Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

One Incontrovertible, Unequivocal, Undeniable Fact Which Refutes the Diary

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Mike J. G. View Post
    Handwriting analysis falls into the questioned documents section of forensic science. These documents are examined by expert questioned documents examiners or QDEs. QDEs look for forgeries and alterations and make comparisons if there is an original sample of handwriting available. Handwriting is an individual characteristic. This means that handwriting is unique for each person. Each…



    When there's a suspect in a crime and the evidence includes a handwritten note, investigators may call in handwriting experts to see if there's a match. How exactly do experts go about analyzing someone's handwriting?




    Two interesting articles on the topic of handwriting analysis.

    As I've said before, James Maybrick had no reason to disguise his hand. You don't start forming letters the opposite way to how you've been doing it for countless years simply because you're inebriated, or "off your noggin." And would you intentionally disguise your writing if you weren't banking on anyone actually reading what you'd written?

    Supposing that Sir Jim penned the Dear Boss letter, (and/or Saucy Jack, seeing as, if I'm not mistaken, they're supposed to be close matches?) then why did he write it in a totally different fashion to how he was apparently penning his diary on the regular? Not simply in a smaller scale, or a bit more untidy, or a bit scribbly... But literally different in the sort of ways that are described in the above articles?

    I mean, the obvious answer is that the person who wrote the diary did not write those letters. You're stretching logic if you disagree, bending over backwards to perform the sort of mental gymnastics you need to keep believing.

    If the diarist didn't write the letter, then they didn't likely coin the moniker of Jack the Ripper, making all references to Jim, James and Jack largely irrelevant, coincidental and pretty damaging to the notion that Jim was Jack the Ripper.

    If Jim wasn't Jack, then the diary is pretty much a work of fiction using cherry-picked information and imagination. Given that the diary's writing doesn't match what we have of James Maybrick's, I'd say the chances of him having written the diary are slim and none, and slim just left the building.

    But someone wrote it... So which story are you behind?

    To be an older hoax, it either came from Devereux, whose family had never heard of it...

    It either came from Anne's family, yet she opted to forget about that fact until later down the line, for some reason.

    Or it was found under the floorboards on Riversdale road and was pinched and taken to the university? Pub? And handed over for nowt to a scrap metal dealer who used to write articles in magazines who subsequently went straight to a publisher to make some bread.

    Or... One of those bunch of characters wrote it, or knew who had.

    Which one, however improbable, is more likely?

    Had Tony kept it locked away from his loved ones, for absolutely no reason whatsoever? Deciding that during his final days he'd unleash the secret to one Michael Barrett, of scrap metal dealing fame?

    Had Anne Graham simply forgot that the book had been in her family home for a billion years, suddenly finding it in the hands of her husband, before suddenly remembering after a strange series of lies about where it had come from, that it was her family heirloom?

    Or, boys and girls, was it plucked from beneath the floor of Jimmy's home, whisked around town and planted, basically for nowt, in Mike Barrett's hands?


    All roads keep leading back to that pesky Mike bloke, the one what wrote magazine articles and crosswords. Funny little games, indeed.

    There was once a chap
    Called Michael Barrett

    On a darkened night
    With a glass of claret

    He put pen to paper
    Like a knife to skin

    And wrote a tall tale
    About a bloke called Jim








    Its not looking good for James Maybrick supporters as JTR now is it ? But then it never ever was .
    'It doesn't matter how beautiful your theory is. It doesn't matter how smart you are . If it doesn't agree with experiment, its wrong'' . Richard Feynman

    Comment


    • Click image for larger version

Name:	82A2AB17-1DED-43F8-B9A5-C55E7D918392.jpg
Views:	245
Size:	103.5 KB
ID:	807882
      Originally posted by Mike J. G. View Post
      Handwriting analysis falls into the questioned documents section of forensic science. These documents are examined by expert questioned documents examiners or QDEs. QDEs look for forgeries and alterations and make comparisons if there is an original sample of handwriting available. Handwriting is an individual characteristic. This means that handwriting is unique for each person. Each…



      When there's a suspect in a crime and the evidence includes a handwritten note, investigators may call in handwriting experts to see if there's a match. How exactly do experts go about analyzing someone's handwriting?




      Two interesting articles on the topic of handwriting analysis.

      As I've said before, James Maybrick had no reason to disguise his hand. You don't start forming letters the opposite way to how you've been doing it for countless years simply because you're inebriated, or "off your noggin." And would you intentionally disguise your writing if you weren't banking on anyone actually reading what you'd written?
      What do you make of the K in Maybrick watch? Or does this argument only suit when discussing the diary?


      Author of 'Jack the Ripper: Threads' out now on Amazon > UK | USA | CA | AUS
      JayHartley.com

      Comment


      • Originally posted by John Wheat View Post

        They are not but feel free to believe what you like. It's a free country.
        They are wrong but feel free to believe what you like. It's a free country

        Comment


        • Originally posted by erobitha View Post
          Click image for larger version

Name:	82A2AB17-1DED-43F8-B9A5-C55E7D918392.jpg
Views:	245
Size:	103.5 KB
ID:	807882

          What do you make of the K in Maybrick watch? Or does this argument only suit when discussing the diary?

          Oh wow, it's suddenly looking good for James Maybrick supporters as JTR now, isn't it ? But then it ever was.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Iconoclast View Post

            They are wrong but feel free to believe what you like. It's a free country

            Comment


            • Originally posted by John Wheat View Post

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Iconoclast View Post

                Immaturity.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Iconoclast View Post

                  Oh wow, it's suddenly looking good for James Maybrick supporters as JTR now, isn't it ? But then it ever was.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by erobitha View Post
                    Click image for larger version

Name:	82A2AB17-1DED-43F8-B9A5-C55E7D918392.jpg
Views:	245
Size:	103.5 KB
ID:	807882

                    What do you make of the K in Maybrick watch? Or does this argument only suit when discussing the diary?

