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

[Mike J. G.]

Sure.

The main summation is thanks to the will, which hasn't been proven 100% to be from James.

What books have you read regarding the diary?

You ask ALOT of questions, strikes me you don't know the details nearly well enough to hold such a strong (aggressive) opinion.

No, there is also a letter, which I believe is from America(?) IIRC.

You seem more interested in the idea that the handwriting on the will/letter may not me James's, but totally accept that the dubious diary was his, bit odd.

Don't you worry yourself about what I've read, Kaz. You keep insinuating that I don't know the details, yet you seem unable to tell me what I'm supposed to be incorrect on. That's frankly hilarious.

[Monty]

Sorry, Monty, but what's your interest in this?

Keith has already handed the notes over for anyone who is willing or able to put them up on casebook and I understand they are being put up on jtrforums tomorrow.

I'm not sure why anyone expects him to do any more than that and I don't know what his workload is like at the moment.

Love,

Caz
X

Apologies Caz, as someone who has been interested in Ripperology since the age of 12, I naturally assumed an interest in all things connected.

I didn't realise Keith offered them to Casebook. I assume, yet again, these were offered to Spry, yes?

And I'm slightly surprised Ripperologist has not taken up this offer, what with them being a respected publication and free.

Monty

[Kaz]

No, there is also a letter, which I believe is from America(?) IIRC.

You seem more interested in the idea that the handwriting on the will/letter may not me James's, but totally accept that the dubious diary was his, bit odd.

Don't you worry yourself about what I've read, Kaz. You keep insinuating that I don't know the details, yet you seem unable to tell me what I'm supposed to be incorrect on. That's frankly hilarious.

Thats the thing, Mike, you DON'T know the full details.

You haven't read roberts new book.

Keep digging though, you'll get the answers you don't want to read soon enough..I'm sure.

[Mike J. G.]

Thats the thing, Mike, you DON'T know the full details.

You haven't read roberts new book.

Keep digging though, you'll get the answers you don't want to read soon enough..I'm sure.

Have you read it, Kaz? I only ask because you don't seem to be able to quote any of it, despite claiming that all of these errors are explained away.

You're definitely the type of person who would jump at the chance to shut those blasted naysayers up, yet you're unable to do so, and me thinks it has something to do with the lack of rebuttal.

[Kaz]

Have you read it, Kaz? I only ask because you don't seem to be able to quote any of it, despite claiming that all of these errors are explained away.

You're definitely the type of person who would jump at the chance to shut those blasted naysayers up, yet you're unable to do so, and me thinks it has something to do with the lack of rebuttal.

The fact that you've disrepected so many open minded posters on here (like myself) I take more satisfaction from you SQUIRMING for those answers... you being the #1 fan an all...

[Mike J. G.]

The fact that you've disrepected so many open minded posters on here (like myself) I take more satisfaction from you SQUIRMING for those answers... you being the #1 fan an all...

Who have I disrespected other than some 44 y/o oddball who makes fun of Asperger's and shows no respect to anyone else?

You call it squirming, I call it laughing at your inability to refute any of those pesky errors, despite having spent £25 on a book which you'd been led to believe wrapped it all up neatly, lol. More fool you, lad.

[Kaz]

Who have I disrespected other than some 44 y/o oddball who makes fun of Asperger's and shows no respect to anyone else?

You call it squirming, I call it laughing at your inability to refute any of those pesky errors, despite having spent £25 on a book which you'd been led to believe wrapped it all up neatly, lol. More fool you, lad.

You've disrespected herlock for starters, poor guys only been playing devils advocate...

I've retired, I can afford £25 (unlike yourself). the answers work for me, thanks for asking

[Mike J. G.]

You've disrespected herlock for starters, poor guys only been playing devils advocate...

I've retired, I can afford £25 (unlike yourself). the answers work for me, thanks for asking

Your brain is retired, Kaz, and probably your sex-life, too, which is why you spend so much time trolling this forum and openly refusing to discuss anything, like the bitter little mid-life-crisis that you are.

I've got no issues with Herlock, I just don't agree with his stance, he at least doesn't actively seek to troll the thread and make odd comments about mental health issues. It's about time you sorted yourself out, Kaz.

[Henry Flower]

The fact that you've disrepected so many open minded posters on here (like myself) I take more satisfaction from you SQUIRMING for those answers... you being the #1 fan an all...

You are without doubt the most transparently dishonest person I've come across on the boards. You are also, by some distance, the worst at reasoning, at logic, and understanding evidence. Your constant failure to understand the burden of proof, and your habit of CAPITALISING it for emphasis make your posts read like those of a 14 year old. I'm genuinely astonished if you're really in your 40s. The Asperger's question was repellant and ignorant. There is no such word as "alot" in the sense you're using it: you mean "a lot".

Seriously, just grow up. For your own sake. You're making a fool of yourself.

[Mike J. G.]

Well said, Henry.

It's a shame that there's always one poster who tries to derail a thread with obvious diversion brought about by frustration at an inability to make a proper rebuttal.

[Ally]

I haven't personally taken it to any experts, have you?

The experts are in books...sadly the ones you trash as they're bias..

so we're back to square one.

So what you are saying is you completely made up your assertion that several experts disagreed with the claim that there are anachronisms. So basically you lied to support your position.

So. There's that. Thanks for playing.

[Ally]

I didn't realise Keith offered them to Casebook. I assume, yet again, these were offered to Spry, yes?

And I'm slightly surprised Ripperologist has not taken up this offer, what with them being a respected publication and free.

Monty

As far as I am aware, no offer was made.

[Kaz]

Your brain is retired, Kaz, and probably your sex-life, too, which is why you spend so much time trolling this forum and openly refusing to discuss anything, like the bitter little mid-life-crisis that you are.

I've got no issues with Herlock, I just don't agree with his stance, he at least doesn't actively seek to troll the thread and make odd comments about mental health issues. It's about time you sorted yourself out, Kaz.

And now you're mocking my sex life...wow. Anything else you want to throw at me?

You keep digging for the info you so desire (surely you need a new shovel by now? ask your mates to buy you a new one..), but carry on railroading others opinions in the mean time..


The fact you've bought up mental health issues SO often since I queried a condition you 'may' or may not have...yea, think I touched a nerve there, didn't I

[Mike J. G.]

So what you are saying is you completely made up your assertion that several experts disagreed with the claim that there are anachronisms. So basically you lied to support your position.

So. There's that. Thanks for playing.

It really is baffling and a struggle to have a proper reasoned discussion with people who flat-out make stuff up and ignore obvious problems.

As I've said before, if the diary ever turned out to be genuine, it'd be a true wonder that all of those coincidences were truly that, as opposed to being the red flags that they should be.

The chances of there being so many genuinely innocent coincidences in a dubious diary with a dodgy provenance are slim and none, and slim just left the building.

What're we left with that goes in favour of the diary? Well, some posters have mentioned that it would be difficult to replicate, which is odd, considering that'd prove nothing, and nobody's actually bothered trying, because it'd be an exercise in futility.

[Admin]

The next person who posts a personal attack on this thread will receive a two month ban. If you can't argue without descending into personal invective that has nothing to do with the case, don't post here.