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

[Abby Normal]

Why doesn't anyone get so angry about Lewis Carroll, Robert Mann, Albert Bachert, Neil Cream, Arthur Conan Doyle etc as they appear to over anything connected to the diary?

How is it that no-one insinuates that the authors of the above books aren't intentially and dishonestly ripping everyone off?

Why is anyone who even allows of slightest (even vanishingly small) possibility that the diary may not be a hoax, or might be other than a 'modern' hoax, is insulted as a gullible idiot?

Why is a book being rubbished by intelligent people who have yet to read it but are quite happy to call its supporters biased?

Because the diary has been around for so long don't we think that simple 'opposition' has festered into unreasonable hatred? It's almost as if people feel the thing to be 'evil.' I got a bit angry with the Conan Doyle book because I admire Doyle hugely (as you could guess from my name) but it's gone now. I don't hold on to it like a longstanding feud. If someone wants to accuse ACD it's up to them and their own consciences. History will judge. The diary, however, appears to transcend reason. Like many on here I've been interested in this case for around 30 years. This fact doesn't make me any more knowledgeable, reasonable or honest than anyone else. I can recall though the downright anger at the diary from the start; even before most people had any real knowledge of it.

All I'm trying to say is, and I'm agreeing with Paul here, shouldn't we just wait and read the book? Doesn't really take a genius does it? It's what we do. Read a book then debate its content. The diary is still here; whatever our individual thoughts on it. My own position is that it's far, far more likely to be a forgery than not. I just have that very, very tiny 'worm of doubt,' which makes me want to find out more. I dont think that qualifies me as a gullible idiot and, although I try not to be, it makes me a little angry when it's insinuated that I am!

HI HS
I dont think your a "gullible idiot". Not at all. Just an idiot. Hehehe. JK-you know I love you. (in the platonic sense of course)

have a great weekend.

[caz]

Yeah but treading in dog turd has much the same effect.

Does it, Harry? I prefer to look where I'm going. Great way to keep your friends and avoid making a mess on their carpet.

Love,

Caz
X

[caz]

Hi Paul
Thanks for your reasonable and even keeled response. As usual your a scholar and a gentleman.

and I note your remark about "The Final Solution...has probably introduced more people to the subject.."

of course I would prefer people to be first introduced to the subject through one of your books, or say Sugden, but I see what you mean and I guess the possible good thing is if it or any of this other stuff I dislike inspires some newcomer to do great research on the subject or perhaps spark someones memory of crazy family stories to go up in the attic and check that old chest well I guess that's the silver lining isn't it?

Happy Friday.

You do know, Abby, that you are only able to air your views here about what's ripper history and what isn't because of the diary?

The casebook came into being as a direct result IIRC.

Happy Friday one and all.

And may Chelsea beat the you-know-what out of Leicester tomorrow!

Love,

Caz
X

[Elamarna]

Been watching this thread most of week.

Some of the comments on both sides are just a little over the top.

Has someone who actually heard Robert Smith last Sunday, I at least have some idea, agreed limited, of what we may expect from the new book.

1. High production value.

2. Arguments for the ink used . These apparently shown scientifically to be more than a few tens of years old.

3. Naming of possible finders and date of.

This seems to be dependent on believing it all happened on same day and denials of those involved. Seems to be based on company time sheets, which while showing who work at the house each day, cannot establish a date of finding.


There must I assume be more in the book, however it does not appear to be close to establishing any more than it is an older hoax at best.

My view is best to wait until publication, but on present limited information it is not earth shattering nor case closing.


Steve

[Abby Normal]

You do know, Abby, that you are only able to air your views here about what's ripper history and what isn't because of the diary?

The casebook came into being as a direct result IIRC.

Happy Friday one and all.

And may Chelsea beat the you-know-what out of Leicester tomorrow!

Love,

Caz
X

I did not know that- LOL!

as I mentioned to Paul-silver lining!

go Leicester! ; )

[caz]

"Team Diary" speaks

Right then you 'orrible lot. Listen up. I have received the following messages from legitimate [or for those who prefer the full picture - illegitimate] paid-up members of.... "Team Diary":

"I am still trying to prove the diary a modern fake."

Keith Skinner


"Ripperologists are a terrible bunch of !"£$%^&& **+*&^%$££Y!!!!

