Originally Posted by rjpalmer
In the meantime, Barrett & Graham split. So 'they' are not working together on anything. Then, in the Summer of 1994, Mike contacts the Liverpool Post and confesses to forging the Diary.
Only then does Anne Graham suddenly resurface and, for the first time, claims the Diary has been in her family for years. It has nothing whatsoever to do with anything 'they' came up with, and certainly nothing to do with any accusations of theft; she is obviously responding to Barrett's confession of forgery and is trying to undermine him.
This is the bit - in bold - that needs a little more thought. Here we have Anne, doing her level best to 'undermine' Mike by trying to take his second
baby - the diary - away from him, at a time when he was spitting blood because she had left him and taken away his first baby - their only child, no less. If anything was designed to encourage
Mike to take his damaging forgery claims to the next level, and drag her into the mire with him, this was it. Assuming she had no proof for her 'in the family claim', and was banking on nobody being able to dis
prove it, she seemed to have no awareness that Mike could have reacted to her 'revelation' by retracting the retraction made on his behalf by his solicitor, and this time produced powerful evidence of their joint enterprise, with a little help from his friends, the little red diary acquired for the purpose in March 1992, and the Sphere book that had supposedly lounged in their home since 1989.
It's almost like Anne knew
he had been talking out of his bottom, so she was safe to create a history for the diary leading up to, accommodating and seeking to explain his original claim to have got it from a pal who died without saying a word about it. It's almost like Anne had no idea the red diary or Sphere book could possibly come back to haunt her. It's almost like one was a little red herring as far as she was concerned and she'd never even heard of the other.
So your scenario that this 'in the family' story was something 'they' made up to cover the for an alleged theft, does not, unfortunately, even loosely fit the facts, though I'm sure some here might be happy to accept it anyway.