Acquiring A Victorian Diary

[rjpalmer]

As I previously posted, she assumed it was made in June 1992 on the basis of an old daily memo book of Rawes, about which there are unanswered questions from me to you in another thread (#1516 of "old hoax).

Hi Herlock--you'll have figured it out for yourself, but in reference to my earlier post, I'm not disputing that there aren't unanswered questions about Rawes' memo book.

I could have worded it better, but I only meant that IF Rawes method of dating his encounter is as described by Caz (and there might be more to it) then it bears a strong similarity to Tim Martin-Wright's methods, only more so.

RP

[Herlock Sholmes]

I said nothing about Eddie having the benefit of 'seeing the timesheets'. As you admit, you only assume this happened, because of a question asked in advance by David Barrat, and you assume that James 'met' Eddie in February 2018 but didn't get the answer he was hoping for. Plans can change depending on people's availability and James was not obliged in any case to fit in with anything suggested by a third party, especially if he decided it was better to find out what Eddie could remember without showing him any documentary evidence first, which could be seen as leading him in a certain direction, desired either by James or Eddie. I may be wrong, but I don't think James is trying to convince you or anyone else that the diary was found in Battlecrease.

Brian Rawes wasn't down on any Battlecrease timesheets because he never actually worked there. He only went there the once, on Friday 17th July 1992, and that was to pick up the firm's van and drive it to another job. His daily memo book did not reflect this brief encounter or he'd have been able to date it accurately for Shirley, instead of relying on his memory for when the conversation with Eddie might have happened, with reference to unrelated jobs he had recorded, and coming up with June. Back in October 1993 he'd been able to give the exact date in July 1992, which he could have obtained from Colin Rhodes's records and later forgotten.

There is no evidence that Brian was ever contacted by Feldman, who wanted the names of electricians who had actually worked in Dodd's house.

No, Caz, I didn't say that I assumed Eddie was shown the the timesheets "because of a question asked in advance by David Barrat". I said I assumed Eddie was shown the timesheets because of what James Johnson said when answering that question. You don't appear to be denying that Eddie was shown the timesheets. It seems to be obvious that he must have been shown those timesheets. James Johnston made clear he was going to show them to Eddie only a few weeks before seeing him, and he surely couldn't have forgotten. So I repeat what I said, namely that you've confirmed that Eddie couldn't say what he was doing on 9th March 1992, even with the benefit of the timesheets.

As for Brian Rawes, you say that he only went there once "on Friday 17th July 1992" but that's precisely what we're trying to establish. How do we know he went there on Friday 17th July 1992 as opposed to some other day? There doesn't seem to be any documentary record of his being at Battlecrease that day. At one time he thought he was there in June by reference to an old daily memo book but you don't explain what it was in that old book which suggested to him that he had been there in June. You now tell me his suggestion of the 17th July date in October 1993 might have been based on "Colin Rhodes's records" but if that means the timesheets, which only showed Eddie as having been present at Battlecrease on one Friday in July (i.e. the 17th), the whole thing becomes purely circular and we could be relying on the timesheets to corroborate what is in the timesheets.

On the present evidence, I just can't see how it can be stated as a fact that Rawes was at Battlecrease on Friday 17th July. I appreciate that one timesheet shows that Eddie was at Battlecrease between 15th and 21st July but, on your own account, the timesheets are not always accurate as to who is present. So how do we know Eddie wasn't also working at Battlecrease on Friday 12th June 1992? In fact, what was he doing on that day? If he wasn't at Battlecrease, where was he?

[Herlock Sholmes]

Hi Herlock--you'll have figured it out for yourself, but in reference to my earlier post, I'm not disputing that there aren't unanswered questions about Rawes' memo book.

I could have worded it better, but I only meant that IF Rawes method of dating his encounter is as described by Caz (and there might be more to it) then it bears a strong similarity to Tim Martin-Wright's methods, only more so.

RP

No problem, Roger, I understood what you meant.

I do have a question for you, though. Are you able to explain to me the significance of the purchase of the hat stand in dating the conversation between Davies and Dodgson? I'm afraid I've no idea how that could have helped Tim. Is it that he thinks he visited a nearby antiques shop in Bootle to buy the hat stand on the day he was told by Dodgson of his conversation with Davies?

[rjpalmer]

I do have a question for you, though. Are you able to explain to me the significance of the purchase of the hat stand in dating the conversation between Davies and Dodgson?

In a word? No.

[caz]

Morning Campers,

I've got good news and bad news for you.

I'm off to the Land of Love Me Do tomorrow for a long Cavern weekend - positively no diary research! - and then our kids will be coming to stay for a while, and after that we're on a countdown to our September fortnight somewhere even hotter than it has been here in the UK of late.

