Maybrick--a Problem in Logic

[caz]

Far be it for me to ever get into any form of an argument, but once again your argument hinges heavy upon the thought process of the killer after the event, does it not? Maybrick wrote to the effect of "I left them a very good clue" and we are left to decipher it, unfortunately. I think Shirley Harrison suggested that the very good clue may have been the piece of cotton in what may have then become the tin match box, empty (I hope it were she for I say so in my bSP). Maybrick could have left such a clue, and just not read the article that you posted or read it and completely missed it. He was human, Rog. It's an artform but it can be learned with practice.

And he homed-in on Abberline rather than the City Police? Honestly - did he really need to care a toss to say it to himself in his private scrapbook?

Ike (now behind that oak tree on the left)

Hi again,

If I can be arsed, I may get around to reading yet more distracting posts on Mike's supposed use of Paul Harrison's book [which I haven't got and haven't read] to come up with his funny little empty tin box lines - sometime in the middle of next week I shouldn't wonder.

In the meantime, I wonder what R.J makes of this:

'Popkov's crimes were motivated by suspicions that his wife had committed adultery.'

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mikhail_Popkov

It appears that between 1992 and 2010, Mikhail Popkov had himself a prolific run of serial murders. Now, my own choice of wording would have been that he only claimed his crimes were motivated by those suspicions about his wife, because it's the old deluded nonsense rearing its head again, that says: "I'm not really a murdering bastard, you see. Look to that horrible woman who is making me do all these bad things". Yes, and my name's Catherine Morris.

You and I were quite wrong to think there was no beginning to Bongo's talents. It seems there was no end to them. Mikhail was quite obviously under the 'fluence of Michael and his 'DAiry', and had it in mind when he got buckled, so he could say he only did what Jack the Ripper had done before him, and killed all those naughty women because his missus couldn't keep her own knickers on.

Clever old Bongo.

Love,

Caz
X

[caz]

Hi Keith. Two reasons. First, I no longer own a cassette player and don’t currently have the technical capability to upload any such file to the internet—if I did, I would. More to the point: I no longer own the tapes. I thought I did, but I don't. I do have a few notes. If you want more details you can always contact me off-board. Further, I never owned an entire set....

Hi R.J,

When you say you no longer 'own' the tapes, do you mean someone else owns them now, or you just can't find them? You wouldn't have dumped them, surely, if they have now taken on so much importance for you?

Also, how do you know that you never owned 'an entire set'? Was this made plain to you when you received some of the tapes? Or did you only realise it because you saw some conversations referred to, or quoted from here, which you didn't have in your personal collection? I'm just trying to work out why you wouldn't have had the full Barrett & Gray comedy box set, but just a selection of episodes. Seems such a shame if you missed out on the funniest ones. Comedy gold gone to waste.

Of course, I am not for one moment suggesting that you were deprived of recorded conversations that were the least favourable to the Barrett hoax believers. For all I know, the missing tapes could be the most favourable, which I presumed was why you wanted Keith to release them. But you really have queered your pitch, if I may say so, because Keith is now damned if he doesn't [because then you can suggest it's because they point clearly to Mike as the diary's creator] and damned if he does [because when everyone gets to hear Bongo in full flow, you can then accuse Keith of only releasing material that points against Mike as the silly faker].

Or maybe that was the object, because you don't really believe those tapes contain anything truly incriminating, otherwise you'd have been sent them in the first place with the others.

Love,

Caz
X

[caz]

Robert M. is obviously a smart man. He must have concluded, undoubtedly correctly, that the interviews with Feldman, Graham, and Harrison are like poisons that contain their own antidote; arguments so weak, that rather than being suggestive of an old or genuine document, actually argue against such ideas. I shouldn’t have worried!

So why did you? You more or less accused Keith of releasing material because it was favourable to the diary's authenticity, but because you have now been told it was Robert M who provided it, the same material has now become unfavourable to the diary's authenticity.

You are wasted here, R.J. Go into politics, where it's not what is said that forms people's opinions, but who says it.

