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

[Scott Nelson]

(In Theory) While at Dodd's house on March 9, 1992, Eddie overhears electricians discussing a document that had been found there some time before and he thinks it could be related to the photo album he knew Mike already had, with the diary handwriting in it. So, in the pub Eddie tells Mike what he was told about the diary being found somewhere in the house.

[Lombro2]

It’s really your job to write the script.

This is your script so far:


Martin: How partial is partially used?

Mike: Oh you know partial partial.

Martin: Two thirds used? One third? Why don’t you tell me how many blank pages you need?

Mike: No. I can’t do that. Someone might think I intend to write in it if I tell you that.

Martin: What do you care?

Mike: I wouldn’t want them to think I intend to write a forgery.


deleted lines

Mike: Oh alright. How about 20 blank pages like the diary I have in front of me right now? Or was that 17 pages.

Martin: 17… 20… Who cares? I’ll ask for 20 minimum.

Mike (to himself with hand over the phone): Great. Then I can say I intended to write a forgery all along. And there will be people who actually believe it.


I can see why you declined the script writing job.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Time is money, so some important questions weren't asked. Martin Earl would have talked to Mike no longer than he thought was necessary, and ditto to the supplier. Earl only stood to make a profit of a couple of pounds from the sale after paying the supplier. It wasn't worth any more of his time.

I agree entirely, Scott. Earlier, in #1472, I described it as a "brief telephone call" although, amazingly, this caused Ike to respond in #1479 asking me if Martin Earl was "in a hurry to save his 'phone bill" and pretending that I'd said that the two men were "in a rush". But, really, it must have been a relatively quick business-like call because of the nature of the transaction.

[Herlock Sholmes]

(In Theory) While at Dodd's house on March 9, 1992, Eddie overhears electricians discussing a document that had been found there some time before and he thinks it could be related to the photo album he knew Mike already had, with the diary handwriting in it. So, in the pub Eddie tells Mike what he was told about the diary being found somewhere in the house.

Doesn't explain why Mike then went on to seek a Victorian diary with blank pages. Nor does it explain why Mike later identified the diary as being in the handwriting of his wife, whose formation of certain characters matches the way the diarist forms those characters. Nor does it explain how Mike managed to crack the "costly intercourse" problem. Nor does it explain why the diary is full of quirky expressions that Mike also used in his speech. Nor does it explain why Mike carefully hid his knowledge of Ryan's book from Shirley in his "research notes". Nor does it explain how the diary, which must have been created after 1945, and almost certainly after 1988, got into Dodd's house in the first place.

[Lombro2]

Maybe your script can explain it.

Then people might believe it if they see it in live action on the screen.

“I saw Anne write ‘one off’ and ‘costly intercourse’ on Netflix!” As it happened.

[Scott Nelson]

Doesn't explain why Mike then went on to seek a Victorian diary with blank pages. As I already theorized, he got jealous of the diary he was given and decided to acquire another one to try his hand at writing a hoax. Nor does it explain why Mike later identified the diary as being in the handwriting of his wife, whose formation of certain characters matches the way the diarist forms those characters. I think Mike lied. And I don't see the writing as being in Anne's disguised hand. Nor does it explain how Mike managed to crack the "costly intercourse" problem. Since I think Mike may have got the diary from Devereux, it likely would have been Devereux or one of his colleagues who cracked the "costly intercourse" problem. Nor does it explain why the diary is full of quirky expressions that Mike also used in his speech. It's not full of Mike's quirky expressions as far as I can see. Nor does it explain why Mike carefully hid his knowledge of Ryan's book from Shirley in his "research notes". He would have hid this fact as a matter of course if he had earlier planned on writing his own diary using the Ryan book. Nor does it explain how the diary, which must have been created after 1945, and almost certainly after 1988, got into Dodd's house in the first place.

