Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

One Incontrovertible, Unequivocal, Undeniable Fact Which Refutes the Diary

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

  • This Williams sounds like an important attorney like a Roland Vaughan Williams or a Montagu Williams, both 50 and over in 1888. But he'd still have to be at the Grand National, don't you think.
    Originally posted by Batman View Post
    BTW - what is the actual response by Maybrick believers to the claim that it was predicted the diary would be missing front pages if a forgery... and was missing such pages on inspection?
    I've studied the nature of the diary book itself. It's been identified as a guard book, also known as a stub book. The guards seem to be spans in the spine to compensate for photos, stubs, or clippings.
    http://cool.conservation-us.org/cool...6/bp06-01.html

    Why wouldn't the clippings or pictures just be removed, instead of ripping out the pages?

    There must have been some writing on the previous pages. Probably related to the office by the looks of the book itself, compared to typical Victorian family photo albums.

    Wasn't the prediction made after the Diary came out?

    Comment


    • Yes, I've looked at that family.

      Williams had a son, ROLAND EDMUND LOMAX VAUGHAN WILLIAMS.
      born 21 Oct 1866, seemed more likely (to me) than his father to
      be Florence's lover. If, indeed as it has been written, Williams was
      a London solicitor.

      Roland Vaughan Williams had a brother who had a distant tie
      to the Maybrick story:

      Ralph Vaughan Williams - Composer

      married Adeline Fisher, daughter of Herbert Fisher (barrister and
      former secy to Prince of Wales). Proposed (June 1897) at the Stephens'
      home of Virginia and Vanessa, cousin through her Aunt Julia and related to
      Judge Stephens of Maybrick trial fame. Studied in Germany and France under
      Maurice Ravel.

      Ralph Vaughan Williams was also associated with the Royal
      Academy of Music and Michael Maybrick was also associated with
      that institution. I think Maybrick set up a prize or something. It's
      been a long time since I researched this, so my memory might be
      a bit faulty.

      If Williams wasn't a solicitor, then there's another fellow from
      Liverpool who may have been involved. He was John Herbert
      Williams, a cotton broker who was a partner of T A Wooley,
      close friend to Maybrick and who attended his funeral. Williams
      shot himself in the head in his office at the Exchange in 1900.
      Last edited by Livia; 01-25-2015, 12:35 PM. Reason: London College of Music/Royal Academy of Music, same institution I think

      Comment


      • Originally posted by MayBea View Post

        Wasn't the prediction made after the Diary came out?
        According to Fido, well before.
        Bona fide canonical and then some.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by caz View Post
          If you had read the diary more carefully you would not have made the error you make above. There is no 'undoubtedly' about it. Shortly before Christmas 1888, according to the diary chronology, 'Sir Jim' writes: The bitch, the whore is not satisfied with one whore master, she now has eyes on another.

          After Christmas, 'Sir Jim' wonders: if the whore will take the bastard? The bitch is welcome to him... and ...A friend has turned, so be it. Later he writes: ...let the bitch believe I have no knowledge of her whoring affairs [plural]. When she returns the whore will pay.

          Make what you will of all this, but there's no sense in ignoring it. If we assume this refers to Brierley (and incidently, the 'Aintree incident' was at the end of March 1889, a few days after Florie and Brierley had been intimate at the hotel in London), then the early 'whore master' references must have been about someone else.

          Love,

          Caz
          X
          I was referring to the first "whoremaster" mentioned in the diary,
          as cited by Caz above.

          So no, I don't think the incident at the Grand National refers
          to anyone other than Brierley.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Batman View Post
            According to Fido, well before.
            According to Slemen, it was Harris' prediction when he first heard there was a Diary.
            http://cool.conservation-us.org/cool...6/bp06-01.html

            I would be impressed by a prediction of ripped out pages if the author wasn't meant to be someone named Ripper.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by MayBea View Post

              I would be impressed by a prediction of ripped out pages if the author wasn't meant to be someone named Ripper.
              That's actually pretty funny.
              Bona fide canonical and then some.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by GUT View Post
                How many of these diaries are contemporaneous with the crimes as Maybrick's purports to be and deal with the actual crimes? That is the real point and I suggest that was what the question was about, not how many keep diaries "I had eggs for breakfast" or "Lunch with Bob" or "Gaol sucks".
                Check out Mark Papazian:

                http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/4817544.stm

                Also, Frederick Baker, killer of Fanny Adams:

                http://murderpedia.org/male.B/b/baker-frederick.htm

                Both killers wrote about their crimes in their diaries.

                I don't think a case needs to fit the rigid definition of serial murder (a killer who is known to have acquired three or more victims) to be relevant in this context. It's more about the psychology of the individual offenders - and what other crimes they might have committed given the opportunity.

                Love,

                Caz
                X
                "Comedy is simply a funny way of being serious." Peter Ustinov


                Comment


                • Originally posted by Livia View Post
                  Roland Vaughan Williams had a brother who had a distant tie
                  to the Maybrick story:

                  Ralph Vaughan Williams - Composer

                  married Adeline Fisher, daughter of Herbert Fisher (barrister and
                  former secy to Prince of Wales). Proposed (June 1897) at the Stephens'
                  home of Virginia and Vanessa, cousin through her Aunt Julia and related to
                  Judge Stephens of Maybrick trial fame. Studied in Germany and France under
                  Maurice Ravel.

