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

[Iconoclast]

Hey, Ike, how do you like being called a "religionist"? About as much as Caz likes being called a "Maybrickian"?

So, in this faith-based "religion", is Maybrick God or the Devil? Is he an object or worship? Or is he your Profit?

I'll ask him when I get down there, Lombro2.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Hi Herlock,

I'm reluctant to quote from the archives, as it invariably leads to a bollocking, but in this case I am surprised that you can't find the quote for yourself, because it was a claim Caroline Brown made barely a week ago--in a post directed to you.



What I find annoying is that Caz herself acknowledges that Anne frequently contradicts herself, and yet when I similarly point this out, she accuses my "theory" of being muddled in regard to Anne when in reality I am merely acknowledging Anne's contradictory behavior and contradictory statements, rather than ignoring them. I have incorporated this obvious reality into my analysis, in a way no one else has, with the possible exception of the late Martin Fido.

As for Caroline Barrett, I don't deny that she would have been coached. It goes without saying if the Barretts were the hoaxers, she would need to be trained to repeat the claim that the Diary came from Devereux, and that she has seen her father pestering him on the phone, and spend many hours researching the diary, etc.

I still can't imagine, however, why the Barretts would coach her to say there was a struggle going on behind-the-scenes. What would be the strategical purpose of coaching her to say this?

About the only counter explanation that I can come up with is that having been coached, Caroline herself couldn't work out what the right answer should be when suddenly quizzed by Paul and Martin, so blurting out that her mum tried to burn the diary, thinking it would somehow help the cause. Whether you find that a plausible explanation, I do not know.

If I was having this conversation with David Barrat or Peter Birchwood or someone else who sees no reason to expand the list of suspects beyond Mike and Anne, I would be hard pressed to argue that Anne wasn't an enthusiastic accomplice, as she admits to typing up the transcript, typing up the bogus research notes, supported the Devereux provenance, and (as far as we know) must have went along with many of Barrett's other porkies in the early days of the diary. And I even think there is a very solid chance she was the pen person. We are hampered in knowing how much she went along, however, as we don't have any recordings or transcripts of those early conversations with Anne, by which I mean those dating to before she left Barrett. It's would certainly be an entirely rational conclusion, but some of Anne's behavior makes me wonder if she didn't want the whole thing to blow up when Mike took the diary to London. She certainly seemed to be afraid of the investigation in a way that Barrett wasn't.

Regards.

Hi Roger, can I just check something with you. Is: "she was speaking to Doreen for the first time and telling her the diary was safely in the bank in case of fire or theft", as Caz put it, an accurate summary of what was said?

Are you able to pinpoint the source of Anne's expressed worry about fire for me? I've seen it mentioned in posts but I don't quite know where it came from.

[rjpalmer]

Thanks for the Feldman extract, Roger, much appreciated. Shame there's no direct quote there by Caroline

On reflection, I have a faint memory of Paul Begg confirming this account, but it might be difficult to chase it down. If I recall, he denied Feldman's characterization of Martin's behavior, and his own, but admitted to quizzing Caroline on this point. If I can find it again, I'll repost, though it is hardly a pressing issue and will only lead to more unproveable speculation.

[rjpalmer]

If what Caroline was saying was true. I do see what you mean about Anne getting upset that her husband wanted to get the diary published which, perhaps, she had never thought he would do. But can I ask you this, Roger, because the others don't seem to want to help me. Did I read somewhere that Anne wanted to have the diary put in a bank vault in order to protect it from a house fire? Or did I imagine this?

Hi Herlock,

I'm reluctant to quote from the archives, as it invariably leads to a bollocking, but in this case I am surprised that you can't find the quote for yourself, because it was a claim Caroline Brown made barely a week ago--in a post directed to you.

It is not disputed that she had a big row with Mike over the diary at one point, and had tried but failed to destroy it, which would be understandable in those circumstances, except that only a week or so after it was seen in London, she was speaking to Doreen for the first time and telling her the diary was safely in the bank in case of fire or theft.

What I find annoying is that Caz herself acknowledges that Anne frequently contradicts herself, and yet when I similarly point this out, she accuses my "theory" of being muddled in regard to Anne when in reality I am merely acknowledging Anne's contradictory behavior and contradictory statements, rather than ignoring them. I have incorporated this obvious reality into my analysis, in a way no one else has, with the possible exception of the late Martin Fido.

As for Caroline Barrett, I don't deny that she would have been coached. It goes without saying if the Barretts were the hoaxers, she would need to be trained to repeat the claim that the Diary came from Devereux, and that she has seen her father pestering him on the phone, and spend many hours researching the diary, etc.

I still can't imagine, however, why the Barretts would coach her to say there was a struggle going on behind-the-scenes. What would be the strategical purpose of coaching her to say this?

About the only counter explanation that I can come up with is that having been coached, Caroline herself couldn't work out what the right answer should be when suddenly quizzed by Paul and Martin, so blurting out that her mum tried to burn the diary, thinking it would somehow help the cause. Whether you find that a plausible explanation, I do not know.

If I was having this conversation with David Barrat or Peter Birchwood or someone else who sees no reason to expand the list of suspects beyond Mike and Anne, I would be hard pressed to argue that Anne wasn't an enthusiastic accomplice, as she admits to typing up the transcript, typing up the bogus research notes, supported the Devereux provenance, and (as far as we know) must have went along with many of Barrett's other porkies in the early days of the diary. And I even think there is a very solid chance she was the pen person. We are hampered in knowing how much she went along, however, as we don't have any recordings or transcripts of those early conversations with Anne, by which I mean those dating to before she left Barrett. It's would certainly be an entirely rational conclusion, but some of Anne's behavior makes me wonder if she didn't want the whole thing to blow up when Mike took the diary to London. She certainly seemed to be afraid of the investigation in a way that Barrett wasn't.

Regards.

[erobitha]

That doesn’t make his affidavit automatically true, but it does mean that it would be incompetent not to intelligently investigate it, particularly since elements of it have been confirmed.

What elements?