With regard to the last point, I have already explained in numerous posts over the past couple of years, that I believe the diary is at least a second-generation morph of a spoof (not necessarily a diary) that was originally written near the turn of the twentieth century and hidden in Battlecrease or some other place associated with Maybrick. This document was later found (possibly in the 1970s) and may have been taken to the offices of the Liverpool Echo where it remained until Tony Devereux found it. The current diary was written by Devereux and his friends* sometime after 1988 (Michael Cain miniseries first broadcast) and before Devereux's death in 1991. The original spoof document may exist or it may have been destroyed.

*I may count Gerard Kane, Billy Graham and Mike Barrett in this group. But Mike only given a peripheral role in supplying writing materials, Graham probably supplying the photo album and contributing to the story, Kane doing the handwriting and Devereux mainly the storyline.

[Herlock Sholmes]

With regard to the last point, I have already explained in numerous posts over the past couple of years, that I believe the diary is at least a second-generation morph of a spoof (not necessarily a diary) that was originally written near the turn of the twentieth century and hidden in Battlecrease or some other place associated with Maybrick. This document was later found (possibly in the 1970s) and may have been taken to the offices of the Liverpool Echo where it remained until Tony Devereux found it. The current diary was written by Devereux and his friends* sometime after 1988 (Michael Cain miniseries first broadcast) and before Devereux's death in 1991. The original spoof document may exist or it may have been destroyed.

*I may count Gerard Kane, Billy Graham and Mike Barrett in this group. But Mike only given a peripheral role in supplying writing materials, Graham probably supplying the photo album and contributing to the story, Kane doing the handwriting and Devereux mainly the storyline.

Ah, yes, Scott, the simple explanations are always the best.

Let's just go through your "explanations" in turn.

1. So Mike was intending to spend time and money writing and creating the third generationof the diary for no obvious reason, even though he had no penmanship skills, when he had a fully completed, old looking Jack the Ripper diary in front of him. And, of course, we know that your opinion is based on an imagined diagnosis of Korsakoff Syndrome for Mike Barrett which makes you think he wasn't capable of creating a fake diary himself.

2. Funnily enough, if the diary is in "Anne's disguised hand" that would explain why you wouldn't be able to see it because it's disguised. But most people can certainly see similarities in the unusual way that Anne forms certain characters which are similar to those of the diarist. If you can't see those similarities, you must be in denial. And it must either be a coincidence that Mike identified his wife as the scribe or he had spotted those similarities himself.

3. Why would "Devereux or one of his colleagues" have been investigating a quote in the diary to try and identify its source? What special abilities do you think Devereux or his anonymous colleagues had to find obscure English quotations?

4. The quirky expressions used by both Barrett and the diarist have been dealt with in a past thread: they include "so help me", his use of "regards", his use of "or I" and his use of "within". Even Caz accepts that Mike used similar quirky expressions to the diarist but believes that Mike picked them up from reading the diary, something which is highly unlikely for him to do and incorporate into his normal speech.

5. Your answer about Ryan makes no sense because the research notes were produced at Shirley's request after Mike brought the diary to London.

6. What is the basis of your belief that the diary is "second-generation morph of a spoof"? If it was "hidden in Battlecrease or some other place associated with Maybrick" why do you tell us that the diary had been found in Dodd's house? It would have to have been hidden in Dodd's house wouldn't it, to have been found there, not "some other place"? But who would have hidden it in Dodd's house around the turn of the century, and for what purpose?

You can, of course, hold whatever beliefs you want, and at least you agree with me that Mike must have been seeking a Victorian diary with blank pages to write upon those pages, which is something I suppose, but I'd like to comment that I don't find anything you've said plausible or convincing in the slightest. Whether you care - and you probably don't - is entirely up to you but I very much doubt that anyone else will think this is the answer.

[Lombro2]

Well, we know the Barrett’s didn’t write it so you have to come up with something.

Scott’s story gives us something to work with and therefore could be made into a screenplay, unlike yours. And at the end, we can say.

“No cherries were bruised or injured in the making of this film.”