One Incontrovertible, Unequivocal, Undeniable Fact Which Refutes the Diary

[caz]

Back to Hitler...

Palmer's argument that Mike was thinking about the Hitler Diaries fiasco when asking Martin Earl for Victorian paper, supposedly in order to create Jack the Ripper's diary and succeed where Kujau failed miserably, is risible. [Try saying that after a beer or two.]

What other steps is Mike meant to have taken?

Everything we know Mike did, and everything he claimed he did, strongly suggests he would not have given a flying one about Kujau's downfall - if he had given it any thought at all.

The handwriting flatly contradicts Palmer's argument about the paper, for starters. Why would Mike have worried about the paper being of the 'correct' period, if he had then taken the diary to London, knowing that no attempt had been made to imitate the 'correct' handwriting?

At least Kujau was able to do a fair imitation of Hitler's handwriting and understood this to be rather crucial. The funny part was that nobody at the time realised that when three handwriting experts declared the handwriting in the diaries to be authentic, they were comparing it with other fakes by Kujau, so they matched perfectly.

Palmer tried to claim elsewhere that Mike rightly predicted that he could safely sell whatever handwriting his wife might produce, because the people who bought it would all be either too gullible, greedy or dishonest to care any more than Mike evidently did.

So perhaps Palmer would now care to indicate which aspects Mike was hoping, at least initially, to get 'right' [apart from the paper]; which aspects he wasn't quite so bothered about by the time he and Anne were up to their armpits; and which aspects he couldn't give a flying one about in the end, because it suddenly dawned on him that down in London, in the book world, nobody would give a thought to the Hitler Diaries fiasco because, after all, they would all be fraudsters just like him.

[caz]

Thanks again, Caz, for revealing your ongoing struggles with reading comprehension and also demonstrating why you are unsuited to act as an intermediary.

Where did I write that I 'need' Keith's cooperation?

"I do think it would be better to contact her with your blessing and your cooperation, for obvious reasons, but if you don't wish to cooperate, I will try to find other means."

As already noted, among the 'obvious reasons' is that, provided Anne is willing to discuss the matter, I wouldn't care to misrepresent Keith's view of the Eddie Lyons provenance if he somehow believes that this trove of 'compelling' evidence for it can still be reconciled with Anne's account.

But...whatever.

RP

But why would Palmer be giving Anne any views that Keith may currently hold?

And what if those views have changed by the time Palmer makes contact with her?

This is the bit I don't get, but fair enough if Palmer would prefer to be armed with Keith's blessing, cooperation and his latest views, before tackling the woman with his own. How hard can it be, if Palmer thinks she's stupid enough to have fallen for Mike's "only a fictional story wrapped in a sales gimmick" ploy?

[rjpalmer]

The handwriting flatly contradicts Palmer's argument about the paper, for starters. Why would Mike have worried about the paper being of the 'correct' period, if he had then taken the diary to London, knowing that no attempt had been made to imitate the 'correct' handwriting?

Yes, it's baffling, isn't it?

Why on earth would the modern hoaxer think he could get away with not even imitating Maybrick's handwriting?

Surely, Doreen Montgomery would immediately send such a hoaxer packing; Shirley Harrison would refuse to be involved; Robert Smith would certainly give the project a thumb's down; and there is simply no way Paul Feldman or Thomas Mitchell would defend such an obvious fake that didn't even bother to imitate Maybrick's handwriting.

I'm uncertain what your point is. Is it a commentary on Barrett's optimism or commentary on the gullibility of those who accepted the diary anyway?

The last twelve times you tried to make this same point I quoted Melvin Harris, so here goes again:

"But before seeing it I made three predictions; it would be written in a simple iron-gall ink, which could not be dated; it would be written in an old journal with its front pages torn out; the handwriting would not match the known handwriting of James Maybrick. With time all three forecasts proved correct, but when first shown this document I was assured by Paul Feldman that no significant examples of Maybrick's handwriting existed. There was just one signature on his marriage lines, but nothing else:--"We have checked."


The idea that a hoaxer would seek suitable paper and ink but fail to imitate the handwriting of someone dead for over 100 years was so wildly unlikely that Melvin Harris managed to predict it. Melvin must have been psychic rather than simply rational and experienced.


