The Diary — Old Hoax or New or Not a Hoax at All?​

[The Baron]

Thank you, sir.

c.d.

Thou art most welcome, noble soul! May the winds of fortune forever fill thy sails and the sun shine brightly upon thy path


The Baron

[c.d.]

Thou art most welcome, noble soul! May the winds of fortune forever fill thy sails and the sun shine brightly upon thy path


The Baron

And may you live as long as you want and never want as long as you live.

c.d.

[rjpalmer]

The version Rob Clack himself uploaded to JtR Forums was exquisite - better even than Farson's 1973 paperback version!

You're confused, Ike. Rob Clack uploaded more than one version.

The one you are referring to (feel free to provide a link if you doubt me) was his photograph of the poorer "flash bulb" version that Farson and other authors reproduced in their books in the 1970s and 80s. As he explained, they were reproducing, sometimes with poor quality, a photograph of a photograph. One can see that even the 'original' copy of this in the archives is a copy because the white blur of a flashbulb is evident in the middle of the photograph (as can be seen in your post #21).

With that in mind, now please reread what I wrote:

As Rob Clack and others have demonstrated, this illusory 'FM' is not visible in the original 'sepia' photograph.

This is not the same photograph as your reproduction. It is a brown-tinted (sepia) high-quality version that was returned to Scotland Yard anonymously in 1988. This is the one Rob Clack viewed at the National Archives said was 'far clearer' and had no 'FM.'

If you want to dispute this, you'll need to refer to the sepia version of the photograph, which you have not done.

He also questioned why Paul Feldman had copies of both versions but chose to use the poorer 'flash blub' version to enlarge when he could have used the far clearer one. Was this because no 'FM' can be seen in the other??

I hope that helps.

Have fun with it. I was informed last week that your comments are 'harmless' and 'pose no threat,' so I'll leave it at that.

[Iconoclast]

You're confused, Ike. Rob Clack uploaded more than one version.

I think I get it, RJ. Bizarrely, you appear to be claiming that the photograph started with a sepia version which had no 'F' and 'M' but somehow or other less perfect versions evolved which did have the initials.

Someone put them there in 1972/1973, is that tonight's version?

[Lombro2]

In all my years of looking at Bigfoot videos, I never resorted to saying I see nothing there or it's all shadows. I'll just say it's blurry.

Saying I see nothing is a little too Socratic or Sergeant Schultz for me. I know nuzzing. I see nuzzing... Why would I do that? It would make me look like a desperate debunker who can't even see a man in a monkey suit.

The M is cut off so it could be a butterfly or it could be an M. What of it? This is Ripperology. Ms are ubiquitous in the case. Even a cursory study of the case shows that. The torn letter with the M and the "inverted Vs" convinced me in the 80s and I went with Montague as my first suspect.

That was even before I found out that three of the ladies had their legs hitched up, and that the Lusk Letter writer apparently put MishterLusk in place of his signature. That what? Five, no six, letter Ms?

So if anyone knows of any more Ms, feel free to let us know. Thanks.

M

[Tani]

Hi Tani.

I have no desire to further debate the Maybrick Hoax, but I think I might be able to help you out on this one point.

If you ever become better acquainted with Iconoclast, you'll soon notice that he's so buried in his own air castles and theories that he often misunderstands what someone is attempting to ask him.

You're referring to a very old observation by Simon Wood regarding certain letters that are supposedly visible on the original Kelly photograph 'MJK3': And you're correct--this was brought up again recently. To quote Simon:

”That said, writing is indeed visible all over the photograph we know as MJK3. Most of it is illegible or nonsensical, probably the result of people writing on the envelope in which the photograph was kept. But at some point an original print was die stamped. In the area below the raised left knee clearly visible concentric circles contain the letters HO. Home Office? Within the circles, and to the left, a notation reads 'SIB8FGA' and, beneath, a second reads: 'pd 2/4'.”

There was also a widespread belief, going back at least a quarter of a century, that there might have been writing on one of the photographic plates and these are discernible in certain reproductions. Over the years, lots of people--not just 'Iconoclast'-- have convinced themselves that they can see all sorts of letters and figures and shapes in the two Kelly crime scene photographs.

