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

[Abby Normal]

Hi Abnormal

nothing ruffled, just a query

Ok well, oh I don't know-spreading and proliferation of misinformation, conmen profiting off of lies, dead innocent men being besmirched, another nail in the validity of Ripperology's coffin.

maybrick
HH holmes
sickert

bring on the circus clowns

[Phil Carter]

Phillip Sugden - The complete history of Jack The ripper - The Chapter A century of final solutions - The unacceptable provenance of the diary, the missing front pages, the factual inaccuracies and the implausibility of Maybrick as a Ripper suspect – even without forensic tests we have learned enough to set a whole belfry of warning bells ringing. A reading of the diary still leaves me baffled as to how any intelligent and reasonably informed student of the Ripper case could possibly have taken it seriously. There were those well versed in the subject, men like Nick Warren, Tom Cullen and Melvin Harris, who saw through the hoax from the beginning. Yet it is astonishing how many experts were fooled and allowed their names to be used in the promotional literature. They remain there, preserved like flies in amber, warnings to the complacent and the credulous.

Exactly.

Now I wonder if Adam Wood will name the "members" of this "Diary team"....all of them?

Or is that secret information only for those supposed to be in on this? (I use "in on this" to be read in whatever way one wishes to interpret it)

All this poster can see is a cynical..not clever..attempt to cash in on an anniversary of a subject that should..as Philip Sugden hints at..have been wiped off the face of the planet.

I do so hope this "Diary team" are proud of what they are doing. I know many that wouldn't want to be associated with this so called "truth".

Any JtR book title with "The True facts" in it will cause extreme doubt to start with.


It isn't often I agree with David Orsam. But this time time I do.



Phil

[David Orsam]

It isn't often I agree with David Orsam. But this time time I do.

I am changing my opinion forthwith.

hehe, just kidding Phil.

[Purkis]

So someone broke into Battlecrease and planted the diary under the floorboards in Maybrick's old room?

[PaulB]

Now I wonder if Adam Wood will name the "members" of this "Diary team"....all of them?

Why wouldn't Adam Wood name the members of the "team"? Why wouldn't he name 'all of them'? You must have a good reason for asking whether he would name them? It hardly seems fair to insinuate that he wouldn't without having a good reason for doing so.

Or is that secret information only for those supposed to be in on this? (I use "in on this" to be read in whatever way one wishes to interpret it)

Why do you suppose that the names of the "team" is 'secret information'? Or might be secret information? What evidence do you have for thinking this? What do you mean by 'those supposed to be 'in on this'? Why don't you make it clear what you mean, rather than leave it open for people to interpret as they wish?

And isn't the "team" those appearing at the Liverpool conference? Haven't they been touted as such by the organiser?

All this poster can see is a cynical..not clever..attempt to cash in on an anniversary of a subject that should..as Philip Sugden hints at..have been wiped off the face of the planet.

I'm not aware that Adam Wood or Robert Smith have pretended that the book isn't a tie-in with the 25th anniversary, but why do you think an expensive-to-produce limited edition book is a cynical attempt to 'cash in', rather than a genuine response to those who would value a high-quality reproduction of the diary in their Ripper book collection?

Is the organiser of the Liverpool conference also cynically attempting to cash-in on the anniversary by using it to attract attendees to his conference?

Don't you think the diary would be 'wiped off the face of the earth' (which isn't anything Sugden hinted at) by proving it to be a modern creation? Is it wrong for researchers to try and do that? Isn't that what the "team" has tried to do?

I do so hope this "Diary team" are proud of what they are doing. I know many that wouldn't want to be associated with this so called "truth".

Why shouldn't they be proud of what they are doing? If they are prepared to give their time, effort and probably money to establishing the origin of the diary, why shouldn't they?

By referring to their conclusions as the "so called" truth, are you insinuating that their motives and intentions are dishonest? Are you calling them liars?

You are insinuating serious and rather nasty things about people, Phil. I hope it's unintentional, but I don't think you are so naive as to be unaware of the implication of your words. So can you be specific about why you think Adam wouldn't reveal the names of the team, or why you think the team is revealing "so called" truth?

[Trevor Marriott]

Exactly.

Now I wonder if Adam Wood will name the "members" of this "Diary team"....all of them?

Or is that secret information only for those supposed to be in on this? (I use "in on this" to be read in whatever way one wishes to interpret it)

All this poster can see is a cynical..not clever..attempt to cash in on an anniversary of a subject that should..as Philip Sugden hints at..have been wiped off the face of the planet.

