One Incontrovertible, Unequivocal, Undeniable Fact Which Refutes the Diary

[Sam Flynn]

There was one "James Laurence" born in Liverpool in 1865... and still living there in 1891.

[Chris]

Of course someone whose intention is to keep the argument going, will do his best to be as irritating as possible.

This game has been going on for years. Decades even.

[John Hacker]

Hey Jane,

Assuming for a moment that it's a forgery...

Finding a book with contets would certainy be easier than an empty book. An empty book would require a longer search and more chance of the purchase being traced back to the forgers. Also, contents could make it easier to date the thing. Diaries/Scrapbooks don't usually come with publication dates and for a non-expert it would be the safest way.

And of course it ould explain why the photographs inside had time to crate impressions on the inner cover which would be indicative of a prolonged presence.

But to be fair i would be in line with the "character" of the of the diaries main character to start his new mission with a grand gesture of tearing out all of the happy memories photos and throwing them into the fire before sitting down to plot his revenge. It would make a wonderful opening shot in the Maybrick movie. (Starring Peewee Herman as James Maybrick)

[John Hacker]

You've illustrated my point fairly well Soothy.

You've given 3 points which you feel support the diary that you would find unlikely. Let's take them one at a time.

1) Of course we know the the diary text is NOT consistent with the positioning of the supposed FM. And it certainly appears from posts after yours that the problems with assuming there were 6 inch high letters on the scene that the police apparently missed entirely are not lost upon you.

But let's pretend for a moment that the author did intend to describe the letter(s) on the wall. How is there a coincidence there? The photograph has been available for years. Referring to something that appears to be there is unlikely... why? The shape that you're taking for an "M" is apparent in most pictures. (The "F" in none of them) So how would a forger referring to it be extraordinary?

2) The "Diego Laurenz" letter has never been connected to the crimes themselves or to Maybrick. It's not a connection between 2 points it's an arbitrary 3rd point where people have decided to connect the dots. The thing is that there were 100s of letters written. So the correct way to look at this is "what are the odds that one ore more Ripper letters could be tenuously attached to a given suspect" and unless we're assuming an illerate suspect the odds have to be approaching 100%, especially if you're going to get to use the "funny little games" excuise to try and rhyme "Florence" with "Laurenz". That's not the forger getting lucky, that's simple wish fullfillment on the part of it's supporters.

3) I think it's a bit of a stretch to call Kim Rossmo "one of America's finest mathmatical minds". He's a crimonologist with a background in math. And we should keep in mind that geographical profiling, while an interesting tool, is hardly 100% under the best of circumstances. A statistical model of 5 crimes plotted onto a 100+ year old data set isn't going to do as well in any case. And of course the foundation of geographical profiling involves a "comfort zone" around familiar areas (home or work) that I am not sure a rented room visited occasionally would provide.

But again, let's ignore all that and play pretend. Rossmo is indeed spot on. One of the two streets he named was indeed where the killer lived. What are the odds that the forger when glomming onto a name with "Sex" in it (ha ha) picked one that Rossmo would name? Considering hed be unlikely to pick tiny backstreets either for the model (higher population centers) probably something like 1 in 10? I'd have to sit down and count streets, but the odds aren't that long. Especially with Rossmo taking 2 bites at the apple.

They're certainly a lot lower IMO than those of the killer forgetting the placement of MJK's breasts (which made a rather twisted sense), reading the paper and getting confused to the point that he wrote in his diary about the incorrect placement as well as a rationale for placing them where they weren't. Or of a chemical that was not in period ink turning up that just coincidentally happened to be a component in the ink that Mike B suggested was used. (Do you have any idea how many chemical compounds there are?)

Clearly everyone will assign their own weight to the various bits of the evidence, but you might want to take a closer look at some of the "improbables" that you feel support the diary that are external to the text and ask yourself if it's really improbable that thes things happen or would it be more improbable that with all the looking that's been done that none these tenous "connections" were found. Every suspect has 'em. :-)

[Soothsayer]

You've illustrated my point fairly well Soothy.

I guess that you yourself have already clarified for us that the destination at the end of the journey remains unclear however much those marching proudly along the road believe they know where they're going.

We could debate endlessly how important the coincidences are or how unimportant they are given Fate's natural tendency to throw up circumstances which lend weight to an argument which folk with other agendas have long-since discounted.

My complex statistical analysis produced p values of startling implausibility, and the world of Ripperology really ought to have turned over faster in its grave on their publication. My abacus is still steaming from the exercise, for goodness sake.

I think that the great joy of a website like this is that serious researchers such as I can come on, share the wealth around a bit, and generally raise the debate up a notch or two. You're worth it, guys!

But that anyone will ever move anyone's beliefs even an inch?

Hold on, let me get the old abacus out again for another superb piece of Soothsayer number-crunching genius ...

Yes, as I thought, the odds of moving anyone's belief even as little as an inch are so incalculably low that I actually need an abacus which stretches from here to Whitechapel itself.

As has been noted elsewhere, you could lay out all of the world's philosophers head to toe right around the world and they'd still never reach a conclusion ... Ripperologists among them would make no difference.

[Soothsayer]

Referring to something that appears to be there is unlikely... why? The shape that you're taking for an "M" is apparent in most pictures. (The "F" in none of them) So how would a forger referring to it be extraordinary?

Well, John, if the 'F' were not there, I would have to agree with you.

Pop along to the library or your nearest bookseller tomorrow and have a look at page 184 of Stewart Evans' and Donald Rumbelow's 'Scotland Yard Investigates'. I doubt anyone would suggest that either of them are journal-supporters, so the fact that they have published Kelly's death scene photograph with the 'FM' so incredibly clear suggests to me that you may be deeply confused when you do so. I can imagine the sweat on your brow, the looking around, and the wondering how 14 good men can say Nay when your eyes say Yay.

For the record, the same picture appears to be used in Trevor Marriott's '21st Century Investigation'. For a book which decried the journal solely on Mike Barrett's confession (which of the many after the many retractions, of course, is impossible to know), it seems particularly humorous to find such a compelling example of the thing no-one else can see.

3) I think it's a bit of a stretch to call Kim Rossmo "one of America's finest mathmatical minds".

I wouldn't know - I based it on the reverence in which he was held in a recent episode of the excellent 'Numbers' on Sky TV.

Especially with Rossmo taking 2 bites at the apple.

It was one. He named Flower and Dean Street. I noticed after the event that the only other street which came up as strong a case as Flower and Dean was Middlesex Street. The two of them were off the scale. My suspicion is that - had he included the Goulston Street location - he'd have named Middlesex Street instead.

We could list the weaknesses for a while if it would get us anywhere (handwriting not yet proved, Post House appearing to be anachronistic, the misremembered breasts, mis-stating the contribution his brother made to the compositions, the three items of Eddowes' possessions listed in the order Fido gave, the 'tin match box empty'). But if we do that, we need to reflect on the strengths (of which 'FM' is the strongest). We could debate endlessly about the paper and the ink. Did the tests inadvertantly 'test the ink' whilst actually testing the paper and the ink and then pronounce solely on the ink? Did Leeds get it right or wrong? Did Analysis for Industry? Did Alec Voller?

Clearly everyone will assign their own weight to the various bits of the evidence, but you might want to take a closer look at some of the "improbables" that you feel support the diary that are external to the text and ask yourself if it's really improbable that thes things happen or would it be more improbable that with all the looking that's been done that none these tenous "connections" were found. Every suspect has 'em. :-)

Well, John, as usual you make a good case, and without the interminable abuse. We obviously have to beg to differ on the journal. I am the only person in the entire world who has no vested financial interest in the journal and yet believes it is authentic despite the protestations of those on the Casebook. Does bother me, mind. I would never be so shallow as to simply follow, nor ever be afraid to stand up and say what I believe.