What Iconoclast is referring to, however, is a dark blotch (undoubtedly traceable to the arterial spray mentioned by Dr. Bond) that vaguely resembles 'FM' in Dan Farson's particularly poor-quality reproduction of the more famous of the Kelly crime scene photographs in his 1971/1972 book, undoubtedly the result of the photograph being second or third or fourth generation. As Rob Clack and others have demonstrated, this illusory 'FM' is not visible in the original 'sepia' photograph.

I hope this helps.

Thanks

I have been lurking Casebook since 2008 when I joined, so I have a very bizarre wealth of knowledge that I can't cite (or shouldn't have to, given how elementary most of it should be for folks here). I also keep having to filter out hoax and conspiracy theories, many of which seem popular, and as I refuse to interact with them I struggle to debate them, and when I do it's only to make rather dry points of observation. I'm not wasting my time when I could be learning actual information. I try to stay away from ideologues, even if they seem to be on my 'side'; it makes it not fun anymore. I have enough essays to write for university, I'm not writing them here!

[C. F. Leon]

Has Anyone even considered the possibility that (assuming that the "initials" are actually there and INTENDED as initials, rather than just random blood splattering) that maybe MARY KELLY put the "M", at least (I don't see a deliberate "F"), on the wall HERSELF, in some spreeish moment, 2 or 3 weeks earlier, or maybe even the day before?? Maybe Joe wrote it when he was teaching Mary how to read, as some would have us believe. [There's a dirty joke there that I'm NOT touching!]

Just as the fire that so many theorists are taking as a MAJOR clue, might have been started by Mary or Joe on some chilly evening or morning and has NOTHING to do with the murder? That on does have SOME chance of being at least stoked by the killer for lighting purposes. (Although I suspect that Mary probably STARTED it: "It's chilly, let's warm up, Dearie.")

[Iconoclast]

So if anyone knows of any more Ms, feel free to let us know. Thanks.
M

I’m only interested in those initials which were predicted in the Maybrick scrapbook and which - lo! - turned out to be there!

If your many Ms were unpredicted, then they were just Ms, I’m afraid.

[Iconoclast]

Has Anyone even considered the possibility that (assuming that the "initials" are actually there and INTENDED as initials, rather than just random blood splattering) that maybe MARY KELLY put the "M", at least (I don't see a deliberate "F"), on the wall HERSELF, in some spreeish moment, 2 or 3 weeks earlier, or maybe even the day before??

You miss the point, C.F.. it’s not that Florence’s initials are visible on Kelly’s wall. That’s simply not the issue.

The issue is that the Maybrick scrapbook predicted they were to be found in that room.

[Iconoclast]

I try to stay away from ideologues, even if they seem to be on my 'side'; it makes it not fun anymore. I have enough essays to write for university, I'm not writing them here!

Word to the wise, university is there to open up your mind not to close it.

Also, watch who you pal about with. They may seem like they aren’t ideologues but deep down everyone’s selling you a story. Some folk just take longer to show their true hand.

[C. F. Leon]

You miss the point, C.F.. it’s not that Florence’s initials are visible on Kelly’s wall. That’s simply not the issue.

The issue is that the Maybrick scrapbook predicted they were to be found in that room.

Actually, YOU are missing MY point. I'm suggesting the possibility that the "M" at least is MARY'S initial, put up by herself. And the diary makes NO such claim that an initial would be found in MILLER'S COURT. "An initial here, an initial there" could be in Poland, the Congo or even Antarctica* for all the evidence that I have seen.

* Some people claim to see, amongst other letters, a "B" in the 1976 Viking photos from Mars. So is that supposed to be PROOF that Bury (or Barnett) was the Ripper?

[Iconoclast]

Actually, YOU are missing MY point. I'm suggesting the possibility that the "M" at least is MARY'S initial, put up by herself. And the diary makes NO such claim that an initial would be found in MILLER'S COURT. "An initial here, an initial there" could be in Poland, the Congo or even Antarctica* for all the evidence that I have seen.

