On The Trail Of The Forgers

[Ally]

Keith refused to elaborate on or provide any more information regarding the "evidence". He says he does not have any idea when the information will be published.

[Steve Powell]

Ink Shrink

Howdy Troopers,
I would just like to remind you of the facts about the ink
which I have already spoken about previously.
Steven Park had a bottle of pre-1940 ink
that was given to him by an old printing man in Sydney.
When he began to worry about the dwindling quantity,
he mixed other components with it.
He seemed quite knowledgeable with ink at this stage
and said that some parts of the diary are written
with the old ink and some with the blended.
He said that no-one would be able to prove
one way or the other if it was the genuine article,
as some would say it was 'old' and others 'new',
depending on where they took the sample.
It would be a dispute that could only go in circles.
He knew that.

Steve Powell

[Callyphygian]

Hi Caz,

"This testing proposal required a certain formula of Diamine ink which was not available from any source, and even if its maker had been willing or able to make some up (he wasn’t)....."

Could you possibly remind me whether Alec Voller was technically unable to make-up a sample of the relevant Diamine ink, or whether he was was personally unwilling to? I'm asking without bias, either way.



Love,
Callyphygian

[Omlor]

That's fine, Ally.

--John

[Ally]

I am sure anyone with a brain would understand that his offer to share would have been predicated upon an agreement not to post the information prior to its publication.

Something you, with your lofty principles would not ever agree to, right?

[Omlor]

Ally,

We cross posted. Yes, I did read that and I have heard the vague "ongoing investigation" talk for many many years. But it explains nothing.

I hope something clearer and at least a little more precise is offered to you.

--John

[Omlor]

One other thought...

Keith wrote to me that he might have been more forthcoming in his response to my questions if I hadn't already pissed him off years ago.

He said this:

"This response to your email of course will not satisfy you but if you had shown yourself more willing to work with me, four years ago, trying to determine what went wrong with the McCrone Group - and possibly it had something to do with you realising that this type of operation is extremely time consuming and expensive and you'd rather delegate the responsibility to somebody else - then I might have been more forthcoming."

So clearly there is more information about this that he is willing to tell everyone -- he just doesn't want to tell me.

I hope Ally's queries, then, prompt the "more forthcoming" explanations he was unwilling to give me.

--John

[Ally]

Actually John,

Keith did in fact say that in the email that he sent to you. The email exchange that you posted on these boards with a song and a dance that you were doing something daring or outre by publishing the emails in full (after promising to send the entire exchange in private) when it was in fact Keith himself who suggested you post the entire exchange.

Ally suggested that I should not have said anything at Liverpool about my information and - in retrospect - she is correct. So are you. Which was why, when I was preparing my presentation, I avoided any reference to this part of the investigation which is still ongoing and you have characterised as secret squirrel. The question from the floor - after the presentation -demanded an honest response which I gave. I could not go any further without compromising the investigation. I am not prepared to say who is financing it but the results will be eventually
published.

He said he can't say more and he said the results will be published. If you want him to make a simple declarative statement to satisfy your sense of what he ought to say and exactly how he needs to say it to satisfy you, well I am sure that in Keith's position, I'd just tell you to go screw yourself.

[Maria]

I thought this thread was called: " On The Trail of The Forgers " the diary is a fake. Keith lied when he said he had some evidence, if he REALLY had that evidence, anyone with a grain of common sense would see that he would have produced it by now, trumpeted in all the newspapers in the land and shown it at the Liverpool Trial.

It is a WHOLE year now and this " evidence " has not been produced because it simply does not exist. And you know people why it doesn´t exist ? Because the diary is not an old forgery but a RECENT forgery, that is why. Anything else are just fabricated lies. Keith is a liar.

This exchange is frankly irritating and POINTLESS. Haven´t you people got better things to do ?

Maria

[Omlor]

Ally,

Let me be clear about this. I said a long time ago that if Keith simply told us that the information he had was about to be published and he was sitting on it until then, I would find that a perfectly reasonable explanation (although in that case I don't think he should have announced not only the existence of that alleged evidence but also its alleged conclusions in a public forum while all the time being unwilling to back up his claim with the actual evidence itself).

But Keith did not say that.

Also, I said some time ago that if Keith explained to everyone exactly why he could not present the evidence to back up his public claim, I would understand that, too.

He did not.

Also, I said that if Keith simply said that the information would be made available at a specific time in the future and told us when that would be, I would understand that as well.

He did not.

I hope you get answers. Honestly. I hope you find out what the secret squirrel evidence really is. I hope you at least get an explanation for why it is being kept secret despite everyone already being told about it and what conclusions it allegedly affords. I hope you at the very least get a precise and clear explanation as to why we haven't even been given an explanation for why it must be kept secret. I hope you get something.

Best of luck. Honestly. I appreciate your attempts here.

