new info on the diary

[James_J]

I understand exactly what you are saying, however I'm not sure that you understand my questions? I agree that Michael Barrett may have made claims in the interest of financial gain and that the origins of the Diary have nothing to do with Mr. Barrett. Based on the current evidence, that leaves only one conclusion ;The Diary could only have come from two possible sources:

[1] The Diary was stolen from Battlecrease Mansion between 1988-89

[2] The Diary was passed down through the Graham family - as concluded by P. Feldman.

I hope to ascertain enough evidence to establish which of these sources is the true origin of the Diary. Any assistance in regard to either of these sources would be greatly appreciated!

Regards, James.

[pinkmoon]

I understand exactly what you are saying, however I'm not sure that you understand my questions? I agree that Michael Barrett may have made claims in the interest of financial gain and that the origins of the Diary have nothing to do with Mr. Barrett. Based on the current evidence, that leaves only one conclusion ;The Diary could only have come from two possible sources:

[1] The Diary was stolen from Battlecrease Mansion between 1988-89

[2] The Diary was passed down through the Graham family - as concluded by P. Feldman.

I hope to ascertain enough evidence to establish which of these sources is the true origin of the Diary. Any assistance in regard to either of these sources would be greatly appreciated!

Regards, James.

My dear James,IF the diary was in Mrs Barretts family why all the lies.Surely to God anybody with any sense would know the potential value of this historical document so there would be no need at all to lie.

[James_J]

Unfortunately I do not believe it was quite that simple. Given the media frenzy which surrounded the Diary, it is natural to assume that Mrs. Graham may have initially rejected ownership or prior knowledge of the Diary. We must also remember that Mrs. Graham had a young to daughter and elderly father to protect from the press throughout this period. Since the publication of Feldman's research, Mrs. Graham has maintained her assertion that the Diary had been passed down through her family.

I do not believe that the evidence permits us to discard the assertion that the Diary was passed down through the Graham family. Paul H. Feldman conducted important interviews with members of the Graham family which appear to support this theory.

If you are inclined to doubt Mrs. Graham, you must also consider the possibility that the electricians who were contracted to Battlecrease Mansion, may not be honest either. It is not unreasonable to assume that in the interest of financial or personal gain, the electricians, or Mr. Dodd may seek to claim ownership of the Diary at the expense of truth. These are important points which must be considered be for any reasonable conclusion can be drawn.

Kind regards, James.

[pinkmoon]

Unfortunately I do not believe it was quite that simple. Given the media frenzy which surrounded the Diary, it is natural to assume that Mrs. Graham may have initially rejected ownership or prior knowledge of the Diary. We must also remember that Mrs. Graham had a young to daughter and elderly father to protect from the press throughout this period. Since the publication of Feldman's research, Mrs. Graham has maintained her assertion that the Diary had been passed down through her family.

I do not believe that the evidence permits us to discard the assertion that the Diary was passed down through the Graham family. Paul H. Feldman conducted important interviews with members of the Graham family which appear to support this theory.

If you are inclined to doubt Mrs. Graham, you must also consider the possibility that the electricians who were contracted to Battlecrease Mansion, may not be honest either. It is not unreasonable to assume that in the interest of financial or personal gain, the electricians, or Mr. Dodd may seek to claim ownership of the Diary at the expense of truth. These are important points which must be considered be for any reasonable conclusion can be drawn.

Kind regards, James.

My dear James,Why can't we sort this out with a bit of old fashioned common sense and a bit of modern D.N.A testing.If mrs Barrett is a Maybrick then why not prove it the family history of the diary is proved and we can all live happily ever after.Mr Feldman did not pursue the electricians angle with much effort why?.I know this diary is very tempting to people to solve the most famous murder mystery of all time but don't get sucked in and waste your time and money.There was no need at all for the Barrett s to lie about this diary in the first place .If I can locate Mr Barrett I will try and get a phone number for you someone else on here has asked if I can locate Mr Barrett as well so hopefully I will be able to assist you as well.

[MayBea]

My dear James,Why can't we sort this out with a bit of old fashioned common sense and a bit of modern D.N.A testing.

Hello all,
DNA testing can now be done for a reasonable price, kits even sent to parties free of charge, and they can find familial relationships up to fifth cousin.

You'd have to find a cousin of Florence Chandler though. Here is a good place to start.
http://www.findagrave.com/cgi-bin/fg...&GRid=80603060

P.S. Actually, I think you can test for American origins including indigenous ones. Since the Grahams were part of the original Virginia colony, they would have both. Then you would only need one sample to test.

[James_J]

Thank you for your help. I appreciate your assistance and theories about the Diary. However, I do not clearly understand your argument. Perhaps for clarity you could state plainly your position on the Diary ? I believe the Diary is genuine - but can only speculate whether the Diary came from Mrs. Graham or Battlecrease. Expert opinion is also divided on this point.

