One Incontrovertible, Unequivocal, Undeniable Fact Which Refutes the Diary

[Iconoclast]

The opinons are no more second hand than the opinions of the writers of the book.

I have assesed and evaluated the affadavit and in my opinon it is the real deal, That being said as I keep saying no one has been able to prove otherwise.

And again at the risk of having to keep repeating myself there is a wealth of corroboration in the public domain from independent experts that confirm the diary is a fake, perhaps you should take the blinkers off and go check it out. You clearly have an agenda with this issue, which I can understand as you were it seems yet again involved directly involved right at the beginning of this fiasco as you were with other contentious issues that have arisen over the years with.

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

I don't know Paul Begg but the impression I have of him is that he is simply seeking the facts of the matter rather than the potentially blinkered errors which inevitably creep quickly in when conclusions are drawn inappropriately and then presented as categoricals.

[Iconoclast]

Congratulations on the most ill-informed post in Casebook history. Serious question - were you ever really a proper detective? I only ask as all your posts on this thread are ignorant to the pint of embarrassment.

That one made me laugh, Owly, and not because of your wonderful typo.

[Iconoclast]

Finally a thread of the debate we can agree on!

Her story has no logic in it at all.

You believe she is throwing a curve ball because she knows it was hoaxed and wants another bite at that big fat publishing cherry.

I say she did it because she had no idea where Mike actually got it from and to take control of the situation she concocted this story so Mike didn’t drag the whole thing down in flames.

Agreed, ero b. It makes at least as much sense as any other opinion (take note RJ et alia).

[Iconoclast]

Why did she care if it went down in flames? According to Caz Brown she was refusing her royalty checks.

Are you suggesting Caz is wrong, and Anne was actually out to make money off the diary, and her hesitancy to take her royalty checks was just an act?

Strange inference, RJ. My inference was that Anne - like the rest of us - was intrigued by the possibility that the scrapbook was authentic and therefore did not want to allow Mike (who she knew didn't create it) destroying it with his utter mince.

[Iconoclast]

The more I read this over, the more curious it appears to me.

Is Keith suggesting the 'motive' of an affidavit must first be established before ascertaining the affidavit's veracity?

RP

Come on, RJ, motive is obviously relevant! If someone's motive is to tell the truth, then they will almost certainly tell the truth. If their motive is to confuse or 'strike back' in some way because they believe they have been emotionally slighted, then they will possibly be willing to tell an untruth which attempts (however illogically) to 'get their own back'.

And we should be talking not only about Mike Barrett's motive but also about Alan Gray's (he wanted to be paid, poor bastard), and Melvin Harris (he wanted to kill the diary because he was a man of such profound and unquestionable integrity).

[rjpalmer]

It does rather beg the question why this little gem of yours has never gained a single bit of traction in thirty years?

To the contrary, Old Boy, among the rational, the implication of Baxendale's solubility test has just as much traction now as it did when it finally found its way out of the safety of Robert Smith's bottom desk drawer.

You have no explanation for Baxendale's results, other than to ignore them with a jocular wave of the hand, as you do all other blatant indications of a hoax, including the handwriting not being Maybrick's. This wind-up act is growing stale, Old Boy.

The only person who has attempted to explain away Baxendale's findings is Caz, who posited that keeping a diary in an enclosed biscuit tin under floorboards for 110 years might keep the ink in a state of suspended animation.

....an idea that doesn't appear to have gained "much traction."

Kindest regards.

[Iconoclast]

It would certainly seem so, Paul. No wonder they all live on super yachts ...

And just in case anyone thinks they really do live on super yachts, Trevor could have easily read the book when it was published at $22 or even better buy it right now for less than a tenner:

[caz]

I have not seen Fido's original source materials and am going simply by his statement in the Feldman film. The thing I am open to be corrected is on whether it was Fido who discovered this or he was referencing someone else's find.

For clarity here is the full transcript of that video extract:

"I don't think in any sense James Maybrick was the easiest person to use. I think he is a very risky person. The way in which the forger has had enormous good luck is that Maybrick was a hypochondriac. He went to his doctor or chemist what about seventy times a year. This is recorded. Those visits went down in their logs or prescriptions books, and by incredible good fortune, not one of those seventy times conflicts with any of the times when the diary said Maybrick was in London."

This is the actual statement and readers can make their own interpretations. I made mine.

My only point would be how the Barretts would have gone about checking if Maybrick could be placed by any documented evidence too far from London, when they decided to see if he could be turned into JtR. I'd be quietly terrified that someone more qualified would prove it to be an impossibility within about five minutes of learning what I was fraudulently trying to publish as the real deal.

Was it just another matter of pure luck that the Barretts didn't come unstuck in this way? The diary author makes it clear that they are aware of JM's constant obsession with his health.