                    Not an awful lot, truth be told. They're hardly an identical match, but rather vaguely similar in their shape to the untrained eye. When you carefully look at the examples from Jim, they are noticeably different.

                    Has anyone ever put that forward for testing by an expert against Maybrick's actual handwriting, or is it just a case of "well the K looks similar so the fact that literally every other letter in every other word out of hundreds of examples doesn't remotely match the writing in the diary or the Ripper letters isn't an issue"?

                    That's pretty baffling logic.

                    ​​​​​Reminds me of a quote from Dumb & Dumber…

                    Lloyd: I want to ask you a question, straight out flat, and I want you to give me an honest answer... What are the chances of a guy like you and a girl like me ending up together?

                    Mary: Not good.

                    Lloyd: You mean, not good like one out of a hundred?

                    Mary: I'd say more like one out of a million.

                    Lloyd: So you're telling me there's a chance?!






                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Iconoclast View Post

                      Oh wow, it's suddenly looking good for James Maybrick supporters as JTR now, isn't it ? But then it ever was.
                      So thats what your pinning your hopes on on is it ? A scratched "K" on the back of a watch that anyone could have made that looks only similar to those examples of Maybrick's 5 ALL DIFFERENT!!! "Ks ?

                      Its back too " Its not looking good for the Maybrick supporter as JTR now is it ?

                      Never really was tho was it ?
                      'It doesn't matter how beautiful your theory is. It doesn't matter how smart you are . If it doesn't agree with experiment, its wrong'' . Richard Feynman

                      Comment


                      • if an artifact in question has more than one provenance, it has zero provenance.
                        "Is all that we see or seem
                        but a dream within a dream?"

                        -Edgar Allan Poe


                        "...the man and the peaked cap he is said to have worn
                        quite tallies with the descriptions I got of him."

                        -Frederick G. Abberline

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Mike J. G. View Post

                          Not an awful lot, truth be told. They're hardly an identical match
                          I suspect that you are rather all-too conveniently choosing to 'forget' that the example in the watch is being inscribed into the back of a watch. It's quite patently a freakishly-unlikely 'K' to have carved if you were doing so without any knowledge of James Maybrick's signature (as we are assured must have happened).

                          but rather vaguely similar in their shape to the untrained eye. When you carefully look at the examples from Jim, they are noticeably different.
                          That'll be the ones on the nice flat piece of paper, yes?

                          Seriously, we understand you don't want to acknowledge these things, but do us a favour and don't try to wish them away. Just ignore them.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Abby Normal View Post
                            if an artifact in question has more than one provenance, it has zero provenance.
                            Well that's a huge relief because the Barretts provided one provenance. Mike's version: Tony Devereux gave me the scrapbook. Anne's version: I gave Tony Devereux the scrapbook to give to Mike a day or so earlier.

                            One provenenace. Not two, or multiples, or loads of, or whatever. One provenance.

                            You are clearly getting - all-too conveniently for my liking - deliberately confused by the publication of the timesheets in 2017 which showed that Maybrick's floorboards were worked on on the record for the first time since his death 100 years earlier on the very morning that a guy rang a London publisher saying he thought he had the 'diary' of Jack the Ripper. You know, the guy who wasn't 'phoning from Southampton, or Singapore, or Colorado, or Nagoya. You know, the one ringing from eight miles away in Liverpool.

                            The same guy who drank in the same pub as Eddie Lyons (who has admitted to being on the Battlecrease job that day), just twenty minutes walk apart.

                            That story doesn't have provenance (because Mike Barrett did not cite it). It's just an amazing fact well worth thinking long and hard about whilst the one (ONE) provenance we have ever had sweats it out in the corner.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by FISHY1118 View Post

                              So thats what your pinning your hopes on on is it ? A scratched "K" on the back of a watch that anyone could have made that looks only similar to those examples of Maybrick's 5 ALL DIFFERENT!!! "Ks ?

                              Its back too " Its not looking good for the Maybrick supporter as JTR now is it ?

                              Never really was tho was it ?
                              Fishy,

                              I have an old gold watch from the Victorian period and I want you to scratch Robert Louis Stephenson's father's signature into the back of it. You aren't permitted to use the internet, obviously.

                              Obviously, it won't be easy because you'd be scratching awkwardly into metal but we'll make some allowances for that (which is considerably more than you are doing). What we really want to see is if you can mirror - by sheer random chance - any idiosyncratic letter formations old Thomas made in his signature.

                              If you do, I think we'll all grant you your theory that these things just happen all the time. Just another coincidence along the long road to Maybrick, and what have you.

                              Obviously, we won't get on that road because obviously the signature you guess will look nothing whatsoever like that of Thomas Stephenson.

                              Looks very much to me like it's back to it looking good for the Maybrick supporter as JTR now, isn't it?
                              Last edited by Iconoclast; 03-30-2023, 11:53 AM.

                              Comment


                              • Sure. The K is ‘vaguely similar’.

                                I have always had issue with the diary’s handwriting but you cant logically on one hand dismiss it because the diary isn’t similar to his own known writing examples. I provide an example in the watch that does match.

                                Then your logic goes bananas.
                                Author of 'Jack the Ripper: Threads' out now on Amazon > UK | USA | CA | AUS
                                JayHartley.com

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X