Love,

Caz
X

[Iconoclast]

Or maybe that was the object, because you don't really believe those tapes contain anything truly incriminating, otherwise you'd have been sent them in the first place with the others.

See, this is why I'm still hiding behind the old bomb shelter in me ganny's [sic] garden. Roger, I've put a box of bandages in the post, mate (I sent them to "RJP, Chigwell Semi" and am certain they will reach you). Until the bloodshed ends, I'm keeping my head down.

Ish.

[Iconoclast]

Afternoon Ike. I'm not sure why it's any of R.J's business what name or names you use when referring to me. In fact, you hereby have my full permission to call me "that meddlesome old ratbag" if you so wish. It's almost certainly kinder than the names I can imagne R.J calling me - in private under his breath.

Love,

That Meddlesome Old Ratbag
X

Dear Most Honourable Caz,

I think you must be confusing me with someone with remarkably large testicles if you imagine I am ever going to risk calling you … I can't even bring myself to say it!

I'm keeping out of this. As Lord O (Olivier or Orsam) probably once said, "Keep yer 'ead down my son - this is big boy ****". Or was that David Brent?

Obviously, he meant big boy and GIRL ****, by the way!!!!!!!!!!!

Your Ever So 'umble Servant,

Ike

PS I wonder how many other naughty words the editor automatically switches out with a bunch of asterisks? Let's see: **** **** ******* **** ***** Hmmm, quite a few, it seems ...

[rjpalmer]

Warning: the following post contains a disturbing photograph of a victim's injuries, so don't scroll down if you find such images upsetting. I usually don't like to post forensic images, but this one illustrates an important point.

And never were you better caught more candidly, Rog, than in your not-so-subtle reference to the rather explicit 'F' carved on Kelly's arm as being 'vague'. Ever one to question what to others might seem fairly straightforward and beyond contention!

Oh how I larfffed … ]

The trouble, Ike, is that you have no idea what you're looking at. Bongo Barrett has you hunting for initials and other 'clues' in the carnage of the Mary Kelly photograph, and you oblige him by seeing what he has asked you to see.

Does the following photograph remind you of anything?

It should.

It is a defensive wound suffered by the victim of a vicious knife attack.

Note how it is on the top and back of the woman's forearm; it happened when she raised her arm to block her face and head from the assailant's knife.

This is what the vague "F" (yes, vague) really is in the famous Kelly crime photograph. At some point she raised her arm to protect herself. There is no 'F.'

The 'P. M.' (was Lord Salisbury the Ripper?) or P. N. (Polly Nichols?) on the rear wall is arterial spray from Kelly's neck wound.

Barrett has you running around like a headless chicken, my son. These are simply the elements of a deeply vile and disturbing murder; there are no initials on the wall or anywhere else.

Meanwhile, my rather big mouth has caused too much trouble lately, so I'm removing myself from the discussion. I think the prosecution can afford to rest its case.

The floor is entirely yours.

One final post to follow...another image.

[rjpalmer]

The following photograph is a supplement to Post #588.

It is a Bryant & May tin match box, which is likely to be similar to the one found among Kate Eddowes' clothing.

One can't be certain, of course, but my guess is the twelve pieces of rag described in the police inventory list were cotton strips, rolled and used for sanitary purposes, and this is the 'cotton' inside the tin match box, as described in the press release. Thus, Kate never carried around a 'tin match box empty.' Why would she? The box and its contents had become separated at the morgue; that they were 'slightly' blood-stained suggests their original purpose.


Ciao.

[erobitha]

Warning: the following post contains a disturbing photograph of a victim's injuries, so don't scroll down if you find such images upsetting. I usually don't like to post forensic images, but this one illustrates an important point.




The trouble, Ike, is that you have no idea what you're looking at. Bongo Barrett has you hunting for initials and other 'clues' in the carnage of the Mary Kelly photograph, and you oblige him by seeing what he has asked you to see.

Does the following photograph remind you of anything?

It should.

It is a defensive wound suffered by the victim of a vicious knife attack.

Note how it is on the top and back of the woman's forearm; it happened when she raised her arm to block her face and head from the assailant's knife.