--John

PS: As to why I wrote to Keith and asked him about all of this -- Caroline Morris suggested that I do it and it seemed like a good idea. I posted Keith's response to my short e-mail in full here, as he asked me to.

[Ally]

I will say that I have emailed Keith as of a few hours ago and asked him some questions. However, it should be stated here, that I told Keith, that if he were to tell me what the information is, I wouldn't reveal it.

The fact of the matter is, that if the information is up for publication, there is absolutely no reason why Keith would tell anyone who would put it out there on the boards and frankly I don't know why John or anyone else would expect him to. Keith said in the email exchange to John that he can't reveal the identity of who he is contracted by and that the information is subject to publication.

What John expects of someone else contacting Keith is questionable. Does John seriously expect Keith to put this information out, breaking his contract and his professional credibility in the process (more so than has already been done?). I have said it before, and I'll say it again: Keith screwed up by letting this info slip, but he should not be expected to compound the error and betray confidentiality because some whiny little snots are demanding it and will stomp their feet and yell til they turn blue because by god they want to know. I said it when it was Caroline doing it to Melvin and I'll say it now when it's John doing it to Keith.

If Keith does choose to tell me what the information is, something highly doubt will happen, but if he should, I will put up here only whether I find the information at all interesting or credible.

I have also asked him for a time frame we can expect the information to be published.

[Omlor]

Wow.

Three posts in a row.

All to me.

And all of them say...

Nothing.

Once again, what the hell does the McCrone nonsense from years ago have to do with Keith Skinner making a public pronouncement about having super secret evidence about the diary's origin and telling everyone what that evidence allows him to conclude and then refusing both to produce that evidence when asked and refusing even to explain why he won't produce it (and refusing even to explain that decision as well)?

The whole discussion Caroline is trying to start here remains completely irrelevant to the questions I asked Keith, upon Caroline's recommendation, and his non-responsive response.

I don't know what Caroline is talking about concerning Peter, so I can't address any of her nonsense in that regard. But I do know that I have never lied about anything on these boards. Of course, by this time, I suspect no one reading this understands what it is I am supposed to have lied about (I certainly don't), so all the accusation flinging (which is no doubt designed also to distract readers from the original simple and direct questions about the secret squirrel evidence that still remain unanswered) is, I think, fairly harmless.

Caroline, I'll make you a deal. You can call me a liar wherever and whenever you want and I won't bother to argue with you about such silliness if you'll agree to help someone else, someone who has not pissed off Keith long ago and thereby given him a convenient if irrelevant excuse not to answer, to ask the same simple and straightforward and direct questions that I asked in my short initial e-mail.

Maybe they'll have better luck getting an actual, informative response.

Then again, maybe not.

Your turn,

--John

[caz]

Of course, no one on these boards is so naive as to believe that Keith is not being kept aware of what is written here.

Remember, when Keith sent me his non-responsive response concerning his alleged secret squirrel evidence, he only copied one other person on the e-mail.

And we all know who that was.

John,

If it's any business of yours, and contrary to your sad delusions of grandeur, the last time I heard from Keith was on July 24 about a totally unrelated matter, and the last time Keith heard from me was about ten days before that. If you want Keith to be kept aware of what is written here, you already know the drill. I don't care whether he is aware or not, since I have no questions to put to him, and if and when I do I will put them to him and no one else.

I suspect the only reason Keith copied me in on his response to you was to give you fair warning that if you failed to post his words in full, just as he suggested, but left the readers with the kind of distorted summary you posted initially, I would soon set that particular record straight. Of course, no one on these boards is so naive as to believe that it was boredom and a lack of anything better to do that suddenly compelled you to heed that warning.

Love,

Caz
X

[caz]

And, of course, not a word I have ever written on this thread or any other has ever been a lie. Caroline knows that, too.

A word, on its own, can't be a lie, so you have me there. It's when you put 'em together and form complete sentences that you start losing control of the truth.

You either know it was a lie to claim you had answered Keith's question about how much the mythical McCrone tests were going to cost, and what proportion you were prepared to pay, or you are becoming seriously deluded and you really ought to see someone about it for your own good.

Love,

Caz
X

[caz]

Hi John,

Unfortunately, events in the past cannot be wished away and have an awkward tendency to impact on the present, whether they concern what tests McCrone could have offered, and Peter Birchwood’s efforts to obtain that information, or where the diary came from, and Keith Skinner’s efforts to obtain this information.

If only you had spent a fraction of the effort on Peter that you are now spending on Keith, you might have persuaded the former to give you his progress reports on McCrone for forwarding on to Robert, and then you would have been in a rock solid position to hurl your accusations if he had failed to commission any viable tests that you had offered to help finance. What a missed opportunity on your part.

It would also have left you in a stronger position today to claim a genuine interest in obtaining new information. If you had no interest then, in learning from Peter what tests McCrone could try, how much they would cost, or whether Robert was ever going to hear about them, your continued show of interest in learning anything at all from Keith strikes a very false note indeed.

Love,

Caz
X