Inspiration for the Fake 'Diary'

[Casebook Wiki Editor]

Hello, Caz.
I don't agree with your first paragraph. It seems to me quite possible that Anne would concoct a more convincing provenance after Mike had royally buggered everything up (possibly after stumbling across the Illustrated Mirror as mentioned in my earlier posts).

I am still having trouble wrapping my mind around the idea that Mike or Billy would have / could have stumbled across the Illustrated Mirror. What's the scenario you have in mind? Can we at least drop Billy out of the picture?

As an aside I think one of the best reasons not to believe a word Anne ever said was her dragging her father into this. Despicable.

[Steven Russell]

[quote=caz;238265]Hi Steve,

Well for a start, if Anne had a hand in this (while the other was tied behind her back), she would not have been sufficiently mentally challenged to run with Mike's shockingly poor Devereux provenance to begin with, only to think of the far superior 'in the Graham family for years' alternative two years down the line, after her estranged hubby had royally buggered everything up by claiming to have written it himself.

And then of course we have Keithypoo and the best possible provenance, which for my money overshadows any last possibility that Anne was in on a modern hoax. How would she have engineered the evidence that the thing had come out of Battlecrease, and why would she then have totally failed to capitalise on it?

Hello, Caz.
I don't agree with your first paragraph. It seems to me quite possible that Anne would concoct a more convincing provenance after Mike had royally buggered everything up (possibly after stumbling across the Illustrated Mirror as mentioned in my earlier posts).

As for the second paragraph, I have never read a bad word about Keith Skinner and, assumung he has proof of what he says, we must take this very seriously. Therefore the points and questions you raise are completely valid and very difficult to explain away. No doubt one day (hopefully soon) Mr Skinner will be at liberty to divulge what he knows. I have a feeling this could be quite a bombshell.

I've been re-reading all the books I have pertaining to the diary (including yours which I enjoyed very much) and have reached the all-too-familiar conclusion that the more I find out the less I know. However, I find that the once least likely solution (an old forgery) is becoming more and more appealing.

Best wishes,
Steve.

[Cogidubnus]

Inside Story

Ripper Diary, The Inside Story is quite revealing in this respect...

Seems to me that the modern suspect with the most ability to construct a forgery (Anne), was the one person who consistently failed to capitalise on the Diary, until having her arm twisted quite late on in the story...the person who did best out of it was clearly incapable of stringing something like this together, and pissed it away anyway...sorry but that's the brutal truth...

Following on from the Hitler Diaries farce, I think any half-credible modern forger would've got the all-critical provenance far better tied down than the chaotic and contradictory tale that unfolded in this case...and I suppose this may contribute to my gut-feel that if it's a forgery (and I very much fear it is) then it's an old one...

But to be honest, the authors of the "Inside Story" and Paul Begg are probably the most qualified to make a judgement in this respect...they lived through the unfolding Barrett family nightmare after all, and it'd be interesting to hear, how, with the benefit of hindsight, THEY now view things...after all none of the rest of us qualify a fraction so well...

All the best

Dave

[Graham]

Yes, Graham, and it's a most peculiar image! Most people I know only use one of their hands to write with, so I'm not sure it's a very useful observation.



Actually, it was The Last Victim and Anne co-wrote it with Carol Emmas, not Shirley.

Love,

Caz
X

Be gentle with me, Caz - I haven't been on these boards for ages, having just returned from the wilderness.

Yes - sorry about getting Anne's book all wrong, especially when it was sitting on the shelf within arm's reach....

Graham

[caz]

With regard to Anne - why not?

Hi Steve,

Well for a start, if Anne had a hand in this (while the other was tied behind her back), she would not have been sufficiently mentally challenged to run with Mike's shockingly poor Devereux provenance to begin with, only to think of the far superior 'in the Graham family for years' alternative two years down the line, after her estranged hubby had royally buggered everything up by claiming to have written it himself.

And then of course we have Keithypoo and the best possible provenance, which for my money overshadows any last possibility that Anne was in on a modern hoax. How would she have engineered the evidence that the thing had come out of Battlecrease, and why would she then have totally failed to capitalise on it?

Love,

Caz
X

[caz]

Martin Fido said that Anne could have written the Diary 'with one hand tied behind her back'...

Yes, Graham, and it's a most peculiar image! Most people I know only use one of their hands to write with, so I'm not sure it's a very useful observation.

However, that Anne was capable of proper, productive research is illustrated by her part-authorship (along with Shirley Harrison) of the book 'The Final Victim', about Florie Maybrick.

Actually, it was The Last Victim and Anne co-wrote it with Carol Emmas, not Shirley.

Love,

Caz
X

[Graham]

One 'theory' that was floating around the old boards in what now seems to me like a mythical past, was that the Diary was concocted and written by a supporter of Florie Maybrick as an attempt to have her conviction brought to appeal on the basis that she bumped James off by means of 'justifiable homicide', presumably before he did her in too! Not a bad idea, as James did have direct contact with the East End, and was well-known as a womaniser if not a user of prostitutes.

Florie did in fact allude to something that James confessed to her, something horrible, but she never said precisely what it was.

Graham

[Steven Russell]

Sir Robert:
With regard to Anne - why not? As Chris George has pointed out, the Maybrick case was probably featured quite heavily in the Liverpool media in 1989. And as Graham points out, Anne is no dummy. As far as Billy is concerned, all he needed to do was back up what Anne said and / or feed Feldman any snippets that Anne had briefed him about.