This is what the vague "F" (yes, vague) really is in the famous Kelly crime photograph. At some point she raised her arm to protect herself. There is no 'F.'

Can't let this go. All victims were most likely strangled / choked before having their throats cut. In ALL C5 victims autopsy reports this one of the things that is present in all of them. Suffocation then a long cut across the throat.

From Dr Bond's report on MJK "The neck was cut through the skin & other tissues right down to the vertebrae the 5th & 6th being deeply notched. The skin cuts in the front of the neck showed distinct ecchymosis."

Echymosis is deep discolouration of bruising under the skin casued most likely by strangling or choking. The same as the rest of the C5.

So now we are saying MJK was fully conscious and able when Jack started wielding his knife around? Then after slashing and thrusting his knife all over the place he then somehow managed to subdue MJK using his usual methods?

And, those defensive wounds do not look like anything but random cuts. There is nothing random about the cut applied post-mortem on Kelly's forearm. Look at the way the cuts are connected - your example is random and is what you would expect from a defensive wound.

[erobitha]

The following photograph is a supplement to Post #588.

It is a Bryant & May tin match box, which is likely to be similar to the one found among Kate Eddowes' clothing.

One can't be certain, of course, but my guess is the twelve pieces of rag described in the police inventory list were cotton strips, rolled and used for sanitary purposes, and this is the 'cotton' inside the tin match box, as described in the press release. Thus, Kate never carried around a 'tin match box empty.' Why would she? The box and its contents had become separated at the morgue; that they were 'slightly' blood-stained suggests their original purpose.


Ciao.

Ladies sanitary products of that era is actually difficult to to research due to the such taboo nature of menstruation at the time. Your theory cannot be ruled out, but I have some concerns with it.

1) Kate was 46 when she was murdered - in the range of menopause so why would she carry such rags if in fact her periods had stopped? We dont know if she was menopausal.
2) Women's period's can often be heavy, would the suggested rags in such a small match box really be sufficient? I'm not a woman but I'm guessing in those cases it wouldnt be. So we don't how heavy her flow was.
3) From what I can gather more substantial solutions were used. In the more affluent areas of Victorian society they would have used something called a "Doily Belt" or a "Sanitary Apron". these were quite cumbersome but discreet. Obviously Kate was destitute so she did not have such luxury, so your theory has some weight, but without knowing exactly what the cotton looked like 100% we will never know

This one is a score draw.

[Iconoclast]

Hi Erobitha,

You beat me to it - and more eruditely (on the medical terminology) than I would have been.

What Roger has attempted to do in his previous post is to provide people like he who read this site and think that the Victorian scrapbook must be - or needs to be - a hoax with ammunition to firmly keep believing - despite the evidence which stacks up against their position, like the inhabitants of a besieged town who just can’t accept the enemy is at the door and breaking it down.

Here are a few of Roger’s very much less than skilfull dodges.

The letters ARE there if they are seen as ‘PM’ or even - truly bizarrely - ‘PN’ but they are not allowed to be ‘FM’, ever (despite so many commentators here on the Casebook happy to agree that’s that what the shapes look like); in the latter caes they must become arterial blood spray. I’ve never heard of arterial blood spray being quite so articulate as to form a very good clue to the murderer’s identity, but RJ needs it to be in order to keep up the facade that there’s nothing to worry about if you’re a hoax theorist.

The ‘F’ that has been carved so unsubtly on Kelly’s arm - out in front “for all eyes to see”, by the way - has to be defensive wounds. The CORPSE fought back and its defensive wounds were created by the same literate Fate as the arterial blood spray and - miracles! - formed an ‘F’. Wow, that’s chance and a half right there, is it not? ‘F’s all over the place, now. But not there at all according to RJ - so nothing to worry about fellow townfolk, our walls cannot be breached!

