One Incontrovertible, Unequivocal, Undeniable Fact Which Refutes the Diary

[FISHY1118]

I made the simplest of points about anatomical/medical knowledge. A point that shouldn’t have been controversial in any way. It was a point so very obvious that I assumed that no one would even bother questioning it. But you are so determined to dismiss Druitt you couldn’t even bring yourself to accept something that’s beyond argument. If I said “Druitt was a man,” I’m almost convinced that you’d question this.

It was a simple, inoffensive and very minor point. The correct response would have been “fair enough, that’s true,” because it is true. But you couldn’t manage even that.

I wasnt contoversial in any way ,you made it so , And im sure you will continue too,

I gave you my answer, you went off topic about facts about druitts family and their medical background, fine but that wasnt the issue. It was maybricks ability or the capacity to gain the knowledge required that in my opinion had im ahead of druitt ,[ which i since agreed with you that because of what you posted i accepted druitt as well . Simple .

Lets not get into a drawn out debate off topic as ''you'' suggested in your original post .

[caz]

Are these silly exchanges getting us anywhere, Caz?

You tell me, RJ. You continued them after writing:

This makes any further discussion a pointless endeavor, so I'm more than willing to terminate this discussion until at least September 12th.

I'm also happy to give you the last word.

Ciao.

Silly me, for taking you at your word.

How is this my 'latest theory'? I told you this exact 'theory' over 15 years ago in a private email and you passed it on to Keith Skinner. I think I still have our exchange somewhere in my email files. In 15 or 20 years, I still can find no reason why this is not the most rational explanation for Anne's participation in the Maybrick Hoax---maybe we'll know more after September 12th? If Jones thinks he has found the final coffin-nail, it can only be one of two things: a) a confirmed alibi for Maybrick; b) a confession by the still living hoaxer or a credible account by someone close to the hoaxer.

Well excuse me for not recognising, nor having perfect recall of someone's silly diary theory from over 15 years ago. In that time I've been through two house moves and a truly horrific divorce. My older brother committed suicide in a truly horrific way and my younger brother nearly died from covid pneumonia. So get over yourself and your silly obsession with what you fondly imagine was Anne Graham's personal life in 1992, and what her deepest, darkest diary secret is.

And it wasn't only Shirley Harrison who was deceived for years by Anne Graham. There was an old poster by the name of Caz who 'for years' used to give great credence to her transparently ridiculous tale of seeing the diary as a young woman but telling no one about it and even hiding it from her own husband behind a cabinet only to give it to him through a third party.

Did I really, RJ? Did I ever give Anne's story 'great credence'? From day one, when I read Feldy's book in 1998, I was more struck by the coincidence of the Battlecrease electrician who lived on the same road as Tony Devereux and supped at Mike Barrett's local. But I had to assume that Feldy, Keith, Paul Begg and everyone else involved must have followed that lead as far as it could ever go and drawn a blank. Who was I to question it? I was Mrs Nobody.

I was never happy with Anne's explanation for asking a virtual stranger to give the diary, which supposedly belonged to her still living father, to Mike - because she wanted to give him something he could write a story about. Yet that's the part of her story you have actually swallowed!

The diary itself was never meant to be published. [How could that be true, if Anne helped Mike create it out of an old photo album for that very purpose?]

She just wanted her unfulfilled hubby to write a story about Maybrick as the ripper. [Yes, because that is what the diary is about].

You've twisted this round so that instead of Mike writing that story, Anne wrote it for him, and they then created a physical diary together to contain it.

Why, if she only wanted Mike to write a story? She knew from his previous efforts that he wasn't capable, so it would have been a foregone conclusion that if she wanted the story written, she would have to do it herself.

If you've been stuck with this exact same theory for upwards of 15 years, I'm wondering how much further you can take it. The additional information that has been gathered over that time by others of a more open and inquisitive mind, is at least building into a more complete evidential picture, that may show whose theories have stood the test of time and whose were never going to make it to the finish line.

[caz]

Some of us didn't need to 'look back,' Ike. We always knew it was bollocks.

Her tale was patently ridiculous when she first told it twenty-seven years ago.

A young woman--a teenager--finds the Diary of Jack the Ripper in her father's trunk. Yet, she's not particularly interested and doesn't tell anyone!

Gee, that's credible.

Years later, she now has ownership of the diary, but doesn't tell her husband--even in the best of times. Instead, she hides it behind the furniture. Why? 'Because it was evil.'

Sure thing.

Yet, despite the evilness of the thing, she eventually decides to give it to her husband so he can 'write a story.'

Instead of just handing it to him like any normal person would do, she instead wraps it in brown paper and gives it to him through a barfly that she apparently barely knows.

