One Incontrovertible, Unequivocal, Undeniable Fact Which Refutes the Diary

[Iconoclast]

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.

Wow - Trevor Marriot has upped the ante and bid £100!

[milchmanuk]

Coroner] Would you consider that the person who inflicted the wounds possessed anatomical skill? - Dr Brown, ''He must have had a ''good deal'' of knowledge as to the position of the abdominal organs, and the ''way to remove them''.

Where is the difficulty ? Right there if your a Cotton Merchant or a Painter like me .


Dont forget it was Dr Brown who did the post mortem not Dr Sequeira.

i was watching a program on poliomyelitis

they used monkey kidneys for vaccines ?
made me wonder as i am catching up on reading this link. if the crazed killer was taking body parts to try and procure a vaccine ?
which could farther imply medical knowledge.

[caz]

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.

I rather suspect RJ would only consider an admission by Anne Graham 'conclusive evidence' if she were to say that the diary was a recent fake.

Anne in 1993: "Did you nick it, Mike?"

If Anne were to admit instead that Mike brought the diary home from an 'iffy' source in March 1992, RJ's track record strongly suggests that he would only consider it to be 'conclusive evidence' of her continued duplicity.

Tell me I've read you all wrong, RJ. I dare you.

Love,

Caz
X

[caz]

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.

Ha ha, nice try, RJ.

Why would anyone bother to come up with 'new' evidence, unless the old was not considered enough for a successful prosecution? Hmmm?

[caz]

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

Afternoon Ike,

But according to RJ:

It was only a 'novella' wot Anne wrote for her fella.

No need for in-depth research.

Why would she care if Jim knew Mitre Square,

With no serious aim to besmirch?

I thank you.

Love,

Caz
X

[caz]

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.

Hi Yabs,

I doubt this one will even be based on: "I know who the hoaxer is".

I predict we will learn lots of new and interesting stuff about the Maybricks, knowing Chris's enthusiasm for the subject, and also his reasons for rejecting JM as a potential ripper suspect.

Love,

Caz
X

[caz]

Caz's claim that the photo album alone would have been worth "in excess of one hundred pounds" appears to be a great exaggeration.

More than a tad misleading. Tut tut, naughty RJ. Why the need for such childish chicanery, if you are so convinced that your sources are the ones to trust?

It was not my claim, but Mike Litherland's - you know, of Outhwaite & Litherland fame.

But as usual, feel free to shoot the messenger. So far, you've only ever fired blanks, unless I'm very good at dodging all your bullets.

Fancy me trusting a source like Mike Litherland over and above liar, liar, pants on fire, Mike Barrett. I'd better go and give my head a wobble, or I'll be doubting the word of Boris 'couldn't lie straight in bed' Johnson next.

Oh, and could I draw everyone's attention to the last post on the Special Announcement thread, before anyone is tempted to promote a certain site here, or link to its 'nonsense'?

[caz]

Just to add...

Mike Litherland's professional opinions were not based on the average going price of 'these photo albums' in general, but on the detailed description given by Mike Barrett, in his affidavit of 5th January 1995, of a specific collection of photos, which he claimed to have bought at one of O&L's auctions for £50.

Either Mike Litherland was talking through his hat, or Mike Barrett was.

I'll give you three guesses which of the two was more likely to have been talking utter bollocks.

Er, make that one guess.

Love,

Caz
X

[caz]

A handy reminder of what Mike Barrett claimed, when his memory for other details, like dates, was meant to have been so badly affected by the booze...

'I feel sure it was the end of January 1990 when I went to the Auctioneer, Outhwaite & Litherland, XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX.

It was about 11.30am in the morning when I attended the Auctioneers. I found a photograph Album which contained approximately, approximately (sic) 125 pages of phootgraphs. They were old photographs and they were all to do with teh 1914/1918 1st World War. This Album was part of lot No.126 which was for auction with a 'brass compass', it looked to me like a 'seaman's Compass', it was round faced with a square encasement, all of which was brass, it was marked on the face, North South, East and West in heavy lettering. I particularly noticed that the compass had no 'fingers'.

When the bidding stated (sic) I noticed another man who was interested in the itmes (sic) he was smartly dressed, I would say in his middle forties, he was interested in the photographs. I noticed that his collar and tie were imaculate and I think he was a Military man.

This man big up to L45 and then I bid L50 and the other man dropped out.

At this stage I was given a ticket on which was marked the item number and the price I had bid. I then had to hand this ticket over to the Office and I paid L50...'

I expect RJ will now shift the goalposts as I seem to recall he did before, when he suggested that Mike's claim that there were some 125 pages of photographs was merely an exaggeration.

But the fact remains that this was what Mike Litherland had to base his valuation on. It would have been pointless to base it on anyone else's assumption of what Mike might have misdescribed.

It seems Mike Litherland was allowing approximately £1 for each page of photographs. Maybe he was quite wrong. But it still proves nothing about where Mike really obtained the diary scrapbook.

Love,

Caz
X

[rjpalmer]

Ha ha, nice try, RJ.

