Who were they?

[Iconoclast]

Hey Jay, Eddie wasn't attempting to sell it himself. He didn't have it and it wasn't his to sell. If he told a potential buyer the Diary of Jack the Ripper was for sale, he was likely trying to make a small marketing commission, which Mike duly nixed.

When Eddie supposedly met with Robert Smith with Mike, it may have been to provide a backup for the story of a floorboards provenance. As it stood, Eddie only heard from other electricians about a book being found some time before that March date. If Eddie told Smith he found the Diary under floorboards, it was likely a cover story to boost an acceptable provenance.

Seems like a lot of effort on Eddie's part to sustain a story which implicates him in theft even though he - by your own admission - made no money out of the tale. When he met Robert Smith in The Saddle in late June 1993, if he was innocent of all charges, he could and should have simply said, "I was told a story, Robert, about a Jack the Ripper diary having been found many years ago. I never saw it, and therefore I have no way of knowing if it was true".

Instead, he whittered on about throwing an old book (which he hadn't seen, it seems) into a skip (which didn't exist).

For the record, a year or so ago, I emailed Robert Smith with a photograph of Eddie Lyons and he identified him unequivocally as the man he had met in the pub all those long years ago. Now, you might not trust Robert Smith so this may make no difference to your equivocation over whether this meeting occurred or not (after all, Eddie Lyons denied it), but I have no reason to mistrust Robert and I would politely ask why you would (if you do).

[caz]

What planet am I on? I'm not delusional unlike many on this thread. The diary is poorly written you make out it's a literary masterpiece. Mike Barret could easily have written the diary.

Ridiculous.

[caz]

STURE BERGWALL MADE IT ALL UP

As reported by The Guardian, Sture Bergwall was until very recently Sweden's most famous serial killer. Claiming to have an alter ego named Thomas Quick, Bergwall confessed to dozens of murders throughout the 1990s, and was convicted of eight of them. He's lived in a psychiatric hospital for the criminally insane for most of his adult life, and is about as famous in Sweden as one can be.

In 2001, Bergwall suddenly withdrew from public life. A reporter became curious and began looking into Bergwall's life and crimes—and discovered something shocking: There was no actual evidence that Bergwall had killed anyone. All the police had were his confessions, and many of those had been offered while Bergwall was heavily medicated. When asked about these inconsistencies, Bergwall easily admitted he'd lied. He'd never killed anyone.

As it turns out, this should have been obvious. Bergwall's confessions frequently got all the details of his supposed murders wrong, and even a cursory examination of Bergwall's movements over the course of his lifetime showed that several of the murders he'd confessed to would have been impossible for him to have committed. It often took police years of painstaking work to force evidence to conform to his confessions. Bergwall was eventually cleared of all charges and released from the hospital into private treatment.

It's remarkably easy to find this stuff on the internet. This one took me about 5 minutes to decide to quote but there were others too (many others!)?

Here's the rub, though:

There was no actual evidence that Bergwall had killed anyone.
All the police had were his confessions, and many of those had been offered while Bergwall was heavily medicated.
When asked about these inconsistencies, Bergwall easily admitted he'd lied.
Bergwall's confessions frequently got all the details of his supposed murders wrong.

Does any of this sound even vaguely familiar? A man experiencing emotional challenges confesses to something but is unable to prove he did any of it, offers details which are inconsistent, got all the details wrong, and even on occasions admitted he'd lied?

But he admitted doing it! Of course he did it! He must have done it - he confessed, didn't he???

Great post, Ike.

Nobody seems to be curious about why a man like Mike Barrett, who found lying as easy as breathing, would have confessed in the first place if he had faked the diary. Scotland Yard were no longer interested. There's a reason why guilty liars will say or do anything to avoid accepting any blame or responsibility for their own wrongdoing.

Can anyone imagine what would make Boris Johnson offer an unsolicited confession to having ever done anything wrong in his entire life? Even with pie crumbs all round his mouth, he would deny eating pie, or blame someone else for ambushing him with pie. "I wasn't there." "It wasn't me."

It doesn't take a genius to work out that people like Boris and Mike are not the men who will be blamed for nothing.

If Mike ever stole something valuable, or made loads of money out of someone else's stolen property , would he ever have confessed to it in a million years?

Would he buggery!

Love,

Caz
X

[John Wheat]

this entire thread, and any other diary post, belongs in pub talk. The diary has as much to do with ripperology as Bigfoot does with zoology lol

Hi Abby. I've come to the conclusion that it's pointless trying to educate the stupid.

[Scott Nelson]

Hi Scott. It still does not explain why Eddie was attempting to sell it himself or that he told another electrician that he found something important. Why would Mike go and visit Eddie threatening him with legal action? Why did Eddie go with Mike to meet with Robert Smith?

I’m struggling to make the above fit with your theory.

Hey Jay, Eddie wasn't attempting to sell it himself. He didn't have it and it wasn't his to sell. If he told a potential buyer the Diary of Jack the Ripper was for sale, he was likely trying to make a small marketing commission, which Mike duly nixed.

When Eddie supposedly met with Robert Smith with Mike, it may have been to provide a backup for the story of a floorboards provenance. As it stood, Eddie only heard from other electricians about a book being found some time before that March date. If Eddie told Smith he found the Diary under floorboards, it was likely a cover story to boost an acceptable provenance.