Maybrick--a Problem in Logic

[caz]

Why did he have to do that? Why go to the expense, and leg work when he already had the information for Shirley Harrison from Liverpool Central Library

Er, because he was playing one diary researcher against another, and playing both against a pair of hoaxbusters! You really haven't been following the plot at all, have you?

Now read this very carefully, Observer, I will post it only once [while sporting my French beret and raincoat, just like in 'Allo 'Allo]:

Mike was trying to show Shirley that he was an ace researcher, earning his share of the royalties [royalties which he had recently put in jeopardy with his initial forgery claim in June 1994!]. At some point after Shirley had sent him off to Liverpool Library to look for the quote, he came back to her with a description of the volume he said he'd found it in. Now R.J may be sceptical that Mike ever went to the library to look, but the fact remains that Shirley was able to get confirmation that Mike had correctly identified a volume that was indeed there on the shelves. [When the authors of Ripper Diary checked several years later, there were in fact three identical volumes together on one of the relatively small number of shelves dedicated to English Literature reference works.] Had the library told Shirley they didn't have the book Mike described, he'd have had some serious explaining to do. But they did have it. So R.J can now change tack and allow for Mike going to the library after all, but only to check the book was there, so he'd have a get-out clause, in case of future need. [No need to thank me, R.J. We all need a little help now and then. ]

Meanwhile, Mike was trying to shaft Feldman any which way he could, for a number of reasons, which anyone who has been paying attention will be more than familiar with. So he taunted Feldy with his knowledge of where the quote came from, claiming it was inside knowledge that would prove the diary a modern forgery. Naturally he wasn't going to tell Feldy if he'd only just gained that knowledge from hours spent in the library! So what he really needed now was to produce his own copy of the Sphere book, and explain how it had come into his possession long before April 1992, when he took his forged diary to London. If his story was credible, and the book he produced was compatible with that story, his next forgery claim might be believed. But he screwed up royally by telling the Hillsborough story first, and when he finally handed over the book to go with it, two months later, to Alan Gray, who was by then feeding information back to hoaxbuster Mighty Mel Harris, it would - or should - have been bleedin' obvious that this was a used copy, which simply didn't live up to the story Mike had already told about it. For all we know, he may not have tracked it down until late November or early December 1994, shortly before giving it to Gray as evidence that he'd had it all along and used it when creating the diary.

All too late. He should have called himself the late Michael Barrett and left Tony Devereux out of it. Tony was only there to carry the can because he had already kicked the bucket.

Love,

Caz
X

[rjpalmer]

Hi Ike - Yes. The Central Liverpool Library owned The Sphere Companion, Vol. 2. Why do you find this compelling? The original library was built in the 1860s and currently holds 330,000 volumes and nearly a mile of shelf space. It's a major research library, so it's not much of a shocker that they owned it. I am more interested in whether Barrett owned it, as seemingly confirmed by Jennifer Morrison. Seriously, mate, how many volumes would you expect Barrett to have flipped through in those 1,500 meters of shelves before he gave up and went and had a pint? Would he have stuck with it for 15 mintues? 60 minutes? His mythical 'week' spent in the CLL is a nice round figure, aint it? Almost like he's codding us.

Here’s what I would say. I think it is so wildly improbable that a snippet from Crashaw could have ended up in the Maybrick transcript by any ‘normal’ means –(it must have been cribbed from The Sphere by some unsophisticated person flipping through the pages looking for inspiration)—that if you were to conclusively prove that Barrett did not own Sphere, Vol 2 prior to his taking the diary to London in April 1992, than I would abandon my beliefs, swap sides, join you in your mission, and fully admit that Barrett had no knowledge of the Diary’s creation. A working knowledge of Crashaw would have been beyond Barrett and Graham. I think Mike owned the volume and that is where he found the quote, and ‘O’ becomes ‘Oh’ during the dictation process, which is, of course, precisely how Mike described the diary’s creation. Logical, eh? Enjoy your weekend, and please hope not to see me back next week.

[Abby Normal]

I have no intention of reading your brilliant Society's Pillar, I've had a taste of your posts in the various Maybrick threads, that enough for me. I hear Mr Orsam has reduced it to a pile of rubble anyway.

thats Lord Orsam to you! ; ). and yes hes has-as well as for the Diary Defenders of any ilk and Ripper nonsense in general.