Why would anyone bother to come up with 'new' evidence, unless the old was not considered enough for a successful prosecution? Hmmm?

That's a question for Chris Jones and the organizers of this event, isn't it?

I can readily imagine someone taking pity on the small band of deluded believers and wish to throw them a lifeline, hoping against hope that this time they will be able to grab on to the blindingly obvious. And thus, exhibits X, Y, and Z, are all patiently presented and explained.

Alas, such grand efforts are almost always futile. The mistake is believing that rational argument can persuade the irrational.

And yet, here, too, am I!

As I've recently pointed out to Ike, the believer has an almost limitless scope for denial, and can come up with the most creative explanations to justify their delusion. To give but one example, even after the Fox Sisters in upstate New York confessed that their "spirit rappings" were a trick, the ardent supporters of spiritualism barely blinked--like our modern bricknicks, they insisted that the confession itself was the fraud and the communications from 'Mr. Splitfoot' and other ghostly entities were real. And they did so using many of the same arguments we so frequently see on this very thread.

If I remember correctly, one of the Fox Sisters, low on funds, even recanted her confession (not unlike Barrett!) and went back on the lecture circuit, to the great delight of the true believers, who now felt entirely justified at having been skeptical of the original admissions of guilt. Does it sound at all familiar?

This begs one question that strikes closer to home: would even CCTV footage do the trick at this point?

If the free-flowing unbonded ink does not phase the believers, if the dodgy handwriting does not faze them, if the Barretts handing over bogus research notes does not faze them, if the allusion to a police inventory list not published until the 1980s does not faze them, if Barrett's attempt to buy a blank Victorian diary does not faze them, if the presence of chloroacetamide in the ink does not faze them, if the error filled text does not faze them, if "bumbling buffoon" and "one off instance" does not phase them, if Barrett miraculously revealing the correct citation for the Crashaw quote doesn't faze them, what possibly could?

Would a confession from Anne Graham do the trick?

Some here have already signaled that it would not. We are in the realm of the Fox Sisters.

[rjpalmer]

I expect RJ will now shift the goalposts as I seem to recall he did before, when he suggested that Mike's claim that there were some 125 pages of photographs was merely an exaggeration.

Are you suggesting it wasn’t an exaggeration?

There aren’t 125 missing pages in the diary.

According to Shirley Harrison, there are only 48.

Thus, as you now seem to be realizing, Litherland’s estimate was anything but reliable, because it was based on a very bad approximation by Barrett.

Why blame me for your own flawed premise?

Of course, one could argue that Mike’s bad “approximation” shows that he was lying—but that doesn’t really make much sense. The number of missing pages wasn’t a secret—it was published in Shirley’s book and Barrett had ownership of the damned thing for weeks.

Meanwhile, I hate to ask this—but you do know how auctions work, don’t you? The final bid isn’t always in perfect harmony with the item’s actual worth. That’s the fun of an auction. Even if we accept Mr. L's estimate of “in excess of a hundred pounds,” (which is now in serious doubt) these specific photos may have generated very little interest at the time and sold for a fraction of that estimate. That is the nature of the beast.

I notice that Lord Orsam refers to 'the elderly Mr. Litherland.' I don’t think this was unkind; it was simply a gentle reminder that the old fellow--the owner of a company that had already tried to distance itself from Barrett's account—was being quizzed by a highly partisan investigator some years after the fact.

Yes, what you say is true. Bill McMahon, the manager of Outhwaite & Litherland, was giving a general estimate of the worth of World War I photos. He wasn’t specifically making a guesstimation based on the vague description in the Barrett/Gray affidavit. Yet, this is not a weakness--it is the beauty of it. His appraisal was made entirely independently of any consideration of the Maybrick Hoax and thus could not have been influenced by his own desires, or to humor his earnest but highly partisan inquisitor. McMahon is clearly the more reliable source, having made his appraisal in 1993—and McMahon was, after all, not only associated with O & L, but a regular contributor to a column in the Liverpool Echo specially set up to discuss the worth of antiques.

He put the price of a similar collection at between 20 and 30 pounds.

It seems Mike Litherland was allowing approximately £1 for each page of photographs. Maybe he was quite wrong. But it still proves nothing about where Mike really obtained the diary scrapbook.

Yes, it is so nice when we can agree!

I always assumed that your motive for posting this “reliable” information was to undermine Barrett’s account—to show that the figure he gave was a ridiculous one. Yet, as is now obvious, Barrett’s account was well within the bounds of plausibility.

As such, I don’t think the topic needs to detain us further.

Back to you, Ike. Sorry for the interruption.

[rjpalmer]

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.

Hi Ike - The above comment interests me.

If it can be shown that Maybrick had previously 'plodded the streets' of the East End, as you suggest, wouldn't that be a strike against the diary's authenticity? And even against the hoaxer's alleged sophistication?

After all, very early on, when 'Maybrick' is planning his campaign and decides on Whitechapel London--almost as a whim--he describes walking the streets in order to familiarize himself with the area.

Why would he need to do that?

The diarist doesn't give any indication--not so much as a peep-- about any previous connection or association to the area--not in the 1860s, the 1870s, or any other time.