No, I definitely didn't miss your point. I didn't miss it because I recognised it: it has been stated a thousand times here on Casebook - each time erroneously. And your obtuse response dug you deeper into the same mire others have floundered in: The line "An initial here, an initial there, will tell of the whoring mother" was written in the middle of four pages in the scrapbook dedicated to Maybrick's murder of Mary Kelly. Yes, if you want to be as awkward as possible, you could say to yourself, 'This must refer to some initials in Poland, surely?' or else you could do the logical thing and agree that the author was referring to something in Kelly's room. We have been playing this movie for thirty years and more now - it's not new to those of us who have engaged in it for a considerable amount of that time.

* Some people claim to see, amongst other letters, a "B" in the 1976 Viking photos from Mars. So is that supposed to be PROOF that Bury (or Barnett) was the Ripper?

And here you double-down on your original missed point (showing us that you didn't understand your own error of logic): If you could quickly cite for us the source of the document in which the 'B' in the 1976 Viking photos from Mars is predicted in the context of Bury or Barnett, then your point will be well made. Until then, it remains utterly irrelevant.

As I say (again), the issue is not that Florence's initials are on Kelly's wall (most people do agree that those shapes are clearly visible) but that the Maybrick scrapbook predicts that we might find them there. See, Viking Mars photos and Bury/Barnett - no link whatsoever. Photograph of Kelly's wall and Maybrick scrapbook - well, I think you probably get it now, don't you?

Now, let me make this easier for you - here's your next post already written. for you:

"So all that shows is that the hoaxer of the scrapbook saw those initials and used them in their hoaxed scrapbook."

You're very welcome.

[Iconoclast]

As Rob Clack and others have demonstrated, this illusory 'FM' is not visible in the original 'sepia' photograph.
This is not the same photograph as your reproduction. It is a brown-tinted (sepia) high-quality version that was returned to Scotland Yard anonymously in 1988. This is the one Rob Clack viewed at the National Archives said was 'far clearer' and had no 'FM.'

So, dear readers, here's a quick summary of the Anti-Scrapbook Camp's considered and heavily non-evidence-based assumptions:

1) The James Maybricjk scrapbook is a hoax written at least in some part by Mike Barrett, an ex-scrap metal dealer
2) The James Maybrick watch is a hoax created at least in part by Robbie Johnson (even though Mike Barrett once claimed he had created that hoax too)
3) The September 17, 1888, 'Dear Boss' letter was a hoax presumably also written by the same hoaxers who wrote the scrapbook (as a large number of words are written the same in both), and
4) The MJK1 (and MJK2) photographs do not contain shapes which look exactly like an 'F' and an 'M' despite being described by RJ Palmer as 'illusory' (which rather does imply that those shapes are even visible to him too) and that, therefore, they were presumably hoaxes added around, say, 1972 by Dan Farson's editors who knew they would be needed twenty years later when Mike Barrett's gang first launched their hoax onto an astonished world.

So that's an incredible series of hoaxes, but I can now sensationally reveal two more hoaxes to add to the pile!

5) There never was a photographer in Mary Kelly's room! The MJK1, MJK2, and MJK3 were all hoaxes produced by the Kodak Company in 1935 because they knew they would be needed fifty-odd years later when Mike Barrett's gang first launched their hoax onto an astonished world; and
6) There was no death in Mary Kelly's room! The so-called fifth canonical murder was a hoax contrived by the Metropolitan Police because they knew they would be needed one hundred-odd years later when Mike Barrett's gang first launched their hoax onto an astonished world.

That only leaves me to secure the 'Jack the Ripper was a Hoax' card for my Panini sticker album and I'll have the lot!

Have fun with it. I was informed last week that your comments are 'harmless' and 'pose no threat,' so I'll leave it at that.

Sir Keir just cannot get it right, can he? I'm amazed he didn't add, 'puerile', 'bombastic', and any of the other dictionary that has been thrown at me over the years.

[Iconoclast]

Have fun with it. I was informed last week that your comments are 'harmless' and 'pose no threat,' so I'll leave it at that.

By the way, I can't believe that you actually reported me to the UK authorities as a terror threat.

Major Ike Iconoclast
General Counsel
Geordie Liberation Army

[rjpalmer]

By the way, I can't believe that you actually reported me to the UK authorities as a terror threat.

The only thing I might consider reporting, Ike, is your colossal waste of bandwidth.

Cheers.