I do so hope this "Diary team" are proud of what they are doing. I know many that wouldn't want to be associated with this so called "truth".

Any JtR book title with "The True facts" in it will cause extreme doubt to start with.


It isn't often I agree with David Orsam. But this time time I do.

Phil

Hi Phil

Robert Smith as you know is a literary agent, if you go to his website it shows that he represents a number of those ripperologists who were involved with him, and the diary in those early days, interesting reading ! maybe some or all are the current diary team ? http://www.robertsmithliteraryagency.com/our-authors/

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

"Oh what a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive" Sir Walter Scott 1808

[Kaz]

Ok well, oh I don't know-spreading and proliferation of misinformation, conmen profiting off of lies, dead innocent men being besmirched, another nail in the validity of Ripperology's coffin.

maybrick
HH holmes
sickert

bring on the circus clowns

Got ya!

you don't believe it so anyone who invests time and money to get more 'answers' are the lowest of the low, 'conmen'....

and the likes of myself who spend our hard earned cash buying into it are 'circus clowns'...


Well, I'd rather be a circus clown than a bully

[GUT]

Ok well, oh I don't know-spreading and proliferation of misinformation, conmen profiting off of lies, dead innocent men being besmirched, another nail in the validity of Ripperology's coffin.

maybrick
HH holmes
sickert

bring on the circus clowns

But surely innocent applies to all ( maybe except one) suspects ever suggested.

[Kaz]

The damn provenance on the diary has tarnished it from the get go.


Theres a programme on the BBC, fake or fortune, theres known works of art by the greatest impressionists hidden away, worthless (practically) gathering dust simply because it can't be proven where they've been for the past centuries...

The Ripperologists who don't let others doubts cloud their judgement and press on regardless get my respect! theres toooo many out there knocking nails into coffins who have no right to hold a hammers licence!!


When will this book arrive!!!???

[PaulB]

Hi Phil

Robert Smith as you know is a literary agent, if you go to his website it shows that he represents a number of those ripperologists who were involved with him, and the diary in those early days, interesting reading ! maybe some or all are the current diary team ? http://www.robertsmithliteraryagency.com/our-authors/

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

"Oh what a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive" Sir Walter Scott 1808

It's nice to see you doing some research. But there is no mystery about the "team" members - they're all on a panel at the conference later this year, and have been advertised almost everywhere you look for ages. And the involvement of people mentioned on Robert's website isn't new either, or secret, or in any sense interesting reading. If anyone is trying to make something mysterious out of the "team", it's likely to fall flat on its face I'm afraid.

[Trevor Marriott]

It's nice to see you doing some research. But there is no mystery about the "team" members - they're all on a panel at the conference in Liverpool later this year, and have been advertised almost everywhere you look for ages. And the involvement of people mentioned on Robert's website isn't new either, or secret, or in any sense interesting reading. If anyone is trying to make something mysterious out of the "team", it's likely to fall flat on its face I'm afraid.

But were you not one of those "directly" involved with the diary 25 years ago? and have you disclosed all you know about this fiasco?

I also note you have been at the forefront of two major contentious issues surrounding the ripper mystery, this being the first, and the other being The Swanson Marginalia

They say lightning never strikes in the same place twice !

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[PaulB]

But were you not one of those "directly" involved with the diary 25 years ago? and have you disclosed all you know about this fiasco?

I also note you have been at the forefront of two major contentious issues surrounding the ripper mystery, this being the first, and the other being The Swanson Marginalia

They say lightning never strikes in the same place twice !

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

I and others were known to Robert Smith before the diary emerged. I was therefore among those who were asked to advise on and assist the research into the diary when it was first taken to Doreen Montgomery. I was later asked to assist Paul Feldman. I am mentioned in and my held is acknowledged by Shirley Harrison and Paul Feldman in their respective books. And I wrote an introduction to Paul's book. There's nothing secret about any of that. Especially to someone who'd bothered to read either book.

Why would you imagine that I haven't disclosed all I know about the diary? Are you trying to insinuate something nasty, Trevor?

There's nothing contentious about the Swanson marginalia except the one you've invented in an effort to pretend that you aren't tilting at windmills. But yes, I investigated the Swanson marginalia when it was first brought to public attention in 1987. Not taking things for granted or at face value is what serious researchers do, Trevor. I'd have thought you knew that.