As I've stated before, and now for the last time, my view is that the relatively unsophisticated hoaxers assumed--like PAUL FELDMAN--that 'no significant examples' of Maybrick's handwriting would still exist after all these writers (they were working in 1992, after all) so they didn't bother to try and do more than scribble out some mock-Victorian handwriting--as per Ironmonger, etc.

And, of course, it worked beautifully.

Nothing succeeds like success, as the old saying goes.

Now go run along, Caz. I'll be away for few days and all the answers you seek are already in the archives.

[erobitha]

Yes, it's baffling, isn't it?

Why on earth would the modern hoaxer think he could get away with not even imitating Maybrick's handwriting?

Surely, Doreen Montgomery would immediately send such a hoaxer packing; Shirley Harrison would refuse to be involved; Robert Smith would certainly give the project a thumb's down; and there is simply no way Paul Feldman or Thomas Mitchell would defend such an obvious fake that didn't even bother to imitate Maybrick's handwriting.

I'm uncertain what your point is. Is it a commentary on Barrett's optimism or commentary on the gullibility of those who accepted the diary anyway?

The last twelve times you tried to make this same point I quoted Melvin Harris, so here goes again:

"But before seeing it I made three predictions; it would be written in a simple iron-gall ink, which could not be dated; it would be written in an old journal with its front pages torn out; the handwriting would not match the known handwriting of James Maybrick. With time all three forecasts proved correct, but when first shown this document I was assured by Paul Feldman that no significant examples of Maybrick's handwriting existed. There was just one signature on his marriage lines, but nothing else:--"We have checked."


The idea that a hoaxer would seek suitable paper and ink but fail to imitate the handwriting of someone dead for over 100 years was so wildly unlikely that Melvin Harris managed to predict it. Melvin must have been psychic rather than simply rational and experienced.


As I've stated before, and now for the last time, my view is that the relatively unsophisticated hoaxers assumed--like PAUL FELDMAN--that 'no significant examples' of Maybrick's handwriting would still exist after all these writers (they were working in 1992, after all) so they didn't bother to try and do more than scribble out some mock-Victorian handwriting--as per Ironmonger, etc.

And, of course, it worked beautifully.

Nothing succeeds like success, as the old saying goes.

Now go run along, Caz. I'll be away for few days and all the answers you seek are already in the archives.

Is there any proof Mystic Melvin did actually predict these things before examining the document?

Or is it another Melvinism?

[Iconoclast]

Is there any proof Mystic Melvin did actually predict these things before examining the document?

Or is it another Melvinism?

Ker ching, ero b!

I was literally about to post that very same question. I'm so bored of hearing of Melvin's psychic powers but never - to my recollection - the source of them.

So, when did he put these predictions down on the record? And was this before he ever cast his eyes on it or was informed by some other of its characteristics?

[Iconoclast]

If I had commented on every typo in Palmer's posts over the past year, he might have had a better reason for this sad little offering. I only tend to draw attention to typos these days if a poster makes a particularly hilarious or ironic one, while pompously claiming the higher ground.

Mea culpa regarding 'conservation'. I bet Palmer nearly wet himself over that one.

Bang to rights there, Caz. I did make a rather pompous howler myself a couple of weeks ago. Pride ever cometh before a falleth.

[Iconoclast]

Nothing succeeds like success, as the old saying goes.

Actually, RJ, nothing succeeds like a budgie with no teeth …

[Abby Normal]

Actually, RJ, nothing succeeds like a budgie with no teeth …

no budgies have teeth, or ever did. they eat seeds by cracking them with their beak. you need to amend this with an animal that normally does have teeth and eats seeds. like...nothing succeeds like a chipmunk with no teeth.

[Iconoclast]

no budgies have teeth, or ever did. they eat seeds by cracking them with their beak. you need to amend this with an animal that normally does have teeth and eats seeds. like...nothing succeeds like a chipmunk with no teeth.

I hope you at least brought some beer to the party, Mr. Logic?

By the way, interesting sidebar, chipmunks are an endangered species in the UK. Their numbers have dwindled so much that many people (including I) have never seen one except in an animated CGI film featuring a bloke called Dave.