Talking of which, I'm jolly grateful I was able to get my COVID booster before all hell broke loose!

Love,

Caz
X

[Iconoclast]

My only point would be how the Barretts would have gone about checking if Maybrick could be placed by any documented evidence too far from London, when they decided to see if he could be turned into JtR. I'd be quietly terrified that someone more qualified would prove it to be an impossibility within about five minutes of learning what I was fraudulently trying to publish as the real deal.

Was it just another matter of pure luck that the Barretts didn't come unstuck in this way? The diary author makes it clear that they are aware of JM's constant obsession with his health.

Talking of which, I'm jolly grateful I was able to get my COVID booster before all hell broke loose!

Love,

Caz
X

You will all be deeply relieved to hear that Mrs Iconoclast and I got ours today too. Ike is here to stay it would appear!

I'd be quietly terrified that someone more qualified would prove it to be an impossibility within about five minutes of learning what I was fraudulently trying to publish as the real deal.

And what **** parents the Barretts were to do what they did, taking these very risks which - by your own admission - would have terrified the Switchblade herself, full in the knowledge that discovery might lead to imprisonment, the loss of their home, and therefore the loss of their beloved daughter?

Mind you, they probably could have kept the house on the back of those fat royalty cheques Mike was picking-up from his hard-hitting exposes in Whizzer and Chips and Twinkle.

[Iconoclast]

And just in case anyone thinks they really do live on super yachts, Trevor could have easily read the book when it was published at $22 or even better buy it right now for less than a tenner:

[/ATTACH]

And that was just my first attempt!

But the price of the book is utterly irrelevant because we all know that Trevor can't be arsed to read it. No wonder he's been voted-in as the latest chairman of the Committee for Integrity.

[rjpalmer]

Hi Ike,

in case you ever want to know what two average, normal, disinterested members of the public think about the Maybrick Diary. The podcast is known as "Fib," which might give you a hint.

The Diary Of Jack The Ripper FIB: A Podcast About Lies podcast (player.fm)

[barnflatwyngarde]

And just in case anyone thinks they really do live on super yachts, Trevor could have easily read the book when it was published at $22 or even better buy it right now for less than a tenner:

Yep!

I paid the princely sum of £5.59 for my hardback copy, and I'm thoroughly enjoying re-reading it.

[Iconoclast]

Hi Ike,

in case you ever want to know what two average, normal, disinterested members of the public think about the Maybrick Diary. The podcast is known as "Fib," which might give you a hint.

The Diary Of Jack The Ripper FIB: A Podcast About Lies podcast (player.fm)

Well I'm two minutes in and really bored so I hope it's going to pick up soon.

I'm also deeply disquieted by the blub they provide:

How a man whose wife was framed for murdering him was framed for murder 100 years after the murders, but then his framer confessed, then retracted his confession and they later framed the murdered man's allegedly murderer wife for framing him so that she could then murder him.

That last sentence immediately tells me that these two are not going to be shedding profound insight into this case which tells me that what two average, normal, disinterested members of the public think about the Maybrick Diary is probably not particularly relevant here - in much the same way that my occasional thoughts on nuclear fusion probably escaped Stephen Hawking's deepest nightmares.

But thanks anyway, RJ. Six minutes in and I am at least listening to it ...

[rjpalmer]

But thanks anyway, RJ. Six minutes in and I am at least listening to it ...

You'll eventually come to my favorite line from (I think) Claire:

“It is really irritating when you go on to some of these Jack the Ripper websites and they have like a scroll of the key subjects [sic? suspects?] and James Maybrick is on there and it’s like (in a voice of exasperation) “Oh come on, it was not FVCKING him.”


Doesn't sound like you're gaining much traction, Ike--at least among the ladies.

There's another humous podcast which I can't currently locate where three normal people also discuss the Maybrick Diary.

Their verdict? It was written in the early 1990s, during an economic recession, when Mike Barrett couldn't make his mortage payment. Which is pretty much what Mike said, wasn't it?

If I can find it again, I'll drop you the link.

[Iconoclast]

But thanks anyway, RJ. Six minutes in and I am at least listening to it ...

Twenty minutes in and they've just mentioned Baxendale's analysis. No mention about the diary still being wet, RJ? You might have thought the podcast could have stopped there?

Despite my cynical expectations, the two of them so far have constructed a decent chronology of the events of 1992, although I'd have been happier if they'd called Phillip Sugden 'Sugden' not 'Sudgen' and had not referred to the scrapbook as 'diaries' (plural).

They've just dissed David Forshaw's view that the psychopathy of the text stands up (in the absence of physical evidence that the scrapbook was a fake) and that's a shame because they are laughing at that view because they can't get their heads around it. Cheap laffs.

I'll be back.