I have always believed that it's better to be on the inside looking out than be on the outside looking in. As far as the diary is concerned, I have been lucky enough to have met and been able to form my own opinions of Feldy, Shirley, Mike and Anne, and a whole bunch of people, and I have had the opportunity to see and handle and assess documents, and see the process of investigation first hand. Now, what would you like to insinuate out of that?

[PaulB]

Oh, and I am not one of the "team" and I didn't hear Robert's talk at the conference, and I don't know what his book contains. Just in case you mind is working it's way down that murky corridor.

[Iconoclast]

So someone broke into Battlecrease and planted the diary under the floorboards in Maybrick's old room?

Dear Purkis,

It is entirely in keeping with the The Journal as Obvious Fraud argument of our armed and dangerous Naysayers that your point can be so easily missed. And jolly good point it is!

Whilst there are those in the Naysaying brigade already rejoicing in the possible undressing of the Barrett's explanations for the origins of the journal, the obvious alternative is lost on them: If the Barret's explanations are undone because it transpires that the journal came out of Battlecrease House, then that undoing is their very own undoing - they cannot have it both ways, celebrating the loss of the Barrett creation story without recognising that the journal came from the very last possible place it could have come from if it were indeed a hoax.

If the journal were ever shown to have come out of Battlecrease House, it is game over for the mystery of Jack the Ripper. Problems with 'one-off instance', handwriting, Kelly's breasts, melodrama, Abberline's role in the detection process, Kelly's key, et cetera all fly wildly out of the window as the Yaysayers (that's me, obviously) celebrate final vindication of our (my) position. That journal could not have come out of Battlecrease House and simultaneously have been a hoax (because of its contents) unless, as you so eruditely point out, it was smuggled in there first in order to be smuggled out again as part of some elaborate reveal.

Personally, I expecting nothing more from my copy of this book than something to put next to my replica Jules Rimet trophy, but - hey ho - you just never know, do you?

Ike
A Person of Insight and Limitless Cleverness If You Just Look Beyond the Humility of the Man

[Trevor Marriott]

I and others were known to Robert Smith before the diary emerged. I was therefore among those who were asked to advise on and assist the research into the diary when it was first taken to Doreen Montgomery. I was later asked to assist Paul Feldman. I am mentioned in and my held is acknowledged by Shirley Harrison and Paul Feldman in their respective books. And I wrote an introduction to Paul's book. There's nothing secret about any of that. Especially to someone who'd bothered to read either book.

Why would you imagine that I haven't disclosed all I know about the diary? Are you trying to insinuate something nasty, Trevor?

There's nothing contentious about the Swanson marginalia except the one you've invented in an effort to pretend that you aren't tilting at windmills. But yes, I investigated the Swanson marginalia when it was first brought to public attention in 1987. Not taking things for granted or at face value is what serious researchers do, Trevor. I'd have thought you knew that.

I have always believed that it's better to be on the inside looking out than be on the outside looking in. As far as the diary is concerned, I have been lucky enough to have met and been able to form my own opinions of Feldy, Shirley, Mike and Anne, and a whole bunch of people, and I have had the opportunity to see and handle and assess documents, and see the process of investigation first hand. Now, what would you like to insinuate out of that?

Paul

Perish the thought that I would insinuate anything sinister from you. I was merely stating an ascertained fact that you were involved in both, and you have acknowledged that.

What I would say for the benefit of readers in relation to both the diary and the Swanson Marginalia and as you were involved, you may or may not know, that several years ago I met Robert Smith at a Ripper conference where he was showing off the diary, at this time my investigation into the Ripper mystery was in full swing. He knew who I was and my background. I started to ask pertinent questions about his involvement in the diary. He would not answer any questions, he simply picked up the diary and walked off.

The second matter relates to Dr Davies the handwriting expert and his handwriting examinations of the marginalia both in 2006 and 2012 which I believe you were also a party to.

Having had a lot of dealings with handwriting experts over the years, and having read and digested his reports which needless to say supported your belief and the beliefs of Nevill Swanson and Adam Wood that all the handwriting was that of Donald Swanson and no other, There were a number of pertinent questions that I felt needed to be asked of Dr Davies and his findings. But would you believe that all attempts to get him to answer these questions proved fruitless he simply didn't want to be questioned.

I note that Dr Davies was on the payroll of those commissioning him to carry out the examinations.

Now when important players in such a well known mystery refused to be questioned about their involvement, and in the case of Dr Davies their findings, warning bells start to sound and I have to ask why?

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk