Vote the Diary

[caz]

If the owner(s) of the diary were interested in putting a case to "the Jury" the diary could be independently examined, without book deals or affidavits or dodgy providence on dodgy providence. This will not happen as this item is accumulating value just through keeping it tucked away.

Hi DD,

Is this your opinion, or are you an authority on how hoaxes become more valuable the longer they are 'tucked away' unexamined?

And is it also your opinion that Mike Barrett owned a word processor in 1985? Or do have evidence for this - beyond of course Mike's word for it? You do know what other claims Mike made over the years, which were often enough to make one's eyes water?

You really don't have to hang on to a single word Mike ever said, in order to believe the diary was not written by a Maybrick.

Love,

Caz
X

[DirectorDave]

Yes Caz. I'm Findey McHoaxface who has just been appointed Professor of hoax-finding at Oxford University...jeez "An authority on how hoaxes become more valuable the longer they are tucked away"...we are through the looking glass now people!

[caz]

Yes Caz. I'm Findey McHoaxface who has just been appointed Professor of hoax-finding at Oxford University...jeez "An authority on how hoaxes become more valuable the longer they are tucked away"...we are through the looking glass now people!

Well you started the nonsense, DD, with this:

'...this item is accumulating value just through keeping it tucked away'.

I merely wondered how you thought you could state that as a fact and not raise a titter.

What is also chuckle-worthy is that the people who usually accuse Mike Barrett of having been a smart enough con artist to write the diary, despite ample evidence that he couldn't have forged a sick note, have allowed themselves to be conned by the same chap whenever his lips moved concerning the subject.

In a fine ironic twist, they also like to hold up Melvin Harris as an expert in exposing such con artists, who worked tirelessly to demonstrate the diary was a fake, when the writing didn't even pretend to resemble Maybrick's. Yet Melvin had to concede defeat concerning Mike as its author, declaring that he did not have the 'capacity' to write it. If anyone thinks Mighty Mel knew a con artist when he saw one, how do they suppose Mike Barrett of all people was able to con him rotten with such ease?

Good old Melvin, he gets wheeled out every so often to make a point, by people who never listened to what he was actually saying all those years ago. Hilarious.

Love,

Caz
X

[DirectorDave]

So are you an authority on sick notes and the autonomy involved in the movement of lips? No? Well I'll just write it off as unsubstantiated opinion in that case.

Good old Melvin, he gets wheeled out every so often to make a point, by people who never listened to what he was actually saying all those years ago. Hilarious.

So you bring up Melvin Harris, all by yourself then go on to slate people who...wait for it...bring up Melvin Harris?

There is nothing to debate here, the time for that has passed...logic left this discussion a long time ago.

[Magpie]

Interesting that "old forgery" seems to be making a bit of a comeback in recent years.

[John Wheat]

No, he is about the least likely candidate for Jack.

Except for maybe Lechmere.

[Busy Beaver]

And these are the authors who would certainly not wish for Jack to be named too quickly as they have hundreds of other toilet rolls awaiting to be written on with JTR Tosh.