Fake!

[Steven Russell]

Blucher is a copy of the original, which is apparently lost. That isn't Maybrick's handwriting. (Neither is the Diary IMHO but that's another issue.)

Bah! Thanls for putting me straight on this point, Bob.

Best Wishes,
Steve.

[Carol]

You do know that Jarndyce Booksellers of London is of the firm opinion that the text (as well as the handwriting) is Victorian in nature? They are one of the world's leading dealers in Victorian era documents. (I visited them in 2009 to reconfirm their opinion which was first expressed in 1992.)

Hello Sir Robert,

I didn't know that you had visited them in 2009. Thanks for telling me.

Carol

[Tempus omnia revelat]

I'm not sure you really need THAT many question marks!

Imparting the feeling you have described could easily be accomplished by a competent novelist.

I don't think miakaal4 was writing a novel, Iain. Besides, I was more interested in his points than in his Question Marks.


Kind regards,


Tempus

[Iain Wilson]

I am sure that when someone is writing about thoughts, images and deeds they would be writing fast, the words pouring out in short bursts, they wouldn't bother with too much formal grammar. They would forget the odd full stop, which he does, and put other punctuation in the wrong place, because it is not important to the content. He was not writing a letter to a severe maiden aunt, or his pal George, he was writing it for HIM and HIM alone. So he could sit in his study and gloat. So he could pour out the poisons that he felt were causing his actions, and ignore the real poisons he was using as medicine because he was addicted to them and he knew it.
It is only towards the very end of the diary that he begins thinking that others might actually read what he has written.
Now he see's the book as his confession. He knows he will soon die, or believes he will. He has scorned God in the book, and perhaps, now close to death he fears retribution. So confess all, leave the book in a place it will be found, and hope that when it is read, the audience will understand his motivation and forgive him.
The tone has changed, regret replaces violent promises and gloating, the need to be wanted by his wife replaces the desire to be alone to hunt.
Fake! ?????????Really?

I'm not sure you really need THAT many question marks!

Imparting the feeling you have described could easily be accomplished by a competent novelist.

[miakaal4]

Oh, by the way, wasn't the forger lucky that old James had no alibi for each of the five murders?

[Tempus omnia revelat]

Tempus

No, you are mistaken. I did not say that the removal of pages from this document - whatever it really is - proves that it is a fake. Evidently, it does not. Nonetheless, the removal of the pages would be necessary if the diary were a fake. If the diary were not - i.e. were genuine, there is no immediately obvious reason for the removal of the pages.

Apart from the fact - as I said before - that they may have incriminated or mentioned someone else. It may simply have been the case that he wanted to start a fresh. To focus on one unknowable feature when you have all the other facts and coincidences surrounding the diary is a bit...we'll, pointless.

In the balance, I would say that was a point in the favour of the 'anit-diarists' as you like to call those who consider it likely a forgery.

If you say so, Sally.

Kind regards,


Tempus

[Sally]

I agree with you Sally, right up to the point where you seem to think that removing pages from the diary proves it a fake. Not sure why you think this. Those pages could've contained anything. They could also have been removed at any time, especially if someone else would have been incriminated or connected to the diary.

I hate calling it a diary, anyway. All it is is a Victorian document that the killer has placed his thougths into. No one knows for sure what it was used for at the time.


Kind regards,


Tempus

Tempus

No, you are mistaken. I did not say that the removal of pages from this document - whatever it really is - proves that it is a fake. Evidently, it does not. Nonetheless, the removal of the pages would be necessary if the diary were a fake. If the diary were not - i.e. were genuine, there is no immediately obvious reason for the removal of the pages.

In the balance, I would say that was a point in the favour of the 'anit-diarists' as you like to call those who consider it likely a forgery.

[miakaal4]

Grammar

I am sure that when someone is writing about thoughts, images and deeds they would be writing fast, the words pouring out in short bursts, they wouldn't bother with too much formal grammar. They would forget the odd full stop, which he does, and put other punctuation in the wrong place, because it is not important to the content. He was not writing a letter to a severe maiden aunt, or his pal George, he was writing it for HIM and HIM alone. So he could sit in his study and gloat. So he could pour out the poisons that he felt were causing his actions, and ignore the real poisons he was using as medicine because he was addicted to them and he knew it.
It is only towards the very end of the diary that he begins thinking that others might actually read what he has written.
Now he see's the book as his confession. He knows he will soon die, or believes he will. He has scorned God in the book, and perhaps, now close to death he fears retribution. So confess all, leave the book in a place it will be found, and hope that when it is read, the audience will understand his motivation and forgive him.
The tone has changed, regret replaces violent promises and gloating, the need to be wanted by his wife replaces the desire to be alone to hunt.
Fake! ?????????Really?

