Why did Florence Maybrick not use this at her defence!

[The Grave Maurice]

I fail to understand where the introduction of the diary as evidence came from. Certainly not from me.

You may not realise it, IA, but it did. You said she could "[s]imply tell the court that she killed James Maybrick because he claimed to be Jack The Ripper".

In 1889, an accused person was not allowed to testify. To get that message to the jury, the diary would have to be introduced into evidence by her barrister. The barrister would say: "M'lud, I have here an unsigned document, apparently not in the victim's handwriting, that claims he was JtR, and I would now like to enter it as evidence in order to clear my client." Any judge, even one as batty as J.F Stephen, would say: "Nice try, counsel, but come back when you have something that is actually admissible."

Even if it existed at the time of trial, there is no way that it, or its contents, could have become part of Florence's defence.

[Graham]

Even if it existed at the time of trial, there is no way that it, or its contents, could have become part of Florence's defence

However, it conceivably and legally could have been produced as mitigating evidence at an appeal - and not a few good folk believe that it was created for just such an eventuality.

Graham

[The Grave Maurice]

Sorry, Graham, not true. There was no appeal from criminal convictions until the Court of Criminal Appeal was established in 1907. In any event, even now, new evidence is virtually never admissible on appeal. Appeals are decided on errors of law, not fact.

[Kaz]

How many answers does the OP need?

[Inspector Abberline]

Quite true!

That would still convict her murder is murder. Killing somebody because they are a killer is still a criminal offence.

But would the jury and judge have looked differently at her case! She could have claimed selfdefence! I think that she not saying anything about him being Jack The Ripper. Proves only what a ridiculous thing the diary is.

Inspector Abberline

[belinda]

I don't know whether the Jury would have thought differently but the Judge was hostile from the start.

Unless she could prove he had threatened to kill her I don't think self defence would have worked.

Florence Maybrick always maintained her innocence.

[Bridewell]

I think the provenance of the Maybrick Diary is highly questionable and, if it's a fraud, it could have no relevance to Florence's trial.

[Kaz]

But would the jury and judge have looked differently at her case! She could have claimed selfdefence! I think that she not saying anything about him being Jack The Ripper. Proves only what a ridiculous thing the diary is.

Inspector Abberline

What physical proof did she have, did she have the diary in her possession?

Wasn't it just the ramblings of a jealous, arsenic eating, madman?

She went into the court room pleading complete "innocence", where would pleading "manslaughter" (because my husband deserved it) have gotten her?

[Mayerling]

I am trying to imagine the situation if Florence (who did make a statement in court had done something like this.

Justice Stephen listening to her says to himself, "Why that dirty adulterous poisoner has done my son James Kenneth a favor - now nobody witll think he was the Ripper, it was Mr. Maybrick!"

Her amazed barrister, Sir Charle Russell (who would have tried to stop her from saying this) says to himself - "Well, that's that. She'll be found guilty for sure now. Anyway I can start thinking of how to help Parnell and the Home Rule cause, and get that scoundrel Pigott!"

In Hull gaol, when a guard lets him read a news account, an amazed and bitter Frederick Deeming thinks, "But what about my possibly knowing two or three of the Victims. This does muddy up the waters regarding my own guilt."

[Perhaps in Joliet Prison in Illinois a similar set of thoughts like Deeming's in the mind of Dr. Thomas Neill Cream.]

At Windsor reading the paper languidly the next day, H.R.H. the Duke of Clarence thinking, "Well thiank God I don't have a diary."

On Harley Steet, the distinguished physician and surgeon, Sir James Paget reads of the incident and thinks, "Almost as good as the conumdrum in that Bartlett case three years back. Too bad Maybrick died - they might have asked him why he did it!"

Jeff

[Hatchett]

Hi Mayerling,

And Joseph Barnett in his new room with his new partner, crumples up his old newspapers, and throwing them into the fire, says "well I have no more use for them!"

Across the other side of Whitechapel some unknown man takes his astrakhan coat out of the wardobe where it has been carefully concealed for many years, brushes off the moth balls, and thinks to himself, "I can start wearing this again."

Best wishes.