new info on the diary

[MayBea]

It's good to see members helping out those on the other side of the controversy work out their theory, even if the theory is, as you say, and as I have come to agree, less preferable.

Some, or most, of the best research defending the Diary, or explaining some of the mysteries of the text, has come from the Hoax side. That includes the explanation for the unusual phrasing match box empty which coincidentally matches the phrasing in the police list.

[Sam Flynn]

If it's old, why can't it be real? Why does it have to be some sort of conspiratorial concoction?

And why didn't the contemporary press cuttings (or whatever) stay in the front of the "diary"? Perhaps the missing pages contained actual dates, or referred to events/personages that happened long after the diary was purportedly written.

[MayBea]

Could the missing pages in front of the diary contained cuttings from newspapers concerning jtr murders?.could the diary be a rough draft to be copied out later?could this diary have been written at the time of Mrs maybricks trial to be sold on when she was hung?

The first two questions are reasonable. But isn't the last question still based on the unsustainable (even to some on the Hoax side) Old Hoax theory?

If it's old, why can't it be real? Why does it have to be some sort of conspiratorial concoction?

[Kaz]

Could the missing pages in front of the diary contained cuttings from newspapers concerning jtr murders?.
could the diary be a rough draft to be copied out later?
could this diary have been written at the time of Mrs maybricks trial to be sold on when she was hung?

You shouldn't be having these thoughts as we don't know where the diary came from...

[Sam Flynn]

Hello Gareth.

Hello, Mike. Nice to see you're still fighting the good fight!

[Sam Flynn]

Is the 'genius' forger theory of the modern hoax preferable to the 'insider' theory of the old forgery side?

It is to me, MayBea, much preferable.

Not to get into the middle of the two sides of the hoax fray but why defend new hoax versus old hoax?

I have very good reasons, which I've expounded at length here and elsewhere, so I won't go too deeply into them here. Suffice to say, I find the language of the "diary" point to a certain type of hoaxer, and that some phrases in particular strongly suggest a composition date no earlier than the 1960s, more probably the 1970s or 80s.

[pinkmoon]

Now that I think about it, new hoax is far more preferable to old. Old hoax seems to need a conspiracy and an insider and somebody planting it somewhere where it could only be found by electricians a century later. One, modern forger is far more tenable.

In the interest of working with people's theories instead of just attacking them right away, I'll admit that someone in the 80s could have read up on the Ripper initially, and just based on the initial M theory and "Marlborough Men" rumors, could have searched British history books and come up with Maybrick. Then it was just a matter of getting to work and getting lucky.

That's all the help I'll give the MODERN HOAXers.

Could the missing pages in front of the diary contained cuttings from newspapers concerning jtr murders?.could the diary be a rough draft to be copied out later?could this diary have been written at the time of Mrs maybricks trial to be sold on when she was hung?no way Mike Barrett wrote it and no way any one would be stupid enough to involve Mike Barrett in any scam concerning this diary.we will never know the truth about the diary because of all the lies told by the people involved with it once a liar always a liar.

[MayBea]

Because it's a mystery.

Now that I think about it, new hoax is far more preferable to old. Old hoax seems to need a conspiracy and an insider and somebody planting it somewhere where it could only be found by electricians a century later. One, modern forger is far more tenable.

In the interest of working with people's theories instead of just attacking them right away, I'll admit that someone in the 80s could have read up on the Ripper initially, and just based on the initial M theory and "Marlborough Men" rumors, could have searched British history books and come up with Maybrick. Then it was just a matter of getting to work and getting lucky.

That's all the help I'll give the MODERN HOAXers.

[Kaz]

It's no different than discussing old or new hoax without any idea of the identity of the insider or the forger.

I think we should all go home......O' wait

[MayBea]

Hi all,discussing fine points about the diary isnt really what we should be doing untill we have discoverd where it has come from and where it has been hiding for all these years....

It's no different than discussing old or new hoax without any idea of the identity of the insider or the forger.

[MayBea]

...If Mrs Briggs was Hammersmith, then James Maybrick could not have written the diary. Mrs Briggs did not leave Much Woolton for Earl's Court London (about a mile and a half from Hammersmith) until after 1901.

I had no idea she moved to London. My suggestion is that he called her Hammersmith because her husband, Captain Briggs, was an honorary Major like "Major Hammersmith" in Robert Louis Stevenson's The Suicide Club (1878).

[James_J]

Pinkmoon please read my previous comment addressing this point. Thank you

Regards, James.

[pinkmoon]

Hi all,discussing fine points about the diary isnt really what we should be doing untill we have discoverd where it has come from and where it has been hiding for all these years.please do not suggest I read Mr Feldmans book to enlighten myself about the diarys history because I have and it hasn't.

[Livia]

Livia,
Might you be thinking of the Diary passage "Encountered old friend on the Exchange floor"?

Hammersmith is not referred to as old.

You're right. Hammersmith is not described as old.

If Mrs Briggs was Hammersmith, then James Maybrick could
not have written the diary. Mrs Briggs did not leave
Much Woolton for Earl's Court London (about a mile and
a half from Hammersmith) until after 1901.

[Ginger]

Not to get into the middle of the two sides of the hoax fray but why defend new hoax versus old hoax?

Because it's a mystery.