One Incontrovertible, Unequivocal, Undeniable Fact Which Refutes the Diary

[Magpie]

Not at all.

They'd have won on penalties too if necessary ...

Great! Then you might be interested in the this authentic Shakespeare folio I've got for sale in the great man's own handwriting. It's written in felt tip, but the handwriting, paper and provenance are excellent.

Make me an offer!

[Magpie]

I've just realised a shocking truth from Sam Flynn's email. Suddenly, it all makes sense!

Sam, you, Christine, all the rest of the debunkers - none of you have actually read anything relevant to the diary!

You come on here and post your trenchant views, and it's all based upon nothing whatsoever. You all read The Times back in 1993, and believed the 'Fake!' headlines.

You're the frauds!!!!!

Get your fingers out and read the material, for goodness sake!

What a joke!

Whatever helps you sleep at night.

You might be interested to know that I'm one of the resident cranks on casebook who believes that the Diary may actually be an old forgery. So your crack about the times has no relevance to my views.l

[DVV]

I want it, but have no money.
Would 500 gr of arsenic be good enough ?

Amitiés,
David

[Sam Flynn]

Sam, you, Christine, all the rest of the debunkers - none of you have actually read anything relevant to the diary!

I might be more sympathetic to that idea, Sooth, if there was anything relevant IN the diary. Suffice to say that I've read the diary's contents and that was quite enough, without having to read its apologists as well.

[Magpie]

I want it, but have no money.
Would 500 gr of arsenic be good enough ?

Amitiés,
David

Wow, 500gr, eh?

For that I'll throw in an Plato's "Theages" from the philosopher's own typewriter, with a signed photo of Francis Bacon and an origanal recording of Jenny Lind signing "Oops, I did it again".

[DVV]

Ok,
100 gr more, and I want Chamberlain's umbrella.

[Magpie]

There was no mention in the diary that the initials were intended as a message to Florrie. You're just adding that bit in to help your disbelief sound like an argument.

And there's no mention in the diary that the reference to "initials" were intended to refer to anything written on the walls.

Surely if you can extrapolate intention from the Diary, it would be churlish to deny Christine the same courtesy...

[Magpie]

Ok,
100 gr more, and I want Chamberlain's umbrella.

Sorry, fresh out.

I do have his I-pod though...

[Magpie]

I think you'll find that I have, numerous times, on this thread, Magpie. Do you only read random bits?

I just read through the entire thread and found one instance where you mentioned it at all, when you said:

The good folk of England in 1888 simply were not ready for such deviousness - so unprepared indeed that on viewing the gruesome scene before them, I can well understand if not one of them turned their eyes to the wall instead and said "There's a couple of letters there - probably a clue from an as yet unrecognised form of killer".

Which not only does not address the dozens of police officers doctors and jury members who were there specifically to examine the crime scene: It also sounds remarkably like one of those "arguments from personal incredulity" that you come down so hard on. Shame on you, Soothie!

[The Good Michael]

I've suddenly realized why this thread is popular. It's for the same reason circus side shows were populer in the States. People often enjoy looking at oddities. It makes them feel good about themselves. That's exactly how I feel here. When my Jewish suspect is being disparaged against, and often, rightly so, I rejoice that there are some who believe in Maybrick. It puts me above them in a way. So... let's keep this freak show going!

Mike

Oh, and I did read Feldman's Final Chapter and Harrison's and even the Graham book. Call me a glutton for punishment. They were sad books.

[Soothsayer]

I've suddenly realized why this thread is popular. It's for the same reason circus side shows were populer in the States. People often enjoy looking at oddities. It makes them feel good about themselves. That's exactly how I feel here. When my Jewish suspect is being disparaged against, and often, rightly so, I rejoice that there are some who believe in Maybrick. It puts me above them in a way. So... let's keep this freak show going!

Mike

Oh, and I did read Feldman's Final Chapter and Harrison's and even the Graham book. Call me a glutton for punishment. They were sad books.

Well at least two of us have read the books so many speak so knowledgably about, The Good!

Personally haven't read Anne Graham's book on Florence (which I take it you are referring to) but have read Morland's 'The Poisoned Life of Mrs Soothsayer' ... erm, 'Maybrick'.

Decided to read Marriott's '21st Century Investigation' as Rankin's first post-Rebus ('Doors Open') is beyond boring. So far, each chapter consists of 20 pages of verbatim coroner's notes, and 2 pages of 'Sounds like bollocks to me, but I've got a book to sell here so I'd better have an opinion'.

Having said that, I did like his theory that the uteruses of Chapman and Eddowes had been removed at the mortuary before the post-morta (for financial gain). Explains the 'How the hell did old Jacko extract the lady bits so expertly in the pitch black?' conundrum.

As a matter of interest, if a brilliant but maverick detective who cuts corners but always gets results, etc. (and the birds), wanted to read as many facts as possible on the case - not opinions - which of the many tomes would the good readers recommend?

Don't worry - if your recommendation turns out to be mince, I shan't hold it against you.

Much.

[Sam Flynn]

As a matter of interest, if a brilliant but maverick detective who cuts corners but always gets results, etc. (and the birds), wanted to read as many facts as possible on the case - not opinions - which of the many tomes would the good readers recommend?

I'd start with excerpts from Life and Labour of the People in London, by Charles Sooth - sorry - Booth, or if you're lucky, the whole thing. Whilst not perfect, it will at least provide some of the necessary grounding in the squalor and degradation we're dealing with, before one gets one's head turned by the more sensational views offered by some of the Ripper-specific books. Of those, the Jack the Ripper Sourcebook is essential reading, because it sticks to the sources whilst adding commendably little gloss.

[Magpie]

As a matter of interest, if a brilliant but maverick detective who cuts corners but always gets results, etc. (and the birds), wanted to read as many facts as possible on the case - not opinions - which of the many tomes would the good readers recommend?

.

The Ultimate Source Book
Letters From Hell
Jack The Ripper A-Z
Whitechapel 1888, by Fishman (ironically, you should ignore the section on the Ripper).

[Soothsayer]

Ripper Sourcebook / The Ultimate Source Book

Thank you my fellow detectives of merit - I assume these two are one and the same so I shall look them up on Amazon today.

PS I possess 'Letters from Hell' - it is very helpful.

[Magpie]

Thank you my fellow detectives of merit - I assume these two are one and the same so I shall look them up on Amazon today.

PS I possess 'Letters from Hell' - it is very helpful.

I think it's a transatlantic thing, but yes, they are the same book.

Stewart Evans and Keith Skinner also wrote an excellent history of the CID, which is tangentially connected to the Ripper case and an excellent read.