25 YEARS OF THE DIARY OF JACK THE RIPPER: THE TRUE FACTS by Robert Smith

[Observer]

It's now a week since the Liverpool event, and the silence from it has been truly deafening over the diary, both here and at JtR forums. Does anyone know why this is?
Even the Facebook sites are very quiet over the event.

Given we were all told to wait, this seems odd to me.

Any ideas?
Anyone?

Steve

Indeed Steve. Some of the more high profile "Ripperologists" for want of a better word, have spoken in this thread about the possibility of an "old hoax", again for want of a better word. I suspect therefore that there's a book in the making there. I wouldn't be surprised if we saw a book in the not too distant future, dedicated to the "old hoax theory".

You know, I ask myself what are the motives behind the production of such books. In my opinion there is ample evidence to suggest that the Diary is a modern hoax, and yet these books still continue to be produced. Is profit the reason behind such publications? Alternatively, do the authors genuinely believe they have the correct answer to the riddle? I don't know.

I am in the process of reading Matthew Smiths, "JFK The Second Plot". Now the blurb in the inside dust cover is reasonable, it speaks of newly released radio messages recorded at the time of the assassination, new interviews with people involved in the detection of the assassin, etc. All in all a reasonable description of what appears to be new evidence which might suggest a cover-up with regard to the Kennedy assassination. Go read the book! All I'll say is Mathew Smith is a nut. Did I feel robbed? Yes, and I only paid two quid for it in a charity shop. Some poor bugger meanwhile got mugged out of £14 99 when the book was originally purchased.

So it is with certain JTR publications. An "old hoax" ? Buyer beware.

[Observer]

By the way, you speak of the silence following the Liverpool conference. The excellent poster Mike J.G. I believe attended the conference in question. Mike, has posted some excellent points with regard to the Diary being a modern hoax here in this thread. Curiously nothing has emerged from Mike J.G. regarding the conference either. Do you think he has been nobbled?

[Herlock Sholmes]

Indeed Steve. Some of the more high profile "Ripperologists" for want of a better word, have spoken in this thread about the possibility of an "old hoax", again for want of a better word. I suspect therefore that there's a book in the making there. I wouldn't be surprised if we saw a book in the not too distant future, dedicated to the "old hoax theory".

You know, I ask myself what are the motives behind the production of such books. In my opinion there is ample evidence to suggest that the Diary is a modern hoax, and yet these books still continue to be produced. Is profit the reason behind such publications? Alternatively, do the authors genuinely believe they have the correct answer to the riddle? I don't know.

I am in the process of reading Matthew Smiths, "JFK The Second Plot". Now the blurb in the inside dust cover is reasonable, it speaks of newly released radio messages recorded at the time of the assassination, new interviews with people involved in the detection of the assassin, etc. All in all a reasonable description of what appears to be new evidence which might suggest a cover-up with regard to the Kennedy assassination. Go read the book! All I'll say is Mathew Smith is a nut. Did I feel robbed? Yes, and I only paid two quid for it in a charity shop. Some poor bugger meanwhile got mugged out of £14 99 when the book was originally purchased.

So it is with certain JTR publications. An "old hoax" ? Buyer beware.

Hi Observer,

If you haven't already read it go for 'Reinventing History' by Vincent Bugliosi. For me it's not just the best researched book on the assassination it's probably the best researched true crime book ever. It took him 20 years to do and he chases down every minute detail, every statement and every conspiracy theory. For me it's absolutely game over. It was Oswald working alone.

[Herlock Sholmes]

By the way, you speak of the silence following the Liverpool conference. The excellent poster Mike J.G. I believe attended the conference in question. Mike, has posted some excellent points with regard to the Diary being a modern hoax here in this thread. Curiously nothing has emerged from Mike J.G. regarding the conference either. Do you think he has been nobbled?

Maybe they've converted him

[Observer]

Hi Observer,

If you haven't already read it go for 'Reinventing History' by Vincent Bugliosi. For me it's not just the best researched book on the assassination it's probably the best researched true crime book ever. It took him 20 years to do and he chases down every minute detail, every statement and every conspiracy theory. For me it's absolutely game over. It was Oswald working alone.

Hi HS

Thanks for that I'll see if I can find a copy. Yes in my opinion it was Oswald as a lone assassin. I have Bugliosi's "Helter Skelter" which is excellent.

Smith's reasoning as to why Oswald could not have been officer Tippit's murderer is quite simply bizarre. He shows a photograph of officer Tippit's car taken shortly after the murder, and asks "whose is that coat on the back seat", insinuating that there was someone else in Tippit's car on the day he was murdered. Looks nothing like a coat to me. Apparently Jack Ruby entered the hospital where JFK had been taken after his murder, and planted a bullet on the trolley which had carried Senator Connelly. And it goes on.