Why? So he won't endlessly hound her father--who later demonstrates that he had little or no memory of it, and could have simply told Mike as much in 30 seconds.

It's ridiculous from one end to the other, Ike. Her tall tale was obviously just an attempt to take the diary out of Barrett's hands when he started to blab.

And anyway, didn't you describe it as one of two 'excellent' provenances, and doesn't Keith still give it a certain amount of weight?

Personally, I find the last two paragraphs of Anne's 'confession' quite suggestive:






She's barely disguising her motive. She basically has a good heart. The story is complete bosh, but she's handing these folks from London a new provenance on a plate because of all the chaos her husband's daft scheme has caused. She's also hoping to save her own skin, having been dragged into it by Barrett.

Seems like good ol' fashion guilt to me, Ike. She's trying to clean-up after Mike.

Or because of all the chaos her husband's silly false confession has caused. Anne knew, when she finally walked out on Mike at the start of that eventful year, taking their only child with her, that he was not going to take it lying down. He was the abusive partner, but that never stops an abused wife feeling terribly guilty for giving up the uneven struggle and being the one to leave the marital home. I've been there, but my guilt didn't come from any religious faith. You accepted that Anne, as a Catholic, would have found it "horrific" to have to make that decision. She basically has a good heart, and wanted to make amends for Mike's desperate behaviour, as a direct result of her abandoning him and her marriage.

The story Anne told in order to make amends served more than one purpose. It restored Mike's original story, that he got the diary in 1991 from Tony. That did them both a favour, assuming they knew this wasn't true, because the diary wasn't seen by anyone until March 1992. Mike didn't appreciate this favour, but it might have saved his skin in the event that his 'confession' was taken seriously.

If there were still only a choice between Anne's 'in the family' story and the Barrett hoax theory, I'll give you three guesses which one I'd be calling utter bollocks.

[erobitha]

Interesting, Erobitha, but keep in mind that there is a famous Lime Street in Liverpool, so you will want to cross the t's and dot the i's.

Oh dirty Maggie Mae they have taken her away
And she never walk down Lime Street any more...

I can remember Johnny Lennon singing it on the Let it Be album.

Anyway, you may want to check that JM didn't keep addresses in both Liverpool and London in 1866.

A bit of a late reply but you will find a bit more colour around the whole 46 Lime Street connection in my latest blog post. Enjoy.

[rjpalmer]

If Chris Jones has truly obtained conclusive evidence that the diary is a recent fake --an admission by Anne Graham, for instance-- isn't it odd that James Johnston would be invited to give his own talk, where he will presumably plump for "it came from beneath the floorboards" provenance?

It would be like leading a lamb to slaughter, wouldn't it? Allowing the alleged opposition to speak only to embarrass them afterwards by springing 'conclusive' evidence that what they believe cannot be so?

Either something is not quite right, or the launch will be partly cloudy with a chance of fireworks.

I hope Liverpool Mike G. drops in.

[rjpalmer]

If Chris Jones has truly obtained conclusive evidence that the diary is a recent fake

Not that I don't think there already isn't conclusive evidence of a recent fake--I refer to 'new' evidence.

See y'all in September.

[Iconoclast]

A bit of a late reply but you will find a bit more colour around the whole 46 Lime Street connection in my latest blog post. Enjoy.

Hi Ero b,

Just read your blog - nice piece of work, young man!

Imagine a scenario where Anne Barrett just for jolly wouldn't you writes a creative piece on James Maybrick (that quintessential Liverpool Lad) and turns him (all mad and inspired and utterly stupidly) into the world's most infamous unsolved murderer - the butcher of Whitechapel - and then you come along thirty years later and show that the thirty year old James ploughed a just-for-jolly wouldn't he furrow down the east end of that there Landarn, right at the very jam tart of Jack's wicked crimes. Would that not jolly well cork you?

Perhaps we might favour a different view in that event? What with shacking up with Sarah Ann 'shame she was a Mackem' Maybrick nee Robertson (nee sense) over in Bromley Road, Stepney to the east (IIRC) and working out of Lemon and Lime Street, Landarn, to the west, some might say it would be remarkable if he had not chosen Whitechapel slap bang in the middle for his industry with a knife when things got a bit tetchy with his - possibly quite literally - second wife, Florie; assuming, of course, that such remarkable coincidences compel even the doubters towards a strong suspicion that the good lad James was the legendary Jack the Spratt himself.

Of course, he might have just been down there in the '60s then never down there again, even when Witty later claimed Maybrick did his Landarn business for him in the '80s which caused so much debate about what he actually meant by that (the argument being, of course, that James did it remotely, working-from-home-like in Liverpool). Discovering - as you so splendidly have - that James was plodding the streets of the east way back in the 1860s must surely make us wonder at the utter implausibility of it being the case post-publication of the erstwhile 'hoax' in 1993. He should have been a Liverpool scally and no more because that's all he was ever understood to be, and yet your hard yards have provided much road for us all to travel down along the route to a resolution of this long debate.

I imagine that you've had to put a considerable amount of work into researching this one for us, Ero b, so my thanks on behalf of us all.

Ike

[Scott Nelson]

I predict Chris Jones will reveal that Tony Devereux was the author of the Diary and gave it to Anne to give to Mike, or gave it directly to Mike. Tony rewrote it in or sometime after 1988 using an older Diary hoax that came into his possession. Mike then tried to write his own version of the Diary before giving up and turning over Devereux's version to the Literary Agent.

I wonder if Eddie Lyons will show up?

[Yabs]

Are books about who JTR definitely isn’t, popular?
I would have thought that an extremely niche thing confined to forum interest.
The usual approach for the general public would be, I know who JTR is.
Having said that, I’m probably going to buy the book.

[Kaz]

Bertrand Russell - Message To Future Generations

[Iconoclast]

Bertrand Russell - Message To Future Generations

Was there a slightly more detailed version?

[Iconoclast]

Was there a slightly more detailed version?

Okay - did it myself.

(55) Bertrand Russell - Message To Future Generations (1959) - YouTube

Couldn't agree more, obviously, by the way.

Ike

[rjpalmer]

Hi Ike - Have you ever wondered where the final destination of the Maybrick relic will be?

I assume that no reputable museum will want it, so I'm thinking something along the lines of the Ripley's Believe It Or Not tourist attraction in Blackpool.

Or does Smith have some plan to eventually sell it at auction?

I might be willing to plonk down fifty or sixty quid to have it tested, but I won't go much higher.

Anyway, I just noticed that Lord Orsam found a 1993 discussion of World War One photo albums by no less a figure than the manager of Outhwaite and Litherland.

Quite enlightening. It seems that they went for under 30 pounds--so Barrett had it right. Caz's claim that the photo album alone would have been worth "in excess of one hundred pounds" appears to be a great exaggeration.

It's funny how these attempts to undermine Bongo's account keep backfiring. Once again--Mike had it right.

Have a good week and lots of love,

Yours truly,

Betrand Russell.

P.S., as an aside, I once saw a mock-up of the 'Cardiff Giant' that was touring the U.S.A. sideshow circuit in the 70s. It had been moved around so many times that the paper-mâché on one of the feet had worn away, exposing the chicken wire underneath. Yet, like everyone else in my small town, I had forked over 75 cents to see it.

[Iconoclast]

Hi Ike - Have you ever wondered where the final destination of the Maybrick relic will be?

I thought at first you were referring to me there, RJ. If you were, the answer is: reduced to ashes, thrown off the Tyne bridge, floating back home to North Shields. Not quite the Viking pyre Mrs Iconoclast is hoping for (when she passes, of course), but rather symbolic all the same, I feel.

Or does Smith have some plan to eventually sell it at auction?

That would be interesting (eBay would be cool).

I might be willing to plonk down fifty or sixty quid to have it tested, but I won't go much higher.

The first bid is in, it would appear!

Anyway, I just noticed that Lord Orsam found a 1993 discussion of World War One photo albums by no less a figure than the manager of Outhwaite and Litherland.

Oh God, does this mean I have to rummage about in his drainpipe for half an hour trying to find it? There's a bloke who's never heard of an index, if ever I knew one.

Quite enlightening. It seems that they went for under 30 pounds--so Barrett had it right. Caz's claim that the photo album alone would have been worth "in excess of one hundred pounds" appears to be a great exaggeration.

Well I suspect that it is extremely unlikely that Caz would have simply made it up, RJ, so I imagine she'll clarify her source all in good time.

It's funny how these attempts to undermine Bongo's account keep backfiring. Once again--Mike had it right.

It might be quite helpful to wait and see, RJ.

By the way, the bid's just gone up to seventy quid (Fishy1118 is clearly desperate to destroy the evidence, I suspect) so you're out, mate ...

Ike

[rjpalmer]

Well I suspect that it is extremely unlikely that Caz would have simply made it up, RJ, so I imagine she'll clarify her source all in good time.

No one said she made it up, Ike. She was "reliably informed."

But it hardly matters now, does it?

How can one hope to find a more reliable source than the actual manager at O & L? --he was the horse's mouth, as it were, and he appraised these photo collections at between 20 and 30 pounds.

I reckon we're back to the chant of "auction ticket! auction ticket!" in hopes of summoning Bongo Barrett from the great beyond...

Or maybe we'll hear something in September from the other horse's mouth.

It ought to be interesting.