Then we fundamentally differ in out interpretation of Mr Barrett, whom I have not met (but I believe you have).
To me, in the doco, Barrett came across as a person perfectly capable of assisting with a minor forgery and/or masterminding a crude, minor forgery that would stumble at the first hurdle (a credible provenance) pass the second (the age of the paper and ink) and fail at the third (Maybrick's handwriting).
I would need to see a formal report by the pertinent constabulary about this checking of Mike and his then spouse's handwriting; who exactly cleared them of fraud. As in which handwriting expert cleared them, and on what basis?
To me, in the doco, Barrett came across as a person perfectly capable of assisting with a minor forgery and/or masterminding a crude, minor forgery that would stumble at the first hurdle (a credible provenance) pass the second (the age of the paper and ink) and fail at the third (Maybrick's handwriting).
I would need to see a formal report by the pertinent constabulary about this checking of Mike and his then spouse's handwriting; who exactly cleared them of fraud. As in which handwriting expert cleared them, and on what basis?
Comment