James, the Dog Killer?

[caz]

Is Barrett's complicity a necessary condition for a modern hoax, Caz? I don't think it is. He could have been duped by a modern hoax as much as by an old one.

Hi Sam,

You mean Mike could have been totally ignorant of the diary's origins, but been chosen by the hoaxer to 'handle and place' it - and take all the profit too? That's a new one. The usual argument is that Mike's 'confessions' probably contained more than a grain of truth, reflecting inside knowledge of a modern money-making fake.

Frankly, the only way I could see the hoaxer letting Mike of all people get his paws on it, losing all control over its destiny in the process, is by some horrible accident.

Which is what must have happened if this is an older document, once placed in Battlecrease, and written by someone who never imagined it would end up with someone like Mike, to do with it whatever he pleased.

Love,

Caz
X

[caz]

Hi Sam,nobody in their right mind would involve Mr Barrett in anything let alone a complicated hoax trust me

I agree, Pinky. But there's the rub. You and I and everyone else who has met Mike would no doubt sing from the same hymn sheet - a modern hoaxer would have to be out of their tiny mind to involve him in any capacity. But we can't force those who have never met the man to simply 'trust' us on this one. They may have faith of a different sort.

Love,

Caz
X

[GUT]

Can make it dead clear I do not consider Deeming a good ripper suspect, however he was clearly a serial killer and killed his partners.

I do however find him an interesting study.

[pinkmoon]

I agree, Pinky. But there's the rub. You and I and everyone else who has met Mike would no doubt sing from the same hymn sheet - a modern hoaxer would have to be out of their tiny mind to involve him in any capacity. But we can't force those who have never met the man to simply 'trust' us on this one. They may have faith of a different sort.

Love,

Caz
X

Hi caz,it's quite obvious to me how Mr Barrett came into possession of the diary I think other people who have met him will have come to the same conclusion as me.

[Scott Nelson]

All we know is the dog didn't eat it.

[MayBea]

All we know is the dog didn't eat it.[

Chris G thinks it was...He calls it a 'dog's dinner'!

http://www.jtrforums.com/showthread.php?t=16265&page=2

[MayBea]

Hitler poisoned his dog Blondie just before he shot himself and we all know what a nice fellow he was.

Does anyone know anything about the English neo-Nazi who set up the dog-killing cult in Yonkers that David Berkowitz joined?

http://visupview.blogspot.ca/2013/03...fices-and.html

[MayBea]

Atlanta Constitution
Georgia, U.S.A.
23 June 1889

It is shown quite clearly that Mr. Maybrick at one time poisoned with arsenic several troublesome dogs in the neighborhood, which would show he had arsenic about him.

http://www.casebook.org/press_reports/atlanta_constitution/890623.html?printer=true

[GUT]

G'day Scott

All we know is the dog didn't eat it.

I presume you mean the dog didn't eat the diary.

Pity about that really.

[MayBea]

Does anyone know anything about the English neo-Nazi who set up the dog-killing cult in Yonkers that David Berkowitz joined?

Correction and Update: The English doctor is not identified anywhere online which is just as well because the dog-killing cult was not "set up" by the English physician as I thought. The dog killing, which happened 30 years after he arrived in New York, certainly did not originate with him.

Author/investigator Maury Terry actually claims a modern-day splinter group of the Process Church called the Four Ps started the practice.

The group may have tried to disassociate themselves from the Process by killing German Shepherds instead of revering them. Their leader was allegedly a business man from Los Angeles.

[MayBea]

It seems even Florence Maybrick was an animal poisoner in her later years; in her case, cats.

Livia Trivia attributes this to the possible effects of syphilis, and I believe she is correct. James had syphilis and not malaria.

http://www.jtrforums.com/showthread.php?t=11751

[rjpalmer]

For those into idle speculation, I see from the above that the missing dogs have been posted already. It is unclear to me who owned these terriers. The number in the first ad is given as No. 6 (or is it 6A?); later accounts of Battlecrease give the Maybrick's house number as 7. Possibly an out-building?

It also seems logical to conclude that the Irish terrier puppy was meant to replace the Fox terrier that had gone missing two months earlier.

Here is another little known article about Sir Jim:


CONFESSION OF ARSON BY A GIRL.-- On Monday morning, shortly after ten o'clock, smoke was observed issuing from the window of a house, No. 21, Vine Street, Liverpool, occupied by John Shannon, a window-blind manufacturer. Directly after a girl, who subsequently proved to be Shannon's daughter Eliza, nineteen years of age, rushed into the street with her clothes in flames. A man named James Maybrick, residing at 46, Jasper Street, thoroughly wrapped her in his coat and extinguished the flames, but not before she had been very seriously burned all over her body. She was promptly conveyed to the Royal Infirmary, where she remains in a very precarious condition. Meanwhile information was conveyed to the police, and the fire was speedily put out, little injury being caused to the property. The room, it appears, was used for the treble purpose of living, sleeping, and working, and the fire, there is no doubt, originated in a bed of shavings upon which the poor girl had been lying. Her mother had gone to the Royal Infirmary for the purpose of getting her head dressed, and had left her daughter in charge of the room. On the way to the infirmary the girl said to those who had charged her, "I done it myself; God forgive me." It is said that the poor creature has for some time past been in a depressed state of mind.

---The Northern Whig, Friday 28 January1876

[rjpalmer]

"I had long known the vocalist, and first knew the deceased, Jas. Maybrick, at the Walker Art Gallery, during the Loan Exhibition of pictures in the spring of 1886, and met him subsequently many times, always impressed by his calm and gentle manner, and his dignity that was totally devoid of stiffness or hauteur. He was invariably bland and courteous, reminding me much of some gentlemen from the Southern States whom I have met, and altogether seemed above the ordinary calibre of men. The published portraits are not at all like him. His rather full face, of olive complexion, was kindly in expression; he wore a small light brown moustache, and his countenance gained additional dignity from his serene expression and the rather unusual width between the eyes. I never saw him at Battlecrease House, his home, but from several friends I hear (what I was sure of) that there he was quietly genial and an excellent host. I had many conversations with him, often on art subjects, and was with him when he purchased, in the Liver Sketching Club's quarter in the exhibition aforementioned, two angling subjects painted by Mr. J. T. Steadman, and pictures in water-colours by Mr. Jas. S. Crompton and Mr. Rutherford. He subsequently commissioned Mr. Steadman to paint his portrait, which was executed at the artist's studio, the deceased sitting there many times, and that excellent likeness and very fine picture was by his permission exhibited at the Liver Sketching Club's recent exhibition, where I met him last, and remarked his unusual colour and expression."

-account of "Peregrine" in the Prescot Reporter, and St. Helens General Advertiser, 8 June 1889.


LIVER'S SKETCHING CLUB ANNUAL EXHIBITION OF PICTURES AT THE CLUB ROOMS, CUTHBERT'S BUILDINGS, CLAYTON SQUARE, LIVERPOOL. 4th March to 16TH MARCH 1889.

"....J. T. Steadman exhibits a large and excellent work in oil, as well as some choice lesser ones, and a fine example of protraiture (sic: portraiture)."

Prescot Reporter, May 2, 1889.

This must have been the portrait of James Maybrick, apparently somewhat prominent at the exhibition. Maybrick died March 11th, while the exhibit was still open. No mention of any of this in the diary, of course.

[Pcdunn]

Not necessarily John it would depend on among other thngs, the access he had to them and his reason for killing the dog, ie if he was afraid of dogs poison might be preferable to getting close enough to use a knife.

What if Maybrick was testing out some newly received "medicine" to see if it was the real thing? Just a thought.