the diary

[caz]

Feldman was a serious believer in Maybrick as the Ripper, to the extent that it appeared to take over his life. He put a sum of money well into 6 figures into his researches, or so I understand, all but ruining him. He was first and foremost a film and TV producer, and had in mind a movie based on Maybrick as the Ripper, and was looking forward to some serious Hollywood backing, but this all fell apart when the 'experts' proclaimed that the 'Diary' was a modern fake and the hoped-for backers pulled out. I don't know how many copies of his book were sold, but probably nowhere near enough to make up for his personal expenditure in researching and writing it. Caz will have more info on this, I'm sure. I don't think Shirley Harrison made a fortune out of her book either, nor out of the book she wrote with Anne Barrett-Graham as a collaborator called 'The Last Victim'. I've never read it, have to be honest.

Hi Graham,

I've only just caught up with the latest posts since my last visit. All the related info we had by 2003, and considered relevant and important to the saga, can be found in Ripper Diary - The Inside Story. We didn't hold back anything that would have provided more insight into who earned what, and what they sacrificed in return. Generally speaking though, in terms of pounds earned for every waking (and fitfully sleeping) hour spent on the diary, I always say a shelf stacker at Tesco would have come out of it better off financially as well as emotionally.

By the way, Anne wrote the The Last Victim with Carol Emmas, not Shirley, and it was dedicated to Paul Feldman among others.

...IF Anne had made the 'Diary' public independently of her husband, then things may have been viewed in a different light; but she didn't.

I'm not so sure they would have been in the long run. For modern hoax believers, Mike "the God's honest truth" Barrett was a Godsend in some ways (though not in the small matter of being incapable of forging a sick note). But they'd have managed without him. Albert Johnson was the salt of the earth, and nobody who knew him would say a bad word about him, yet they still manage to convince themselves that he was a bandwagon hoaxer, or at the very least led astray by his less than squeaky clean brother. I have no doubt that if Paul Dodd had accepted the diary had been in his house, he'd have been suspected of writing the thing sooner or later, whether he had tried to claim ownership or not. And then of course it would have miraculously changed from the sort of rubbish that Mike could be expected to turn out over a wet weekend, to something with a bit more polish and thought, carefully researched by a teacher.

Have you noticed how the quality of the diary can change like the weather, according to who is suspected of putting it together? It really should be the other way round.

Love,

Caz
X

[caz]

And what about the Maybrick Watch? Genuine, or a scam intended to make a bob or two? If the latter, then it's slightly surprising that its owner Albert Johnson turned down an offer of around $80000 for it from an American collector....

Graham

The problem is, if the watch had been a bandwagon hoax, the hoaxer would surely have waited for the diary to be published first, in order to learn which victims were included or (more importantly) excluded, and whether their faked scratches would even work with the written confession. There is no evidence that the Johnsons and the Barretts knew one another when Albert called Robert Smith to describe his discovery, and therefore nothing to suggest that he could have known what the diary would reveal.

Love,

Caz
X

[Graham]

Hi Caz,

I've managed to retrieve all my 'Diary' books recently, so will have a good read when time permits. Sorry about getting the co-author of The Final Victim wrong - I've never read it, as I said. In fact a long time ago I ordered a copy from Waterstone's or somewhere, and never actually got it.

The Inside Story is now back on my shelf, so I'll read that as the first part of my revision course.

I'm now beginning to wonder if Paul Feldman didn't deliberately play down any Battlecrease connection, as it clashed with his belief that it had been in the Graham family since the year dot, and that the Grahams really were descendants of Jack The Ripper. Seems to me that this makes for a much better tale than the simple finding of some old book in an old house. And as you rightly say, there was a good chance that Paul Dodd could have come in for a pasting on these boards, which wouldn't have bothered Feldman but may have seriously annoyed Mr Dodd.

I mentioned in a previous post that the 'Diary' has often struck me as being written by someone with literary style and inventiveness, but deliberately 'down-tuned' in a way which sometimes works, sometimes doesn't.

I never for an instant doubted the veracity and integrity of Albert Johnson.

Rgds,

Graham

[Stephen Thomas]

the 'Diary' has often struck me as being written by someone with literary style and inventiveness, but deliberately 'down-tuned' in a way which sometimes works, sometimes doesn't.

Hello Graham

It looks to me more like a thicko trying to talk posh.

[Graham]

Hello Graham

It looks to me more like a thicko trying to talk posh.

Maybe, but there's no real evidence that James Maybrick was what you might call upper crust...he comes across to me as a hard-headed Scouse who didn't write a diary of Jack The Ripper. His brother Michael was the posh-o of the family or so it would seem. Now there's a thought....

Graham

[pinkmoon]

Could the diary be a rough draft which was then going to be passed on to some one else who would then write it up copying maybricks handwriting into a proper diary.The missing pages might have contained newspaper cuttings some one had collected at the time of the murders and used this as the source of the diary.

[Livia]

Maybe, but there's no real evidence that James Maybrick was what you might call upper crust...he comes across to me as a hard-headed Scouse who didn't write a diary of Jack The Ripper. His brother Michael was the posh-o of the family or so it would seem. Now there's a thought....

Graham

Actually, there is some evidence that he was better
connected than was first thought, as was Sarah
Robertson.

In 1866, Maybrick attended the wedding, as a groom's
man, of George William Elliot Esq. of Houghton-le-Spring
and Miss Sarah Taylor of Sunderland. Both Elliots, father
and son were MP's. Elliot senior was a self made man
having eventually bought the colliery he worked in when
nine years old. Wedding particulars can be found in the
Newcastle Daily Journal of August 24, 1866, "A Fashionable
Wedding in Sunderland".

