The Diary—Old Hoax or New?

[StevenOwl]

No I'm here to educate the foolish as I said originally. If you weren't so bogged down in grammar and spelling you might see the wood for the trees. Maybe you could also name who did write the diary instead of bleating about how the Battett's didn't write it. Which is frankly both logical and highly likely.

Educate people? Despite the fact that you've never once offered a single original or enlightening thought about the Diary in all your many posts here?? Don't make me laugh. With all your repetitive, childish, insulting one-liners you're just a troll, simple as that.

[caz]

Hi Trevor. The short answer is that Shirley Harrison, making the same error that Thom Mitchell and Caroline Brown are still making two decades later, had the auction house check the wrong dates, so the transaction was not traced if it ever existed. Shirley should have had them check the dates around March 1992, since Barrett's confession states that he went to the auction house after the Diary that he bought from Martin Earl showed up and it was too small. We know this was in March 1992, but based on the wrong date given in Barrett's affidavit, Shirley had them check dates further back instead.

Realizing Shirley's mistake, I recontacted the auction house 18 years ago (roughly) and was told the records are now pulped. I was a year or two too late.

Keith Skinner remarked on this forum many years ago that had he been in charge of the research, he would have had the auction house check their records all the way up into April 1992, but he wasn't there so this never happened. Keith clearly has a more thorough and rational mind than those now commenting on the pro-Diary side of the aisle.

Anyway, this means that all the blather about the auction house records having been competently checked and that Barrett's claim has been debunked is just that...blather. We don't know. What we do know is that small lots were often marked "miscellaneous" and that people even used bogus names at the auction, so there is no guarantee the record would have been found anyway.

RP

What error am I 'still making' two decades later?

It's up to anyone who seriously still wants to claim that Mike obtained the scrapbook from an auction held as late as 31st March 1992 to find and produce some kind of evidence for it. By 3rd April at the very latest, Mike was voluntarily back in contact with Doreen discussing arrangements to come to London with the diary. So at best, we are asked to believe that he and Anne were just a couple of days into the creation process by this point and, at worst, he had got back in touch before he'd even found himself a book to put it in.

Alan Gray was led a merry dance by Mike Barrett back in 1994/5, and was never able to get a straight answer from him about when he had supposedly attended this auction or the lot number, despite Mike's claim in 1999 to have retained his ticket and brought it with him to the Smoke & Stagger. If this had been true, he could at least have checked the date on it, when he changed his mind about showing it to anyone. It was Mike's fault that nobody - including Gray, Harris, Harrison and Palmer - was ever able to help him in his efforts since December 1993 to make a true confession.

[John Wheat]

Since you are so well-informed, John, perhaps you could 'get real' and enlighten the rest of us regarding what you have decided Mike Barrett's [double t] motivation was for trying to make a clean breast of it, between June 1994 and April 1999, but then changing the story many times, and ultimately failing to produce his auction ticket, which would have finally cleared his guilty conscience in readiness for making his peace with his Maker in 2016.

Here's a bit of friendly advice: start by teaching yourself how to spell the man's surname correctly and your credibility will increase accordingly.

You are most welcome.

Love,

Caz
X

No I'm here to educate the foolish as I said originally. If you weren't so bogged down in grammar and spelling you might see the wood for the trees. Maybe you could also name who did write the diary instead of bleating about how the Battett's didn't write it. Which is frankly both logical and highly likely.

[caz]

Has anybody bothered to check with the auction company, I know that with auctions before you can bid you have to set up an account which is set up and retained on the auction house computer system, and all transactions are kept on the persons file.

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

I think I'll let RJ respond more fully to this one, dear Trev, when he returns to the debate for the millionth time. But God help him, if this is how little his own supporters have paid attention to his arguments over the years.

Quick tip, as I'm feeling generous: RJ would like you to believe that Mike Barrett knew a damned sight more about the auction process than the auctioneers he named in his affidavit.

Ah, I see he has responded, quick as a flash. This should be amusing...

Love,

Caz
X

[rjpalmer]

Has anybody bothered to check with the auction company, I know that with auctions before you can bid you have to set up an account which is set up and retained on the auction house computer system, and all transactions are kept on the persons file.

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

Hi Trevor. The short answer is that Shirley Harrison, making the same error that Thom Mitchell and Caroline Brown are still making two decades later, had the auction house check the wrong dates, so the transaction was not traced if it ever existed. Shirley should have had them check the dates around March 1992, since Barrett's confession states that he went to the auction house after the Diary that he bought from Martin Earl showed up and it was too small. We know this was in March 1992, but based on the wrong date given in Barrett's affidavit, Shirley had them check dates further back instead.

