One Incontrovertible, Unequivocal, Undeniable Fact Which Refutes the Diary

[David Orsam]

No all five are there.

Oh, okay.

Who is the one I can see? Is it MK or MN?

And where in relation to the other four is the fifth?

[Joshua Rogan]

Apart from "j n Maybrick", I can only make out "ac" for sure, plus "CB" and some other indecipherable squiggles. Can't see anything resembling "I am Jack".

[Observer]

The diagram in Feldmans book shows at top right the possibility of four initials MK NK NR and MR, so thats obviously MK Mary Kelly. Just below this is I AM JACK quite plainly depicted in the diagram. Just below this TC orTL to the right of which is 9/3 and below this 1275 .Below this to the left side ES Elisabeth Stride. To the right of ES, CB or E obviously Catherine Eddowes. To the right of this AC Annie Chapman obviously. Below this line to the left two sets of initials side by side either JV JN , JV JW, or WN MN. The MN obviously Mary Nichols. Who the first initial the JV or WN is, is anybody's guess. These marks, in my mind, the work of an amateur, not used to inscribing onto metal.

[Observer]

Apart from "j n Maybrick", I can only make out "ac" for sure, plus "CB" and some other indecipherable squiggles. Can't see anything resembling "I am Jack".

It would be useful if the photograph in "Inside Story" be reproduced here. Also you must appreciate that the diagram as reproduced in Paul Feldman's book was submitted by individuals who had the watch itself in front of them. They obviously employed a magnifying glass to reveal the inscriptions.

[David Orsam]

The diagram in Feldmans book shows at top right the possibility of four initials MK NK NR and MR, so thats obviously MK Mary Kelly. Just below this is I AM JACK quite plainly depicted in the diagram. Just below this TC orTL to the right of which is 9/3 and below this 1275 .Below this to the left side ES Elisabeth Stride. To the right of ES, CB or E obviously Catherine Eddowes. To the right of this AC Annie Chapman obviously. Below this line to the left two sets of initials side by side either JV JN , JV JW, or WN MN. The MN obviously Mary Nichols. Who the first initial the JV or WN is, is anybody's guess. These marks, in my mind, the work of an amateur, not used to inscribing onto metal.

Okay I've seen the diagram in Feldman's book. The initials at the top right of the diagram are not visible in any way in the photograph in "Inside Story".

I can just about see "TC" (or "TL") and I'm wondering whose initials they are supposed to be in Maybrick World.

[David Orsam]

It would be useful if the photograph in "Inside Story" be reproduced here.

I thought about it but there may be copyright issues and I'm too scared.

[Observer]

Okay I've seen the diagram in Feldman's book. The initials at the top right of the diagram are not visible in any way in the photograph in "Inside Story".

I can just about see "TC" (or "TL") and I'm wondering whose initials they are supposed to be in Maybrick World.

Ok, Well that particular one in the diagram is Mary Kelly. I'm just wondering if there were any of the books on the subject which were written in the 80's and 90's which disputed whether Mary Kelly was a member of the canon? I can't remember who it was who first suggested Kelly might not have been a Ripper murder.

Looking at the diagram, apart from TC or TL, there's also JV, or WN to consider.

[David Orsam]

there's also JV, or WN to consider.

WN is, I assume, actually MN, i.e. Mary Nichols.

JV is potentially another set of initials but it all gets mixed up into one with MN and J. Maybrick. So it may not really be there.

[Observer]

I thought about it but there may be copyright issues and I'm too scared.

Ok, I'd better not reproduce the diagram here then. You know, the inscriptions are that obscure it makes one wonder how Albert Johnston and friends associated them with Maybrick, and Jack The Ripper. The name "Maybrick" is plainly seen though, Dundas would not have failed to see that.

[Observer]

WN is, I assume, actually MN, i.e. Mary Nichols.

JV is potentially another set of initials but it all gets mixed up into one with MN and J. Maybrick. So it may not really be there.

Right. All in all though, I'd say the inscriptions are a definite attempt to associate James Maybrick with Jack The Ripper.

[David Orsam]

Ok, I'd better not reproduce the diagram here then. You know, the inscriptions are that obscure it makes one wonder how Albert Johnston and friends associated them with Maybrick, and Jack The Ripper. The name "Maybrick" is plainly seen though, Dundas would not have failed to see that.

If he could clearly see "I am Jack" there then maybe it peaked his interest. In the photograph the name "Jack" is only partially visible but the last two letters might well be hidden in shadow.

[Observer]

If he could clearly see "I am Jack" there then maybe it peaked his interest. In the photograph the name "Jack" is only partially visible but the last two letters might well be hidden in shadow.

Indeed. "I am Jack" is plainly depicted in the diagram. I'm sure Johnston, and friends could clearly make it out. Also, I should have said Dundas would not have failed to see "J Maybrick", and "I am Jack", should it have been there. Dundas has categorically stated he did not see it when he repaired the watch. I very much doubt it was there at that time.

[Joshua Rogan]

This website has a small photo of the watch scratches, bottom of page;

http://virginiaclub.com/VC/Infamy.html

[Observer]

Better rendition of the watch scratches here. David O correct in stating that the N in between J and MAYBRICK, is the N which follows the M, that is Mary Nichols.

http://www.jacktheripper.de/tatverdaechtige/maybrick/

[caz]

Occams razor dictates that this is a modern hoax and we have several clues that prove it...

Hi Mike,

A 'modern' hoax in the context of the diary is generally taken to mean late 80s/early 90s, so if you have found 'several clues' that 'prove' it wasn't created any earlier, I'd be interested in reading about them.

In the absence of such proof, I defer to the scientists, who could do no better than conclude pen met paper 'prior to 1970'. So the whole Poste House issue doesn't really help one way or t'other as far as I'm concerned. I just think it's worth considering that the diary author didn't simply plump for a pub name whose history could easily have been checked and found wanting.

If you can find me literally any evidence to suggest that the Tavern was ever known by such a nickname, then I'll be happy to reconsider, but there is no such evidence available, and I have to wonder where your source got his information from, as I can't find it, and it's not for a lack of trying, Caz.

Yep, I realise my evidence is purely hearsay, but Robert Smith had the same experience with a former landlord of Rigby's, which presumably counts for something. It wasn't so much a case of an actual 'nickname', or where my source got his information from; it was merely a spontaneous answer to a casual question along the lines of: "Do you know if there is or was a post house in Liverpool?" [which naturally sounded the same as "Poste House" in conversation]. The reply came back without hesitation: "Yes, that would have been the Old Post Office Pub off School Lane". Now he might have been wrong, but he was an old Scouser and local pub and history buff [name of Tony Carroll actually, if that's likely to make any difference at all, which I doubt], and if he understood that pub to be on the site of Liverpool's early post house, as did Robert's source, I'd be looking for good evidence that this wasn't the case, rather than just your failure to find anyone else with a similar understanding.

Love,

Caz
X