Originally posted by Yabs
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
New Book: The Maybrick Murder and the Diary of Jack the Ripper
Collapse
X
-
The problem we have Ike is that only those willing to look beyond the superficial and try to understand why such a thing would exist are the ones most likely to be convinced that there is something worth investigating here.
Its all too easy to dismiss the Maybrick document outright for any frivolous reason you choose to find, there seems to be many. I believe Chris Jones has merely collated such reasons he has found, but I’m open to him having a smoking gun.
However, the inconvenient truth is that Mike never provided one jot of evidence that he forged it. There is no evidence at all that Ann did it. Yet, it exists. Someone wrote it and wrote it for a reason.
Then there is the watch. The watch for me is the crux of all of this and is actually why the diary exists in my view.Last edited by erobitha; 09-03-2022, 06:43 AM.
- Likes 1
Comment
-
Hi ero b,
Originally posted by erobitha View PostThe problem we have Ike is that only those willing to look beyond the superficial and try to understand why such a thing would exist are the ones most likely to be convinced that there is something worth investigating here. Its all too easy to dismiss the Maybrick document outright for any frivolous reason you choose to find, there seems to be many. I believe Chris Jones has merely collated such reasons he has found, but I’m open to him having a smoking gun.
However, the inconvenient truth is that Mike never provided one jot of evidence that he forged it. There is no evidence at all that Ann did it. Yet, it exists. Someone wrote it and wrote it for a reason.
If anyone chooses to believe Barrett's story - and they have to pick out which bits they want to believe - we should all be asking ourselves how reasonable that process is, and Society's Pillar 2025 will definitely help everyone to do that. It's going to be brilliant, I suspect.
Then there is the watch. The watch for me is the crux of all of this and is actually why the diary exists in my view.
By the way, I asked the Lord Orsam to review SocPill because I couldn't be arsed to check any of my facts (I was working full time at the time, for goodness sake - I needed a lackey to step in to save me the effort), and I knew his ego would rise to my challenge and therefore do it for me. Eventually, I'll read it and - if he ever makes a cogent, rational argument which corrects something I've written - I'll edit it appropriately (or just delete it). If he doesn't, I'll just shred it (or file it under 'Mince').
Palace at home this afternoon, ero b - could do with three points after that heart-wrenching last nanosecond at Anfield on Wednesday evening. I don't know if you have a footy team, young man, but - if you do - I hope they extract three points too today, assuming they're playing.
Yer old pal,
Ike
- Likes 1
Comment
-
Originally posted by Iconoclast View Post
**** me, I didn't realise you gave your name at the foot of your post, Tristan. Lot easier than Lostmandrake or whatever the hell your username is.
At least answer me this (it's mega-massively simps, mate): Why would you expect James Maybrick to be anything other than a 'second rate writer'? Aside from merchanting cotton (******* easy life), what classics of literature did he bash out on his old Remington?
Ike
Best wishes,
Tristan
Comment
-
Originally posted by Losmandris View Post
Probably not but then I would not expect him to write in the style of a second rate paper back either. To me it reads as if it is meant to be read by an audience rather that as something personal. Its a bit too salacious and sleay souding to me. Again just calling it as I see it!
Just asking for a friend ...
Comment
-
Probably a bit off topic, but Ike, can you comment on the positioning of the "FM" on Kelly's wall? To me, it seems to be written too low without the writer having to awkwardly bend over in front of the bed or squat down behind it. And the supposed initials may have been totally obscured by the bed and her body had the photographer taken the picture from a different angle.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Scott Nelson View PostProbably a bit off topic, but Ike, can you comment on the positioning of the "FM" on Kelly's wall? To me, it seems to be written too low without the writer having to awkwardly bend over in front of the bed or squat down behind it. And the supposed initials may have been totally obscured by the bed and her body had the photographer taken the picture from a different angle.
Comment
-
Originally posted by paul g View PostVAR cost us dearly.
Never a foul in a million years.
Just watching MoTD on iPlayer and Shearer is giving the VAR officials a right rogering up the rectal area. Leeds denied a stonewall penalty, Wet Spam denied a beautiful finish (even though the ref gave the goal to begin with), and Newcastle robbed of a goal (even though the ref gave the goal to begin with) for an infringement on our own player! You couldn't make it up, you really couldn't. 'Minimum interference, maximum impact' VAR trumpeted when it was brought in. Well, it's gradually eroded into 'Minimum insight, maximum insanity'. Wilson's 'goal' chalked-off against Brighton, a blatant tug on Longstaff produces no penalty, Schar gets pole-axed against Citeh (no penalty), Isak is 'offside' by an atom at most against Liverpool, and now this disgraceful decision. The VAR doesn't do his job and to make sure the ref can't disagree, he only shows the angle where the push on Willock into the goalkeeper can't be seen - so of course the ref's going to chalk it off! The Wet Spam one was far far worse. I'd be raging if I was an Unhappy Hammer right now.
On a positive note, Michael Oliver had the gonads to finally be the first ref this season to go to the monitor and stick with his decision (to award a penalty to Forest). VAR is supposed to identify 'clear and obvious errors' and Oliver knew he hadn't made a clear and obvious error (a debatable one, yes, but then that's his job to interpret it). I can understand why the VAR asked him to check it, but I am delighted on behalf of all football fans that Oliver didn't assume the checking his decision meant he had to overturn it. First time this season but - after yesterday's disaster for VAR - you watch, it will now become the norm for refs to check and then stick with their original decision.
Absolutely raging ...
Ike
Comment
-
Originally posted by Scott Nelson View PostProbably a bit off topic, but Ike, can you comment on the positioning of the "FM" on Kelly's wall? To me, it seems to be written too low without the writer having to awkwardly bend over in front of the bed or squat down behind it. And the supposed initials may have been totally obscured by the bed and her body had the photographer taken the picture from a different angle.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Harry D View Post
The killer made sure to awkwardly position himself to write it low-down on the wall, where it was conveniently just caught on camera.
Not!
From Scotty Nelson:
To me, it seems to be written too low without the writer having to awkwardly bend over in front of the bed or squat down behind it.
And the supposed initials may have been totally obscured by the bed and her body had the photographer taken the picture from a different angle.
Cheers,
Ike
Comment
-
Originally posted by John Wheat View PostThe Diary was written by The Barrett's.
Minor detail, but what actual hard proof is that either of them created it? Drunken confessions? Phantom auction tickets? Phantom auctions? Phantom ink? Phantom linseed oil?
Has there been one iota of evidence that actually confirms a Barrett hoax?
The answer remains no.
Comment
-
Originally posted by erobitha View Post
That solves it then.
Minor detail, but what actual hard proof is that either of them created it? Drunken confessions? Phantom auction tickets? Phantom auctions? Phantom ink? Phantom linseed oil?
Has there been one iota of evidence that actually confirms a Barrett hoax?
The answer remains no.
Comment
-
Originally posted by erobitha View Post
That solves it then.
Minor detail, but what actual hard proof is that either of them created it? Drunken confessions? Phantom auction tickets? Phantom auctions? Phantom ink? Phantom linseed oil?
Has there been one iota of evidence that actually confirms a Barrett hoax?
The answer remains no.
Comment
Comment