Casebook: Jack the Ripper - Main
   

Introduction
Victims
Suspects
Witnesses
Ripper Letters
Police Officials
Official Documents
Press Reports
Victorian London
Message Boards
Ripper Media
Authors
Dissertations
Timelines
Games & Diversions
Photo Archive
Ripper Wiki
Casebook Examiner
Ripper Podcast
About the Casebook

Most Recent Posts:
Hutchinson, George: Any updates, or opinions on this witness. - by Trevor Marriott 13 minutes ago.
Hutchinson, George: Any updates, or opinions on this witness. - by Debra A 26 minutes ago.
Hutchinson, George: Any updates, or opinions on this witness. - by harry 4 hours ago.
Non-Fiction: The Mysterious Fred - by Simon Wood 7 hours ago.
Shades of Whitechapel: Dennis Nilsen - by Mayerling 7 hours ago.
Non-Fiction: The Mysterious Fred - by Mayerling 7 hours ago.

Most Popular Threads:
Hutchinson, George: Any updates, or opinions on this witness. - (9 posts)
Non-Fiction: The Mysterious Fred - (3 posts)
Casebook Announcements: Katherine Bradshaw Amin (1980-2018) - (2 posts)
General Suspect Discussion: Kansas Physician Confirms Howard Report - (1 posts)
Visual Media: "Mysteries at the Museum" features JtR Museum - (1 posts)
Shades of Whitechapel: Dennis Nilsen - (1 posts)

Wiki Updates:
Robert Sagar
Edit: Chris
May 9, 2015, 12:32 am
Online newspaper archives
Edit: Chris
Nov 26, 2014, 10:25 am
Joseph Lawende
Edit: Chris
Mar 9, 2014, 10:12 am
Miscellaneous research resources
Edit: Chris
Feb 13, 2014, 9:28 am
Charles Cross
Edit: John Bennett
Sep 4, 2013, 8:20 pm

Most Recent Blogs:
Mike Covell: A DECADE IN THE MAKING.
February 19, 2016, 11:12 am.
Chris George: RipperCon in Baltimore, April 8-10, 2016
February 10, 2016, 2:55 pm.
Mike Covell: Hull Prison Visit
October 10, 2015, 8:04 am.
Mike Covell: NEW ADVENTURES IN RESEARCH
August 9, 2015, 3:10 am.
Mike Covell: UPDDATES FOR THE PAST 11 MONTHS
November 14, 2014, 10:02 am.
Mike Covell: Mike’s Book Releases
March 17, 2014, 3:18 am.

Go Back   Casebook Forums > Ripper Discussions > Suspects > Maybrick, James

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #4091  
Old 09-16-2017, 12:24 PM
Darryl Kenyon Darryl Kenyon is offline
Detective
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 174
Default

You know i have a feeling that even if Maybrick was ever found to have attended, say a gala evening in Liverpool on the night of one of the murders. It would prove to the pro diarists what a clever man he was and obviously the murderer by planting a body double at the event so as to murder fallen women in London without suspicion against him ever being raised.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #4092  
Old 09-16-2017, 12:44 PM
Sam Flynn Sam Flynn is online now
Casebook Supporter
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Wales
Posts: 10,020
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by John G View Post
I mean, not only did one of the electricians tell Paul Feldman that the diary was discovered in 1989, not 1992, something he had no reason to lie about if the story about the discovery was true, the idea that one of the electricians then mysteriously presented Barrett with the aforementioned document the same dayof discovey-a man whom he had no proven connection to- who then quickly decided that it was the diary of Jack the Ripper, his next thought being, "wow, I'd better phone a literary agent about this", is completely hilarious!

