the diary

[Scott Nelson]

Pinkmoon, you actually know Mike Barrett?

[pinkmoon]

There are actually (at least) two ways that could be argued Jason..and provimg even a high likelihood of either could be something of a challenge...

All the best

Dave

The problem we have Dave is because of all the lies in the first place anything we are told by anyone involved with this diary we will think here we go again yet more lies.I am pretty certain I've worked out how Mr Barrett came to own the diary and own is the key word.I personally believe his wife has no connection to it at all.

[Cogidubnus]

There are actually (at least) two ways that could be argued Jason..and provimg even a high likelihood of either could be something of a challenge...

All the best

Dave

[pinkmoon]

Yes PM, but until and unless Keith Skinner says his piece, if indeed he ever will, we don't know for sure if the 'Diary' ever was actually IN Battlecrease, and even if and when he does, it may well be his word against that of others.

I still think Paul Feldman didn't fully follow up the claim by the electrician that he'd taken the 'Diary' from a skip during alterations to Battlecrease. Very unlike Feldman, once he'd got his teeth into something, so it kind of suggests that he either didn't completely accept the electrician's story, or more likely it suited him not to. Such as the 'Diary' was abstracted from Battlecrease early in its existence and found its way into the possession of the Graham family, for example.

But if you believe that James Maybrick wrote the 'Diary', then by extension it must have been written in Battlecrease, as during the last months of Maybrick's life he didn't leave the place very often. If as most people believe it wasn't written by Maybrick yet spent time inside Battlecrease, then this opens up a whole new can of worms. Come on Keith, let's be hearing from you!

Graham

Hi Graham,Mr Feldman did not follow up the workmen from battlecrease as thoroughly as he did other leads I think the reason being he was convinced Mrs Barrett was a descendant of Florence maybrick.I think when you step back and apply a bit of logic it's not to hard to work out how this diary appeared.

[Graham]

Exactement, mon brave!

Graham

[pinkmoon]

Personally Jason I think Mike Barrett is a poor dupe...I get the impression that half the time he was so pissed he'd hardly any idea what was going on...I hasten to add that this is what I've (perhaps incorrectly) read between the lines from various accounts...lots of us go through a phase like this between starting work and starting a family...most of us grow out of it pretty quickly...some alas do not...

If his missus had wanted to pull the wool or manipulate him, then in his state probably she could've, as easily as blink...she seems to have been the sober backstop of the marital partnership... I never met the guy at all, never mind during the critical years, but is this not your impression? She says she wanted to lift him out of himself and give him some sort of objective in life...well it just about could be...

If there's anybody in modern life holding things back about the origins of the Diary, (and I emphasise it's if), I'd say it'd be Anne...I'd like to see a little more concentration on the possible motives of Anne and a lot less emphasis on Mike who, rightly or wrongly, I tend to see as something of a cypher

All the best

Dave

Evening Dave,I think the answer to the whole diary story is quite straight forward I think Mr barretts wife only agreed to the story about diary been in her family to get rid of any police action aimed at Mr Barrett.I do not think Mrs Barrett had anything to do with this diary and I think Mr Barrett never in a million years expected people to take it so seriously like I've said before he couldn't believe that people took it so seriously.Mr Barrett told me lots of things three things were constant "I only wanted to raise enough money to buy a greenhouse" also"I did not believe they would take it so seriously"

[Cogidubnus]

I suspect then Graham, that like me, you suspect the Diary is an old forgery...which being the case, it'd be somewhat more than interesting to discover the motive behind it's creation!

All the best

Dave

[Graham]

Good points all, Dave. The Diary Debate compared with a few years ago on the pre-crash Forum is weak-kneed, but plainly it still interests a few people, and so it should. Paul Feldman was convinced that the 'Diary' was written by James Maybrick, who therefore was Jack the Ripper. Feldman went to extraordinary lengths (and huge expense) in his attempts to prove his belief, but I for one don't think he was successful. He seemed convinced by Anne's story that the 'Diary' had been known to her since her youth, and that it had been in the Graham family since at least 1940. Unfortunately, his 'interview' with Billy Graham proved nothing. I agree with you that Anne didn't reveal everything she knew about the 'Diary', but unless she is prepared to come on these boards and speak for herself there is little else we can say. I (for one) do not accept that according to the various 'experts' who carried out tests on it that the 'Diary' is a modern production, and if this is indeed the case there are many, many more questions to be asked.

Graham

[Cogidubnus]

Personally Jason I think Mike Barrett is a poor dupe...I get the impression that half the time he was so pissed he'd hardly any idea what was going on...I hasten to add that this is what I've (perhaps incorrectly) read between the lines from various accounts...lots of us go through a phase like this between starting work and starting a family...most of us grow out of it pretty quickly...some alas do not...