Obviously, a DNA test that definitively proved Mrs. Graham had descended from Florence Maybrick would valid her assertion that the Diary had been passed through her descendants. However, the chances that this could ever be performed with the consent of Mrs. Graham is slender.

In such light, I believe the most efficient & valuable research should focus on attaining definitive proof that the Diary was or was not stolen from Battlecrease. I believe Rhodes Electrics hold the answer. Without a DNA test to validate Mrs. Graham's story, this appears to the only reasonable method to establish the true origin of the Diary.

In regards to Mike Barrett, any contact is undoubtedly important. I would be interested to hear & assess his current view of the Diary.

Regards, James.

[Kaz]

Thank you for your help. I appreciate your assistance and theories about the Diary. However, I do not clearly understand your argument. Perhaps for clarity you could state plainly your position on the Diary ? I believe the Diary is genuine - but can only speculate whether the Diary came from Mrs. Graham or Battlecrease. Expert opinion is also divided on this point.

Obviously, a DNA test that definitively proved Mrs. Graham had descended from Florence Maybrick would valid her assertion that the Diary had been passed through her descendants. However, the chances that this could ever be performed with the consent of Mrs. Graham is slender.

In such light, I believe the most efficient & valuable research should focus on attaining definitive proof that the Diary was or was not stolen from Battlecrease. I believe Rhodes Electrics hold the answer. Without a DNA test to validate Mrs. Graham's story, this appears to the only reasonable method to establish the true origin of the Diary.

In regards to Mike Barrett, any contact is undoubtedly important. I would be interested to hear & assess his current view of the Diary.

Regards, James.

Good luck in getting someone to admit to theft and a possible criminal record. Surely the owner of battlecrease has already twisted some arms about it anyway?

Caz doesn't believe anne graemes story which surprises me somewhat, I can perfectly understand a lady with a young daughter not wanting it common knowledge they're descended from Jack the ripper...


What you need is barrett to take a lie detector test, can't see it happening.... unless you've got plenty of money

[James_J]

Unfortunately you are right. The likelihood is that nobody will readily confess to finding the Diary. One might hope that given the historical significance of the Diary, those involved may be able to see the greater good and give an honest account of events. I am also pleased that you share my view on Mrs. Graham. The evidence does not yet permit us to discount her version of events.

I am not sure what fresh insight can emerge from M. Barrett taking a lie detector test. For reasons mentioned previously, I do not believe that Mr. Barrett can offer any fresh insight into the origins of the Diary. He has consistently stuck to his original story that he was given the Diary by Mr. Devereux -[aside from his false confession that he had forged the Diary]. At this point, I am inclined to believe that this version of events is correct. Paul H. Feldman & Barrett's daughter supported his claims. The real question is how Mr. Devereux came into possession of the Diary.


James.

[pinkmoon]

Thank you for your help. I appreciate your assistance and theories about the Diary. However, I do not clearly understand your argument. Perhaps for clarity you could state plainly your position on the Diary ? I believe the Diary is genuine - but can only speculate whether the Diary came from Mrs. Graham or Battlecrease. Expert opinion is also divided on this point.

Obviously, a DNA test that definitively proved Mrs. Graham had descended from Florence Maybrick would valid her assertion that the Diary had been passed through her descendants. However, the chances that this could ever be performed with the consent of Mrs. Graham is slender.

In such light, I believe the most efficient & valuable research should focus on attaining definitive proof that the Diary was or was not stolen from Battlecrease. I believe Rhodes Electrics hold the answer. Without a DNA test to validate Mrs. Graham's story, this appears to the only reasonable method to establish the true origin of the Diary.

In regards to Mike Barrett, any contact is undoubtedly important. I would be interested to hear & assess his current view of the Diary.

Regards, James.

Hi James my dear,Just to let you know speaking to Mr Barrett will get you no where fast he is a loon because of this diarys value nobodys going to admit stealing it and nobody's going to admit forging it apart from Mr Barrett depending on which moods he's in.Please don't waste you time and money on this when I first met Mr Barrett I was excited and over the moon that I could solve this mystery then you get to talk to Mr Barrett and its oh dear oh dear.I do believe the diary is an old document not written by Maybrick but by someone wanting to make a quick buck on the back of Florence trial and the diary has resided in battlecrease for a long time.

[James_J]

Dear Pinkmoon, I appreciate your concern but please do not worry. I do not believe that Mr. Barrett can offer any fresh insight as to the provenience of the Maybrick Diary. I am NOT going to waste time, money or resources in the pursuit of information which is not of value! However, I do appreciate your concern!