And the strange entry about the tin match box empty which may once have held twelve rags and may then have not. I’m unclear how showing us a picture of a thing makes a thing less valuable as evidence (or even more valuable). It’s just a thing and here’s a picture of it. Weird logic. It was interesting to see such a box, but personally my knowledge of the case was not advanced a great deal in the seeing. I see you have added to your earlier post (Erobitha) with some further thoughts about sanitary towels for such ladies of the day, and your observations are really helpful. All RJ has to accept is that - by the time the list of Eddowes’ possessions was formally documented - the tin match box was empty. I’m personally pretty sure that you are right in arguing that the box would have been far too small to have carried any rags never mind twelve, but it doesn’t ultimately matter - by the time it was listed, it was empty. When Maybrick looked in it for a light, it may well have been empty. This stuff just isn’t complicated, is it?

I’m heading-out with the dogs now so will draw a line here, but please people reflect on what RJ is trying to do to your understanding of what lies outside the walls of your town. Those walls are crumbling. I’d get out while you can.

They started crumbling at least as early as 1972, but it turns out we didn’t realise it for half a century ...

Ike

[Graham]

Ike,

Good day! I only poke my snout in here very occasionally these days, but as Dan Farson was (a) one of my favourite blokes and (b) wrote a darn good Ripper book, I'm moved to add a wee comment or two. Farson's book was actually the first Ripper book I ever read, and I still think it's up there with the best of them. I remember shuddering at the photo's, but...I can't say that the 'FM' actually leaped out of the pages at me. And I don't think it leaped out of the pages at any reader of the book, not until Simon Wood spotted it. OK, in fairness, others may have remarked the 'FM' but Simon Wood was well into Ripperology by 1988 and brought it to the attention of the dribbling public. That's not to say that there's nothing on the wall resembling an 'FM' - there is certainly something there that doesn't look like a random marking. But back in 1972 the Maybrick Case, although obviously up and running in the discussions of the well-read and famous, hadn't quite taken off in the way it did once Bongo made his infamous visit to London. To be short, and please don't tear out your hair or take to sackcloth-and-ashes or come looking for me, I can't quite convince myself that the 'FM', if that's what it is, is naughty Jim's little way of getting his own back (or something) on Florie.

I note that RJ quotes Paul Harrison's book 'The Mystery Solved'...well, not quite, as although it wasn't a bad read, Mr H had got his hooks into the wrong Joseph Barnett. But everyone knows that already.

Out with the dogs, what? I think I may have you marked down as an Irish Wolfhound man. You know, like that famous photo of J P Donleavy with his wolfhound....I always wanted to be like him, but that's another story.

Ciao,

Graham

[Iconoclast]

But back in 1972 the Maybrick Case, although obviously up and running in the discussions of the well-read and famous, hadn't quite taken off in the way it did once Bongo made his infamous visit to London.

Morning Graham - roll on June 17, eh???

Back in 1972, no-one would have had any reason to look for any letters on Kelly's wall. The reason to look only came twenty years later when Bongo produced the scrapbook and the scrapbook told us that "An initial here, an initial there, will tell of the whoring mother". And there they were, there all the time, there in 1992, in 1972, in 1899, and - clearly - in 1888.

The Maybrick case was certainly being talked about in 1972, but for very different reasons. In 1970, the 'Wicked Women' TV series featured a haunting version of Florence's story which I have seen but for the life of me cannot now track down. It was particular spooky to watch James Maybrick as portrayed in 1970, long before he would be 'in the dock' himself for other crimes. It was released on March 14, 1970, incidentally - just three months or so before the wonderful hot summer which followed and the greatest World Cup Final of them all.

Cheers,

Ike

[GUT]

Ike,

Good day! I only poke my snout in here very occasionally these days, but as Dan Farson was (a) one of my favourite blokes and (b) wrote a darn good Ripper book, I'm moved to add a wee comment or two. Farson's book was actually the first Ripper book I ever read, and I still think it's up there with the best of them. I remember shuddering at the photo's, but...I can't say that the 'FM' actually leaped out of the pages at me. And I don't think it leaped out of the pages at any reader of the book, not until Simon Wood spotted it. OK, in fairness, others may have remarked the 'FM' but Simon Wood was well into Ripperology by 1988 and brought it to the attention of the dribbling public. That's not to say that there's nothing on the wall resembling an 'FM' - there is certainly something there that doesn't look like a random marking. But back in 1972 the Maybrick Case, although obviously up and running in the discussions of the well-read and famous, hadn't quite taken off in the way it did once Bongo made his infamous visit to London. To be short, and please don't tear out your hair or take to sackcloth-and-ashes or come looking for me, I can't quite convince myself that the 'FM', if that's what it is, is naughty Jim's little way of getting his own back (or something) on Florie.

