New Ideas and New Research on the Diary

[rjpalmer]

there wasn't a peep about Anne being anything other than an honest British secretary until she needed to not be ...

I think we must travel in different circles.

Who are you referring to Ike?

The skeptics I know always thought of Anne Graham and her "in the family" nonsense as total malarky so you must be referring to Shirley Harrison, Keith Skinner, etc.

Maybe Shirley still thinks of Anne as an honest British secretary. I haven't heard otherwise. Does anyone know if she endorses the great Battlecrease caper?

It was the diary folk who needed to throw Suzanne and Ron under the bus, and, of course, they did the same with Anne.

[rjpalmer]

How I laughed!

This, my dear dear readers, is why Anne Barrett is occasionally described as having been tricked by her conman husband into writing the Maybrick scrapbook.

This is why I don't enjoy discussing the hoax with you, Ike. You don't act in good faith.

I did not suggest Anne was "tricked" into writing the hoax. This shows the fundamental dishonesty of your approach.

I suggested the hoax could have started out as a fictional diary. One doesn't need to "trick" someone into writing a work of fiction. (Although it is somewhat interesting that Anne herself claims she tried to "manipulate" Mike into doing so).

And it would hardly have been the first or last time a Ripper theory was presented as fiction. Martin Fido appears to have had the same suspicion.

I also suggested that Mike could have come up with the idea of creating a physical diary as a marketing gimmick and Anne--as a codependent to an alcoholic--went along to humor him, even though she would have been suspicious of his intent.

rjpalmer 12-31-2024:

"My suggestion--and that's all it is---but it's a damn good one--is that Barrett could have told his missus that the physical photo album confessional was just a marketing gimmick for their joint novella (and I hate to tell you this, old boy, but back in the 1980s there was a mystery novel marketed along similar lines in the United States)--which allowed her to suspend just enough belief to go along with Barrett's mad scheme.

Of course, the real reason was to humor him and thus keep peace in the house.

Would she have believed him?

Probably not.

But that's where the other angle comes in.

As I've told Caz about a zillion times, look no further than Anne Graham's own words.

I think Anne helped Barrett for the very reason she said she did--she assumed that when Barrett got to London with the ridiculous Diary, the literary agent Doreen Montgomery would "just send Mike packing."

--

She wasn't "tricked" Ike---that's a superficial rendering of what I suggested.

And if this suggestion is wrong, all it means is that Anne was a more willing co-conspirator than I suspect.

[Lombro2]

I didn't use Suzanne's father as a patsy to describe a completely different Verity watch. Obviously, he wasn't coached so probably wasn't in on it.

As for the Sock Drawer Caper, well I'll just leave that to the imagination of those who dream of golden sock drawers and sugar lumps.

[Lombro2]

So we've rightly shifted the onus to prove the Diary's authenticity to the people, or person, who believe it, or believes it. Because you can prove a positive and the onus is on the people who believe something to prove it.

But inexplicably Barrett Theory Believers have shifted the onus of proving their Belief to the Non-Believers. Now the Non-Believers are working away at proving Michael Barrett didn't write the Diary and the Believers are just ducking and dodging. And of course, shifting the onus back on them, and not holding themselves up to the same standard.

They can't be taking the onus and shifting it at the same time. You read Mike's words! You listen to Mike's words! Find something that's demonstrably and unequivocably, undeniably and incontrovertibly true! I'll just sit here and sip my tea.

Why don't the Believers take the onus to prove their own theory, their own positive that they're positive about?

PS. If they won't (I'm guessing they won't since they never have), I can do it. I'll concede the Diary is a forgery and prove that Barrett was the forger. I'm not chicken. I'll take the onus and take on all the 3 amigo Non-Believers. Ready!

[Iconoclast]

I'll concede the Diary is a forgery ...

That's a shame. I had you down as one of the good guys.

Come over to the proper thread and let us all know why you are conceding that the scrapbook is a hoax when you know deep down it ain't.

[Lombro2]

As you said, it's important to be fair. That means you have to be able to suspend disbelief and see things the way the other side sees it, if only for five minutes. So here goes:

The proof that Michael Barrett wrote the Diary

1. He had it in his possession.


PS Possession is 9/10ths of the law.

[Lombro2]

2. Barrett knew where "O Costly Intercourse of Death" came from.

He said he found it in the library.

Yes, it was in the library so he could have found it with five hours of research. But, around here, five hours of research constitutes a "Library Miracle". So we can rule that out. There are no miracles!

[Iconoclast]

2. Barrett knew where "O Costly Intercourse of Death" came from.

He said he found it in the library.

Yes, it was in the library so he could have found it with five hours of research. But, around here, five hours of research constitutes a "Library Miracle". So we can rule that out. There are no miracles!

3. Barrett said he wrote the text in the scrapbook, though I'm now starting to think it must have been Alan Gray.

[Lombro2]

4. We (actually I and no one else) can concoct—I mean construct—a seamless narrative of how Michael Barrett created his masterpiece.

The story is “analogued” in my head. I assure you there are no holes or seams visible and it will explain everything. Now I just have to get it down in the casebook. It might take a while but just be patient. I’ll just set the opening scene:

It was a dark and stormy night one wet weekend…

[Lombro2]

Wow, it looks like I'm actually going to the one who has to write this. Help! Help!

Maybe we should have a Buwler-Lytton contest on a "wet weekend". Best narrative that begins with "It was a dark and stormy night" wins.

[Lombro2]

Until then, how about this mock-up?





"I send you half the Kidne I took from one women prasarved it for you tother piece I fried and ate it was very nise"

[Lombro2]

Sheep, pig, or human?

Knife drippings? Nice touch!

[rjpalmer]

Sheep, pig, or human?

Knife drippings? Nice touch!

Robert Smith should have the stain tested if he has the courage of his convictions.

What are the odds? Human blood or flaxseed oil?

[Lombro2]

In the Diary, Lowry "makes him" rip out the pages after the MJK murder.

So if Maybrick was using the inside cover as a cutting board, then the stains obviously wouldn't get on his confession.

Barrett must have done the same. Good thinking! Leave just one page just in case it's still wet which it would probably be in his case.

[Lombro2]

I'm going with a pig's kidney.

The way Anne likes making porkers....