Who was the author of the 'Maybrick' diary? Some options.

[John G]

Unless someone has changed the definition of "majority" without telling me you are just plain wrong.

9874 (Maybrick votes)
/
75805 (Total votes)
=.130 * 100 = 13.0%

13.0% is not a majority.

That's just what I was thinking. However, I think we've established that maths isn't Spider's forte!

It's also worth pointing out that 5947 voted for Prince Albert Victor!

[Henry Flower]

Henry quite probably stated aloud what a lot of people were thinking privately.
That said, it might be pointed out in Keith Skinner's defense (and Shirley Harrison's for that matter) that by staying 'close' to Mike Barrett and Anne Graham, they were able to gather information that would have otherwise been lost. None of the early researchers had the powers of the police; they couldn't subpoena witnesses or demand bank statements, lie detector tests, etc., They had to muddle through the best they could and use persuasion. It's ironic; I'm completely a 'modern hoax' advocate--I think there is not doubt whatsoever--but I think we owe them something of a debt. Harrison 'made the rounds,' questioned people, and reported back. And (irony again) the single gravest piece of evidence against Barrett--the purchase of the maroon diary--would not have been fully confirmed if Keith had not obtained it from Anne Graham (along with the receipt). He couldn't have done that from the wings. So that certainly demonstrates great integrity--something worth remembering as we rake one another over the coals.

rj - I agree with every word you say there, and my only quibble is that it might be inferred from your post - whether or not it was implied - that I was in any sense criticising KS. That was absolutely not the case at all, I have nothing but admiration for his work and have no problem with researchers investigating from the 'inside', so to speak. No problem at all. I was attempting only to rebut the notion that someone who has been on the inside must necessarily be closer to the truth of the matter than mere 'armchair detectives' or keyboard warriors. No criticism of KS or any serious researcher was implied at all, far from it.

But yes, I agree with your analysis. The more time you spend among the trees the harder it can be to see the wood. Sometimes things are more readily apparent from a certain distance, but I would have no doubts about KS's professionalism or integrity whatsoever, and in fact I can't wait until his membership is approved and activated. (When!?)

[Henry Flower]

Kaz:

The naysayers are always going to jump on the provenance as reason to bury the diary as theres very little else they have.

And now the joke becomes apparent. We've been taking you semi-seriously, Kaz, but in truth it now becomes clear you are merely a troll and a mischief-maker.

Good effort to keep it up for so long, I must say.

[DirectorDave]

That's just what I was thinking. However, I think we've established that maths isn't Spider's forte!

It's also worth pointing out that 5947 voted for Prince Albert Victor!

4228 for the royal conspiracy too...so 10175 people think Eddy was involved.

[Kaz]

Kaz, but in truth it now becomes clear you are merely a troll and a mischief-maker.

Mischeif-maker.... guilty Anyone who knows me well will confirm it

Troll on the other hand... no, read practically all there is available regarding the Diary, something I find fascinating, JM still fits ludicrously well

And I can't see how the odd word/handwriting/pub puts the diary to bed, those points have been explained away for decades.

I'll remain open minded and continue to 'hope' that one bit of information materialises and decides it one way or the other.


ps. no mudslinging from my side

[Spider]

James Maybrick
How popular is this suspect?


Votes: 9874
Average: 8.297
Ranking: 1st of 22


When will you have something worthwhile to discuss about the case without sarcasm. The immaturity on these threads sometimes is astounding.

[Henry Flower]

When will you have something worthwhile to discuss about the case without sarcasm. The immaturity on these threads sometimes is astounding.

Spider, leave your details with Admin and they can contact you when they've dealt with all the dangerous sarcasm and it's safe for you to return.

[DirectorDave]

James Maybrick
How popular is this suspect?


Votes: 9874
Average: 8.297
Ranking: 1st of 22


When will you have something worthwhile to discuss about the case without sarcasm. The immaturity on these threads sometimes is astounding.

Right so it's pointed out to you that you don't know the definition of majority so to hide your embarrassment you change the question?

And you talk of immaturity...quite a bit of projecting going on here.

[Spider]

So if I change ‘majority’ to ‘most popular’ in line with the wording on the poll with Maybrick in 1st place out of 22 suspects, will that suffice and keep you happy?