Quite apart from anything else, where did he get the agent's name and number from at such short notice? And assuming the electrician didn't bunk off work during the daytime, before, completely by chance, meeting Barrett in his local pub-miles away from where he was working-the meeting must have taken place during the evening. Presumably Barrett then, possibly in a somewhat inebriated state, phoned directory enquiries, telling the telephonist, "You're never going to believe this, I've just bought Jack the Ripper's diary from a man in a pub. please connect me to a random literary agent." And, of course, the random literary agent was still working, despite it probably being well outside normal business hours. Unbelievable!
Indeed. In fact, the only thing that's believable about the scenario you've just outlined is the idea of Mike Barrett being pissed.
__________________
Kind regards, Sam Flynn

"Suche Nullen" (Nietzsche, Götzendämmerung, 1888)
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #4093  
Old 09-17-2017, 12:47 PM
Mike J. G. Mike J. G. is offline
Sergeant
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Aigburth, Liverpool, UK.
Posts: 586
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Iconoclast View Post
...then we are left with a coincidence so implausible that it boggles the mind to reflect that it could have happened..
The irony of this is quite something.

The diary is riddled with coincidences, all of which you find no issue in shunning, lol.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #4094  
Old 09-17-2017, 12:49 PM
Mike J. G. Mike J. G. is offline
Sergeant
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Aigburth, Liverpool, UK.
Posts: 586
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by John G View Post
Is Ike's last post meant to be a wind up? For the reasons given on the other thread the recent revelations only serve to demonstrate how completely ludicrous the argument in favour of the diary has become.

I mean, not only did one of the electricians tell Paul Feldman that the diary was discovered in 1989, not 1992, something he had no reason to lie about if the story about the discovery was true, the idea that one of the electricians then mysteriously presented Barrett with the aforementioned document the same dayof discovey-a man whom he had no proven connection to- who then quickly decided that it was the diary of Jack the Ripper, his next thought being, "wow, I'd better phone a literary agent about this", is completely hilarious!

Quite apart from anything else, where did he get the agent's name and number from at such short notice? And assuming the electrician didn't bunk off work during the daytime, before, completely by chance, meeting Barrett in his local pub-miles away from where he was working-the meeting must have taken place during the evening. Presumably Barrett then, possibly in a somewhat inebriated state, phoned directory enquiries, telling the telephonist, "You're never going to believe this, I've just bought Jack the Ripper's diary from a man in a pub. please connect me to a random literary agent." And, of course, the random literary agent was still working, despite it probably being well outside normal business hours. Unbelievable!
You know what they say, John, never let logic get in the way of lunacy! lol
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #4095  
Old 01-27-2018, 11:35 AM
Iconoclast Iconoclast is offline
Sergeant
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 829
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike J. G. View Post
You know what they say, John, never let logic get in the way of lunacy! lol
Well here's a thing. They actually don't say that at all!

It is so wearisome, this being so utterly clever and you lot being so slow on the uptake. Even in the depths of my self-imposed retirement, I find myself having to illustrate again how James Maybrick seems to be doggedly determined to remain in the frame for the Whitechapel slaughtering of 1888. By the way, if you can’t be a****d to read through the following and just want to get straight to the core of my brilliant insight, feel free to leap lazily to the end of this, my latest illuminating post as there lies my genius in its ever most freshest moment.

Okay, we’re on the theme of coincidence again, fellow sleuths. And the fact that there need to have been an awful lot for the Maybrick journal to be a hoax. The number keeps growing, and yet still the Naysayers ignore its volume. Nay, even attempt to out shout it!

So – for the sake of some fun - we enter a bizarre world where the Maybrick journal is finally proven to be a hoax. We are then left to tally up the serial coincidences – I’ve collated 21 chronologically but the 22nd at the end of this post deserves a much higher placing if it were on merit - which worked so cunningly in the hoaxer’s favour. From the top of my head (and other faithful sources):

