One Incontrovertible, Unequivocal, Undeniable Fact Which Refutes the Diary

[David Orsam]

Clearly we would not still be here enjoying ourselves if everyone shared your opinion that Mike's 1891 diary was enough to clobber 'the' diary over the head years ago, when details of it first emerged.

You mention "everyone" again as if that's supposed to have any meaning.

But here's the thing Caz. In this very thread, only a short time ago, you completely pooh poohed the idea that the diary could have been acquired on 26 March and completed on, say, 9 April and provided to Doreen on 13 April. You suggested that such a Diary written a few days earlier would obviously have been exposed as a fake. For that reason, you appeared to discount the idea completely. I happen to think that's where you and others have gone wrong. You simply didn't think it was possible for Mike to have acquired the Victorian guard book on or shortly after 26 March 1992 and have been in a position to present a completed fake Diary to Doreen on 13 April. I rather think that "everyone" assumed that the Diary must have been finished before Mike's call to Doreen earlier in March.

Further, I suspect that you and others have placed undue reliance on the statements by the director of O&L by which you felt able to conclude that Mike could not possibly have acquired the Diary at any time from O&L. Given that it would appear that the records of O&L have not been searched for March 1992 this could be considered a mistake.

What I have never seen anyone do until now is adjust the chronology in Mike's affidavit with the acquisition of the 1891 diary in mind and give serious consideration to whether the diary could have been forged in an 11 day period after 26 March 1992 but before 13 April. Now, perhaps you will tell me that it was all given very deep consideration as soon as the details emerged about the 1891 diary acquisition but, if so, could you direct me to where I find anything said about this in writing, including your book?

In fact, in 'Inside Story' (p.237), the idea is dismissed in a sentence on the basis that this would have left Mike "barely two weeks" to have acquired the guard book and completed the forgery. But as far as I am concerned this was plenty of time.

[David Orsam]

Why black? Why not Victorian?

Why black? - Because you told me he wanted to write out extracts from the diary in a "similar" book. But if you tell me that the colour did not matter and the book was not going to be similar then why not write these extracts out into a modern exercise book of any colour? Why did it need to be old, let alone Victorian?

Why not Victorian? Because there is nothing on or about the guard book that says it was Victorian and you have told me he was wanting to write out extracts into a "similar" book to the guard book. And don't forget that Barrett wasn't asking for a "Victorian" diary, he was asking for one from the specific period of 1880-1890. Why? He didn't need one from that narrow period Doreen a taster of the actual Diary did he?

[David Orsam]

If Mike wanted to find out for himself what someone's personal diary might have looked like in the 1880s (given the only date in 'the' diary is 1889) so he could better judge what he had been given before going public with it, why would the colour matter, and why would he have wanted a 'modern' book - something you seem more than a little fixated about?

Hold on Caz. Where has this suddenly come from? I thought you told me that Mike wanted something "similar" to what he already had in his possession in order to write out a "taster" for Doreen to show her instead of transporting the actual diary down to London. This is the first I'm hearing from you of him wanting to "better judge what he had been given".

Are you now saying that he both wanted to see what an 1880 (or 1891) diary looked like AND separately wanted a diary with blank pages for him to write out the taster for Doreen?

[David Orsam]

I love your use of 'us' here, David.

There appear to be other people following this thread Caz.

When you regard any innocent explanation as 'sensible' I'll be seeing snouts and trotters flying past above me.

The issue is that you can't provide a sensible explanation (and I certainly can't think of one) and THAT is why I think that Mike must have been involved in forging the Maybrick diary in March 1992.

[Iconoclast]

That means nothing. If popularity is an indication of quality then why for example is Justin Bieber popular.

I love Justin Bieber!

[GUT]

I love Justin Bieber!

Explains a lot.

[John Wheat]

Explains a lot.

Yes Gut it definitely does.

Cheers John

[Iconoclast]

Yes Gut it definitely does.

Cheers John

I'm his like totally biggest fan!