Have you ever heard of the psychology experiments from the 1950s where 14 stooges sat in chairs and pronounced that Line C was the longest of three on a card? When the card is then handed to the 15th person - not in the know - he or she sees that Line B is actually the longest. In a state of utter confusion, the vast majority will simply concur with the 14 presumably for reasons of doubting their senses and wanting to fit in.

Personally, I feel that if Line B is the longest, then it's not Line C and never will be.

My thoughts about the journal reflect the same principle...

[Jane Welland]

Er, these letters..

that may or may not be there? Has anybody (can anybody) demonstrate(d) this one way or the other? Or not? Is it to be reasoned that these 'letters' are written in blood? Can that be proved? Jane x

[Soothsayer]

that may or may not be there? Has anybody (can anybody) demonstrate(d) this one way or the other? Or not? Is it to be reasoned that these 'letters' are written in blood? Can that be proved? Jane x

Janey,

Most folk seem to accept that the 'lines' are blood. Blood (even rivulets of blood, as has been argued elsewhere) does not spontaneously form letters familiar in our or any other language. This creates a quandry because the two letters in question are referenced in the journal when it describes the Kelly murder. The journal doesn't state where the letters are to be found, or how far apart they are to be found - it merely unequivocally implies that such are to be found in the room. Those (i.e., I) who believe in the journal's authenticity consider this an unlikely occurrence if the journal were forged. The only possible explanation would be that the forger saw the letters and built an elaborate back story around them.

Actually, the second only other possible explanation is that the letters aren't actually there, but fortunately, no-one takes that view seriously!

[Soothsayer]

Incidentally, your sign-off (Janey) reminds me of Simon and Garfunkel's reunion gig in Central Park twenty-odd years ago when Simon added a verse to 'The Boxer' which went somewhat as follows:

Now the years have passed between us
They are rocking easily
I am older than I once was
But younger than I'll be
That's not unusual
No, and it isn't strange
How after changes upon changes
We are more or less the same

[Applause as audience geddit]

[Graham]

Yoo-hoo Soothy!

Can you please quote the relevant line(s) from the Diary in which the writer specifically, categorically and undeniably states that the letters are to found 'in the room'?

Season-ticket to Aston Villa 2008 Season if you can answer to my complete satisfaction.

Thanking you,

Graham

PS: Jane's signing-off line is Rousseau, n'est-ce pas?

[Soothsayer]

Yoo-hoo Soothy!

PS: Jane's signing-off line is Rousseau, n'est-ce pas?

Grahamster!

I have been accused in t'other quarters of being Billy Nae Mates - but I always have you!

Spooky you replied. I had just checked out your A6 Murder posting, got confused, sat down for a while, came back and found your post to this, just when I'd spent ten minutes grappling with why you haven't posted here for a while!

Actually, I was on the Newcastle Evening Chronicle website checking to see if TalkSport got it right when it claimed that NUFC were paying a £10million loyalty bonus to those muppets who got our proud club relegated. Sadly, it turns out it is true.

You know the reference to "An initial here ..." to which I added a little spice to tickle the noses of POSTERS (not the 'posers' I accidentally typed!) like your good self who just can't resist my utter charm.

PS If that was Rousseau, I'm voting you officially the Midlands brightest ever bulb in the garden. Or I would do if the Midlands had a garden.

[Soothsayer]

Graham,

I meant posTers, not posers!!!!!!

[Graham]

Soothy,

If nothing else, you're a bloody good laugh!

Don't get into the A6 Case unless you really mean it. I really mean that.

The Midlands does have a garden. It's called The Midlands Garden and it's in...er...The Midlands. Isn't it?

Graham

[Soothsayer]

The Midlands does have a garden. It's called The Midlands Garden and it's in...er...The Midlands. Isn't it?

Graham

THAT is exactly why they call me Soothsayer!

[Jessica Pisces]

Doesn't the diary say, "Tin Match Box Empty", in those exact words, just like the police list of Eddowes personal effects?