1) The spelling of Jack from Maybrick’s name
2) Maybrick – despite being a hypochondriac whose second home was the doctor’s surgery – never being placed somewhere else at the time of any of the murders
3) Maybrick’s now well-established addiction to arsenic
4) Maybrick’s now well-established link with the east end of London (via his girlfriend/wife/lover Sarah Robertson, and possibly Mr. Witt and his ‘London business’)
5) A Whitechapel in both Liverpool and London
6) The ‘Who is Jim?’ newspaper article after the first canonical murder
7) The piece of muslin left with Annie Chapman’s corpse
8) The ‘M’ on the envelope also found with Chapman’s body
9) V marks on Catharine Eddowes (‘left my mark’)
10) The convenience of Juwes in the GSG appearing much like ‘James’, and – oh – as you know, ‘Thomas’, and ‘William’, and ‘Ed’ [I’ll excuse you the ‘win’ here], Michael and Florence Maybrick’s initials, and even the word ‘nothing’ written in the hand that wrote the journal [remember, the GSG we have on the record is a ‘duplicate’ of that which was washed so carelessly off the wall]
11) The discovery of the little-known September 17 ‘Jack the Ripper’ letter in whose hand the journal was written
12) The remarkable ‘photofit’ of Oct 6 which looked so much like Maybrick
13) The FM on the wall of MK’s room [unclear in many versions of the infamous photograph, but very clear indeed in the works of those two arch-journal detractors Sugden and Marriott]
14) Florence’s comment in a letter to Brierley (‘The tale he told me …’) [not so much a coincidence, I grant you, but we’ll leave it in nevertheless]
15) The Diego Laurenz letter [arguably the biggest clue that Maybrick was indeed Jack]
16) The extravagant swirl at the end of a sentence (see Feldman, ‘The Final Chapter’)
17) The Maybrick watch and the incredibly-unlikely coincidence that Maybrick’s best pal George Davidson would die penniless and yet leave a gold watch under his pillow on the day he died – a fact which either inspired the watch’s hoax or else which supports the theory that the hoaxers put in a truly remarkable shift in the Liverpool libraries in creating their masterpieces (the journal and the watch)
18) The provenance given by Anne Barrett which revealed that Elizabeth Formby (pal of the viper Alice Yapp) had a daughter Edith who was married to Anne’s grandfather (second marriage) thereby providing ‘apparent’ support for the hoaxer’s work
19) The implausibly-convenient fact that on her release from gaol in 1904, Florrie Maybrick took the surname ‘Graham’ (Anne Barrett’s maiden name, of course)
20) Latterly, the stunningly-implausible coincidence that work had been done on the floorboards in Maybrick’s old room on the very day (March 9, 1992) that Michael ‘Master Forger’ Barrett first attempted to gain interest in his Ripper journal
21) The geoprofiling data which placed Middlesex Street at the very heart of where the Ripper should have been found [the GSG was ignored so Flower and Dean Street was focused on as his most likely lair, but the case for Middlesex Street was just as strong and if Rossmo had added in the GSG, Middlesex Street it undoubtedly would have been]

All of this is discussed in my seminal work of stunning insight and genius – History vs. Maybrick (email historyvsmaybrick@gmail.com if you would like a full expose with pretty pictures) – but it is worth iterating these points for the uninitiated. Oh, and for the initiated.

And so to the point of all this reprising malarkey. The rhymes. Those wonderful little snippets of verse which the Maybrick journal makes occasional reference to and which conveniently turn up in the record in all the right places. You know the ones:

I’m not an alien maniac
Nor yet a foreign tripper
I’m just your jolly, lively friend,
Yours truly – Jack the Ripper


And

I'm not a butcher
I'm not a Yid
Nor yet a foreign skipper
But I'm your own light-hearted friend
Yours truly, Jack the Ripper


Recently, I came across a longer version of the ‘I’m not a butcher’ verse, and it continued thus:

Up and down the goddam town
Policemen try to find me.
But I ain't a chap yet to drown
In drink, or Thames or sea

I’ve no time now to tell you how
I came to be a killer
But you should know, as time will show,
That I'm society's pillar


A quick Google search brought me to an old, disused corner of the Casebook, which seems to point towards an origin of sorts and from which I paraphrase below:

Quote:
Casebook: Jack the Ripper - Message Boards » Letters and Communications » General Discussion » "Up and down the goddam town ..."
Posted on Thursday, April 03, 2003 - 5:43 pm:
Chris Phillips

Does anyone know anything further about the following example [the verses I quote immediately above] of the Ripper's "sallies in verse", quoted by Donald McCormick, The Identity of Jack the Ripper (1959 edn, p. 83).

In contrast, no source is given for the poem above (it immediately follows the poem "I'm not a butcher...", extracted from Macnaghten's memoirs), and it seems to play no part in McCormick's scheme.