I’m not here to partake in petty arguments, that seem as ever to be the sole purpose for some. I’m not convinced that half the contributors have even read the ‘Diary’, or other material they discuss.
I’m sure Admin have my details, and I have not referred to sarcasm as dangerous, it is still just the lowest form of wit.

[Sam Flynn]

James Maybrick
How popular is this suspect?

Votes: 9874
Average: 8.297
Ranking: 1st of 22

That poll is in no way definitive, as access to the poll is not restricted, e.g. limited to Casework members only. As I recall, people could vote for a suspect as many times as they liked. The poll is as vulnerable to vote-rigging as Amazon's rating system was (or still is) vulnerable to bumped-up, fake reviews.

[Henry Flower]

So if I change ‘majority’ to ‘most popular’ in line with the wording on the poll with Maybrick in 1st place out of 22 suspects, will that suffice and keep you happy?

You mean, if you make a claim that is true, rather than one that is not? Yes, that would be good enough for me. Reminder: you made a claim which was not true.

I’m not here to partake in petty arguments, that seem as ever to be the sole purpose for some. I’m not convinced that half the contributors have even read the ‘Diary’, or other material they discuss.
I’m sure Admin have my details, and I have not referred to sarcasm as dangerous, it is still just the lowest form of wit.

Aren't you noble!? I'll take the sarcastic over the soporific any day. Your estimation of how many contributors have actually read the Diary is of course an untested, groundless (and uninteresting) supposition, to which you are welcome.

[Kaz]

I’m not convinced that half the contributors have even read the ‘Diary’, or other material they discuss.

The ones with the fieriest opinions and most nauseous put downs (Flower/Mike) haven't, by their own admission.

But they still see things the clearest....apparently meeting people and reading up only clouds judgement...

[caz]

The writing looks female.

I'll probably regret this, DD, but assuming you meant the prose style and not the handwriting [given that human hands, and the teaching of handwriting, do not differ appreciably between girls and boys], what are your qualifications for saying this? Why did/do many female authors write under male pseudonyms if there are people who can easily tell the difference?

Love,

Caz
X

[caz]

We then have the alternative version. Apparently one or more electricians discovered the diary at Battlecrease and then gave it/sold it to Mike, who then promptly contacts a literary agent the same day. Of course, not a scrap of evidence is offered in support of this theory. For instance, Mike had no known connection to the electricians and, in fact, vehemently denied knowing them.

And how on earth does this scenario make sense anyway? I mean, presumably the electrician bunks off work and then somehow, on the same day, he just gives the diary to Mike, a man that he's apparently never met, despite the fact that he considers it to be so potentially valuable that he also fits in a trip to Liverpool University, with seemingly the intention of getting it valued/authenticated.

Or perhaps he just bumps into Mike in the Saddle on the night of the discovery. Mike then phones directory enquiries and says something like, "You're not going to believe this but I've just bought Jack the Ripper's diary from some stranger in the pub-poor fool had no idea what it may be worth. Of course, I've managed to fully authenticate it over a few pints...please put me through to a random literary agent."

Hilarious!

It might have been, John, if anyone had claimed this is what probably happened. All you've achieved is to invent deliberately absurd scenarios just so you can knock them down. Hilarious if you can't do any better than that.

Who has ever suggested, for instance, that Mike Barrett could have been a complete stranger to the electrician who drank in the same pub and is suspected of passing the diary on to him?

Who has ever suggested that Mike would have read through the diary in this scenario and made an effort to 'authenticate' it before making his first phone call?

Love,

Caz
X

[DirectorDave]

I'll probably regret this, DD, but assuming you meant the prose style and not the handwriting [given that human hands, and the teaching of handwriting, do not differ appreciably between girls and boys], what are your qualifications for saying this? Why did/do many female authors write under male pseudonyms if there are people who can easily tell the difference?

Love,

Caz
X

I meant handwriting, and yes I was making a sweeping generalisation with no qualifications.

Unless you have an IT question, pertaining to the Ripper I can bring no expertise to the case.

My sig is on every post caz....my opinion is all I have to offer here.