- and Caz is the worst."

Bruce Robinson


The next one took a little while to come through:

"AnD tHat is How I wRot tHe DAiRy AnD tHAts tHe GoDs Honist tRutH."

Michael Barrett


The last one came 30 seconds later:

"I RetRAct tHAt lAst stAteMent - AnD wHAt HAve you."

Michael Barrett


More from "Team Diary" coming soon - I'm sure there must be more team members just itching to communicate.

Have a great weekend. I'm off to see a Beatles tribute band in Beer tonight.

It's costing me a tenner plus taxis and I don't know why I'm bothering. Bloody fakers.

https://fabbeatles.com/shows/beer-regatta-beer-devon-available/

Love,

Caz
X

[Herlock Sholmes]

HI HS
I dont think your a "gullible idiot". Not at all. Just an idiot. Hehehe. JK-you know I love you. (in the platonic sense of course)

have a great weekend.

You too Abby

[PaulB]

Hi Ike,

I wonder if Trevy ever asked Robert Smith to act as literary agent for him.

If so it might explain everything. I would offer to act as Trevy's literacy agent but I'm not sure he'd understood the offer.

Love,

Caz
X

If that was the case, I'm sure Trev would have 'fessed up, don't you? Enjoy the fake Beatles.

[c.d.]

Hi Paul,

I hate to display my ignorance so openly but in all my many years on this site I never realized that you are in fact Paul Begg. I am a big fan and very pleased that you contribute here.

c.d.

[PaulB]

Hi Paul
Thanks for your reasonable and even keeled response. As usual your a scholar and a gentleman.

and I note your remark about "The Final Solution...has probably introduced more people to the subject.."

of course I would prefer people to be first introduced to the subject through one of your books, or say Sugden, but I see what you mean and I guess the possible good thing is if it or any of this other stuff I dislike inspires some newcomer to do great research on the subject or perhaps spark someones memory of crazy family stories to go up in the attic and check that old chest well I guess that's the silver lining isn't it?

Happy Friday.

Hi Abby
My first Ripper book was Donald McCormick's, so I guess he's got a lot to answer for! Have a great weekend.
Paul

[PaulB]

Hi Paul,

I hate to display my ignorance so openly but in all my many years on this site I never realized that you are in fact Paul Begg. I am a big fan and very pleased that you contribute here.

c.d.

Hi c.d.,
It's always good to know one's efforts are appreciated. Many thanks.

Cheers
Paul

[caz]

Hi Abby
My first Ripper book was Donald McCormick's, so I guess he's got a lot to answer for! Have a great weekend.
Paul

Hi Paul,

Before Phil gets his knickers in another unholy twist, I trust you meant the first ripper book you read was Donald McCormick's, not the first one you wrote!

Otherwise you'd have a lot to answer for.

Love,

Caz
X

[caz]

If that was the case, I'm sure Trev would have 'fessed up, don't you?

Oh I'm sure he will 'fess up now, Paul, if that is the case and he hasn't fessed up before.

Enjoy the fake Beatles.

Thank you. But should I really be enjoying something that's fake? How will I hold my head up afterwards? I suppose I could pretend to hate every minute while I'm dancing and singing along.

Love,

Caz
X

[David Orsam]

It is defining because it encapsulates another truth, this one spoken - as I recall - by Keith Skinner: "We just can't shake it".

And 25 years later, we still can't (despite Mr Orsam's best efforts).

Holocaust denial continues more than 70 years after the end of the Second World War, we just can't shake it, but just because there are some people who refuse to face facts, it doesn't mean that the Holocaust didn't happen.

[David Orsam]

One off had been used before, but the diarist was apparently the first to pair 'one off' with 'instance'.

I just want to clarify this, not to re-open the entire discussion but because it could cause confusion in the future, possibly on other forums, if I remain silent.

While it might be literally true that Maybrick was the first to pair "one off" with "instance", the point I have made is that the author of the diary was the first to use "one off" to mean something other than a manufactured item, product, job, design, etc. It isn't known to have been used in a similar (metaphorical) way again, to refer to an event, until after the Second World War. So the point would be exactly the same if the author had said that hitting his wife was a "one off" without using the word word "instance".

I might add that there is not even a single confirmed example of "one off" having been used before 1888 to mean a unique item, job or similar.