I am curious as to your view on the Diary. How do you suppose that a forger could have possibly obtained the adequate knowledge of the Ripper case, to include references such as the empty tin matchbox - [found at with the body of Catharine Eddowes.] These facts were known ONLY by police officials & the Ripper. They were not publicly known before 1987. There is NO conceivable way that the Diary is the work of an old forger. The dates do not permit that conclusion.

Kind Regards, James.

[pinkmoon]

Dear Pinkmoon, I appreciate your concern but please do not worry. I do not believe that Mr. Barrett can offer any fresh insight as to the provenience of the Maybrick Diary. I am NOT going to waste time, money or resources in the pursuit of information which is not of value! However, I do appreciate your concern!

I am curious as to your view on the Diary. How do you suppose that a forger could have possibly obtained the adequate knowledge of the Ripper case, to include references such as the empty tin matchbox - [found at with the body of Catharine Eddowes.] These facts were known ONLY by police officials & the Ripper. They were not publicly known before 1987. There is NO conceivable way that the Diary is the work of an old forger. The dates do not permit that conclusion.

Kind Regards, James.

My dear James,it is quite possible that empty tin matchbox was printed in some newspaper at the time and it hasn't been discoverd or perhaps a tin matchbox was a common thing to carry who knows?The diary might originally have had press cuttings of the ripper murders stuck in the missing pages.Also might the diary have been a rough draft to be written up later in a tidy more genuine way in a nice posh expensive diary who knows.Like I said before what ever we are now told will we believe it because of all the lies in the first place.I think James Maybrick makes a very good suspect especially his drug addiction which might explain our killers boldness.

[James_J]

Interesting theories. However, the extensive research conducted by Paul H. Feldman, Shirley Harrison, Carol Emmas, Kieth Skinner and Paul Begg could find NO public reference to the empty tin matchbox, or indeed other references made by the author of the Diary. Feldman states ; "The fact is that the empty tin matchbox did not appear in any press report at the time. As happens today, police held back information from the press that only the murderer would know." He continues; "He [the forger] could not have known that the "Tin match box, empty" was held back from the media without checking every newspaper report of the period - something we were forced to do." [1997]

We must also consider the nature of these references. Many are written as off-hand remarks or rhymes. Any forger, [that was lucky enough to stumble across these confidential details] would surely have placed emphasis on their inclusion.

I have recently contacted Professor David Canter, [Investigative Psychologist at Liverpool University] who examined the Diary in 1997. He was not of the opinion that the Diary was a forgery, basing his conclusions from the psychological accuracy of the Diary [13.12.13]. Professional graphologist Hannah Koren, categorically stated that the Diary could not be written by a forger. She stated; "The handwriting is fluent; it has not been copied. It was written as it was thought. Secondly, it is not a disguised hand. It is completely natural. Finally, the handwriting has so many complications and disturbances that it could only have been written by the individual who felt these emotions." [23.12.92]

In the whole, the questions you have raised are conclusively answered by Paul H. Feldman - The Final Chapter. The extensive research and considered, responsible conclusions drawn by Feldman & his team of dedicated researches have convinced me that the Diary cannot be an old forgery. In my opinion, the Diary is genuine and could only have been written by the Ripper - James Maybrick.

[Stephen Thomas]

I am curious as to your view on the Diary. How do you suppose that a forger could have possibly obtained the adequate knowledge of the Ripper case, to include references such as the empty tin matchbox - [found at with the body of Catharine Eddowes.] These facts were known ONLY by police officials & the Ripper. They were not publicly known before 1987. There is NO conceivable way that the Diary is the work of an old forger. The dates do not permit that conclusion.

Quite right, James.

Or that Maybrick or an old forgery could second guess an unknown police report that uses the particular sequence of words 'tin matchbox empty'.

[RavenDarkendale]

Not if the "old forger" were a member of the police force. Not if the "old forger" gains this knowledge because the detectives talk over their pints at the pub. The inclusion of private information doesn't make the diary real if we consider the two preceding points. Then too, in the event diary is actually real (Written by JtR) doesn't make James Maybrick guilty, someone could have been framing him but he died before they could implement their plan. And of course it could be a new forgery. The case of the Mormon Documents comes to mind. Had Mark Hoffman not been so greedy, he would have gotten away with his first forgeries. And recall Piltdown Man and how long it was before the forgery was found?

[pinkmoon]

What ever has or hasn't happened if it was forged,stolen,found,passed down through the family line,crashed to earth via an asteroid or even sent through a hole in time the whole connection to everything happening seems to be the electricians drinking in Mr Barretts second home the saddlers arms.This wasn't followed up properly by Mr Feldman because it didn't fit into his theory of Mrs Barrett been a Maybrick which she isn't if she was a simple d.n.a test would solve everything.