One Incontrovertible, Unequivocal, Undeniable Fact Which Refutes the Diary

[rjpalmer]

As I understand the opposing view, Barrett got a stub book at the end of March and in 2 weeks he was able to find out what a stub book was and incorporate it into the final draft of his diary.

In the roughly thirty-year history of the Diary fiasco, I've only encountered one person who had the strange quirk of referring to the hoax as a 'stub book.'

Markus Aurelius Franzois. I've often wondered what happened to him after his suddenly disappearance and hope he is doing well.

[Lombro2]

I’m doing well, thank you. Stub Boy is back! To the rescue!

So how did the author know that the book could be used in an office setting? Did it contain pictures of Old Ebenezer’s office Christmas Party?

I think you stubbed yourself on the stub/guard book. You should have been more guarded! Scott and I are just trying to help.

[Lombro2]

Mike's choice of book would have been a lucky one for any beginner, regardless of when it might have been acquired, because with any other type of book - an actual diary being the obvious example - an ESDA test could have been conducted on the pages of handwriting in order to detect a recent faker's work.

By that, do you mean the lack of transfer of ink onto the other pages would otherwise have automatically indicated a modern hoax?

And yes, I mean a guard or scrap book, but I like to use the office-specific-sounding term—stub—as per its use in the context of the diary text, with clerk Lowry looking for it and the subsequent explanation for the missing pages.

[Lombro2]

…I see the diary as…. written at some as yet unestablished date prior to 9th March 1992, when Mike Barrett first saw its potential from the name Jack the Ripper on the last page of writing [before Maybrick was identified from internal clues] and immediately got in contact with a London literary agent to claim it as his own…. Mike Barrett had no provable inside knowledge of the diary's creation, but was motivated to claim otherwise after his wife and daughter had abandoned him and gone over to 'the dark side' of Paul Feldman's influence.
X

!D! No cherries were harmed or picked in the production of this stance!

[caz]

By that, do you mean the lack of transfer of ink onto the other pages would otherwise have automatically indicated a modern hoax?

And yes, I mean a guard or scrap book, but I like to use the office-specific term—stub—as per its use in the context of the diary text, with clerk Lowry looking for it and the subsequent explanation for the missing pages.

I'm not sure what an ESDA test could have established, Lombro, but I do know one was suggested for Mike's "old book" [another expression guaranteed to get Palmer's goat], but could have proved nothing due to its original purpose for housing various bits and bobs. I think the test could also have been used to detect any tell-tale impressions or indentations if the "old book" had instead been a notebook or conventional diary, or just loose sheets of blank Victorian paper.

Yes, the guard book - with its ripped out early pages - does lend itself rather too well to the entries which refer to JM's days in the office and his meddling clerk. I wonder how the affidavit faithful get round this, if the "old book" was only spotted on the last day of March 1992, when the text had supposedly been sitting on the word 'prosser' since before Tony D's death in August 1991, and Mike just needed enough old paper for the job after getting Doreen's attention on 9th March 1992.

It would appear that the Barretts considered a thoughtful rewrite was appropriate, if not essential, to reflect the guard book Mike had just managed to find and adapt, immediately following the little 1891 diary fiasco.

By the way, you will not be blamed for nothing for bringing me back here, Lombro. In 'the other place', Palmer said he had thoroughly enjoyed my recent absence from the debate [I was on holiday in sunny Lindos and then busy with real life] and was looking forward to 'it' being extended 'for several more months or years' - as if he was gleefully anticipating some seismic event that would finally shut me up. How little he understands me.

It's in Palmer's hands to put me on 'ignore' if he can't stay away from where he's likely to find me.

Love,

Caz
X

[Al Bundy's Eyes]

By that, do you mean the lack of transfer of ink onto the other pages would otherwise have automatically indicated a modern hoax?

And yes, I mean a guard or scrap book, but I like to use the office-specific term—stub—as per its use in the context of the diary text, with clerk Lowry looking for it and the subsequent explanation for the missing pages.

Hi Lombro2,

Not being a frequenter of JTR Forums, and being something of a tangential observer myself of the diary story, could you please explain for my own benefit what it is you think the Barrett diaries provenance is, or wether it's the real deal or not?

Don't worry, I've no intention of getting into debate about it, I'm just curious as to what your own particular stance is?

Cheers, Al

[Lombro2]

Oh, that’s a good question, Al.

Caz and Erobitha finally convinced me of the Battlecrease Provenance. The book was hidden in a cubby-hole under the floor which I think is as good an explanation for the lack of provenance as anything else.

[Lombro2]

I'm not sure what an ESDA test could have established, Lombro, but I do know one was suggested for Mike's "old book" [another expression guaranteed to get Palmer's goat], but could have proved nothing due to its original purpose for housing various bits and bobs. I think the test could also have been used to detect any tell-tale impressions or indentations if the "old book" had instead been a notebook or conventional diary, or just loose sheets of blank Victorian paper.
X

I see what you mean now. Electro-static Detection Apparatus can detect writing impressions done through several pages.

So if the guard book wasn’t fortuitously used for photos like Mike said, it could have picked up tell-tale writing such as:

Thank you so much. Best B&B ever.
PS Nice vintage guard book you’re using for a guest book. However I would suggest putting it up for auction instead.

