Tweet
Hello McFly!!!!!!!!!!!!
-
-
-
Lacassagne, 1899 … (very poor quality and initials harder to detect, but still very much there):
Comment
-
A random version of the photo of MJK's room from the Huffington Post [https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/ent...b0428c7f134acb] (letters very clear, interestingly):
Comment
-
-
I think that everyone - on both sides of the argument - would accept that the 'F' is far far from perfect and that it requires interpretation.
But it is impossible to make the argument that that is not as clear an 'M' as you could realistically hope to see from a 130 year old photograph. And that telling rising second-half so very reminiscent of the Victorian scrapbook.
There in 2020. There in 1993. There in 1972. There in 1899.
There in 1888 ...Comment
-
-
Please c.d., enough with the facile so-called 'counter-arguments'. You can't simply 'make up' the cryptic reference, and I certainly didn't 'make up' the cryptic references in the GSG. I pointed them out quite clearly (see Society's Pillar appendices) whereas you have simply ignored that fact, cited some random phrase which clearly can't be found in the GSG, and posted that here in the name of an 'argument'. That's just plain distraction tactics.Originally posted by c.d. View Postthe Goulston Street Graffito with the cryptic references to Maybrick and the five other significant adults in his life
"cryptic" is putting it mildly. You might as well argue that the GSG says "for a good time call Queen Victoria." It says that. It really does. It's...uh...just cryptic.
c.d.
What you could have done is shown us how the word 'nothing' in the GSG looks nothing like the 'nothing' in the Victorian scrapbook. But you skipped on that and homed-in on an entirely spurious argument instead.
You could have challenged that the 'M' on Kelly's wall was not the same recurring 'M' in James Maybrick's scrapbook, but you didn't.
You could have helped us to understand how the Liverpool Post (the Liverpool Post, for goodness sake!) published a postcard on Oct 10 1888 containing the clearly cryptic clue DIEGO LAURENZ, but you deferred.
You could have done so much more to contribute to this discussion than simply pretend that any phrase in the English language could be inferred from the GSG and then called 'cryptic', but you didn't. You just pretended that my argument was worthless because you could have claimed that "for a good time call Queen Victoria" is discernible in some way in the GSG when it is quite clearly not.
Give yourself a shake, man.Comment
-
While you're digesting all of that, digest this.
Here is an interesting exchange that the hoax theorists might want to consider. It is dated 20th January 2003 and was sent to researcher Keith Skinner from private detective Alan Gray:
Please note that all the tapes involving Mike Barrett are my property and no transcripts can be used without my express permission. If the tape you refer to as being made in early November [1994] shows indifference on my part to the Sphere book, this is no surprise because at that time no person had ever mentioned that it could be of great importance and that includes Mr Melvin Harris. From the start on my new set of instructions I was more interested in finding evidence of the purchase of the journal and possible identity of the vendor than anything else. As you know auctioneers will forward letters to vendors without revealing their addresses and I had hoped this would happen, but I did not find the auctioneers very helpful.
By November [1994] I was cheesed off with Mike since his cheque had bounced and he was wasting my time with constant repetitions and rambling yarns. He had told me of all sorts of evidence that could be produced but he failed to show me anything of value and all the leads he gave me led nowhere [Ike's emphasis here and below]. He even claimed that evidence relating to the diary had been hidden away in a secret place in Devereux’s house. I am not a literary detective so I had no idea that the quote he talked about was a rare one and as far as I was concerned they could have been words found in scores of books so I was indifferent.
It was only after Mr Harris established in November [1994] that the quote was rare and only to be discovered in one book that the Sphere volume became an object of great interest and Mr Harris advised me to get the book back from the Solicitors and examine it to see if Mike’s claim that it fell open at the quote was true. The earliest date I could fix up with Mike was in the first week in December and the details of my visit to his Solicitors were recorded by me on the end paper of the volume. My certain feeling at that time was that Mike had not realised that the quote was as rare as it turned out to be, and then it became the only piece of solid evidence he could shout about, but he later told Mr Harris that he had found it by accident and had mentioned it to Devereux, because it was about intercourse and death, just like the murders.
