One Incontrovertible, Unequivocal, Undeniable Fact Which Refutes the Diary

[Soothsayer]

Sir Robert,

Why are Ripperoligists held in high contempt in that book shop?

Also I would just like to add, what ever we think about the diary, one cant help admire ( if it is a fake ) the hoaxers behind it.
It is it's self a fasinating mystery and if JTR is ever solved, at least we got something else to debate.

Spysy,

Your latter logic only holds true if - in solving the crime - we find that it wasn't already well solved in the journal itself.

As the Casebook's sole believer in the authenticity of the journal (well, I've had the surgery, you know - and those labotomies are not cheap by the way, especially if you go private, as Mrs Soothsayer insisted I did; "Don't skimp!" I well remember her shouting at the surgeons as they dragged me into theatre kicking and screaming) ... what on earth was I saying?

Ah yes, as the Casebook's only member with a magnificent magnifying glass and deerstalker hat, I think that I am well positioned to note that Ripperologists are not held in high regard essentially because they have discounted the only real evidence we've ever had for who old Jackster was. The only Smoking Gun in this game was long since condemned for supposedly firing blanks.

I agree with Kazzy - the handwriting gig isn't such a big deal, it really isn't.

Darn, just as I was getting into my flow, Mrs Soothsayer has just called me in for my bread and milk and the Big Brother eviction. Well - like I say - I've had the surgery!

More insight to follow, fellow Casebookers ...

[spyglass]

Soothsayer,

Pheeew!
I like your refreshing angle on things, and you know..you could be right.

[jerrip]

I believe the book is real. It's the content that I disbelieve.
The con artist Barrett stated that he purchase it an auction and it dates around 1910. He used a method that is not his own. Go here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elmyr_de_Hory

This con artist used the same method of taking "real" paper for use in his forgeries.

I was laughing when watching a documentary on this diary, where the experts were fact checking. Barrett was probably accessing the same source material, so of course he is going to be accurate, but apparently that never occurred to them.

Letters "FM" on the wall, so what. That instantly means it belongs to Maybrick's wife? She was the only one with those initials at that time? FM could mean any two words starting with an "F" and an "M". It could mean "Final Murder" for all we know! Frequency Modulation.

All of this is so obvious to me. It is refreshing that there are several Casebook members who agree with some points I have. The most important being the Diary is a fake.

Seems to me everyone is running in the wrong direction on this, they should be analyzing the source, Tony Devereux. How did he come in possession? Did any of his family members ever see him with it? Or is Barrett manufacturing this aspect also (that's what I believe).

jerrip

[Scott Nelson]

jerrip.

Please check the numerous archived threads on this topic before posting further.

[Scotland Yard]

Also that the handwriting just did not look authentic to the period either. I was just amazed that anyone ever believed it was authentic.
RH

Have to agree with this. I saw the diary on display in a Ripper exhibition a couple of years back and the first thing that leaps out at you is how the handwriting just didn't tally with the supposed period. The style is clearly that of someone used to writing with a biro!!

The diary's very obviously a fake, confession or not.

[spyglass]

Hi all,

I too believe the diary to be a fake, however I cannot believe that Barratt was the forger for many various reasons.
I have a deep down feeling it was a forgery nearer the time of the events for what ever dark reasons.

[Johnr]

Yup!

Not having read the Maybrick Diary, I feel eminently qualified to comment upon it.

Rather as several famous authors have embarked upon the writing of novels about places they have never visited.

I truly, madly, deeply, believe the Maybe Diary was one such novel.

By someone who was not there at the time. And is not here now.

And is not likely to be here in the future.

And I challenge you to disprove that Incontravertible, Unequicocal, Undeniable Fact!

JOHN RUFFELS ( If THAT is my REAL name!).

(Where AM I?).

[caz]

I can't be bothered to address all the myths and misinformation that have appeared on this thread since my last visit. Life's too short.

But Scott Nelson is right - some people would do themselves a favour by getting up to speed with this subject before coming out with "I reckon..." followed by some very ill-informed observations, whether they concern Mike Barrett the con artist (there's a big clue there), what Mike claimed about Tony Devereux, the mythical FM on the wall, or genuine handwritten documents of the late Victorian period.

Just because a few people have never seen any Victorian writing that resembles the diary physically, it doesn't mean that nobody has - very far from it in fact.

Love,

Caz
X

[Scott Nelson]

Ooh, thanks Caz. Now here's the background story in a comprehensive and concise book for those new to the Maybrick Diary who wish to know more (highly recommended):

Ripper Diary The Inside Story- Seth Linder, Caroline Morris and Keith Skinner

[Kaz]

Ooh, thanks Caz. Now here's the background story in a comprehensive and concise book for those new to the Maybrick Diary who wish to know more (highly recommended):

Ripper Diary The Inside Story- Seth Linder, Caroline Morris and Keith Skinner

I wish to know more so have just ordered from amazon.

Thanks Scott

[jerrip]

I am taking Mr. Nelson advice and reading up on this subject. But I may stop shortly as it appears no really takes the diary for fact anymore. The only difference is how they dralw this conclusion.

I admitted that I am nowhere near an expert or well read on the JTR as most of the members here on this forum, nor will I ever be, it's just slight interest to me. I have no intention of committing major time and resources to JTR.

What little I do know, just surprise me of Maybrick's placement of suspects. That's all I was pointing out (with the confession being a major element, for me at least).

Caz, no one is begging you devote your time to responding to ANY post. I thank anybody that responds on topic and with accurate information, but if they don't respond, it will not be missed.

What a Diva.

Jerrip

[caz]

What a Diva.

Thanks jer, I'll take that as a huge compliment.

The term is used to describe a woman of outstanding talent...

The basic sense of the term is "goddess"...



Love,

Caz
X

[caz]

I wish to know more so have just ordered from amazon.

Thanks Scott

Hi Kaz,

I really hope you will enjoy the book and get something useful out of it.

Love,

Caz
X

[Casebook Wiki Editor]

Caz, no one is begging you devote your time to responding to ANY post. I thank anybody that responds on topic and with accurate information, but if they don't respond, it will not be missed.

What a Diva.

Jerrip

Oh my, a Diary ignoramus posting from Florida. Haven't had one around these parts for awhile.

Caz has forgotten more about the Diary, the Watch and the Maybricks themselves than most of us have ever known. I would have suggested that she'd be a great resource for anyone with an interest in getting up to speed on this subject, but if I were her I'd just put you on ignore.

[caz]

Oh my, a Diary ignoramus posting from Florida. Haven't had one around these parts for awhile.

There's another one due in - ooh - two weeks to be exact.

Love,

Caz
X