Realizing Shirley's mistake, I recontacted the auction house 18 years ago (roughly) and was told the records are now pulped. I was a year or two too late.

Keith Skinner remarked on this forum many years ago that had he been in charge of the research, he would have had the auction house check their records all the way up into April 1992, but he wasn't there so this never happened. Keith clearly has a more thorough and rational mind than those now commenting on the pro-Diary side of the aisle.

Anyway, this means that all the blather about the auction house records having been competently checked and that Barrett's claim has been debunked is just that...blather. We don't know. What we do know is that small lots were often marked "miscellaneous" and that people even used bogus names at the auction, so there is no guarantee the record would have been found anyway.

RP

[erobitha]

Jesus Christ. Keep up Trevor...

Why didn’t anyone think of the auction house?

I can see now why Trevor was a detective.

Yes, Trevor they had been contacted. Their own records for that era were not computerised and relied and whatever paper files they had.

There was an auction which possibly took place on Tuesday the 31st of March 1992. This is the awesome auction that apparently Mike was able to source the final scrapbook.

Except there are no records that such a scrapbook was for sale. Was sold as part of “Misc items” (conveniently) according to some. Mike also claimed he had an auction ticket confirming it. Except no other human being has actually seen this ticket. Also, the process in which he describes the auction was not how the auctioneers themselves claimed their auctions were conducted.

A dead duck for those Barrett believers.

[caz]

Jesus Christ. Keep up Trevor...

What Owly said...

[caz]

If you think childish antics shuts down the debate, then I guess maybe it is you who needs the eye test.

On the contrary, ero, I think the last thing John wants is to shut down the debate. What on earth would he do all day, if he wasn't here, giving us the benefit of his wisdom?

Norman wisdom, that is.

Love,

Caz
X

[StevenOwl]

Has anybody bothered to check with the auction company, I know that with auctions before you can bid you have to set up an account which is set up and retained on the auction house computer system, and all transactions are kept on the persons file.

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

Jesus Christ. Keep up Trevor...

[caz]

I'm just trying to educate the foolish.

No, John. You are just here to disagree in a rather insulting and disagreeable fashion.

If you have finished your own education on this and every other subject under the sun, why not take all your books to the charity shop, switch off the internet and put your feet up for a nice nap?

Love,

Caz
X

[Trevor Marriott]

Since you are so well-informed, John, perhaps you could 'get real' and enlighten the rest of us regarding what you have decided Mike Barrett's [double t] motivation was for trying to make a clean breast of it, between June 1994 and April 1999, but then changing the story many times, and ultimately failing to produce his auction ticket, which would have finally cleared his guilty conscience in readiness for making his peace with his Maker in 2016.

Here's a bit of friendly advice: start by teaching yourself how to spell the man's surname correctly and your credibility will increase accordingly.

You are most welcome.

Love,

Caz
X

Has anybody bothered to check with the auction company, I know that with auctions before you can bid you have to set up an account which is set up and retained on the auction house computer system, and all transactions are kept on the persons file.

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[caz]

Hi Caz,

I was in Brighton on Wednesday, I could have popped in for a cup of tea and said hello to Monty.

Hi Herlock,

Sadly, that would have been a bit difficult, since we are in Sidmouth, East Devon, which is a fair old trot from Brighton - even for Monty. He draws the line at Bournemouth!

The good news is that if you are down our way in late September and fancy saying hello to Monty, you could feed him while we are away on holiday, to help save Sid Valley's mouse and bird population.

The less good news is that we are booked to go to Rhodes.

Love,

Caz
X

[caz]

Because Mike Barret a published author who claimed to have written the diary would be the last person who could have written the diary. Get real.

Since you are so well-informed, John, perhaps you could 'get real' and enlighten the rest of us regarding what you have decided Mike Barrett's [double t] motivation was for trying to make a clean breast of it, between June 1994 and April 1999, but then changing the story many times, and ultimately failing to produce his auction ticket, which would have finally cleared his guilty conscience in readiness for making his peace with his Maker in 2016.

Here's a bit of friendly advice: start by teaching yourself how to spell the man's surname correctly and your credibility will increase accordingly.

You are most welcome.

Love,

Caz
X

[John Wheat]

Honestly, ero b, my decision to block the child's posts (the first and only time I have ever done so in nigh-on 20 years of reading the Casebook) was the best thing I have done this year (Jack-related).

I strongly recommend it to you and anyone else who is simply irritated by his infantile repetition and bleating about things unproven as if they were fact.

Ike
Resting in Peace

I'm a child? Your the one who believes all the Maybrick bullshit.

[Iconoclast]

I should stress that I assume he is a child. I'd hate to think this behaviour was stemming from a grown adult.