Chris Phillips
This is truly a coincidence too far for me. The Diego Laurenz letter is astonishingly-convenient for our erstwhile hoaxers, but this latter verse simply compounds the evidence or unreasonably racks up the coincidences. Why? Because Maybrick reveals himself not once but twice in this rhyme:

But you should know, as time will show,
That I'm society's pillar


Maybrick first gives us his family motto – tempus omnia revelat (time reveals all) – when he writes ‘as time will show’.

And not content with that teasing little clue, he secondly goes one step further and gives us a clue to his name – he is ‘society’s pillar’. Google ‘pillar’. You’ll get, an upright shaft or structure, of stone, brick, or other material, relatively slender in proportion to its height, and of any shape in section, used as a building support, or standing alone, as for a monument. In shorter, simpler terms, a brick.


Truly, no hoaxer could ever have hoped for such luck, but our hoaxers received it in bucket loads. Maybrick just keeps creeping out of the brickwork of the Jack the Ripper story at every turn, and yet still we will hear the bleating of the hoaxers’ defenders, at least we do in here, this occasional sacred cowpat of debate. They will say that it was old mad McCormick making it up again (with no evidence to prove it, of course), but they will miss the point - whether McCormick made it up, someone else made it up, or it was a genuine Ripper rhyme of 1888, its last two lines conveniently speak of James Maybrick yet again! The unluckiest man ever in the legal system (if he'd ever been arrested)?

Of course, I can hear the Naysayers sharpening their pencils even as I post this. I already sense Orsam looming out of the darkness in the cramped, foggy alleyways yielding his cutting opinions. “Does it actually say – word for word – ‘Tempus Omnia Revelat’? Does it say – word for word – ‘Time reveals all’? Does it say ‘My surname contains the word ‘brick’’? Does it say ‘By ‘pillar’ I do of course mean ‘brick’? Does it say ‘I am a ‘brick’’? Et cetera. Yawn yawn! We’ll have to face it, so I suggest you all prepare yourselves for the onslaughter. See, I even give you a new word for it. Personally, I am back off into the world of retirement and a different type of toothless companion in the nursing home. They all love me there, you know!

PS For those of you who feared that Orsam the Ripper had mutilated and destroyed The Greatest Thread of All, you will all be relieved to hear that I have also resolved his confusion over the mooted ‘one-off instance’ which he claims was never a term which in 1888 could have been used or – if it was – it was not then used again anywhere in the world until about 1982 in an early episode of ‘Only Fools and Horses’ in which Rodney Trotter downs a sex worker and then writes in his diary that he’ll not do it again. The inspiration for my solving this conundrum came from my dear old mother, God rest her soul (though He’ll have to wait a bit to do so as she’s not actually dead yet) – who always says ‘a one’ when she means ‘one’. So, for example, she’ll say “Could you get me a one?” when “Could you get me one?” would suffice. It may be a Geordie thing. It may be a northern thing, I don’t know. But I do know that James Maybrick may very well have written it thus in his musings of 1888 and 1889. So ‘a one-off instance’ (which really should be hyphenated but in the Maybrick journal was not) becomes ‘a one off-instance’ (which definitely wasn’t hyphenated in the Maybrick journal but is here for clarity). Maybrick has hit poor old Florrie, and it’s okay your honour because it was a bit of an ‘off’ instance. Indeed, it was a one ‘off' instance. I’m sure I won’t find the lightbulbs going on around the detractors too soon with this notion, but it should serve to provide a little caution. The Greatest Thread of All lives and breathes and ‘one off instance’ may or may not be one incontrovertible, unequivocal, undeniable fact which refutes the diary, but sadly for all Mr Orsam’s efforts, it is not just yet the final nail in its coffin. Indeed, it’s not even a one.