Both Elliots, father and son, have wiki pages, for those interested.

Because of the links to Durham, I tried to find a connection
between Sarah Robertson and either the Elliots or the Taylors.
I did find a Christiana Robertson b. 1819 living with the
Reed Taylor family in Newcastle in 1841, but have yet to connect
these Taylors with Miss Sarah Taylor of Sunderland, daughter
of the late Charles Taylor and Ann Green.

Sarah Robertson's first cousin was Sir Alexander Frederick
Bradshaw (son of Sarah Elizabeth Robertson and George
Bradshaw), surgeon general of the RAMC. Earlier this
year his medals came up for sale at Bonham's, fetching
£3,480.

A brief bio:

Surgeon-Major-General Alexander Frederick Bradshaw was born in 1834, he was educated at a private school in Cambridge and qualified for the medical profession at St.Bartholomew's Hospital, London. He joined the Army Medical Department in 1857, joining the 2nd Battalion Rifle Brigade as Assistant Medical Officer the same year. He served with the Battalion through the Mutiny and received the medal with clasp Lucknow. After ten years he transferred as Medical Officer to the Chestnut Troop R.H.A.. During the Afghan War of 1879 he served on the Staff, and received the medal for the campaign.

In 1884 he was Principal Medical Officer to the Zhob Valley Expedition and was mentioned in despatches, while in 1891 he was principal Medical Officer to the Hazara (Black Mountains) Field Force, and was decorated with the C.B., mentioned in despatches and received the India General Service Medal with clasp Hazara. He continued to serve in India until 1895, when he retired. From 1892-95 he was principal Medical Officer to Her Majesty's Forces in India.

He was Honorary Physician to Queen Victoria, King Edward VII and King George V, he was advanced to K.C.B. in 1912, and received an award in 1914 for distinguished service. During WW1 he was Honorary Consulting Physician to the Military Hospitals at Oxford, and in the neighbourhood. He died on the 27th September 1923, aged 88.

[Graham]

No reason at all why James Maybrick shouldn't have made some good society connections - after all, he married the daughter of a wealthy American society matron. Even so, he was engaged in a rough, tough cut-throat trade, certainly not one for the faint-hearted, and it would seem that he was short of dough towards the end of his life. Plus Florence was spending hand over fist, and he was having to cough up on her behalf.

Michael Maybrick was the very epitome of the Victorian self-made man, and worth an absolute fortune when he died, the bulk of his money coming of course from his music, which was extremely popular - he was up there with Sir Arthur Sullivan.

Graham

[Graham]

If you have trouble nodding off tonight, maybe you should have a read of this relatively ancient 'Diary' history from the Forum of a few years ago. Not much, it seems, has changed (apart from the number of posters, that is).

Go to Forums/Discussions/Suspects/Maybrick, James/The Ever Changing Provenance of the 'Diary'.

Graham

[pinkmoon]

If you have trouble nodding off tonight, maybe you should have a read of this relatively ancient 'Diary' history from the Forum of a few years ago. Not much, it seems, has changed (apart from the number of posters, that is).

Go to Forums/Discussions/Suspects/Maybrick, James/The Ever Changing Provenance of the 'Diary'.

Graham

I have a feeling that when we get told the real truth behind the diary we will find it a very straightforward affair.This information discoverd 2007 I'm sure will be available in book form some time soon.

[jason_c]

I think this may be worth viewing for those who are interested in the authenticity of the Diary. The video linked is concerned with the authenticity of a document linked to the Shakespeare authrorship controversy. The Diary is mentioned at about 28-29 minutes in. Peter Bower, a paper historian and analyst, dismesses the Diary. He mostly dismisses it on account of what he claims is the age old tell tale sign of forgeries. That the paper used to write the Diary is not Diary or Journal paper. That it is a photograph album. Now, this will not be news to those interested in the Diary. What mat be of news is Bower's claim that such incongruity is often a tell tale sign a forgery has taken place. That many forgers have come unstuck on this point.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-rLKLBPGG5g

[pinkmoon]

I think this may be worth viewing for those who are interested in the authenticity of the Diary. The video linked is concerned with the authenticity of a document linked to the Shakespeare authrorship controversy. The Diary is mentioned at about 28-29 minutes in. Peter Bower, a paper historian and analyst, dismesses the Diary. He mostly dismisses it on account of what he claims is the age old tell tale sign of forgeries. That the paper used to write the Diary is not Diary or Journal paper. That it is a photograph album. Now, this will not be news to those interested in the Diary. What mat be of news is Bower's claim that such incongruity is often a tell tale sign a forgery has taken place. That many forgers have come unstuck on this point.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-rLKLBPGG5g

"The whole thing about the diary is that it can never be proved but again it can never be disproved" I was told this by Mike Barrett a few years ago and you know what he is dead right.The best we can ever hope for is to find out the truth of how it came into Mr barretts possession that part I think will be very straightforward I think the bit about who wrote it and why we've got no chance on that one.

[Haskins]

It can never be disproved, but it's what you might call a long shot. Roughly on a par with the odds of Elvis crashing-landing a UFO on top of the Loch Ness Monster.

[Cogidubnus]

That's one for the "glub"

All the best

Dave

[pinkmoon]

I would only believe the loch ness monster and Elvis story if it was verified by Lord lucan.