google ngrams

[Herlock Sholmes]

No one has given an actual reason why Michael and Ann couldn’t have fenced the diary. Unless you believe that there’s a secret Guild of Fencers which wouldn’t have allowed non-members like Mike and Anne to participate in the the trade

You're suggesting that Mike and Anne fenced the diary to Robert Smith for £1?

[Lombro2]

£1 seems to be a pittance for the amount of time they supposedly spent on it. I think they spent no time on it so why not get rid of it?

I heard Mike made thousands on the book.

[caz]

How about Devereux and Billy Graham writing the diary in Graham's photo album and Billy taking it with him before Devereux's death. Graham then gives it to his daughter, who gives it to Mike? There's no direct evidence of this, but is it improbable?

Morning Scotty,

I'm not sure if Billy Graham would have had occasion to meet Tony Devereux. It would have been a reasonably easy walk for Mike and young Caroline, between Goldie Street and Fountains Road, but Billy was elderly by then, and lived close to the Barretts - Sleepers Hill if memory serves.

Love,

Caz
X

[caz]

I've run this through an English online translator and what you seem to be asking me is why Mike Barrett, as the forger, would have telephoned a literary agent to say he had Jack the Ripper's diary before he'd physically created it.

The answer is, I think, very simple. There is a financial cost to creating a fake Victorian diary. You need to purchase a blank diary, or similar, ink and nibs. Why spend that money if you end up with a diary no-one's interested in publishing?

So step one is to establish there is interest in the product. Step two is to create the product.

That's probably the most efficient way of doing it.

Are you having a laugh, Herlock?

Mike Barrett never paid for anything. He claimed that Billy gave him the £50 to bid for the photo album, and Anne ended up paying the £25 for the useless 1891 diary.

He also claimed he forged the diary so he could pay the mortgage - which Anne was paying from her salary. She wouldn't have taken it out in the first place if she couldn't afford the repayments and had to rely on Mike to come up with a nice little criminal enterprise.

I don't see Mike as a long con merchant, where he'd have been well aware of how long he might have to wait - before and after the call to Doreen - before the diary could finally be published, if it ever was, and potentially start earning the Barretts enough to cover the mortgage repayments.

Mike was more about instant gratification, like the time he impulsively tried to snatch that old lady's handbag. I doubt his intention was to take her cheque book and practise forging her signature. She'd probably just picked up her pension in cash from the Post Office.

It makes so much more sense that Mike would not have hung around once he clapped his eyes on an old book signed by Jack the Ripper, but seized the opportunity to get in on the act post haste - the same afternoon in fact. Why wait? It was entirely in character for a man who acted and spoke before engaging his brain and could change his game plan more often than his underpants. If he'd been a billionaire he'd have made a bloody dangerous politician in these strange times.

Love,

Caz
X

[caz]

Careful now. Isn't that Caroline Ann Brown's theory that you're kicking to the curb?

Haven't we been told more than once that Barrett was shown 'the old book' down the boozer and immediately ran home and called the literary agent in London and asked her if she was interested in Jack the Ripper's diary--that is, before Barrett had even obtained ownership of it from Ed Lyons?

It's only a hop, skip, and a jump from Mike not owning the diary to the diary not even existing.

The way I see it, the penniless Barrett was a scammer on a budget.

There's no point in investing in a boat and tackle until you know there's fish in the lake.

Mike gave Doreen a false name. If he'd been unable to con Eddie out of the old book, that would have been that. But he evidently thought it was worth a try, and it paid off.

Interesting. My middle name is Anne with an e, and I originally chose the name Caz for this place to make it easier and quicker for people to type if they wished to address me or refer to me.

Now Palmer is typing out my full name - badly - which I only seem to get from people who find my posts strange or tiresome.

I wonder what that signifies?

[caz]

I've covered the red diary purchase on various posts about my 'theory'. People are making it far too complicated than it actually was. I think Barrett already had the photo album with the diary handwriting in it when he made the request for another Victorian Diary. Since Mike probably didn't have anything to do with the original production of the diary, he simply wanted to try his hand at producing his own version and hand that one over to Rupert Crew. Something he could call his own fake. But he attempted to do this after he had already contacted the literary agency to deliver his substitute version, and by so doing, set himself up with a short deadline as far as: 1) Obtaining a suitable blank diary, and 2) Composing his own story of Maybrick as JTR.

I think this was done purely as ego on Mike's part. He didn't want to simply copy the existing text, he wanted to change the story as well, but it turned out to be harder than Barrett thought. Not only was the red diary unsuitable, so with time running out to find another and Mike lacking the ability to revise a long story, he gave up and turned over the diary he already had.

I don't think Anne had anything to do with the diary, other than handing Mike a partially completed cheque for the purchase of the red diary.

That is head and shoulders above Auction Theory, Scotty. Have a gold star.

And pay no attention to anyone accusing you of 'gaslighting', or being 'intimidated' by their Barrett theory of choice, or 'nearly hysterical' when they try to force it down your throat for the millionth time. It's just an insecurity issue.

Love,

Caz
X

[caz]

Again you leave out the conclusive Negative test for Chloroacetamide (same as a paternity test — negative rules) and that the chemical was found in other 19th century inks. For convenience?

Oh yeah! The diary being sealed might account for any 20 year or more discrepancy.

Nothing new nothing real and nothing on topic. Again.

Barrett authorship? Dung theory! Pre-1970s proves it. Thanks for showing us again and again the desperation and senseless effort needed to push the dung ball and keep it from rolling back down the hill.