If Ero has done anything, he has admirably demonstrated, once again, that our modern hoaxer was completely unfamiliar with the more obscure aspects James Maybrick's real life. There is nary a mention of Witt, Lime Street, the young Jim's business dealings in East London, or any local knowledge.

Quite the contrary.

As always, you seem eager to give the diarist (or the hoaxer) more credit than they actually demonstrate in the text.



Any reasonable person reading the above passage would conclude that 'Maybrick' was walking these streets for the first time in order to familiarize himself for his upcoming campaign. Only now has he 'become' familiar with them.

Mitre Square is only 0.3 miles from Middlesex Street. Why would he need to familiarize himself with the area if, as you claim, he already knew it?

It is my humble belief that you and Ero have done more research into Maybrick than the hoaxer ever did, but for some strange reason are willing to project your own hard-earned knowledge onto him (or her).

It is very charitable of you, but I'm not sure it is wise.

What you're left with is a not very striking coincidence that a Victorian British businessman would have had an office in London, which at the time was the financial and commercial center of the world.

[erobitha]

It is my humble belief that you and Ero have done more research into Maybrick than the hoaxer ever did, but for some strange reason are willing to project your own hard-earned knowledge onto him (or her).

It is very charitable of you, but I'm not sure it is wise.

What you're left with is a not very striking coincidence that a Victorian British businessman would have had an office in London, which at the time was the financial and commercial center of the world.

That's very charitable of you RJ to acknowledge that some effort of research has been undertaken here. I have no doubt Ike will answer for himself, so I only speak for me.

It was not long ago you were doing train timetable gymnastics to see if it was at all possible if Druitt could have made it from a cricket game in Dorset to commit a murder in Whitechapel later that night - in an area to which he had no connection with whatsoever.

Then I give you a suspect within a 5 minute walk of Mitre Square with a proven geographical connection, and suddenly it is "well of course why wouldn't a businessman have a London office?"

[Iconoclast]

I have no doubt Ike will answer for himself, so I only speak for me.

Ike’s back up in Edinburgh again, lads (Lauriston Place, the old Royal Infirmary where I was born in October 1987 aged 26 years, the Meadows, Sutherland no more, and Skye no more, unless you count our old dug - not the east, the dreadful east of Leith with its tram-laying roadworks and its Easter Road, but the west end of Tynecastle and Tollcross and Bruntsfield, the Heart of Midlothian, The Last Drop and the old Quarterback building where Mrs Ike worked before she was Mrs Ike). Never fails to stir the blood - the walk up Market Street to where it meets the Mound and the indescribable beauty of Edinburgh Castle standing solidly on its old rock reminding us of childhood loves: ”And girl it looks so pretty to me, like it always did, like the Spanish City to me, when we were kids”.

I’ll be back, dear readers, and will address young RJ’s thoroughly Hibernian comments, but - for now - I am basking in the late glow of the most amazing city in the world and nothing must distract me.

Ike

[rjpalmer]

It was not long ago you were doing train timetable gymnastics to see if it was at all possible if Druitt could have made it from a cricket game in Dorset to commit a murder in Whitechapel later that night - in an area to which he had no connection with whatsoever.

Then I give you a suspect within a 5 minute walk of Mitre Square with a proven geographical connection, and suddenly it is "well of course why wouldn't a businessman have a London office?"

Let me respond this way.

The well-known Ripper historian Keith Skinner is far more impressed by the Maybrick Diary than I am, yet we've been recently informed by both Ike and Caz that his preferred suspect is not Maybrick, but M. J. Druitt.

Why might that be? Judging by your comments, you find this strange and irrational. Perhaps he can set your mind at ease.

I can only answer for myself: Druitt is not my preferred suspect, but he was named by a Chief Constable at Scotland Yard as early as 1894, so it would be foolhardy not to be interested in the reasoning behind those suspicions.

And is Maybrick even a suspect? Or is he merely the subject of a questioned document that first surfaced in 1992?

Anyway, I notice that you didn't answer the question I posed.

Ike implied that Anne Graham, or whoever our modern hoaxer might be, must have been extremely lucky to have chosen Jim Maybrick as her proposed Ripper, since he has a now confirmed association to Lime Street, London -- a mere 0.3 miles from Mitre Square.

But was this lucky?

Or was it extremely unlucky--considering that 'Maybrick' of the diary is oblivious to this, and makes the clumsy mistake of familiarizing himself with the area in 1888?

The way I look at it, luck for the hoaxer would have been having Maybrick reacquainting himself with the streets around Mitre Square ("I have again walked the streets, and have refamiliarized myself..."). Or alternatively, the hoaxer could have had Maybrick flooded with the same waves of nostalgia that Ike exhibits as he describes his old haunts in Edinburgh.

'Ah, to once again hoist a pint in the paneled rooms of the Three Nuns!' or 'How strange to walk again the shadowy gloom of Mitre Square as I had done twenty years ago' etc. etc.

Yet, not so oddly, we get none of that--almost as if the hoaxer is entirely unaware of this connection.