[David Orsam]

What I have never seen anyone do until now is adjust the chronology in Mike's affidavit with the acquisition of the 1891 diary in mind and give serious consideration to whether the diary could have been forged in an 11 day period after 26 March 1992 but before 13 April. Now, perhaps you will tell me that it was all given very deep consideration as soon as the details emerged about the 1891 diary acquisition but, if so, could you direct me to where I find anything said about this in writing, including your book?

In fact, in 'Inside Story' (p.237), the idea is dismissed in a sentence on the basis that this would have left Mike "barely two weeks" to have acquired the guard book and completed the forgery. But as far as I am concerned this was plenty of time.

One observation I'd like to add here is that the paragraph in 'Inside Story' dealing with the acquisition of the 1891 diary makes no mention of the crucial advertisement placed on behalf of Mike Barrett in a trade journal of 19 March 1992 which requested a diary from the period 1880-1890 with blank pages.

As a result, one could easily fall for the idea that he merely wanted to see what a Victorian diary looked like.

The absence of any mention of the advertisement on its own could easily explain why the purchase of the 1891 diary was not regarded by "everyone" as a crucial clue. Unless you know that Mike's target was a diary containing blank pages, the purchase of the 1891 diary doesn't quite make sense. But when you know that he wanted blank pages, and you know that the Maybrick Diary had pages removed from it, suddenly it all makes sense.

[David Orsam]

Following on from the above, looking at this again, it seems that what happened is that, shortly after speaking to Doreen on about 11 March 1992, Mike Barrett contacted HP Bookfinders to ask them to obtain a diary on his behalf, specifying the period 1880-1890 and requesting a minimum of 20 blank pages (although he obviously wanted more than this if possible). It was HP Bookfinders who then placed the advertisement which appeared in a trade journal dated 19 March 1992. Possibly as a result of this advertisement, HP Bookfinders located an 1891 diary with some blank pages and it was this that was sent to Barrett on 26 March.

So it's likely then that the £25 charged by HP Bookfinders covered both the cost of the advertisement and the cost of the diary.

[caz]

Have you heard of the expression to cut your coat according to your cloth?

Oh yes, David. My late mother used to say this frequently.

I doubt the Barretts had heard it though, or they would have known, when trying to obtain a book large enough to house all their hard work, to specify minimum page size along with a minimum number of consecutive blank pages, in order to avoid being sent and having to pay decent money for a diary with such teeny-weeny pages that their draft would have required cutting to the bone and a magnifying glass to hand write the few remaining passages, after ripping out a page here and a page there with "Aunt Maud's birthday", "Uncle Charlie's funeral in Paignton" or "appointment with doctor in Yeovil".

Love,

Caz
X

[David Orsam]

I doubt the Barretts had heard it though, or they would have known, when trying to obtain a book large enough to house all their hard work, to specify minimum page size along with a minimum number of consecutive blank pages, in order to avoid being sent and having to pay decent money for a diary with such teeny-weeny pages that their draft would have required cutting to the bone and a magnifying glass to hand write the few remaining passages, after ripping out a page here and a page there with "Aunt Maud's birthday", "Uncle Charlie's funeral in Paignton" or "appointment with doctor in Yeovil".

But the advert was perfectly sufficient for Mike's purpose of flushing out a suitable diary Caz.

Let's remind ourselves of the actual wording (presumably formulated by HP Bookbinders on Mike's instructions of what he was seeking):

"Unused or partly used diary dating from 1880-1890, must have at least 20 blank pages".

He was, therefore, actually hoping to find an unused diary but would take a partly used one as long as it contained an absolute minimum of 20 pages.

You are, in my view, suggesting an unrealistic and unnecessary level of detail to be included in the advert. No doubt if there had been multiple offers of diaries arising from the ad, Barrett could have selected the most helpful one in terms of size, content and whatever else for his purpose, but, in the end, nothing suitable from the 1880-1890 period seems to have arisen and he had to take one from outside his preferred date range on the basis that beggars can't be choosers.

I also have no doubt that quite a lot of the diary's text could have been edited down if necessary. The poetry could have been discarded for example. But faced with the 1891 diary in his hands, being too small, he then adjusted his plan again and went to an auction. It's hardly rocket science.