Here are extracts from a letter Keith also received from author Melvin Harris on January 21st 2003:
You ask about my conversations with Mike, Well there were many and they were initiated by Mike after Mrs Harrison gave him my unlisted phone number. They varied in length from short to long. On one call I was asked to “Listen to the confession of a dying man.” An overdose had been taken, so he pretended, and his words were punctuated by realistic moans and groans. He lived to make fresh calls and in the last stated that he “Had sod all to do with the faking.
I knew of Mr Kane’s heart condition well before the publication of Mrs Harrison’s hardback. The information came from a female reporter in Liverpool. And I met and talked with Robbie Johnson at the launch of Mrs Harrison’s book. He butted in to an interview I was giving to a reporter. This took place in the corridor outside the launch
room. He was scathing about the Diary calling it “A bloody fake”, but that is an old conman’s tactic! I plied him with questions and drew the conclusion that he was in fact a conman with a possible drug problem. I later discovered that he was a drug addict with a criminal record and had been released from prison in time to have faked the scratches in the watch. This does not imply that his brother knew of this. [This seems to be where RJP sourced his recent scenario – now rather died a death, I note.]
On the Sphere book episode: I did not discuss the matter with Alan Gray until AFTER I had learned of Mike’s library claims. But it was not until November [1994], after I collated reports from my librarian contacts in the UK and USA that I realised just how special the quote was. [This must be when Harris “checked and double-checked” that Liverpool Central Library did not have a copy of the Sphere volume – you know, the one that was on their shelf the whole time?]. That was the Sphere Book Vol 2 and Mike owned a copy. Only then did I press for Alan to retrieve the book at all costs and report on its condition.
And this is me. Presumably Alan Gray did track down Mike’s copy and sent it to Harris at which point Harris blew a gasket when he saw the condition of it and realised that Mike had nipped down to a local book store and purchased his own dog-eared copy of this otherwise incredibly rare book – thereby revealing to the world that he didn’t have a pristine copy of volume 2 and very possibly never did. Shirley Harrison asked to see the book in January 1995. Well, you can imagine Melvin Harris’s sense of panic. He couldn’t possibly allow it to be known that Barrett had nipped-out and bought a student’s old copy, so he reported back to Shirley that “There is a conflict of interest here” [Thursday January 19th 1995]. Well, to once again quote Mandy Rice-Palmer, “He would, wouldn’t he?”.
The point of posting material like this is to illustrate that Mike Barrett was sending huge signals to Melvin Harris that his account of hoaxing the scrapbook was a pure fabrication, but that Harris (and now others) ploughed-on making the case against Barrett even though it could clearly never be made to stick. The desperation of such people to discount the evidence before them is little short of criminal. For some reason, they did not and do not want the Jack the Ripper mystery to be solved.
Personally, I have absolutely no skin in this game. The mystery was solved in 1992, and the evidence was there in 1972, 1899, and - most crucially of all - 1888 ...Comment
-
This guy has the answer right there in his hands and then changes tack, inexplicably ignoring the evidence he himself has just confirmed. Donald Rumblelow (1975) also published Florence Maybrick's initials on Mary Kelly's wall and this guy knows it, but he lets the gold slip from his fingers, moving all too quickly to Bongo's bonkers confession, and thence to reliance on the myths and the prejudices which have hounded this story more or less from the start.
Such a shame - he was so close, and then he blew it!
1992, 1975, 1972, 1899, 1888 ...Comment
-
Pretty hard to argue with a man who can change font size and put it in color too. Now that is impressive.
c.d.Comment
-
Indeed c.d. It's becoming increasingly strange here in these Maybrick threads. Hold on who's this ? There's a very tall Native American approaching. What's that he's carrying, it looks like a large ceramic sink, there are taps. Hey watch out fella, he's heading for the window, he's thrown the sink through the window, he's escaping. FM? think I'll follow him.Originally posted by c.d. View PostComment
-
Well, Mildred, doesn't it just show what can be done when one person stands up to the authoritarian dictatorship of the many closed-minded individuals around them? They may not necessarily be the one enjoying the freedom their efforts brought about but others can and will. Stand up for what you believe in, say I, regardless of the crowing and baying of the naysayers and lobotomists around you ...Originally posted by Observer View PostComment
-
Mildred? No it's mildew. it's mildew you're seeing on Kelly's wall definitely not bloodOriginally posted by Iconoclast View PostComment
-
Mind, if you had eyes like this fella you might see a dodgy FM written on Kelly's wall
Comment
Comment