I note that RJ quotes Paul Harrison's book 'The Mystery Solved'...well, not quite, as although it wasn't a bad read, Mr H had got his hooks into the wrong Joseph Barnett. But everyone knows that already.

Out with the dogs, what? I think I may have you marked down as an Irish Wolfhound man. You know, like that famous photo of J P Donleavy with his wolfhound....I always wanted to be like him, but that's another story.

Ciao,

Graham

Irish Wolfhound is one dog I have always wanted, doubt my health is up to the task now. So will have to put up with my Mini Schnauzer, who is the light of my life.

[erobitha]

The Maybrick case was certainly being talked about in 1972, but for very different reasons. In 1970, the 'Wicked Women' TV series featured a haunting version of Florence's story which I have seen but for the life of me cannot now track down. It was particular spooky to watch James Maybrick as portrayed in 1970, long before he would be 'in the dock' himself for other crimes. It was released on March 14, 1970, incidentally - just three months or so before the wonderful hot summer which followed and the greatest World Cup Final of them all.

Cheers,

Ike

If it the same episode I watched, if any hoaxer was watching it for inspiration we would have Florence being English and James working as a stock broker. Talk about inaccuracies - that is well worth a watch alone for how to twist facts for dramatic purposes.

[caz]

Meanwhile, my rather big mouth has caused too much trouble lately, so I'm removing myself from the discussion...

Not so much your big mouth, R.J, but your ill-founded suspicions. And they have only ever really caused trouble for yourself.

They prove, beyond doubt, your capacity for mis-reading between the lines and coming to the wrong conclusion. I'm not sure which is worse - when your motivation is to try and discredit a professional researcher, or when it is to try and demonstrate that a semi-literate Scouser didn't send you on a horrendously long and fruitless fool's errand with his off and on and off again claims to have created the DAiry on his word ProSSer.

If only Bongo could see the desperate twisting and turning of your more recent posts, believing the frankly unbelievable of him, he would probably have [in his own inimitable writing style]: 'raised his eyebrows to there full capacity'. But he would also have noted that 'there was always an expectation to the rule', so there was bound to be someone, somewhere, in the 21st century, still giving 'tail-tails signs' of having swallowed his untruthful January 1995 affidavit whole. "I may add, there's also a distinct possibility he's telling us, he was quite literately born a bastard!"

'"So who's bloody initials has he left... They could be, his, his mothers, his girlfriends or even, for all I know, his milkman's." Said the Professor...

"Apart from the initials he's emulated from the diary, notice how he written the words: JACKS BACK Ignore the fact he's written them in capitol letters, that's simply to get his massage across. He's written them with the heart, using the victim's blood as an inkwell! I know more than a few professional researchers, who are convinced that's exactly what the Ripper used as a tool, to write the initials on the wall..."'

'"Is there anything else I should know John." He asked, feeling peevish. "Before my breakfast, decides to lever my stomach...'

'"There's only one thing you should beware of!" He replied, as he and Fox turned to leave the hotel room. "And that's today's date. It's the Ninth of the Eleventh! Mary Jane Kelly was killed in the early hours of the morning, on the 9th November 1888. "The killer could of deliberately pick today's date telling us, he has began his own 9/11 atrocities..." Fox shook his head in amazement at his friend's train of thought, as they left the room.'

Fox and me both!

Yes, I know, it's utter twaddle, but that was Mike for you - just a few passages from a 4,600 word chapter of the novel he was hoping to flog to Robert Smith in October 2008, based on 'my personal transcript of The Diary Of Jack The Ripper'. In his covering letter, Mike writes: 'I enclose a S.A.E. for your connivance'.

You just couldn't make up gems like these. Unless your name is Mike Barrett of course.

Love,

Caz
X