You seem to be forgetting that without some kind of book or diary from the period he would have had absolutely nothing to present to Doreen. There would have been no Jack the Ripper Diary at all! He can't pop round to the local shop and purchase a nineteenth century diary of perfect size, or of any size, can he? Having already spoken to Doreen, he is under time pressure in March 1992. The clock is ticking. He has to take whatever he can get, surely?

[Hannibal Hayes]

Let’s assume Barrett forged the diary. Now put yourself in the shoes of a forger. What’s do you do first? Plan. You get hold of the necessary items – diary, ink, content, etc. Only when you have everything in place do you take the next step & take it to Doreen.

Who, in their right mind would make contact with Doreen & say they have JtR’s diary & then go about finishing it? If he was in total control of creating the diary, surely he would have done the necessary preparation beforehand?

Anyone know if Doreen has confirmed how the conversation with Mike went? What was said etc?

The flaw in this plan is alcohol. Barrett wasn’t a total alcoholic but liked a drink & for this reason alone, anything he said cannot be accepted as the truth. Claims, denials, mumblings, they’re all to be taken with a pinch of salt.

If we’re saying that because Barrett obtained a diary from that period, the diary must be fake, it’s a reasonable argument. However, it’s not conclusive & unless Anne knows why he wanted that diary, we’ll never know.

Unless he kept a diary which comes to light in a few years …… ha ha!

One other thing that puzzles me is why write that many pages? Surely if you were forging something, you’d write the minimum amount of pages required to fool people. There is plenty of unnecessary stuff in the diary. However, if you’re off your head on strychnine or something else, you’d prattle on regardless.

[David Orsam]

Let’s assume Barrett forged the diary. Now put yourself in the shoes of a forger. What’s do you do first? Plan. You get hold of the necessary items – diary, ink, content, etc. Only when you have everything in place do you take the next step & take it to Doreen.

Who, in their right mind would make contact with Doreen & say they have JtR’s diary & then go about finishing it? If he was in total control of creating the diary, surely he would have done the necessary preparation beforehand?

The thing that you are, I think, forgetting is that the diary and the ink cost money whereas Mike Barrett in March 1992 had very little money.

So you are a potential forger, but a poor one, and you've planned out the content of 'Jack the Ripper's diary' but what would you do with it once it's finished? What if no-one is at all interested? You've just wasted money.

So I would disagree with you and say that Mike Barrett's actions were perfectly rational. Before spending any money on the diary and the ink he first established that someone would actually want to see it.

Once Doreen told him to come to London and bring the Diary with him it suddenly became worth buying the materials to physically create it.

My counter argument is to ask why didn't Mike Barrett come to London immediately on 11 or 12 March once he received Doreen's letter confirming that she wanted to meet him? It wasn't until a month later that he made the trip. Just enough time to obtain the Diary and transcribe the text.

[caz]

Mike simply wanted to know if there would be any interest from a literary agent for Jack the Ripper's diary. Having discovered that there would be such interest...

You are having me on, David. If Mike was that out of touch with reality in 1992 that he didn't know if a diary by Jack the Ripper might be of interest to anyone in publishing, what was he doing drafting the thing in the first place before finding out the answer to that rather crucial question?

...he went about obtaining a book with enough pages for its creation. No point spending the money on such a thing if there was no-one he could give it to.

No point spending a single day researching the bloody thing or preparing a draft either, surely?

As for your second question, I simply do not know what you mean by "a sensible interval between putting ink to paper and allowing anyone to see it". What is a "sensible interval" in your opinion? What do you think the visible difference is between a period of two days and a period of two months? As far as I am aware there is no difference. Once you have your fake Diary, and your literary agent lined up, you use it. It's simple. No "indecent haste" involved at all.

You are beginning to sound like Mike. His patter must be rubbing off on you. When he was asked in 1999 at the old Cloak & Dagger Club what he had put in the ink to make it look and behave like a Victorian one he replied, quick as a flash: "Sugar. Simple!"

Love,

Caz
X