Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The Diary—Old Hoax or New?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • PaulB
    replied
    Originally posted by APerno View Post

    Read it, thank you, good read. Interesting that someone could still be successful, publishing wise, this late with the Diary. 25 Years of the Diary of Jack The Ripper, Robert Smith. He resurrected a bad argument and got everyone to argue it again anyway.

    This has probably been addressed before (god, around here I feel like I always have to lead with that disclaimer, LOL). Has anyone considered that someone was forging the diary with the intent of gaining Florence Maybrick a pardon or parole? Circa 1895

    Use the Diary to paint the deceased Maybrick as the Ripper; the roost needn't hold long, just long enough for the public to response to the exciting (false) revelation and pressure the courts into releasing her.

    Just a passing thought.
    Yes, it was considered that the "diary" was created to help in Florence's trial, but the conclusion was that James being Jack the Ripper would have provided Florence with a motive for murdering him and that no matter how sympathetic people might be towards Florence for taking such an action, it would still have been murder and perhaps have resulted in her execution. I think Florence's lawyers wanted a "not guilty" verdict, not to provide mitigation for a "guilty" one.

    Of course, that doesn't mean the "diary" could not have been produced for the purpose you suggest, but never used.

    One of the problems that has always dogged "diary" is that people don't ask "when" the "diary" was created, but let the argument polarise into whether the "diary" is genuine or a modern fake, and it's a circular argu,emt that goes nowhere.

    Leave a comment:


  • Scott Nelson
    replied
    Ike,

    Look at some of the Harry Dam writings.

    Leave a comment:


  • APerno
    replied
    Originally posted by Abby Normal View Post
    fyi if anyone wants to really know the history of the phrase one off instance and how it proves the diary is a hoax (like if you actiually needed yet another fact that does that) all they need to do is google orsam books and click on articles.

    the definitive answer to the maybrick nonsense(and many ripper related bull shite) will be found here.
    Read it, thank you, good read. Interesting that someone could still be successful, publishing wise, this late with the Diary. 25 Years of the Diary of Jack The Ripper, Robert Smith. He resurrected a bad argument and got everyone to argue it again anyway.

    This has probably been addressed before (god, around here I feel like I always have to lead with that disclaimer, LOL). Has anyone considered that someone was forging the diary with the intent of gaining Florence Maybrick a pardon or parole? Circa 1895

    Use the Diary to paint the deceased Maybrick as the Ripper; the roost needn't hold long, just long enough for the public to response to the exciting (false) revelation and pressure the courts into releasing her.

    Just a passing thought.

    Leave a comment:


  • Iconoclast
    replied
    Originally posted by tanta07 View Post
    I suppose the diary being a hoax is the most likely answer; it is the simplest explanation, after all. However, if the diary was created by a hoaxer, I've had some nagging questions that I can't resolve:

    - If you're going to pick a subject as your fake Ripper, why choose Maybrick? The innocuous Liverpool cotton merchant seems about as unlikely a Ripper suspect as you can come across. Why not choose a far sexier subject like Chapman or Druitt or Tumblety, or hell, just about ANYONE else?
    Hi tanta07,

    This is one of the most bemusing aspects of the whole scrapbook case. Of all the eligible males alive in 1888, our 'hoaxer' homed-in on the most obvious of candidates - yes, the 50 year old well-respected businessman from a prosperous part of Liverpool who had no overt link with the east end of London. It's so obvious, I'm amazed his name didn't come up years earlier!

    There are contradictions at every turn in the Maybrick case - some working for him and some working against him. It does your head in at times!

    Cheers,

    Ike

    Leave a comment:


  • Sam Flynn
    replied
    Originally posted by rjpalmer View Post

    "I was clever. George would be proud of me, told the bitch in my position I could not afford a scandal. I struck her several times an eye for an eye, ha ha too many interfering servants, damn the bitches."

    The passage comes directly after the reference to the Grand National and is an obvious (a little TOO obvious) reference to the fight later that night, in which the "interfering servants" heard Maybrick scream "such a scandal will be all over town tomorrow." The maid had tried to intercede, etc. It's all in the standard books on the Maybrick case.
    Thanks, RP. What immediately follows is a couple of pages of attempted poetry ("Victoria, Victoria, the queen of them all"), and my eyes glazed over. Had they not, I'd have seen that the passage you quoted appearing immediately after the "poem".

    I agree with you that the reference to the fight is a little too obvious, and that the info is available in the standard books about the case.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X