All else aside, why Maybrick's unlikely....

[caz]

You - of course - have to be very careful with probabilities, especially where they may impact upon each other.

There was - quite recently - a case where a mother lost two of her children - seemingly to natural causes. A doctor at the inquest said that the odds of a child dying was X (a large-ish number) to 1, therefore the odds of losing two was much larger. This was deemed shady, foul-play was assumed, and the woman was accused of being involved.

However, this doesn't take into account the genetic link. Therefore, if a child dies, the chances of their brother/sister also dying of a similar condition is actually much higher than in the general population.

I'm not saying that Maybrick was the killer, however if he was the greatest monster of the age, I would say it increased his chances of being bumped off by his long-suffering wife. i.e. if he was involved in one (JtR) it increased his chances of being involved in a second high-profile case (Florence the poisoner).

A very good post, DGB, which highlights the potentially disastrous consequences of assuming cause from effect.

You also make a good point about the greater chances of JtR coming to a sticky end (because of what he became and what he had done) than your average citizen. Something caused him to stop killing at some point, and it could well have been directly or indirectly connected with his criminal behaviour, eg he could have ended up in prison; become too sick, mentally or physically, to carry on; or he could have died prematurely, by his own hand or someone else's, or even run over by a cart as he looked for another victim!

You have to wonder what actually became of JtR, and if he got the death he so richly deserved. I don't personally believe James Maybrick was bumped off by Florie, or that she had any reason to believe he was the Whitechapel Murderer. I suspect he knew when he was dying and how easy it would be to set Florie up to be accused of poisoning him. We do know he suffered terribly with his health during his final months, mainly due to his drug habit, and he changed his doctor in November 1888, after complaining of headaches since the August - a gift for our diarist really, if looking for someone who went downhill and died at the right time, and in the right circumstances to turn into the greatest romantic monster of the age, with a sticky end to end all sticky ends.

Love,

Caz
X

[Stephen Thomas]

When I first read reference to the [alleged] Maybrick diary, my thought was, "Oh, SURE!" It's kind of like someone saying, "They found out who murdered Marilyn Monroe...it was ELIZABETH TAYLOR!"

Maybrick is already associated with one of the most studied murders from the Victorian era. What are the chances he'd be so centrally associated with TWO???

It just seems obvious he was chosen as the subject of a forged item because the Maybrick name already had some public recognition, and there had been books written about the Maybrick poisoning that attracted an audience.

Common sense is of no use in 'Diary' discussions, Mary

And, by the way, there were three murders in Millers Court within a few yards of each other in the space of 21 years.....

1888: Kelly in #13

1898: Eliza Roberts in the room directly above

1909: Kitty Ronan in a room directly opposite #13

[Casebook Wiki Editor]

If we play the odds it goes something like this:

The diary is either genuine or it is a fraud 50-50

If a fraud is it a modern or period fraud? 50-50

That's not remotely close to how probabilities work, Raven. Binary outcomes are not necessarily coin flips.

[DGB]

You - of course - have to be very careful with probabilities, especially where they may impact upon each other.

There was - quite recently - a case where a mother lost two of her children - seemingly to natural causes. A doctor at the inquest said that the odds of a child dying was X (a large-ish number) to 1, therefore the odds of losing two was much larger. This was deemed shady, foul-play was assumed, and the woman was accused of being involved.

However, this doesn't take into account the genetic link. Therefore, if a child dies, the chances of their brother/sister also dying of a similar condition is actually much higher than in the general population.

I'm not saying that Maybrick was the killer, however if he was the greatest monster of the age, I would say it increased his chances of being bumped off by his long-suffering wife. i.e. if he was involved in one (JtR) it increased his chances of being involved in a second high-profile case (Florence the poisoner).

[Phil H]

Surely there is an absolute certainty that some individual will win the Euro Lottery (allowing for roll-overs etc). the high odds are against any particular INDIVIDUAL winning. Surely a difference?

Phil H

[miakaal4]

Probable? I used to go to a Shiatsu class, along with about 15 other students in London. One weekend I went to Paris to see Jean Michel Jarre doing a free concert. 2 million people were there. I stop outside a cafe to light a cigarette and one of my shiatsu classmates is sitting right there having a coffee.
We were so blown away we took photo's to prove it. The moral is: Anything that can happen, can happen. The odds dont matter. Winning the Euro lottery is about 40 million to one. Someone wins it though.

[Tempus omnia revelat]

Hello Mary

Coming from Liverpool as I do -- I grew up just up the road from where the Maybricks lived but am now resident in the U.S. of A -- it was the unlikelihood that two such famous cases could be so linked that struck me immediately when I first heard about the Diary. Even now, having lived with the idea of the Diary for nearly twenty years, I find the story of Maybrick being the Ripper contrived and convenient. Somebody had a very clever idea but it does not wash. And neither did Florie's facewash.

Check out an article of mine that appeared in Ripperologist in 2003 at the time of the Liverpool Jack the Ripper conference that year:

"Jack the Ripper’s Liverpool" by Christopher T. George

Cheers

Chris

Someone had a very clever idea...and incredible luck.