I don't say it's definite or even likely. Merely possible. Anyway, even if my speculations are correct, this brings us no nearer to figuring out who wrote the bloody thing as no-one's handwriting matches.

Best wishes,
Steve.

[Graham]

Martin Fido said that Anne could have written the Diary 'with one hand tied behind her back', but that didn't imply that she actually did. I'm not sure that Feldman fed her very much that was actually germane, as he did tend to go off in unproductive directions in his own research, for example he spent a lot of time and money investigating branches of the Maybrick clan based in and around Peterborough. However, that Anne was capable of proper, productive research is illustrated by her part-authorship (along with Shirley Harrison) of the book 'The Final Victim', about Florie Maybrick.

Billy Graham was Anne's father, and in all honesty and seriousness I do not believe that he would have been capable of anything even approaching an input to the manufacture of a fake Diary.

What is equally plain and obvious (at least to me) is that Mike Barrett didn't write it, either.

Graham

[Casebook Wiki Editor]

What I was driving at was the possibility that Anne or Billy had come across the Illustrated Mirror article

Do you seriously believe that Anne or Billy were capable of that type of research circa 1990?

Anne got fed a lot of her "research" by Feldman

And Billy? Billy???

[Steven Russell]

Hi Steve

I think the supposed diary of Mrs. Maybrick, if it ever existed beyond rumor, had nothing to do with the existing Maybrick Diary. No, someone had the very bright idea to make James Maybrick into Jack the Ripper. It's likely that the coincidence of dates and Maybrick's shady personal life as an arsenic addict was responsible for that inspiration. The dual centennial of the Ripper crimes (1988) and of the Maybrick Case (1989), the latter being publicized in Liverpool to the extent of a recreated trial of Mrs. Maybrick in St. George's Hall, venue for her original August - September 1889 trial, could have led to someone concocting the diary if it was indeed created circa 1988-1989 or soon thereafter.

Best regards

Chris

Hello, Chris.
Agreed. What I was driving at was the possibility that Anne or Billy had come across the Illustrated Mirror article and decided that "found in a trunk" would be a more believeable story than just having the trail go cold at Tony Devereux. Anne may also have been inspired by the article to claim she indirectly gave the diary to Mike so he could use it as the basis for a work of fiction.

Whether Florie's diary existed or not is irrelevant. My point is that the IM article could have put certain ideas into certain heads.

Best wishes,
Steve.

PS I like your idea too, Caz. The same tale told from two different (fictional) points of view.

[ChrisGeorge]

I've recently been re-reading Paul Feldman's JtR: The Final Chapter (paperback) and was struck by this on page 341. It is an extract from Illustrated Mirror dated 16th September 1889.

"A gentleman is making the rounds of the publishers, with what he claims to be the diary of Mrs Maybrick. The diary, he says, was found in a trunk after the conviction of Mrs Maybrick...
"We are not exactly convinced of the genuineness of the document, although so far as we can glean the genuineness of them [sic] is guaranteed. The object of those into whose hands the alleged diary has fallen appears to be to publish a 'shilling shocker'..."

Could this be the inspiration for the Anne Barrett / Billy Graham story of the provenance of what we now call the Maybrick Diary? Also the reason given by AB for giving the diary to her husband: she says she thought he could write a novel around it.

Best wishes,
Steve.

Hi Steve

I think the supposed diary of Mrs. Maybrick, if it ever existed beyond rumor, had nothing to do with the existing Maybrick Diary. No, someone had the very bright idea to make James Maybrick into Jack the Ripper. It's likely that the coincidence of dates and Maybrick's shady personal life as an arsenic addict was responsible for that inspiration. The dual centennial of the Ripper crimes (1988) and of the Maybrick Case (1989), the latter being publicized in Liverpool to the extent of a recreated trial of Mrs. Maybrick in St. George's Hall, venue for her original August - September 1889 trial, could have led to someone concocting the diary if it was indeed created circa 1988-1989 or soon thereafter.

Best regards

Chris

[caz]

I've recently been re-reading Paul Feldman's JtR: The Final Chapter (paperback) and was struck by this on page 341. It is an extract from Illustrated Mirror dated 16th September 1889.

"A gentleman is making the rounds of the publishers, with what he claims to be the diary of Mrs Maybrick. The diary, he says, was found in a trunk after the conviction of Mrs Maybrick...
"We are not exactly convinced of the genuineness of the document, although so far as we can glean the genuineness of them [sic] is guaranteed. The object of those into whose hands the alleged diary has fallen appears to be to publish a 'shilling shocker'..."

Hi Steven,

It's funny how different minds see something like this and come up with completely different ideas.

My first thought was that if Mr Maybrick's notorious diary had been doing the rounds at that time, I could well imagine it being described as a 'shilling shocker' (as opposed to a penny dreadful). I don't suppose anyone reading it in September 1889 would have considered it to be anything else. I find it quite similar in style to some of the satirical, or burlesque pieces that appeared in Punch between 1888 and 1889.

Wouldn't it be intriguing if the diary of Mrs Maybrick was written along similar lines and they were meant to be companion pieces? A pity that hers doesn't seem to have surfaced or survived. Might answer a lot of questions!

Love,

Caz
X

[Steven Russell]

Thanks, Carol. Yes, that's it.

Best wishes,
Steve.

[Carol]

Hello Steve,

The paper might be 'Stuart Cumberland's Illustrated Mirror' which he ran weekly from 1889-1892. Cumberland was a celebrated Victorian 'mind reader'.

I found this on the Society for Psychical Research website.

Carol