I'm sure everyone will enjoy the peace and quiet and the tumbleweed which will now descend on this troubled place, with all its nagging questions left hanging in the air, and nothing for anyone to do but guess if they are getting vaguely warm or stone cold.

The bad news is that five balls on the lotto last night means we didn't win the jackpot, or I'd have been putting my trotters up for good.

Carry on speculating, chaps!

Love,

The Old Sow-and-Sow
X

[caz]

No, Caz, I didn't say that I assumed Eddie was shown the the timesheets "because of a question asked in advance by David Barrat". I said I assumed Eddie was shown the timesheets because of what James Johnson said when answering that question. You don't appear to be denying that Eddie was shown the timesheets. It seems to be obvious that he must have been shown those timesheets. James Johnston made clear he was going to show them to Eddie only a few weeks before seeing him, and he surely couldn't have forgotten. So I repeat what I said, namely that you've confirmed that Eddie couldn't say what he was doing on 9th March 1992, even with the benefit of the timesheets.

As for Brian Rawes, you say that he only went there once "on Friday 17th July 1992" but that's precisely what we're trying to establish. How do we know he went there on Friday 17th July 1992 as opposed to some other day? There doesn't seem to be any documentary record of his being at Battlecrease that day. At one time he thought he was there in June by reference to an old daily memo book but you don't explain what it was in that old book which suggested to him that he had been there in June. You now tell me his suggestion of the 17th July date in October 1993 might have been based on "Colin Rhodes's records" but if that means the timesheets, which only showed Eddie as having been present at Battlecrease on one Friday in July (i.e. the 17th), the whole thing becomes purely circular and we could be relying on the timesheets to corroborate what is in the timesheets.

On the present evidence, I just can't see how it can be stated as a fact that Rawes was at Battlecrease on Friday 17th July. I appreciate that one timesheet shows that Eddie was at Battlecrease between 15th and 21st July but, on your own account, the timesheets are not always accurate as to who is present. So how do we know Eddie wasn't also working at Battlecrease on Friday 12th June 1992? In fact, what was he doing on that day? If he wasn't at Battlecrease, where was he?

Just a quick one before I go off in a cloud of evil smelling smoke.

As far as I know, Eddie has never been shown a Battlecrease timesheet. He was completely unaware, back in June 2018, while giving his account in the drive of Dodd's house, of what work records James may or may not have possessed, and I didn't see him being shown any documentation afterwards.

I can't give you the detailed information you want, Herlock, and there's nothing either of us can do about it. We will have to wait until it's all in the public domain.

I'm so sorry to leave you in a state of limbo, but there we are.

[rjpalmer]

Are you able to explain to me the significance of the purchase of the hat stand in dating the conversation between Davies and Dodgson? I'm afraid I've no idea how that could have helped Tim.

Setting aside the tedium of these inquiries, a companion question would be when did TMW "recover" this memory of having left a hall stand or a hat stand at APS?

Initially, he couldn't pinpoint when the conversation occurred. He gave a vague, six-month window.

But as I understand it, Keith Skinner didn't reopen the investigation into the Curious Case of Paul Feldman and the Electricians until sometime in the 2000s, ie., post-Anne Graham, and it appears that some of these blokes weren't reinterviewed until 2014 or later. So they are being asked to recover memories from years--or decades--earlier.

So I don't think we've ever been given enough information to determine when TMW's memory began to shift to where he now began to associate the conversation with a specific episode involving a hall stand. But it appears as if it must have been years later.

Maybe you'll see it differently, but it seems to me that the standards of what constitutes reliable "witness" testimony¹ is shifting radically depending on what the theorist wants to believe. Rawes' account of Eddie being at Battlecrease in June is dismissed as unreliable even though Rawes specifically referred to a memo book about the job itself, and even though Shirley Harrison must have interviewed him back in the mid-to-late 1990s.

But TMW, who is not truly a witness to anything, and was never at Dodd's house and didn't know Eddie, etc., is deemed reliable even though--unless I understand it improperly--he wasn't interviewed about the hall stand until many years after the fact, and (unlike Rawes) his memo book was not even related to anything to do with the work at Dodd's house nor (specifically) to any conversation.

Can you appreciate my concerns?

¹I use the term "witness" loosely, because I don't see how TMW is a witness to anything. His only usefulness to the theory is that he supposedly heard a rumor about the diary before Feldman entered the equation and had a chance to muddy the waters or to allegedly offer filthy lucre for information. I couldn't say, but I'm assuming someone later noticed that this minor "witness," TMW, was placing this conversation to pre-Feldman so it was only at that point that it was thought necessary to recontact TMW and ask him if he could pinpoint the date of the conversation more specifically, and it was then that the hall rack connection was discussed.