[Observer]

Such irony laced throughout that one line!

If you read my brilliant Society's Pillar, you will know all of the many reasons I have outlined for why the Victorian scrapbook is actually a deeply complex document with the surface shiny appearance of utter crap.

Obviously you would have had no way of knowing this.

I have no intention of reading your brilliant Society's Pillar, I've had a taste of your posts in the various Maybrick threads, that enough for me. I hear Mr Orsam has reduced it to a pile of rubble anyway.

[Iconoclast]

There you have it folks, the great arbitrator in the sky has decreed it a deeply complex hoax. Bow to his great wisdom

Such irony laced throughout that one line!

If you read my brilliant Society's Pillar, you will know all of the many reasons I have outlined for why the Victorian scrapbook is actually a deeply complex document with the surface shiny appearance of utter crap.

Obviously you would have had no way of knowing this.

[Iconoclast]

I'm aware of his boast.

However, are you not on record as saying if the Diary is a hoax, then it's the greatest hoax on record?

If I'm mistaken in this assumption, I'll ask you. If the Diary is a hoax is it the greatest Hoax on record?

I don't know of hoaxes generally so I wouldn't know. If it is a hoax, I would certainly say that it was a first-rate one.

[Observer]

By the way, it is very definitely a deeply complex hoax. Obviously you would have had no way of knowing this.

There you have it folks, the great arbitrator in the sky has decreed it a deeply complex hoax. Bow to his great wisdom

[Observer]

Only if the chopping block was lying in the gutter so to speak.

Give a man enough rope

[Observer]

I was paraphrasing Barrett's confession newspaper headline. Obviously you would have had no way of knowing this.

I'm aware of his boast.

However, are you not on record as saying if the Diary is a hoax, then it's the greatest hoax on record?

If I'm mistaken in this assumption, I'll ask you. If the Diary is a hoax is it the greatest Hoax on record?

[Iconoclast]

It's not a complex hoax. It's a very simple one.

By the way, it is very definitely a deeply complex hoax. Obviously you would have had no way of knowing this.

[Iconoclast]

Let's not forget that when Mike Barrett was making his confessions he was putting his head on the chopping block so to speak.

Only if the chopping block was lying in the gutter so to speak.

[Iconoclast]

Your elevation of it into one of the greatest hoaxes in human history is unfounded.

I was paraphrasing Barrett's confession newspaper headline. Obviously you would have had no way of knowing this.

[Observer]

Let's not forget that when Mike Barrett was making his confessions he was putting his head on the chopping block so to speak. He obviously regretted those confessions, because he later retracted them. So, it's no wonder he was reluctant to provide solid evidence to back up his claim that he was the author of the Diary. He was a man tormented, always in two minds, money, booze, and the break up of his marriage was his downfall. Certain individuals who met him after the emergence of the Diary tell us he was a buffoon, not capable of it's creation. IKe, and his ilk believe them without question. To her credit, Shirley Harrison was genuine enough to state that Mike was no fool. Weighing up all the circumstances surrounding the Maybrick saga, I have no doubt at all that it was Mike Barrett, and his wife, who created The Diary of Jack The Ripper.

[Observer]

And you can prove this, yes?

Can you back up any of your outlandish claims?

[Observer]

If you know for definite what Mike Barrett did or did not do (whether in relation to the original scrapbook, the useful 1891 diary, the Sphere volume, etc.), or if you know for definite why he did things, just let us all know. Don't forget to clarify for us exactly how you know these things to be true.

No need. You've provided everything we need to know about Barrett. The reason he Needed the Sphere book, the maroon diary. The fact that he was a buffoon who couldn't possibly have had the intelligence to produce the Diary. You have all the answers.

Now, this is the guy you and Roger and Lord Orsam would have us believe pulled-off a complex 60+ page Ripper hoax which to this day is unrevealled.

I think you may be quite wrong, you know.

It's not a complex hoax. It's a very simple one. You put great emphasis on the fact that it's still a mystery 28 years in the making. The fact is it only had a shelf life of a fraction of those 28 years. Nobody gives a damn about it now, apart from we sad sacks. Your elevation of it into one of the greatest hoaxes in human history is unfounded.