What. Other Than Diary and Watch, Points to Maybrick As JtR?

[caz]

Why 'lucky', if these FMs are really there in the photo for all to see? The hoaxer could simply have seized the opportunity to exploit them in a diary claiming that James Maybrick was Jack and murdered the women because of Florie's known infidelity - ingenious.

Except that no FMs were exploited in the making of the diary, or the hoaxer would have written "I left the initials F and M all over the place, yet nobody even noticed them, I was too clever".

The diary author was only 'lucky' in the sense that the initial left here and the initial left there are not spelled out, explained or given actual locations. Not so ingenious, if FMs had been described in detail and later shown to be nothing but photographic effects.

Love,

Caz
X

[Tempus omnia revelat]

[QUOTE=caz;245451]Why 'lucky', if these FMs are really there in the photo for all to see? The hoaxer could simply have seized the opportunity to exploit them in a diary claiming that James Maybrick was Jack and murdered the women because of Florie's known infidelity - ingenious.

But they are still in the photo, so who left them there?

Except that no FMs were exploited in the making of the diary, or the hoaxer would have written "I left the initials F and M all over the place, yet nobody even noticed them, I was too clever".

The diary author was only 'lucky' in the sense that the initial left here and the initial left there are not spelled out, explained or given actual locations. Not so ingenious, if FMs had been described in detail and later shown to be nothing but photographic effects.

Oh dear. If you seriously think that that FM in the 'Front' is a photographic effect caz, then that is up to you. To say that no locations are actually given when he clearly says the 'front' for one of them is to ignore everything the man states.

How can you say that he does not refer to FM? He does not say his name is James Maybrick but you've all come to the conclusion that's who he is.

This is starting to become ridiculous. So let's go through it again, shall we?


When murdering MJK the diarist clearly states that she reminds him of the whore:

'she reminded me of the whore. So young, unlike I.'

So who do we think this 'young' whore is? It's Florence, isn't it? Especially if the diary is a forgery. So, in the mind of the diarist, the murder of MJK is focused on Florence, his wife. Next we have...

'An initial here and an initial there will tell of the whoring mother.'


So, reading this, we can now say that he has left us some initials of the whoring mother in the room. But who is the whoring mother? Well, seeing as how

a) Florence is a mother.

b) Throughout the diary he refers to her as the 'whore' or the 'bitch' and,

c) We now know that Kelly reminds him of his wife.

we can be pretty sure that this is a reference to Florence. Now, what are Florence's initials again? That's right...FM!


We also have further confirmation when he writes:

'All did go, as I did so, back to the whoring mother...'

Who exactly do we think he is returning to after he leaves London? It's Florence. This is simple.


Again, caz, if you think the diary is a forgery then those initials have to refer to Florence, otherwise what's the point of the diary.


Kind regards,


Tempus

[caz]

No need to shout, Tempus.

I have read the diary you know - several times. You keep concentrating on that photo if you must; I prefer to take in the bigger picture and consider this man, supposedly obsessed with initials: those of his victims (scratched in his watch) as well as the 'whoring mother' who is blamed for the bodies piling up. All those initials, taken together or separately, are effectively 'telling' of Florie's infidelity. She is the whoring mother who gave birth to 'Sir Jim's' dastardly deeds.

I don't know what's real in the photo and what's a photographic effect, so I wasn't giving my opinion on that. All I'm saying is that our diarist must have chosen to leave things vague, or it would have been spelled out for us, and you would not now be trying to convince everyone that only your interpretation can be the correct one.

You might well be right about an F shape carved into MJK's arm (by accident or design). I first discussed this possibility years ago, when I suggested that the diarist was referring to this when 'Sir Jim' fantasised about carving his funny little rhyme into his next victim's flesh (where changing the emphasis to 'rhyme' from 'flesh' would imply he had carved something shorter into MJK's flesh). But what if this were proved just a trick of the light and not a deliberately placed F at all? At any time another photo could have surfaced to put paid to the whole idea. So we must ask ourselves why the diarist was so careful not to write anything too specific about the various 'clues' left behind.

