One Incontrovertible, Unequivocal, Undeniable Fact Which Refutes the Diary

[Iconoclast]

Still can't see them

Hi GUT,

You seem to have a determination not to see these letters which is almost unrivalled on this site.

Can you at least see the 'M'?

You are flying in the face of those people on this thread and on this site who say they can see them. And many of them are not pro-journal commentators.

They are on the wall, the first bit of wall after Kelly's body, directly up from the 'F' carved in her arm.

Or can you not see that either?

Ike

[MsWeatherwax]

Im certain I know which marks you are referring to, but I absolutely do not agree that they are an 'F carved into her arm''. If there was a slight possibility that the marks you are seeing were a letter of any description, I just cannot accept that they went unnoticed by every contemporary.

[Yabs]

I can see the "initials" on this version of the photograph which have a white blotch just to the left of the assumed "F"


On this version which doesn't look as though it's been enhanced in any way the letters are much less defined.
I would say the "F" even looks like an E in this version
And no white blemish in this one either.

[c.d.]

Im certain I know which marks you are referring to, but I absolutely do not agree that they are an 'F carved into her arm''. If there was a slight possibility that the marks you are seeing were a letter of any description, I just cannot accept that they went unnoticed by every contemporary.

The letter "F" is composed of straight lines. A knife has a straight edge. So it is not really surprising that some kind of mark which resembles the letter "F" should appear amidst all of the cutting but to automatically assume that it was intentional is a bit of a stretch.

c.d.

[Iconoclast]

The letter "F" is composed of straight lines. A knife has a straight edge. So it is not really surprising that some kind of mark which resembles the letter "F" should appear amidst all of the cutting but to automatically assume that it was intentional is a bit of a stretch.

c.d.

It just looks more like an 'F' on her arm than it looks like anything else. Funny how that straight line theory didn't produce any As, Es, Hs, Is, Ks, Ls, Ms, Ns, Ts, Vs, Ws, Xs, Ys, or Zs, though, isn't it?

Oh - hold on - let me help you out there, it's just another example of pareidolia so let's just ignore it ...

Ike

[Iconoclast]

Still can't see them

Thought I'd make it really easy for you, GUT. Surely now you see them? (I'm not holding my breath, by the way.)

For sport, I have coloured-in Tempus Omnia Revelat's theory about a second 'FM' in the room. It's fascinating that we can discern two sets from one dull photograph and that the journal makes reference to 'I placed it all over her room'. Did he mean Florrie's initials? Who knows?

What I do know is that the journal makes reference to Florrie's initials and they are 'FM' and they can be discerned twice in one grainy old photograph (whether they really were menat to be 'FM' or not). Same can't be said for other random combinations of letters such as DD, GY, TC, OW, et cetera.

Just saying, is all ...

[c.d.]

"Oh - hold on - let me help you out there, it's just another example of pareidolia so let's just ignore it ..."

Better yet, let's apply an objective and skeptical perspective rather than donning Maybrick colored glasses.

c.d.

[Iconoclast]

"Oh - hold on - let me help you out there, it's just another example of pareidolia so let's just ignore it ..."

Better yet, let's apply an objective and skeptical perspective rather than donning Maybrick colored glasses.

c.d.

I'm not sure that I do don such glasses, c.d.. What I do is reply on behalf of the journal in equal conviction to the critic's scepticism. I think the journal deserves a voice and one not afraid to express itself in equal measure with its detractors.

I think I have expressed balanced concern for the gaps (e.g., the issue of the missing key) and also shown restraint over the likes of Tempus Omnia Revelat's claims of a second 'FM', so I don't think I can be accused of indecent support for the journal. Maybe it is because I am pretty much the only voice of support for the journal which makes me seem more extreme than I actually am?

Whatever is the truth, that is one distinctly marked 'F' on her arm. And it is not the work of single, unintended cuts. To challenge your theory at its very heart - you note that knives have straight edges, which is true, but how many knives have you come across which are millimetres - maybe even centimetres - thick???

Ike

[Iconoclast]

"Oh - hold on - let me help you out there, it's just another example of pareidolia so let's just ignore it ..."

Better yet, let's apply an objective and skeptical perspective rather than donning Maybrick colored glasses.

c.d.

Objective I can accept. It is the very soul of truth.

