The Diary—Old Hoax or New?

[The Baron]

Right now, you sound like a demented Parrott offering nothing of any value.

Said the one who spent his time defending a proven hoax


The Baron

[The Baron]

I don't know who wrote the diary

But you know it was not Maybrick, you know he couldn't have written "Bumbling Buffoon" because you yourself spent hours and days trying desperately to find a single damn example from the 19the century of the phrase and you failed, admit it if you have the courage.


The Baron

[erobitha]

The Watch is no more the real deal than the diary.

It's those depths of the debate you go to that really win people over.

If I believed you genuinely wanted to discuss the watch for one second, I would, but your only ambition is posting one-liners of nonsense.

You might enjoy the art of trolling, but I have faith that people with more critical thinking than you can present an open mind for discussion. Right now, you sound like a demented Parrott offering nothing of any value.

[John Wheat]

I don't know who wrote the diary, but I sure as hell believe Maybrick scratched his name into the watch. The evidence is pretty compelling, even if you do not want to accept it.

The Watch is no more the real deal than the diary.

[John Wheat]

He's right.

I know the Baron's right.

[erobitha]

You might want to try living in the real World. Where Maybrick was not the Ripper and the Barretts wrote the diary.

I don't know who wrote the diary, but I sure as hell believe Maybrick scratched his name into the watch. The evidence is pretty compelling, even if you do not want to accept it.

[John Wheat]

The most ill-informed post here!


The Baron

Absolutely Baron but Owly believes he's well informed but as they say ignorance is bliss.

[erobitha]

The most ill-informed post here!


The Baron

He's right.

[John Wheat]

Slightly less amusing one-liners for the reader's benefit.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lYznB09WukM

You might want to try living in the real World. Where Maybrick was not the Ripper and the Barretts wrote the diary.

[The Baron]

There is absolutely ZERO credible evidence that the Diary was written by the Barretts

The most ill-informed post here!


The Baron

[erobitha]

Ridiculous post. The Barretts wrote the diary end of.

Slightly less amusing one-liners for the reader's benefit.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lYznB09WukM

[John Wheat]

Hmmm, a published author now was he?

I've never said that Mike Barrett couldn't have written the Diary. Of course he could. So could any adult alive between 1888 and 1993. I simply stated that there's no credible evidence that Mike wrote it, and that (unlike your posts) is a fact. Even when Mike tried to prove that he wrote it, he couldn't. Even when Mike hired a private investigator to prove he wrote it, he still couldn't. That to me suggests that in all probability, he didn't write it. But he could have, and I acknowledge that, because I deal in facts, whereas you post opinions and sell them as facts. I think it's important that some of us on here stick to repeating those facts, otherwise casual visitors to the Maybrick threads on these message boards might mistake the kind of ill-informed posts by the likes of you and Fishy and as God's honest truth.

Ridiculous post. The Barretts wrote the diary end of.

[StevenOwl]

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.

Hmmm, a published author now was he?

I've never said that Mike Barrett couldn't have written the Diary. Of course he could. So could any adult alive between 1888 and 1993. I simply stated that there's no credible evidence that Mike wrote it, and that (unlike your posts) is a fact. Even when Mike tried to prove that he wrote it, he couldn't. Even when Mike hired a private investigator to prove he wrote it, he still couldn't. That to me suggests that in all probability, he didn't write it. But he could have, and I acknowledge that, because I deal in facts, whereas you post opinions and sell them as facts. I think it's important that some of us on here stick to repeating those facts, otherwise casual visitors to the Maybrick threads on these message boards might mistake the kind of ill-informed posts by the likes of you and Fishy and as God's honest truth.

[Herlock Sholmes]

First of all, I don't consider myself to be one of 'the diary faithful', whatever that means, unless it's just the polar opposite of 'the Barrett and Barrat faithful', who seem to actually believe that the diary was physically created by the Barretts over 11 days, between 1st and 13th April 1992, as opposed to being 'transcribed' during that interval, from scrapbook to word processor, so that Mike could take both documents to London with him and impress everyone with a good job done on the transcript.

There is no evidence for the scrapbook being obtained as late as 31st March 1992, or that it came from any auction sale, and the whole idea is not transformed from highly implausible to 'plausible', let alone provable or in any way proved, merely by the existence of the little red 1891 diary and the specifications it represents.

As Mike was in the habit of doing, he tended to base his tall stories about the diary on actual events, adapting the dates and details to whatever advantage he was seeking to gain at the time. So a live electrician living on Fountains Road in 1992 became a deceased friend living there until August 1991, so Mike could explain how he came to have Jack the Ripper's "diary" in his possession. The transcript that was prepared from the diary for its debut in London on 13th April 1992 became, in January 1995, the draft that was handwritten into the scrapbook by the wife who had deserted him the year before and had just divorced him. But even Mike knew that if he claimed this was not done until early April 1992, when he had already begun making arrangements with Doreen to bring both the diary and the transcript to London, it would simply not be credible, so he wisely backdated the process to January 1990 in his affidavit, apparently altering the year on the draft version to 1991 at a later date - probably when he realised his mistake that Devereux had died that year, and not in 1990.

Hi Caz,

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

[John Wheat]

You're bang-on there ero of course. I'm happy to take on board ALL opinions and arguments pertaining to the Diary being a hoax, providing they're well-researched, well informed, and well thought out. Quite frankly, "Bongo must have written it coz he said he did" is the most risible stance a Naysayer can take, and it tells me straight away that person has absolutely nothing to offer the discussion.

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.