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

[John G]

Is this a derivative of the same company? http://www.merseyside.com/info/11239/

It seems Portus and Rhodes have an office based on St. Mary's road, Garston, which is mere minutes away from my house and Battlecrease. Is this the same group who carried out the work in 1992?

If so, I could possibly make inquiries as to whether any records exist of previous work at the house before 1992, and if there are records for when the work was ordered by Dodd.

E.T.A

Bloody hell, I pass this place all the time, and I think the sign is still there: http://www.rightmove.co.uk/commercia...-58719146.html

I'd not made any connection that this was the place, seems it's been sold on, or has been put up for sale. I was only in Garston just yesterday and passed that building.

The Rightmove advert says that the building was originally Portus and Rhodes, electrical contractors. That means they're no longer trading, so how did Bruce Robinson obtain the old timesheets? Why would a defunct small business keep timesheets from a quarter of a century ago? What's going on?

[Mike J. G.]

The Rightmove advert says that the building was originally Portus and Rhodes, electrical contractors. That means they're no longer trading, so how did Bruce Robinson obtain the old timesheets? Why would a defunct small business keep timesheets from a quarter of a century ago? What's going on?

I've wondered that myself, John. There seems to be more than one Portus and Rhodes beyond Liverpool, but I can't quite find out if they're all connected or not.

The one in Garston seems to have been gone for some unknown amount of time, but the building is still there, I'm not sure it's been sold yet.

I don't understand why a bigger branch of the firm (if there is any) would hold the records for the smaller firms based around the country, least of all records from 1992. That one in Garston was tiny, and likely didn't have the room to store all the various records from years/decades past. Unless they all went onto a database, in which case some more sap had to transfer records from decades ago onto the system, for some unknown purpose.

[Ally]

Tbf, the house in question (if it was indeed ever found there, it's doubtful that it was) is historic for the Maybrick story. If anything was found there, it'd be of significance, as the story of Jim and Flo' was a very well-known one.

This presumes that the electricians gave a fat rat's ass about the Maybrick story at all. Just because we find a subject interesting, one should never presume that others do, or have a sufficient interest to know sufficient detail about the events to know the address where they take place, or care.

If a book was found purporting to be the diary of the Ripper, it'd be of some significance, especially being found in such an historic and significant house.

They'd have to have read it to know it was about Jack the Ripper, and again, have enough immediate knowledge on the spot to connect it to Jack the Ripper.

Again, just because a subject interests us, we should not presume anyone else involved had even more than a passing idea of the story.


We are meant to presume that random electricians knew enough about true crime history to connect two obscure cases in a cursory overview of a diary they found under the floorboards and immediately make the connections.

Right.

[Mike J. G.]

If I'm reading correctly, the building had been with the former client's (Portus and Rhodes) family since 1914, and was put up for sale after the owner's retirement.

What're the chances that they kept records from 1914 all the way up to the time of sale?

[GUT]

On one hand, we're being told that Devereux gave it to Barrett, and on the other, we're being told that the electrician/Rigby gave it to Barrett.

It's odd that those three men were all connected in at least one way or other; Devereux knew Barrett, and also lived in the same street as Rigby.

When was Barrett supposed to have loaned Devereux the Whittington-Egan book containing the Maybrick chapters? Is this known?

And on yet another hand that it had been in Anne's family for ages.

So many lies yet people still believe it's genuine.

[John G]

If I'm reading correctly, the building had been with the former client's (Portus and Rhodes) family since 1914, and was put up for sale after the owner's retirement.

What're the chances that they kept records from 1914 all the way up to the time of sale?

They'd have definitely needed a very large basement, Mike!

[Mike J. G.]

This presumes that the electricians gave a fat rat's ass about the Maybrick story at all. Just because we find a subject interesting, one should never presume that others do, or have a sufficient interest to know sufficient detail about the events to know the address where they take place, or care.

Well, the story is that they did care, tbf. I find it hard to believe that anyone working in an historic building (which they surely knew the story of, being local men) and finding an old book beneath the floorboards would not be interested.

I'm not saying I'd expect them to steal it, but I'd expect them to take interest.

They'd have to have read it to know it was about Jack the Ripper, and again, have enough immediate knowledge on the spot to connect it to Jack the Ripper.

It's not a very long book, though, so it's entirely plausible that they'd flip through it and read the front and the back, the back page contains the name of the killer. I always look at old books in that manner, so it's not impossible.

Again, just because a subject interests us, we should not presume anyone else involved had even more than a passing idea of the story.


We are meant to presume that random electricians knew enough about true crime history to connect two obscure cases in a cursory overview of a diary they found under the floorboards and immediately make the connections.

Right.

It's not that this was a vague old story, though, Ally. The Maybrick story is a very well-known one in this city, of which many people are aware of. There is a wonderful mural down in Aigburth Vale of James and Florence, for instance, which has nothing to do with the Ripper diary.

I don't doubt that they knew before working on the house that it was the Maybrick home. Everyone round here knows about it, and it had been well written about long before 1992.

I get what you're saying, but I don't see any real problems with it.

[Mike J. G.]

They'd have definitely needed a very large basement, Mike!

That's the other thing, it wasn't a very big building. It supposedly had 8 rooms, some of which were in a bad state at the time of sale.

I'd guess that records were transferred onto computer at some point, but I can't see why they'd transfer data from the early 90's onto it, unless they had good reason for doing so.

Also, the fact that this place had been there since 1914 under the same family, makes me think that this was an independent branch of the company, meaning it'd be unlikely that they'd have shared their records with other branches, if there were other branches to begin with.