Iconoclast (inter alia)
Detective with Merit and a Right Old Orchestrator of Cleverness

Last edited by Iconoclast : 01-27-2018 at 11:46 AM. Reason: Keen to give me proper name, guv'nor
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #4096  
Old 01-27-2018, 11:48 AM
David Orsam David Orsam is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 7,916
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Iconoclast View Post
I already sense Orsam looming out of the darkness in the cramped, foggy alleyways yielding his cutting opinions. “Does it actually say – word for word – ‘Tempus Omnia Revelat’? Does it say – word for word – ‘Time reveals all’? Does it say ‘My surname contains the word ‘brick’’? Does it say ‘By ‘pillar’ I do of course mean ‘brick’? Does it say ‘I am a ‘brick’’? Et cetera. Yawn yawn!
I don't why you pretend to anticipate something that I might say on a subject that I've never discussed before, or even said anything remotely similar to what you purport to anticipate me saying. Then, having had this imaginary conversation with me, you conclude with "Yawn yawn!"

It's very poor, pathetic even, and I'm disappointed in you because I thought you were better than this.
__________________
Orsam Books
www.orsam.co.uk
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #4097  
Old 01-27-2018, 11:52 AM
David Orsam David Orsam is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 7,916
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Iconoclast View Post

PS For those of you who feared that Orsam the Ripper had mutilated and destroyed The Greatest Thread of All, you will all be relieved to hear that I have also resolved his confusion over the mooted ‘one-off instance’ which he claims was never a term which in 1888 could have been used or – if it was – it was not then used again anywhere in the world until about 1982 in an early episode of ‘Only Fools and Horses’ in which Rodney Trotter downs a sex worker and then writes in his diary that he’ll not do it again. The inspiration for my solving this conundrum came from my dear old mother, God rest her soul (though He’ll have to wait a bit to do so as she’s not actually dead yet) – who always says ‘a one’ when she means ‘one’. So, for example, she’ll say “Could you get me a one?” when “Could you get me one?” would suffice. It may be a Geordie thing. It may be a northern thing, I don’t know. But I do know that James Maybrick may very well have written it thus in his musings of 1888 and 1889. So ‘a one-off instance’ (which really should be hyphenated but in the Maybrick journal was not) becomes ‘a one off-instance’ (which definitely wasn’t hyphenated in the Maybrick journal but is here for clarity). Maybrick has hit poor old Florrie, and it’s okay your honour because it was a bit of an ‘off’ instance. Indeed, it was a one ‘off' instance. I’m sure I won’t find the lightbulbs going on around the detractors too soon with this notion, but it should serve to provide a little caution. The Greatest Thread of All lives and breathes and ‘one off instance’ may or may not be one incontrovertible, unequivocal, undeniable fact which refutes the diary, but sadly for all Mr Orsam’s efforts, it is not just yet the final nail in its coffin. Indeed, it’s not even a one.
Frankly, this is just meaningless gobbledigook. The expression "one off", whether hyphenated or not, was not used in the 1880s to mean something unique (such as hitting a person) and that's the end of it. There's nothing more to say. This fact alone nullifies all the little "coincidences" that you seem to find so fascinating but which are remarkably unconvincing.
__________________
Orsam Books
www.orsam.co.uk
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #4098  
Old 01-27-2018, 11:59 AM
Iconoclast Iconoclast is offline
Sergeant
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 829
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Orsam View Post
I don't why you pretend to anticipate something that I might say on a subject that I've never discussed before, or even said anything remotely similar to what you purport to anticipate me saying. Then, having had this imaginary conversation with me, you conclude with "Yawn yawn!"

It's very poor, pathetic even, and I'm disappointed in you because I thought you were better than this.
I'm not.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #4099  
Old 01-27-2018, 11:59 AM
Iconoclast Iconoclast is offline
Sergeant
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 829
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Orsam View Post
Frankly, this is just meaningless gobbledigook. The expression "one off", whether hyphenated or not, was not used in the 1880s to mean something unique (such as hitting a person) and that's the end of it. There's nothing more to say. This fact alone nullifies all the little "coincidences" that you seem to find so fascinating but which are remarkably unconvincing.
I think you may have misunderstood my argument.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #4100  
Old 01-27-2018, 12:18 PM
David Orsam David Orsam is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 7,916
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Iconoclast View Post
I think you may have misunderstood my argument.
Yes, of course I have. It was meaningless and nonsensical and not capable of being understood.
__________________
Orsam Books
www.orsam.co.uk
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 11:28 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.