new info on the diary

[GUT]

G'Day Amanda

I think we're both singing the same words to different tunes. There is next to no chance that he had MPD IF such a thing exists and modern Psychiatry is all but unanimous that it doesn't.

GUT

[Amanda Sumner]

Oh, it exists alright. I've been reading about it. No one could have failed to recognise it. However they no longer call it that but it's now under the umbrella of 'Dissociative Identity Disorder'.
People can change their writing considerably, with DID or not, but there would have been no reason to in M's case if he wrote it as a confession and wanted it found.
I think the pocket watch appearing so soon after the diary was to boost the authenticity of it and somehow the two of them are linked.
It seems strange that one should appear so soon after the other and analysis of the watch appears to be that the etches were done many decades ago which suggests to me that the diary was done at the same time.
But this is only supposition on my part.

The whole subject is certainly intriguing....

[MayBea]

It is not unfeasible to suggest that he did, considering his drug abuse, but even if that caused him to change his writing there would have been certain clues in the way he wrote certain letters. It's almost impossible to disguise one's writing completely apparently, or at least that is what I have read.

Amanda, how many matching idiosyncrasies would you need to conclude a handwriting match? I remember finding three possible ones using the Will and the samples of the Diary online...

Tempus Omni Revelat found numerous letter-formation matches between the Diary and the Ripper letters, but still skeptics are unconvinced. You can find his thread in this section.

[Amanda Sumner]

Amanda, how many matching idiosyncrasies would you need to conclude a handwriting match? I remember finding three possible ones using the Will and the samples of the Diary online

Hello MayBea,
The point I'm making is that there was no reason for Maybrick to change his handwriting while writing a diary, unless he disguised it to hide the fact that it was him, but that seems to me a pointless exercise when he gave that away throughout his book and wanted it found.
He either wrote the diary or he didn't.
He either wrote the will or he didn't.

There would be no point trying to find a handwriting match unless one accepts he wrote one of them.
If he he wrote the diary then the will is forged and must have involved family members and two independent witness's, his friends. I personally feel that this is unlikely.
If he wrote the will, he did not write the diary in my opinion. There was no need for him to change his handwriting.

I think we can all debunk the MPD theory.

As far as how many matches one needs to conclude that two samples of handwriting have been done by the same person, I have no idea. I am not a handwriting expert. Three does not sound very many.

It really does not matter a jot what I think, however, I do find the subject very intriguing. It would be wonderful for the truth to come out one day but, until then, it will remain a source for much speculation.

[GUT]

G'Day Amanda

As far as how many matches one needs to conclude that two samples of handwriting have been done by the same person, I have no idea. I am not a handwriting expert. Three does not sound very many.

I'm not an expert either, but I have worked with some of the best document examiners in the world. I can tell you that all they need is one proven example and the questioned document and they can say either

Likely
Unlikely or
Inconclusive

On them being written by the same person.

It also appears highly unlikely that the will is other than genuine, given the witnesses.

GUT

[pinkmoon]

One thing that always struck me about the diary was why the author claimed ownership of the infamous letters sent to the police it would have been a lot safer for the forger to not include these in the diary.

[MayBea]

I have worked with some of the best document examiners in the world. I can tell you that all they need is one proven example and the questioned document and they can say either

Likely
Unlikely or
Inconclusive

By "one proven example", do you mean one example of the handwriting? I was thinking three individual letters was enough for me, not that it matters either way.

I believe the standard Victorian script taught in schools would be the one that hides one's personality, not the Normal Script. That's why on the page with Kurten's handwriting, taken from the Kurten book, it says Kurten's Normal Handwriting above the two natural and strange scripts.

[GUT]

G'Day Maybea

Yes one sample that is known to belong to someone and then they can say the likelihood of another being written by the same person.

I believe the standard Victorian script taught in schools would be the one that hides one's personality, not the Normal Script.

Personality is another issue all together and falls into graphology [or perhaps even hocus pocus IMHO]

Handwriting analysis is about WHO wrote something, not personality and relies on letter formations, lifts, pressure and the like.

Document examiners really don't like to work off photocopies, they want the real thing.

I sat through a 2 hour presentation by a man regarded by many as the best in world recently and honestly as far as I was concerned he could have gone on all day, it was fascinating the things they look at. Blowing up single letters 1000X and comparing them.

GUT

[Amanda Sumner]

G'Day Amanda



I'm not an expert either, but I have worked with some of the best document examiners in the world. I can tell you that all they need is one proven example and the questioned document and they can say either

Likely
Unlikely or
Inconclusive

On them being written by the same person.

It also appears highly unlikely that the will is other than genuine, given the witnesses.

GUT

Hello Gut,
Only one? That's really interesting. I know that I read somewhere that it is virtually impossible to disguise one's handwriting.
I'm sure that the experts have not found a link between the two documents, so in their opinion Maybrick did not write the diary. At least, as far as I know. Maybe more tests have been done on it since.
Certainly there seems no valid reason why Maybrick should have felt the need to change the style of his writing.
What is interesting though is the amount of detail in the diary.
Someone did a lot of research, but why Maybrick?
It is interesting that there is an alleged connection between Mrs Maybrick and Ms Graham. Maybe that is where the mystery lies. Ms graham has said that her father passed it down to her and he got it from his step mother(?)
Supposing there was a bastard child and the plan was, initially, to make money from the family when Mr Maybrick died. Only legitimate children could inherit... I'm possibly going off into flights of fantasy now, but the answer does lie, as I've said before, among those that brought the diary into the limelight. In my opinion.

[GUT]

G'Day Amanda

I'm inclined to agree that that's where the answer [if that is there is one] lies.

G.U.T.

[MayBea]

Personality is another issue all together and falls into graphology [or perhaps even hocus pocus IMHO]

Handwriting analysis is about WHO wrote something, not personality and relies on letter formations, lifts, pressure and the like....

By personality, I really meant individuality or creativity in letter formation and writing style.

But handwriting examiners don't seem to have much more success than graphologists anyway. If Straight Dope is any indication, they're only right about half the time for positives.

The experts were frequently wrong--in one test "the true positive accuracy rate of laypersons was the same as that of handwriting examiners; both groups were correct 52 percent of the time."

http://www.straightdope.com/columns/...-legit-science

[MayBea]

Here you can see the page from the Kurten book, translated from the German.

I wondered why it said Kurten's Normal Handwriting below the first sample and above the other two. It must be because the two below are considered natural.

[GUT]

G'Day

I really have doubts about straightdopes figures, but training and examination is probably different around the world, I know that here they are frequently tested by the submission of known handwriting and are right a lot more than 52% of the time.

By the way no half decent examiner will say it is or it isn't they'll say it is likely or consistent, or unlikely or inconsistent or inconclusive.

GUT

[GUT]

G'Day MayBea

And that same great source, straightdope, calls into question fingerprints?

As I said there may be a difference in countries applying standards of testing and examination.

GUT

[GUT]

One thing I did forget to say is that Forensic Document Examiners generally prefer a known document that is written at close to the same time as the questioned document.

G.U.T.