Offers exceeding the sum of nothing, and less than the sum of 5p will secure the ownership of this book.

[Observer]

Maybe they've converted him

The way in which he castigated the Diary in this thread, perhaps he's floating in the Mersey. Only kidding by the way.

[Henry Flower]

Hi Observer,

If you haven't already read it go for 'Reinventing History' by Vincent Bugliosi. For me it's not just the best researched book on the assassination it's probably the best researched true crime book ever. It took him 20 years to do and he chases down every minute detail, every statement and every conspiracy theory. For me it's absolutely game over. It was Oswald working alone.

I agree 100% Herlock - that book is an amazing piece of work. Anyone who can read that and still believe in any conspiracy is someone who quite literally cannot and should not be reasoned with.

[Henry Flower]

Hi HS

Thanks for that I'll see if I can find a copy. Yes in my opinion it was Oswald as a lone assassin. I have Bugliosi's "Helter Skelter" which is excellent.

Smith's reasoning as to why Oswald could not have been officer Tippit's murderer is quite simply bizarre. He shows a photograph of officer Tippit's car taken shortly after the murder, and asks "whose is that coat on the back seat", insinuating that there was someone else in Tippit's car on the day he was murdered. Looks nothing like a coat to me. Apparently Jack Ruby entered the hospital where JFK had been taken after his murder, and planted a bullet on the trolley which had carried Senator Connelly. And it goes on.

Offers exceeding the sum of nothing, and less than the sum of 5p will secure the ownership of this book.

I love this old chestnut: before it was known how many bullets or fragments had been recovered the conspirators planted a bullet on the trolley: the only thing that could possibly have achieved is to make a conspiracy more obvious. Obviously: the more bullets that turn up, the less likely it is that Oswald's bolt-action rifle could've done all the shooting. For all they knew, that planted bullet alone could've completely exposed the conspiracy!

[Herlock Sholmes]

Hi Henry/Observer,

The only problem with Bugliosi's book is that it's 1,500 pages or so. I may be wrong but I'd think that you might struggle to get it cheaply. Luckily I got it as a birthday present.

One of my favourite bits of conspiracy is about the fingerprints on the rifle. Conspiracy loons say that the Dallas Police never found Oswald's prints. Then they sent the rifle to the FBI who, hey presto, found prints! That's why you get the scene in the movie JFK (a film Bugliosi's calls 'a 3 hour lie') where you see someone pulling Oswalds arm from beneath a shroud to 'plant' fingerprints on the rifle. Bugliosi's just checked all the records and found that it was quite simply the other way around. Dallas Police found prints but they used the method where you place sticky tape over the area and lift off the prints. Unfortunately this often destroys the prints. They sent the gun to the FBI and it was them who couldn't find prints.
There's also a video which I think is still on YouTube where they held a mock trial. I think the guy defending was called Gary Spence. Bugliosi's was the prosecutor. He won of course.
I think Bugliosi's wrote a book on the OJ case too? Haven't managed to get that one yet though.

[Herlock Sholmes]

I agree 100% Herlock - that book is an amazing piece of work. Anyone who can read that and still believe in any conspiracy is someone who quite literally cannot and should not be reasoned with.

Hi Henry,

A friend once asked me about it and I described it by saying that 'it makes Sugden's book on the the ripper look like a hastily written pamphlet!'

It's a pity he couldn't have a crack at the ripper but I doubt he's got another 20 years to spare!

[Joshua Rogan]

The only problem with Bugliosi's book is that it's 1,500 pages or so. I may be wrong but I'd think that you might struggle to get it cheaply. Luckily I got it as a birthday present.

Blimey, isn't that longer than the Warren Commission's report?

[Observer]

I believe Vincent Bugoliosi has passed on HS.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Blimey, isn't that longer than the Warren Commission's report?

It's definately not a 'light read' Joshua. It's interesting written though (if you're interested in the case of course.)

[Herlock Sholmes]

I believe Vincent Bugoliosi has passed on HS.

You're right. 6th June 2015! How did I miss that? Don't recall it being on the news here? Maybe it wasn't?

[Henry Flower]

You're right. 6th June 2015! How did I miss that? Don't recall it being on the news here? Maybe it wasn't?

I'm quite active on a few Manson discussion sites. Bugliosi is not well respected by many students of the Manson case. He definitely played some shifty games during that case, and there are things in Helter Skelter that have been proven to be not quite true. But nevertheless I think he did an amazing job during that trial, and HS is still one of the most riveting true crime books you can read.