The watch, the science and the jeweller's rouge proves the Barretts didn't fake the diary.

The watch is the elephant in the room.

It's not a white elephant but the red diary is a red herring.

Love,

Caz
X

[Herlock Sholmes]

£1 seems to be a pittance for the amount of time they supposedly spent on it. I think they spent no time on it so why not get rid of it?

I heard Mike made thousands on the book.

As you love Google so much, why not use it to find out what a fence does? You'll probably come up with something like this:

"A fence will pay a below market price for the stolen goods and then attempt to resell them and make a large profit."

On the other hand, someone who makes "thousands" from the publishing of a book is commonly described as "an author".

[Herlock Sholmes]

Are you having a laugh, Herlock?

Mike Barrett never paid for anything. He claimed that Billy gave him the £50 to bid for the photo album, and Anne ended up paying the £25 for the useless 1891 diary.

He also claimed he forged the diary so he could pay the mortgage - which Anne was paying from her salary. She wouldn't have taken it out in the first place if she couldn't afford the repayments and had to rely on Mike to come up with a nice little criminal enterprise.

I don't see Mike as a long con merchant, where he'd have been well aware of how long he might have to wait - before and after the call to Doreen - before the diary could finally be published, if it ever was, and potentially start earning the Barretts enough to cover the mortgage repayments.

Mike was more about instant gratification, like the time he impulsively tried to snatch that old lady's handbag. I doubt his intention was to take her cheque book and practise forging her signature. She'd probably just picked up her pension in cash from the Post Office.

It makes so much more sense that Mike would not have hung around once he clapped his eyes on an old book signed by Jack the Ripper, but seized the opportunity to get in on the act post haste - the same afternoon in fact. Why wait? It was entirely in character for a man who acted and spoke before engaging his brain and could change his game plan more often than his underpants. If he'd been a billionaire he'd have made a bloody dangerous politician in these strange times.

Love,

Caz
X

Just like I said, Caz, there is a financial cost to creating a fake Victorian diary. You have confirmed that, although you seem to have forgotten about the cost of the pens, nibs and ink etc.

You also have a strange way of distinguishing Anne's money from Mike's. Surely the Barretts' joint income is the relevant income here. If Anne was paying for the mortgage, as you claim (although I have to say that you haven't provided any evidence for the Caz, so are you making an assumption?) it just reduces the Barrett family income pot so that they can't purchase other things.

It's curious, if Mike "would not have hung around", that he waited for over a month to take the diary to London. He did hang around, didn't he?

[Herlock Sholmes]

The watch, the science and the jeweller's rouge proves the Barretts didn't fake the diary.

The watch is the elephant in the room.

It's not a white elephant but the red diary is a red herring.

Love,

Caz
X

Could you explain how "the watch, the science and the jeweller's rouge" can possibly prove that the Barretts didn't fake the diary please Caz?

[rjpalmer]

Mike gave Doreen a false name. If he'd been unable to con Eddie out of the old book, that would have been that.

Now C.A.B. is whistling David Orsam songs? Sounds a lot like what he suggested about Mike trying to sell a non-existent diary: no harm, no foul, no cost, nor further contact if he failed.

So, there you have it, Lombo:

"Why would you call for a rep and say you got an artifact before you get it?"

For the very reason suggested. No point in buying the tackle before you confirm there's fish in the lake and why not use an alias to boot as an exit plan?

Even C.A.B. is forced to create a nearly identical explanation why Mike ran straight to the telephone before he's even ordered that all important 'doppelganger' from Martin Earl so he could see if it could be done before investing with Fast Eddie.

I'm glad we got that settled and it's no longer an issue.

You see, Lombro, the Floorboard Fantasy never happened; it's just a not-very-convincing attempt to create a magical mirror image of what really happened, using the same data and using the same explanations borrowed or appropriated by the diary critics.

It's the same technique used by the Flat Earth Society. It's better if one tips their hat to the same 'lines' used by NASA. It's still not convincing, but it's better.

[rjpalmer]

As you love Google so much, why not use it to find out what a fence does?

In Feldman's video, there's a memorable line where Paul Begg states that he's been 'sitting on the fence for so long that he's at risk of developing piles.'

Perhaps Lombro thinks he was referring to Eddie Lyons or Mike Barrett?

[rjpalmer]

the same explanations borrowed or appropriated by the diary critics.

Before C.A.B. gets too excited, it's early morning here and I meant from the diary critics.

Another odd aspect of the Floorboard Theory is that Fast Eddie Lyons supposedly slipped across The Mersey, traveled to the shopping district up in Liscard, where he anonymously and cautiously sold the watch to the Murphys (despite the watch having been in the family's possession for years) but was at the same time Eddie was also so utterly reckless that he sold the far more distinctive Diary of Jack the Ripper in his local up the street to the loosest set of lips in Liverpool.

Sounds legit.

[Lombro2]

Let me explain the position of the Barrett Believers:

Eddy, the man who stands accused of stealing the diary from Battlecrease, reportedly says he "picked up" another book from there at another time. He's not sure what kind of book it was, except that it was an "old book". That of course makes him innocent of stealing the actual diary!

That's like a guy, who stands accused of stealing the Mona Lisa, saying he picked up another painting from that museum at another time. It was tossed in a skip and he doesn't remember what painting it was except it was an "old painting".

Innocent, I say! INNOCENT!