[Tecs]

Hello Tecs

Well I am originally from Liverpool as well, although now a resident of Baltimore in the United States. To be more correct, the mob in Liverpool appears to have been anti-Florence before she was convicted, and anti-verdict after the sentence of death was passed down. Justice Stephen's carriage was mobbed after the verdict as he left the courthouse. But Florence's cause wasn't just a sentiment in Liverpool, it was a worldwide cause celebre, on both sides of the Atlantic.

Best regards

Chris

Thanks for this Chris,

So, the editor of Ripperologist is a fellow scouser. I know where to send my manuscript if I ever finish it!!!

Don't think I'm above any cheap nepotism!!!

regards,

[Tempus omnia revelat]

Tempus

Well yes, obviously the Diary would probably be written in a Victorian writing book of some sort whether it was genuine, forged, written in the 19th century, or at any time since.

As to the pages having been torn out, that doesn't tell us much either. Except perhaps that a forger would probably have to remove the pages because whatever had been written in the book would prove to have absolutely no connection with the text of the diary whatsoever, and would demonstrate that the diary was a forgery. If the diary was genuine, why remove the pages?

There are still a lot of partially used Victorian writing books around incidentally; it wouldn't have been difficult for a forger to have acquired one. I'm sure that must have been noted many times by now.

I agree with you Sally, right up to the point where you seem to think that removing pages from the diary proves it a fake. Not sure why you think this. Those pages could've contained anything. They could also have been removed at any time, especially if someone else would have been incriminated or connected to the diary.

I hate calling it a diary, anyway. All it is is a Victorian document that the killer has placed his thougths into. No one knows for sure what it was used for at the time.


Kind regards,


Tempus

[Sally]

Tempus

Well yes, obviously the Diary would probably be written in a Victorian writing book of some sort whether it was genuine, forged, written in the 19th century, or at any time since.

As to the pages having been torn out, that doesn't tell us much either. Except perhaps that a forger would probably have to remove the pages because whatever had been written in the book would prove to have absolutely no connection with the text of the diary whatsoever, and would demonstrate that the diary was a forgery. If the diary was genuine, why remove the pages?

There are still a lot of partially used Victorian writing books around incidentally; it wouldn't have been difficult for a forger to have acquired one. I'm sure that must have been noted many times by now.

[Tempus omnia revelat]

After the news first broke Melvin Harris predicted that the book 'would be written in a journal or diary with a number of its front pages torn out'.

To come up with the idea that any faked document centreing around the Jack the Ripper (the Victorian era) would be faked using a Victorian Journal or diary is hardly brain surgery, is it? The torn pages, also, are easy to guess. Especially as any old journal would probably have some stuff already located at the beginning.


Kind regards,


Tempus

[ChrisGeorge]

Two quick points,

1. Coming from the great city myself I've never heard it but apparently the miscarriage of Florence's trial lingered in Liverpool for many years as an example of injustice against women and how women were kept down by men. Her case became symbolic of womens' struggle and until quite recently many women looked to Florence as an example of a "wronged woman." So to switch events on their head and suggest that far from being the villain she was actually a victim and the man who made her life a misery was none other than JTR was a chance to put things right. . . .

Hello Tecs

Well I am originally from Liverpool as well, although now a resident of Baltimore in the United States. To be more correct, the mob in Liverpool appears to have been anti-Florence before she was convicted, and anti-verdict after the sentence of death was passed down. Justice Stephen's carriage was mobbed after the verdict as he left the courthouse. But Florence's cause wasn't just a sentiment in Liverpool, it was a worldwide cause celebre, on both sides of the Atlantic.

Best regards

Chris

[Casebook Wiki Editor]

2. Didn't some Ripperologist suggest before the diary ever came out that if a faked document ever surfaced, it would be an old Victorian document such as a photograph album with the first few pages ripped out? Off the top of my head I think it was Stewart Evans but I may be completely wrong about that.

After the news first broke Melvin Harris predicted that the book 'would be written in a journal or diary with a number of its front pages torn out'.

[Tecs]

Two quick points,

1. Coming from the great city myself I've never heard it but apparently the miscarriage of Florence's trial lingered in Liverpool for many years as an example of injustice against women and how women were kept down by men. Her case became symbolic of womens' struggle and until quite recently many women looked to Florence as an example of a "wronged woman." So to switch events on their head and suggest that far from being the villain she was actually a victim and the man who made her life a misery was none other than JTR was a chance to put things right.

2. Didn't some Ripperologist suggest before the diary ever came out that if a faked document ever surfaced, it would be an old Victorian document such as a photograph album with the first few pages ripped out? Off the top of my head I think it was Stewart Evans but I may be completely wrong about that.

Apologies if this has already been mentioned, I haven't gone through the whole thread.

regards,