And - just for the record - my budgie did have teeth (albeit the dentist who fitted them is still serving time) so I am willing to meet you halfway in declaring that nothing succeeds like a budgie with false teeth (that are still in the glass by the side of its cage).

Now. get out of the kitchen, Abby, and come and meet some of the nice people in the living room.

[caz]

Actually, RJ, nothing succeeds like a budgie with no teeth …

Morning Ike,

Is your budgie's name Success by any chance?

If so, I'd love to hear him pronounce his own name, either with or without his false teeth in.

Just popped in to see how Palmer is getting on with contacting Anne, but now I'm more interested in your budgie.

See you sometime next week. It's the last day of Sidmouth Folk Festival, so I'm off to see folk who are almost as eccentric as some of the posters here.

Love,

Caz
X

[caz]

Bang to rights there, Caz. I did make a rather pompous howler myself a couple of weeks ago. Pride ever cometh before a falleth.

The thecret of thuctheth ith the ability to thuck up the dirt if you dith it out.

Your budgie just told me that, and he's a smart bird.

Love,

Caz
X

[caz]

Is there any proof Mystic Melvin did actually predict these things before examining the document?

Or is it another Melvinism?

Is there any proof Melvin examined the document? If so, how many pages was he given access to, and by whom?

And where is the source for Baxendale having examined all 63 pages 'line-by-line'?

Edited to say that, naturally, I'm not expecting ero to answer those questions, which were aimed at Palmer.

Mind you, I'm not expecting Palmer to have the answers either.

Love,

Caz
X

[caz]

Now go run along, Caz. I'll be away for few days...

Now go run along, Caz ??

Does Palmer get off on putting me down and ordering me about like I'm a school girl attending one of his lectures?

Does he think Keith Skinner is any more likely to want to engage with him directly when he constantly belittles his co-author, as if I'm the kitchen maid?

I'll also be away for a few days, and when I return I will see if Palmer has managed to contact Anne via Chris Jones, or by some other means, to put his own theory to her.

[caz]

Yes, it's baffling, isn't it?

Why on earth would the modern hoaxer think he could get away with not even imitating Maybrick's handwriting?

A modern hoaxer, who was even vaguely aware of the Hitler Diaries fiasco, surely wouldn't.

That's the point that Palmer keeps missing.

How the heck would the Barretts have been able to ascertain in 1992 that few if any examples existed, of the informal handwriting of a well known historical figure like Maybrick? Is Palmer seriously suggesting they would have just 'assumed' this was the case, without even making any rudimentary inquiries, while insisting that the request to Martin Earl was all about getting paper from the 'correct' period??

Remove the Barretts from the equation, and we have someone who didn't care what anyone might make of their handwriting, or the paper it was written on, and didn't know or care about the Hitler Diaries, because they would not have been in the business of trying to make money from a fake of their own making. The handwriting implies another motive.

Now I'll run along.

[Abby Normal]

I hope you at least brought some beer to the party, Mr. Logic?

By the way, interesting sidebar, chipmunks are an endangered species in the UK. Their numbers have dwindled so much that many people (including I) have never seen one except in an animated CGI film featuring a bloke called Dave.

And - just for the record - my budgie did have teeth (albeit the dentist who fitted them is still serving time) so I am willing to meet you halfway in declaring that nothing succeeds like a budgie with false teeth (that are still in the glass by the side of its cage).

Now. get out of the kitchen, Abby, and come and meet some of the nice people in the living room.

wow. chipmunks are endangered in the UK!?! now that really does suck! cute little critters -got a couple living in my wood pile. im a huge nature and wildlife guy and lucky to live in an area where theres lots of it. eventhough im only five miles northwest of DC theres big fields next to my house that stretch all the way to the mighty Potomac and i can sit on my back deck and watch the squirrels(gray and black), rabbits, woodchucks, fox, deer and even the occasional coyote(not kidding), plus a myriad of birds..including hawks, owls, those big woody wood peckers and all manner of colorful song birds, and evn reptiles..snakes, lizards and box turtles. its pretty cool.

we dont have hedgehogs or red squirrels where i live but i do love those guys too. hope they are still well and good in england?