                  Ralph Vaughan Williams was also associated with the Royal
                  Academy of Music and Michael Maybrick was also associated with
                  that institution. I think Maybrick set up a prize or something. It's
                  been a long time since I researched this, so my memory might be
                  a bit faulty.
                  Hi Livia,

                  Coincidentally, my late mother (1917-1993) was taught music at school by Ralph Vaughan Williams - and also Gustav Holst.

                  Small world, ain't it?

                  Love,

                  Caz
                  X
                  "Comedy is simply a funny way of being serious." Peter Ustinov


                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by caz View Post
                    Check out Mark Papazian:

                    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/4817544.stm

                    Also, Frederick Baker, killer of Fanny Adams:

                    http://murderpedia.org/male.B/b/baker-frederick.htm

                    Both killers wrote about their crimes in their diaries.

                    I don't think a case needs to fit the rigid definition of serial murder (a killer who is known to have acquired three or more victims) to be relevant in this context. It's more about the psychology of the individual offenders - and what other crimes they might have committed given the opportunity.

                    Love,

                    Caz
                    X

                    G'day Caz

                    I agree rigid definitions are less than useless when we are dealing with such a small pool [comparatively] of exemplars.
                    G U T

                    There are two ways to be fooled, one is to believe what isn't true, the other is to refuse to believe that which is true.

                    Comment


                    • Doesn't Maybrick tell us why he ripped out the pages?
                      "Curse the bastard Lowry for making me rip"

                      It must have been before he'd started the bulk of the writing we see, but must have been incriminating none the less. Maybe Lowry caught sight of Maybrick with the 'diary' in his office? What was on those missing pages is any ones guess, but obviously enough to make Maybrick think twice about keeping up his notes, and writing done threats towards Lowry.

                      Regards
                      ‘There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact’ Sherlock Holmes

                      Comment


                      • No, Lowry made him rip the victims, not the pages in the diary.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Scott Nelson View Post
                          No, Lowry made him rip the victims, not the pages in the diary.
                          Florence made him 'rip' the victims. Why would a 19 year old office clerk, one of his employees, be the catalyst for the murders?
                          He's quite simply referring to the pages in the 'diary' in my opinion.

                          "If I could have killed the bastard Lowry with my bare hands there and then I would have done so......................Damn him, damn him, damn him should I replace the missing items...............Should I destroy this?

                          "I am cold curse the bastard Lowry for making me rip"

                          Regards
                          ‘There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact’ Sherlock Holmes

                          Comment


                          • "Items" could refer to the guard book and the stubs or clippings inside.

                            Presumably, the forger would have known he had acquired a stub book commonly used for office records, and not just a "scrap book".

                            Comment


                            • Here's a wee challenge. I wonder if it would be possible for any one of us to come up with an even less plausible candidate for Jack the Ripper than a middle class Liverpool cotton merchant who was the 'victim' of one of the most famous murder trials of its decade and then write a journal purporting to show that he was Jack the Ripper and somehow have the good fortune to choose a candidate who cannot actually be proven to not be the Whitechapel murderer himself?

                              It's an interesting challenge, as illustrated by this rather magnificent thread that seems to have lived as long as the case itself (just my feeling, that's all). I'm not saying that Maybrick has been proven to be Jack the Ripper, of course, so no need for folk to post the contrary view (that is, "But nor can he be proven to be the Whitechapel murderer himself").

                              I'm simply intrigued to know if anyone could come up with a candidate who could be fitted into the facts, so:
                              • Known to have reason to visit London in 1888.
                              • Not known to be somewhere else at the time of the murders.
                              • Has links to the evidence and facts (however tenuously) such as Maybrick's 'M', the examples of cotton, the newpaper article asking 'Who is Jim?', the GSG bearing cryptic versions of his name, his brothers, and his wife, the letters 'FM' on Kelly's wall (whether they are ultimately 'there' or not), the 'F' cut into Kelly's arm, the photofits looking so like Maybrick, the eye witness statements that he was dressed well rather than shabbily, the letter to the Liverpool Echo signed 'Diego Laurenz', the fact that 'Jack' is formed from the first and last two letters of Maybrick's name, etc..
                              • Has a reason for committing the crimes (however obscure to us).
                              • Is even less plausible than James Maybrick as a candidate for Jack the Ripper.


                              And then I'm fascinated to know if we could also write so much without making the killer mistake which this thread first sought, and so knowledgeably about the case from both an 1888 Maybrick household perspective and an 1988 published material perspective.

                              And write it in a book (or whatever) that would be consistent with the LVP (I acept that this would be one of the easier bits) in an ink which would not be disproven to be LVP.

                              And that's before we start on the watch!

                              I honestly think that we would take forever to find such a candidate, much less create a candidate who could not be easily displaced from the long list of these unfortunate and innocent men (bar a likely maximum of one, of course, they are all not guilty of these famous crimes).

                              I think to do so would take us a truly significant amount of effort and -in this regard - I rather applaud the evil genius who first thought to concoct it.

                              To be honest, I don't think any of us could possibly do a better job - so I don't think I personally will try, but if any of you feel you are up to it, please let us know and give us the occasional update on how you are getting on ...

                              Best wishes,

                              Iconoclast
                              Last edited by Iconoclast; 08-31-2015, 02:00 AM.
                              Iconoclast

                              Comment


                              • What about VanGough?

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X