Signed Mr and Mrs Outhwaite

[caz]

I see what you mean now. Electro-static Detection Apparatus can detect writing impressions done through several pages.

So if the guard book wasn’t fortuitously used for photos like Mike said, it could have picked up tell-tale writing such as:

Thank you so much. Best B&B ever.
PS Nice vintage guard book you’re using for a guest book. However I would suggest putting it up for auction instead.

Signed Mr and Mrs Outhwaite

Hi Lombro,

Dodging the scold's bridle again today...

I assume it's simply that a guard book was designed with a gap between each page, to accommodate whatever might be kept in it, and the gap itself would have hindered or prevented any detectable impressions being left from one page to the next, regardless of any contents. The diary is handwritten on pages that had not previously had photos or any other items glued onto them, and we can only speculate about the ripped out pages at the front.

Mike swore in his affidavit that the diary had been a photograph album containing approximately 125 pages of photos, which is absurd. The entire book only had 128 pages originally. This obvious falsehood - like the one about the linseed oil - has been excused as a bit of harmless exaggeration by a remorseful rogue with a drink problem - and a guilty conscience that could evidently kick in and out again at will.

Instead of coming out with such infantile, easily disproved claims about the "old book", why didn't Mike mention the additional diary entries created to explain the use of a guard book with pages ripped out?

I think we could hazard a reasonable guess.

Love,

Caz
X

[Lombro2]

The guards are just in the binding like shims to keep the binding from tearing. So I think you can still press the pages together when you’re writing. There still might be something for the ESDA test to pick up.

Who knows? On top of “bumbling buffoon” you might be able to make out something like this:

I shan’t stop ripping pages until the binding does get buckled!

[Lombro2]

Don't worry, I've no intention of getting into debate about it, I'm just curious as to what your own particular stance is?

Cheers, Al

So, what do you think of my stance? I think there’s more proof the guard book came out of a hole than an auction. It’s okay if you think it’s an “embarrassment to Ripperology”.

If you think that’s bad, you should have heard my previous stance! Now that’s embarrassing!

[Al Bundy's Eyes]

So, what do you think of my stance? I think there’s more proof the guard book came out of a hole than an auction. It’s okay if you think it’s an “embarrassment to Ripperology”.

If you think that’s bad, you should have heard my previous stance! Now that’s embarrassing!

Hi Lombro,

I don't have any issues with your stance. It's not one I'm sold on myself but as it stands there's much that hasn't been released and until such time as the full interviews are made available (and the Barrett/ Gray interview, the word processor typescript) I'm not really wanting to get into debates about the Battlecrease evidence. I can't debate what I've never seen.

I've never described anyone as an embarrassment to Ripperology and I can't see myself doing it anytime soon. I don't foist my opinion on anyone and I don't take exception to the opinions of others. I think the Barretts created it, others think it's an old hoax, Ike thinks it's the genuine article. Fine with me.

I know there's rights and commercial interests surrounding the unavailable material so I'll just have to be patient, but until such time as it's made available I'm choosing not to continue with the diary discussion.

[caz]

The guards are just in the binding like shims to keep the binding from tearing. So I think you can still press the pages together when you’re writing. There still might be something for the ESDA test to pick up.

Who knows? On top of “bumbling buffoon” you might be able to make out something like this:

I shan’t stop ripping pages until the binding does get buckled!

Ha ha. Nice one, Lombro.

I don't think there was any resistance to having an ESDA test if the professionals involved had advised one. My understanding is that it was not considered viable for this type of book.

Love,

Caz
X

[erobitha]

Hi Lombro,

I don't have any issues with your stance. It's not one I'm sold on myself but as it stands there's much that hasn't been released and until such time as the full interviews are made available (and the Barrett/ Gray interview, the word processor typescript) I'm not really wanting to get into debates about the Battlecrease evidence. I can't debate what I've never seen.

I've never described anyone as an embarrassment to Ripperology and I can't see myself doing it anytime soon. I don't foist my opinion on anyone and I don't take exception to the opinions of others. I think the Barretts created it, others think it's an old hoax, Ike thinks it's the genuine article. Fine with me.

I know there's rights and commercial interests surrounding the unavailable material so I'll just have to be patient, but until such time as it's made available I'm choosing not to continue with the diary discussion.

Hi Al,

I just want to pick up on the “rights and commercial interests” point. What exactly do you mean by that?

Who exactly benefits from “holding back” and why? Can I push you to be specific?

[Al Bundy's Eyes]

Hi Al,

I just want to pick up on the “rights and commercial interests” point. What exactly do you mean by that?

Who exactly benefits from “holding back” and why? Can I push you to be specific?

Hi Ero,

I can't say who benefits, if anyone does. What I can say is Keith Skinner has said that certain material is witheld due to commercial interest, which he was pretty clear about in my conversations with him, which I'm fine with myself. I mean, if there's no conflict of information, then we'll get the electricians interviews and the typescript and the Barrett Gray tapes right? But we won't, because of commercial rights etc. Or am I wrong Ero? We won't get them, that's as sure as day follows night. Why? No one benefits from the restrictions, but there they are. Send them out mate, you have access to them.