Kind regards,


Tempus

[RavenDarkendale]

If we play the odds it goes something like this:

The diary is either genuine or it is a fraud 50-50

If a fraud is it a modern or period fraud? 50-50

If it is a fraud, who forged the bloody thing? Endless Possibilities

If it is genuine it either reflects real fact or imagined scenarios. With Maybrick's drugged and deteriorating mind the rate should be more 60-40 in favor of imagined fact. (Please. If the diary is genuine Maybrick has to be the author)

The chances of proving the diary one way or the other are pretty much at least 4 to 1

Odds aren't very good...

God bless

Darkendale

[ChrisGeorge]

When I first read reference to the [alleged] Maybrick diary, my thought was, "Oh, SURE!" It's kind of like someone saying, "They found out who murdered Marilyn Monroe...it was ELIZABETH TAYLOR!"

Maybrick is allready associated with one of the most studied murders from the Victorian era. What are the chances he'd be so centrally associated with TWO???

It just seems obvious he was chosen as the subject of a forged item because the Maybrick name already had some public recognition, and there had been books writen about the Maybrick poisoning that attracted an audience.

I know there are coincidences that crop up in life and history, such as the fact that there was a second lady killed in Miller's Court twenty years after the unfortunate Mary Kelly...but things don't usually play out that closely?

Hello Mary

Coming from Liverpool as I do -- I grew up just up the road from where the Maybricks lived but am now resident in the U.S. of A -- it was the unlikelihood that two such famous cases could be so linked that struck me immediately when I first heard about the Diary. Even now, having lived with the idea of the Diary for nearly twenty years, I find the story of Maybrick being the Ripper contrived and convenient. Somebody had a very clever idea but it does not wash. And neither did Florie's facewash.

Check out an article of mine that appeared in Ripperologist in 2003 at the time of the Liverpool Jack the Ripper conference that year:

"Jack the Ripper’s Liverpool" by Christopher T. George

Cheers

Chris

[lynn cates]

Mike Edwards

Hello Mary. Not to mention the strange death of Mike Edwards of ELO fame.

What are the odds?

Cheers.
LC

[Merry_Olde_Mary]

It would be interesting to think about the improbable things that have happened in OUR lives.

I found a crisp, folded $100 bill on the steps of my office building, with no one around. Unfortunately, the incident has not repeated itself.

I also met someone in the elevator at work last week who recognized me from a community theater musical done in my TINY hometown in 1977.

[Kaz]

A teacher I had used to use this story to illustrate the problem of applying probability to the real world.

A man had a problem with flying--he was terrified of dying in a terrorist attack. So he asked a friend who told him that the probability of being on the same plane as a bomb was 100,000 to one. The man went away to think about it.

Years later they were discussing it and the man said to his friend that he no longer had a problem flying. "That's great" said the friend, "I suppose that you considered the probability of there being a bomb and realized that you were perfectly safe".

"Not exactly" Said the man "I considered what you said and realized that if the probability of there being a bomb on the plane was 100,000 to one, then the probably of there being TWO bombs on the plane must about closer to a million to one".

"Well, I guess that's fair" said the friend, "but why should that make a difference". The man replied "Because whenever I fly, I pack a bomb in my luggage"

Post of the day!

[Magpie]

A teacher I had used to use this story to illustrate the problem of applying probability to the real world.

A man had a problem with flying--he was terrified of dying in a terrorist attack. So he asked a friend who told him that the probability of being on the same plane as a bomb was 100,000 to one. The man went away to think about it.

Years later they were discussing it and the man said to his friend that he no longer had a problem flying. "That's great" said the friend, "I suppose that you considered the probability of there being a bomb and realized that you were perfectly safe".

"Not exactly" Said the man "I considered what you said and realized that if the probability of there being a bomb on the plane was 100,000 to one, then the probably of there being TWO bombs on the plane must about closer to a million to one".

"Well, I guess that's fair" said the friend, "but why should that make a difference". The man replied "Because whenever I fly, I pack a bomb in my luggage"

[lynn cates]

probably

Hello Mary. This is an interesting question about probability.

I know of one analogous problem concerning Schwartz's testimony concerning the BS man. It goes like this.

"If BS man didn't kill Liz, then what are the chances that she was attacked twice in 15 minutes?"

That, too, is an interesting question and, for what little it is worth, here is my take. Probability was my least favourite study whilst at university and I've never really developed an appreciation of its power. So, I see plenty of problems with Schwartz' story--over and above the probabilities involved.

Now, applying this to Maybrick's diary, I find that, here too, there are glaring problems over and above the probability question.

Cheers.
LC

[Merry_Olde_Mary]

When I first read reference to the [alleged] Maybrick diary, my thought was, "Oh, SURE!" It's kind of like someone saying, "They found out who murdered Marilyn Monroe...it was ELIZABETH TAYLOR!"

Maybrick is allready associated with one of the most studied murders from the Victorian era. What are the chances he'd be so centrally associated with TWO???

It just seems obvious he was chosen as the subject of a forged item because the Maybrick name already had some public recognition, and there had been books writen about the Maybrick poisoning that attracted an audience.

I know there are coincidences that crop up in life and history, such as the fact that there was a second lady killed in Miller's Court twenty years after the unfortunate Mary Kelly...but things don't usually play out that closely?