But 'sceptical'? I think you reveal your true intentions all too easily by linking objectivity with scepticism. They are not soulmates, and hopefully never will be.

[c.d.]

Ike,

You continually argue that these letters (be they on the wall or on Mary's arm) are clear and distinctive. Yet you acknowledge that they were missed by the police and others at the time because there was a lot of gore. Well if there was a lot of gore how could the letters be so distinctive? Your argument contradicts itself.

c.d.

[Iconoclast]

Ike,

You continually argue that these letters (be they on the wall or on Mary's arm) are clear and distinctive. Yet you acknowledge that they were missed by the police and others at the time because there was a lot of gore. Well if there was a lot of gore how could the letters be so distinctive? Your argument contradicts itself.

c.d.

I don't think I've ever said they were missed, c.d.. They may well have been noted but the observers may have placed no importance upon them and focused instead on the general gore in the room. After all, in 1888, who would have thought a serial killer would wish to taunt the police ('taunt' as he saw it, incidentally, not as we might see 'taunting' in 2016) by leaving what to us are incredibly obscure 'clues' to his identity.

I know that the letter 'F' is distinctive because - despite the general gore - it is evidently there on her arm, intended or not. The camera may on this occasion lie, but it certainly helps us to cut through the gore (especialy when we only get to see it in monochrome - less horrifying by half, I'd venture).

I don't think you should be worrying about my argument contradicting itself. Personally, I'm slightly concerned that your argument makes no sense.

[Geddy2112]

Thought I'd make it really easy for you, GUT. Surely now you see them? (I'm not holding my breath, by the way.)

I can't give you the F on the fore arm... the 'vertical' stroke of the F is surely just a shadow or crease where the edge of her arm is lying. The 'FM' on the wall for me always has been a very very big stretch.

If anyone has an unaltered picture that clearly shows different I'd be amazed.. I'm off to get my grassy knoll shots out... I think I see smoke...

[Iconoclast]

I can't give you the F on the fore arm... the 'vertical' stroke of the F is surely just a shadow or crease where the edge of her arm is lying. The 'FM' on the wall for me always has been a very very big stretch.

If anyone has an unaltered picture that clearly shows different I'd be amazed.. I'm off to get my grassy knoll shots out... I think I see smoke...

Personally Geddy2112, I can live with the loss of the 'FM' on Kelly, though it is a very distinctive 'F'.

I think we have established without much doubt that something very similar indeed to the letters 'FM' are on Kelly's wall and that just can't be possible unless:

• Maybrick was Jack and wrote the journal, or
• The journal was written after the author first saw those initials on Kelly's wall

Given how very hard certain people find seeing the letters even when guided to them, I find it incredibly hard to believe that a hoaxer saw the 'FM' and thought to write an invented account of Jack's crimes. And then to possibly do so but choosing so obscure a candidate! Inspirational, if that is what actually happened ...

Personally, I'm happy to settle for the less daunting version - that is, that Maybrick was Jack the Slash, big deal, let's move on to the next mystery, et cetera.

I'm thinking storm drain rather than grassy knoll, incidentally ...

Ike

[c.d.]

I find it very hard to believe that a trained Scotland Yard detective who was in that room looking for clues of ANY type would come across what appeared to be a distinctive initial and not make note of it to at least a fellow detective or Inspector Abberline himself. Awareness of taunting or not that would just be extremely piss poor detective work.

c.d.

[Iconoclast]

I find it very hard to believe that a trained Scotland Yard detective who was in that room looking for clues of ANY type would come across what appeared to be a distinctive initial and not make note of it to at least a fellow detective or Inspector Abberline himself. Awareness of taunting or not that would just be extremely piss poor detective work.

c.d.

Well I would probably agree with you there, c.d., though we both have a 2016 eye of CSI Whitechapel (coming to your screens any day now) so we may be more predisposed to look for such a clue than a hardened detective of 1888.

Ultimately, I don't concern myself too much with whether it is or is not an 'F'. I know it unequivocally looks like one, and that's fine with me.

You should watch out for that bad case of reverse-pareidolia you've got going on there - it could make you ever so sceptical about things which don't necessarily deserve it ...

It's Saturday night and we are just minutes away from X Factor. Let's chill a wee bit for now, eh?



Ike