Fake!

[RavenDarkendale]

@ Sir Robert

Well I did say when I posted the "mock trial" that neither opening statement by the lawyers was completely truthful but "Lawyer Speak!"

Cheers!

Darkendale

[Simon Wood]

Hi Caz,

I obviously need to get out more. That's a bit too elliptical for me.

Regards,

Simon

[caz]

Don't be filthy.

If you've never considered the possibility that the diary was meant to come across as 'drivel', you haven't lived.

The suckers may yet be those who think it was actually designed to deceive them.

Love,

Caz
X

[Simon Wood]

Hi Caz,

Duly chewed.

Should I swallow or do you want me to spit it out?

Regards,

Simon

[caz]

Hi Caz,

And yes, you do take it correctly: no one who signed themselves "Jack the Ripper" was the real McCoy—for very good reasons.

Naughty Simon. I only pointed out that Jack the Ripper was nobody's actual name. If a hundred hoaxers adopted it for themselves, why would it have been impossible for the murderer (or one of them, if you believe there were half a dozen) to have done the same? It was a name on everyone's lips, after all. Where's the logic in your argument, dear boy? Stick to the problematic handwriting - I would.

Assuming for a brief moment that the "Diary" wasn't a late 20th Century concoction, imagine this "1889" drivel having accidentally landed on a pre-1894 desk at the CID.

What might Messrs Anderson and Macnaghten have made of it?

I've already said what I think many times. I don't think it would have been seen as a serious murder confession by the real James Maybrick at all, or even someone's serious attempt to frame him. At that time it would have so resembled the kind of burlesque pieces and spoofs appearing in the pages of Punch, designed to send up the class system, the police, the politicians, the semi-literate, the famous and the infamous (anyone considered fair game), that my guess is it would have been taken for someone's pre-published spoof at best, or someone's idea of a practical joke at Anderson or Macnaghten's expense at worst.

In fact, I wouldn't put it past one of Mac's cronies to have come up with the idea, based on inside ripper information (or misinformation) given to him by Mac himself.

Now who wrote another spoof diary for Punch in 1888, which mentions a "double event"; spent his honeymoon in Aigburth of all places on God's green earth; and had a brother (who was as fond of practical jokes as he was) who counted Macnaghten and George Sims among his personal friends, referred to Mac as the "boss" of the CID, and whose portrait, as notorious criminal Jack Sheppard (which he played at the Pavilion Theatre, close to Buck's Row, in 1898) hung on Mac's wall, next to a print of the real Sheppard?

Chew on that one.

Love,

Caz
X

[Simon Wood]

Hi Sir Robert,

Whilst not disagreeing with you for an itsy-bitsy moment, going on past form with the Dear Boss and Saucy Jacky correspondence, might not Scotland Yard have serialized the "Diary" in, say, the Police Gazette?

Merely a passing fancy.

Regards,

Simon

[Casebook Wiki Editor]

Assuming for a brief moment that the "Diary" wasn't a late 20th Century concoction, imagine this "1889" drivel having accidentally landed on a pre-1894 desk at the CID.

What might Messrs Anderson and Macnaghten have made of it?

They'd have done the correct thing of course - evaluate it on its literary merits and then seeing the atrocious rhymes and puns they would realize it couldn't be from a real killer and totally disregard it!

Then they would obsessively write letters to the editor denouncing it as a shoddy hoax. Perhaps several a day......

[Simon Wood]

Hi Caz,

I too admit that the "Diary" not being in the known handwriting of James Maybrick is a bit of a deal-breaker.

And yes, you do take it correctly: no one who signed themselves "Jack the Ripper" was the real McCoy—for very good reasons.

Assuming for a brief moment that the "Diary" wasn't a late 20th Century concoction, imagine this "1889" drivel having accidentally landed on a pre-1894 desk at the CID.

What might Messrs Anderson and Macnaghten have made of it?

Regards,

Simon

[caz]

Hi All,

What says fake to me about the "Diary" is the author signing himself "Jack the Ripper" when three of Scotland Yard's head honchos agreed that the name and accompanying correspondence were a journalistic invention.

But I'm certain that someone will square this particular circle.

Regards,

Simon

Hi Simon,

Each to his own, but for me it's the fact that the diary is not in the known handwriting of James Maybrick.

If you had murdered and mutilated one or more women, and a journalist had invented a really catchy name for you, based on the assumption of a lone killer at work, might you not have adopted it for yourself, rather than signing your real name?

I take it you realise that none of the people who signed themselves Jack the Ripper were actually called that?

Love,

Caz
X

[Albert]

Hi Albert,

Don't hold your breath.

Nobody can tell you why the diary is genuine; only why it may not be a fake.

Welcome to Ripperology.

Regards,

Simon

Thanks Simon - I will definitely breathe while I'm waiting!!
Cheers
Alan

[Simon Wood]

Hi Albert,

Don't hold your breath.

Nobody can tell you why the diary is genuine; only why it may not be a fake.

Welcome to Ripperology.

Regards,

Simon

[Albert]

Is this not proof that the diarist got it wrong?

Hi everyone ,
I apologise in advance if this has been covered on previous threads but I can’t understand why the Diary is still believed to be a genuine Jack the Ripper artifact.
After reading the recent various Diary threads I was prompted to take another look at my copy of Shirley Harrison’s book (1993). On the first page I opened (Page 284, Diary section 241), ‘Sir Jim’ is describing his actions with the body of MJK and he writes ‘I thought it a joke when I cut her breasts off, kissed them for a while. Left them on the table with some of the other stuff.’ (my emphasis)
This didn’t seem to tie in with what I remember having read before about the crime scene and I referenced SPE’s SYI (2006) page 184 where Dr. Bond’s report states that The breast had been cut off with more or less circular incisions leaving the muscles down to the ribs attached to the breasts. One was placed under the head and the other by the right foot.’
This led me to have a look at the excellent reproduction of the said photograph on page 189 of CSI: Whitechapel (2012) by Bennet and Beggs.
As one looks at this, the second MJK photograph, the one with the ‘crocodile’, there on the table to the right of the photograph are two objects that do indeed look like breasts.
My point is that this proves to me that the diarist had access to the photograph but not to Bond’s report and therefore made the understandable mistake of thinking they were the breasts when describing the murder. If he was JtR he would have known exactly where he'd placed them, in my opinion.
I’m sure someone will explain to me why the diary is genuine, regardless of this important anomaly and I will look forward to reading it, but for me the Diary is definitely a hoax, albeit an interesting one.
Regards Albert

[miakaal4]

Maybrick was definately living in the fast lane. On top of that, he was living at a time in history when men, of his class, had to behave in certain ways or they would lose face and credibility. This would effect them both socially and financially. The comments within the Diary show a man who is screaming against these 'restraints' one example being his attitude during the races where he is standing near royalty. This angst is not fake. It is not necessary to the books' authenticity, but it is there none the less. He shows intense anger, jealousy and endearment within a few lines, and again none of this promotes belief in any direct way, but it is there.

[Tempus omnia revelat]

I beg your pardon? Context may just be everything...else we'd all be believing Vincent or Walter did it...Please do indicate the origins where known!

All the best

Dave

Sorry, Cogidubnus, but I have indicated the origins. My point was that just because a letter is posted outside of Whitechapel, it doesn't mean that JtR couldn't have sent it.

Kind regards,


Tempus.

[Cogidubnus]

Where the letters were posted, Miss Marple, is irrelevant - especially if JtR lived outside the area.

I beg your pardon? Context may just be everything...else we'd all be believing Vincent or Walter did it...Please do indicate the origins where known!

All the best

Dave