What I don't understand is if Robinson obtained these time-sheets, why did he not also obtain the record for the date of the initial contact from Dodd to the company? It is likely that Dodd and his father had used the same company in the past, seeing as the place (Battlecrease) was renovated in the 60's, and Portus and Rhodes was a mere 20 minute walk away.

I'm of the opinion that there had been other works at the house by Portus and Rhodes, at least once.

There should've been records for the transactions, if there were still records of time-sheets, surely. Why didn't Robinson ask about any of this?

[Mike J. G.]

And on yet another hand that it had been in Anne's family for ages.

So many lies yet people still believe it's genuine.

lol, true!!

[Mike J. G.]

The fact that "Battlecrease" was/is such a big property, it is odd to think that any member of Portus and Rhodes would risk losing such a valuable contract by stealing a book from there, not to mention risking their job and potential legal action.

I think if Robinson had dug a little deeper, he'd have found more than just the one transaction between Dodd and P&R.

I would be surprised that in all the years of the Dodd's owning the property that they hadn't used P&R at least once or twice before, as they were literally the nearest company of that kind to the house, and were in business at the time.

If Rigby had worked there before, or was with the company when they had, and Rigby knew Barrett/Devereux, then it's a bit weird, and would leave room for possible planning between the men. Not concrete, but it's a thought.

[Ally]

There was a famous murder in my town a few decades ago. People all know the story. People were riveted by the story. People talked incessantly over the story and tuned in daily for the latest scoonch of gossip. A house featured prominently in this murder. People could no more point out the house than they could fly.

Battlecrease was not kept as a museum or relic. Other people lived there. Basically, it's expecting people to know that a serial killer lived in a particular house, enough to decide the book was noteworthy, enough to steal, but not feel any understanding that this would be directly tied to battlecrease house if they did anything with it. Which rendered it worthless to them.

This presupposed an utter knowledge of the importance of the find, with a complete obliviousness of how it's easily traced.

Why steal something that you can literally make no profit from?

[Mike J. G.]

There was a famous murder in my town a few decades ago. People all know the story. People were riveted by the story. People talked incessantly over the story and tuned in daily for the latest scoonch of gossip. A house featured prominently in this murder. People could no more point out the house than they could fly.

Battlecrease was not kept as a museum or relic. Other people lived there. Basically, it's expecting people to know that a serial killer lived in a particular house, enough to decide the book was noteworthy, enough to steal, but not feel any understanding that this would be directly tied to battlecrease house if they did anything with it. Which rendered it worthless to them.

This presupposed an utter knowledge of the importance of the find, with a complete obliviousness of how it's easily traced.

Why steal something that you can literally make no profit from?

All I can tell you is that this house is very well known, Ally, the Maybrick murder and trial was big news in the UK and in the USA, and led to much debate and speculation on the legal system of the era. It was written about by many prominent writers and local historians. Yabs posted a short sample of the volume of stuff that has been written and broadcast about the murder.

I'd be surprised if the men working there were unaware of its history. When you say people lived there after, it wasn't many people. Fletcher Rogers, foreman at the inquest for James's death, was living there after the trial, and then the Dodd's had it in 1940. I'm not sure how many people there were between Rogers and Dodd.

I don't doubt that a profit could easily be made from stealing such a thing, not that I'm convinced it was stolen at all.

E.T.A

Battlecrease is as much ingrained into the fabric of the city as Penny Lane.

[Mike J. G.]

Something we have to bear in mind is that in 1992, it hadn't been long since much literature on the Maybrick's had been republished in this city, in RWE's Liverpool series, which were also featured as weekly installments in the local paper. We're talking late 80's. The prime time for a hoax re: Maybrick and the Ripper would be around the time the diary came about, unsurprisingly, when people were made aware once again of the Maybrick story.

[John G]

The fact that "Battlecrease" was/is such a big property, it is odd to think that any member of Portus and Rhodes would risk losing such a valuable contract by stealing a book from there, not to mention risking their job and potential legal action.

I think if Robinson had dug a little deeper, he'd have found more than just the one transaction between Dodd and P&R.

I would be surprised that in all the years of the Dodd's owning the property that they hadn't used P&R at least once or twice before, as they were literally the nearest company of that kind to the house, and were in business at the time.

If Rigby had worked there before, or was with the company when they had, and Rigby knew Barrett/Devereux, then it's a bit weird, and would leave room for possible planning between the men. Not concrete, but it's a thought.

The point Feldman made about provenance is interesting, though. As I noted earlier, Barrett apparently went to see one of the electricians and accused him of being a liar. But if the diary did come from Battlecrease, why would he do that? Bearing in mind that the connection with Battlecrease would have provided him with considerably better provenance than the tenuous story he came up with, which I believe is that it had been in Anne's family since 1943.

[Mike J. G.]

The point Feldman made about provenance is interesting, though. As I noted earlier, Barrett apparently went to see one of the electricians and accused him of being a liar. But if the diary did come from Battlecrease, why would he do that? Bearing in mind that the connection with Battlecrease would have provided him with considerably better provenance than the tenuous story he came up with, which I believe is that it had been in Anne's family since 1943.

Was he calling him a liar regarding the electrician denying involvement, or regarding the electrician having stated that the book was taken from Battlecrease?

It is odd. I'm a bit perplexed at each of the stories re: provenance, tbh, lol.

Something isn't quite right, and I don't think any time-sheet will help the situation as far as believers are concerned.

Robinson should've obtained all relevant information re: the job at the house. When was it initiated by Dodd? etc. If Dodd had arranged for the work to be done weeks in advance, it leaves questions re: the "finding of the diary" and the connections between Rigby and Barrett.