If his missus had wanted to pull the wool or manipulate him, then in his state probably she could've, as easily as blink...she seems to have been the sober backstop of the marital partnership... I never met the guy at all, never mind during the critical years, but is this not your impression? She says she wanted to lift him out of himself and give him some sort of objective in life...well it just about could be...

If there's anybody in modern life holding things back about the origins of the Diary, (and I emphasise it's if), I'd say it'd be Anne...I'd like to see a little more concentration on the possible motives of Anne and a lot less emphasis on Mike who, rightly or wrongly, I tend to see as something of a cypher

All the best

Dave

[Graham]

Don't you think it's funny that Mr Barrett has never taken advantage of the opportunity to link the diary to battlecrease I think that is very telling in its self.Also to go to trouble of planting it in battlecrease then not making any attempt to say "look this has come from maybricks old house it must be genuine"again very telling I think.

Yes PM, but until and unless Keith Skinner says his piece, if indeed he ever will, we don't know for sure if the 'Diary' ever was actually IN Battlecrease, and even if and when he does, it may well be his word against that of others.

I still think Paul Feldman didn't fully follow up the claim by the electrician that he'd taken the 'Diary' from a skip during alterations to Battlecrease. Very unlike Feldman, once he'd got his teeth into something, so it kind of suggests that he either didn't completely accept the electrician's story, or more likely it suited him not to. Such as the 'Diary' was abstracted from Battlecrease early in its existence and found its way into the possession of the Graham family, for example.

But if you believe that James Maybrick wrote the 'Diary', then by extension it must have been written in Battlecrease, as during the last months of Maybrick's life he didn't leave the place very often. If as most people believe it wasn't written by Maybrick yet spent time inside Battlecrease, then this opens up a whole new can of worms. Come on Keith, let's be hearing from you!

Graham

[pinkmoon]

Isn't it more significant how the thing got into the Battlecrease house rather than how it came out?

Don't you think it's funny that Mr Barrett has never taken advantage of the opportunity to link the diary to battlecrease I think that is very telling in its self.Also to go to trouble of planting it in battlecrease then not making any attempt to say "look this has come from maybricks old house it must be genuine"again very telling I think.

[Scott Nelson]

Isn't it more significant how the thing got into the Battlecrease house rather than how it came out?

[Graham]

The workmen from battlecrease admitted to drinking in the saddlers pub which was Mr barretts local or should I say second home.I think this fact was not followed up properly by Mr Feldman I think it might tie the whole thing together it links to some of the constants Mr Barrett told me.If we assume diary is not a modern forgery then what could this information tell us.

There's another possibility, that the Battlecrease workmen knew Tony Devereux rather than Mike Barrett at The Saddle, and either gave or sold the 'Diary' to Tony rather than Mike. Maybe Tony thought that it wasn't for him, and passed it to Barrett who did, after all, fancy himself as a writer and had on at least one occasion tried to get something published. As the Devereux daughters swore on all that's holy that they had never seen the 'Diary' at their house or in their dad's possession, could it be that Tony passed it to Mike almost immediately? Pure speculation, of course.

Graham

[pinkmoon]

[QUOTE=Kaz;276214]

Re-read the final chapter, theres a perfectly plausible explanation.

Even if you don't buy the given explanation, how does it change whats written in the diary?

I'm amazed you can meet mike and still consider him the brains behind it all? Mike didn't really benefit from the diary, I'm sure if he had time to go over he'd had had nothing to do with it all, but that would beg the question "would we be here talking about it now"?

Mike Barrett is a bit of a character but when I met him I soon came to the conclusion that he is no master forger like he kept on telling me.I personally would not get involved in anything with him at any level apart from sending him to the corner shop to purchase a newspaper even then something would properly go wrong.A constant thread ran through what he told me which leaves me to believe how he came to own the diary like I said before it's not rocket science.Keith Skinner has meant to have come across some information in 2007 about where Mr Barrett got the diary I think it will be very Similar to what I'm thinking.Mr Feldman was very thorough in some of his research but not as thorough on some of the details close to home which might have disproved his theory.

[Kaz]

[QUOTE=pinkmoon;276211]

Yes the diary needs more work but you've got to admit the way it was "discoverd"harms it greatly why oh why couldn't they just give us the last story about it been in the family in the first place

Re-read the final chapter, theres a perfectly plausible explanation.

Even if you don't buy the given explanation, how does it change whats written in the diary?

I'm amazed you can meet mike and still consider him the brains behind it all? Mike didn't really benefit from the diary, I'm sure if he had time to go over he'd had had nothing to do with it all, but that would beg the question "would we be here talking about it now"?