Love,

Caz
X

[Tempus omnia revelat]

[QUOTE=caz;245561]No need to shout, Tempus.

I have read the diary you know - several times. You keep concentrating on that photo if you must; I prefer to take in the bigger picture and consider this man, supposedly obsessed with initials: those of his victims (scratched in his watch) as well as the 'whoring mother' who is blamed for the bodies piling up. All those initials, taken together or separately, are effectively 'telling' of Florie's infidelity. She is the whoring mother who gave birth to 'Sir Jim's' dastardly deeds.

We must all concentrate on that photo, caz, because the writer of the diary has specificallty stated that he has left you something in that area.

So you agree that the whoring mother is Florence? Therefore, the initials that he has left consitute the letters FM. Which is what I have been saying all along.
I don't know what's real in the photo and what's a photographic effect, so I wasn't giving my opinion on that. All I'm saying is that our diarist must have chosen to leave things vague, or it would have been spelled out for us, and you would not now be trying to convince everyone that only your interpretation can be the correct one.

You may not know what is real and what is an effect, but I do. The F on her arm is not an effect, caz. It is a real incision made by the murderer. The chemise is not an effect, it is an actual item left by the murderer in that room. I am not talking about smudges or shadows that can be interpreted as shapes, I am talking about actual items created by the killer.

My interpretation is the correct one because it is a deliberately created FM and it is exactly where he said it would be - the front. Forger or not, caz, this is what the diarist is referring to. Whether you like it or not.

You might well be right about an F shape carved into MJK's arm (by accident or design). I first discussed this possibility years ago, when I suggested that the diarist was referring to this when 'Sir Jim' fantasised about carving his funny little rhyme into his next victim's flesh (where changing the emphasis to 'rhyme' from 'flesh' would imply he had carved something shorter into MJK's flesh). But what if this were proved just a trick of the light and not a deliberately placed F at all? At any time another photo could have surfaced to put paid to the whole idea. So we must ask ourselves why the diarist was so careful not to write anything too specific about the various 'clues' left behind.

There is no way you can carve a shape like that on someone's arm without meaning to. It's simple. To call it a trick of the light is to have very little understanding of an actual crime scene. As I have said before: no one is arguing that the cuts above the F are actual cuts, but because this one looks like an F, everyone starts going into ridiculous mode. This is a cut. End of story.

I have already stated that I believe 'the funny little ryhme' bit refers to the F.

Again, caz, you fail to appreciate the significance of the chemise and the reasons why it is where it is. This is exceedingly important to the whole thing.

Kind regards,



Tempus

[Steve S]

Hang on a bit.....Even if one accepts the theory of initials left in the room....Why do they have to be in the area covered by the photo?..And if they ARE in the photo for all to see,why did it take so long before anyone did....?

[RavenDarkendale]

Hang on a bit.....Even if one accepts the theory of initials left in the room....Why do they have to be in the area covered by the photo?..And if they ARE in the photo for all to see,why did it take so long before anyone did....?

They don't necessarily but what could be more front than beside the bed?

@ Porky Man

=Porky Man: the FM appears 3 times, as well you know. there's the one on the wall, there's the more tenuous one you identify (not knocking it, just stating a fact), and there's the fact that MJKs body was left in an FM shape (the arm is across the body in a very implausible way if it wasn't staged that way, and her legs form a very plausible M).

Thank you. I'm glad someone besides me noted the staged position of the body to form an M

http://i94.photobucket.com/albums/l1...e/05-mar10.jpg

Now an aside: The C5 murder sites can be connected to form an M. It has been said by those who espouse the Royal Conspiracy theory that the M was for Masons. Could it have stood for Maybrick? As the diary is still unproven one way or another, and the M formed by the murder sites can also be a W for Walter Sickert, a five point star, occult, and various other shapes de3pending on how you connect them, we will likely never know...

God Bless

Darkendale

PS Sorry I was out of touch for a bit, my first grandson was born in Nashville on Tuesday 11/6/2012.