you for your questions posed in #952.

                          The answers, from me, are no. If the Diary had come out of Battlecrease on March 9th 1992 and found its way into Mikeís hands on the same day, prompting his telephone call to Doreen, then Iím not even sure whether Mike would have known the supposed author was James Maybrick or whether he had ever heard of him, or even if he had been told where the Diary allegedly had been found.

                          Itís just Mikeís association with the electricians, via the Saddle Pub, which has given me pause for thought.

                          All Good Wishes, Keith
                          Now you're looking for the secret, but you won't find it, because of course, you're not really looking. You want to be fooled.

                          Comment


                          • Passing this along. Best JJ

                            TO DAVID O.

                            Thank you David.

                            All going to Conte’s brilliant strategy and cunning game plan at Stamford Bridge – as you’ll see when they play West Brom tomorrow evening!

                            Best Wishes, Keith
                            Now you're looking for the secret, but you won't find it, because of course, you're not really looking. You want to be fooled.

                            Comment


                            • To everyone having trouble with the "you are not logged in" screen after finishing a post:
                              -- Use the log-on boxes provided below the message to re-enter your name and password.
                              -- The message should change to one along the lines of "Thank you, proceed", and you should find your post has, in fact, already posted! (If you go back to the draft of the post and try to resubmit it, you will get a message about the system requires waiting thirty seconds between posts, try again later-- which is only confusing to the would-be poster.)

                              I usually check the Remember Me box at the first log-on, as I often lose or forget passwords, and this saves time.

                              Using the copy and paste technique also helps a lot with very long posts.
                              Pat D.
                              ---------------
                              Von Konigswald: Jack the Ripper plays shuffleboard. -- Happy Birthday, Wanda June by Kurt Vonnegut, c.1970.
                              ---------------

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by James_J View Post
                                Evening all, passing this along from KS




                                Passing this along from KS

                                TO JOHN G.

                                Thank you for your questions posed in #952.

                                The answers, from me, are no. If the Diary had come out of Battlecrease on March 9th 1992 and found its way into Mikeís hands on the same day, prompting his telephone call to Doreen, then Iím not even sure whether Mike would have known the supposed author was James Maybrick or whether he had ever heard of him, or even if he had been told where the Diary allegedly had been found.

                                Itís just Mikeís association with the electricians, via the Saddle Pub, which has given me pause for thought.

                                All Good Wishes, Keith
                                Hi Keith,

                                Thanks for the reply, much appreciated.

                                I am very much of the same opinion. Robert Smith, I believe, has argued that Mike was an impetuous character, and therefore seeing Maybrick's signature would have been sufficient evidence to prompt the call to Doreen. Not only does this seem implausible to me, this scenario, of course, runs in to numerous other difficulties.

                                The best explanation that I could come with is that there was a plan to launch a hoax diary, but there were concerns about lack of provenance. Mike then discovers that work is going on at Battlecrease, via the Saddle, and offers one of the electricians a deal: He reveals details of the hoax, and offers them a share of any consequential royalties and, in return, they agree to say the document was discovered during the electrical work. However, the agreement falls through, possibly as a result of a dispute over money, or because the electrician is concerned about the legal implications.

                                However, this scenario also has many problems. For instance, why would Mike risk revealing details of the planned hoax to someone he'd just met in the pub? And presumably the electrician might be accused of theft, and Mike of handling stolen goods, resulting in possible criminal charges and disputed ownership.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X