What. Other Than Diary and Watch, Points to Maybrick As JtR?

[RavenDarkendale]

In all seriousness I am wondering something. Without the infamous diary and watch for evidence, what ties James Maybrick to the crimes? That he did business in London in a street not far from Miter Square doesn't depend on the diary. But are the dates when he was allegedly in London able to be matched up with murder cases?

I asked about something along this line on Montague John Druitt, so I will use the same criteria to ask about Maybrick.

In the C5, Elizabeth Stride doesn't really fit the pattern. So we will toss her out. Some question Eddows, I cannot see this, I will keep her as a suspect. Some are doubtful about Mary Kelly. The crimes had been getting more and more gruesome, so I will not rule that out either. (My only question there was whether or not the witnesses were correct about seeing her when the body in the room had to be dead. If so, the killer got someone else, and she quietly disappeared.)

So the list will go like this:

Undiscovered murder
Martha Tabram
Polly Nichols
Anne Chapman
Mary Jane Kelly
Undiscovered murder/or murders

Catherine Eddows was murdered in Mitre Square. As noted, Maybrick's London business address wasn't far away. Date is essential to lock this one on Maybrick, but if he was in London at the time, he was certainly close to the crime scene.

As for the "FM" evidence in Miller's Court: Let's say the diary is one hundred per cent correct on this statement. Might that not point to only a single murder, that of the victim in Miller's Court. How would that tie Maybrick to any other murder? I put this forward, because what can certainly be interpreted as FM is certainly in the picture of the victim.

But Nichols and Chapman are two that no one disagrees were JtR victims. Can we prove Maybrick in London at the time of their deaths? Nichols and Chapman are key. If Maybrick can not be placed in the area at the time of these two deaths, he was not responsible for all the JtR (Whitechapel, remember at the time) murders.

Hope to stir up a good discussion, don't come here just to fight, please.

God Bless

Darkendale

[Casebook Wiki Editor]

In all seriousness I am wondering something. Without the infamous diary and watch for evidence, what ties James Maybrick to the crimes? That he did business in London in a street not far from Miter Square doesn't depend on the diary. But are the dates when he was allegedly in London able to be matched up with murder cases?

Well of course there is the small issue of there actually being evidence....obviously most people aren't happy with the provenance . Understandable.

But while a lot is known about the Maybricks I have never seen a detailed time line of Sir Jim's coming and goings. And of course the Diary entries are undated. But no one has yet found anything showing he wasn't in Whitechapel when needed, just as there is no evidence outside the Watch and the Diary that indicates he was.

In the C5, Elizabeth Stride doesn't really fit the pattern. So we will toss her out.

Long Liz might not appreciate that.

So the list will go like this:

Undiscovered murder
Martha Tabram
Polly Nichols
Anne Chapman
Mary Jane Kelly
Undiscovered murder/or murders

The two attacks outside Whitechapel that the Diarist lays claim to....problem is it's not clear from the text that the women actually died.

As for the "FM" evidence in Miller's Court: Let's say the diary is one hundred per cent correct on this statement. Might that not point to only a single murder, that of the victim in Miller's Court. How would that tie Maybrick to any other murder? I put this forward, because what can certainly be interpreted as FM is certainly in the picture of the victim.

Please excuse the shouting.

NOWHERE IN THE DIARY DOES "FM" APPEAR. IT'S NOT IN THERE.

OK, I feel calmer now.

But Nichols and Chapman are two that no one disagrees were JtR victims. Can we prove Maybrick in London at the time of their deaths? Nichols and Chapman are key. If Maybrick can not be placed in the area at the time of these two deaths, he was not responsible for all the JtR (Whitechapel, remember at the time) murders.

See above. We don't know enough about his coming and goings to make either a positive or a negative statement about his whereabouts.

Maybrick's Ripper candidacy lives and dies with the Diary and the Watch.

Hope to stir up a good discussion, don't come here just to fight, please.

I have never understood why Diary threads have to be nasty.

[Stephen Thomas]

There is absolutely nothing to link JTR and Maybrick apart from the Diary and Watch.

[Casebook Wiki Editor]

There is absolutely nothing to link JTR and Maybrick apart from the Diary and Watch.

That is unquestionably true. But it means he is one of the few Ripper suspects that actually have evidence against them. The vast majority have nothing other than an avalanche of delusional message board postings and/or a poorly written and researched suspect book. If they're lucky they have both. William Gull, anyone?

[Jenni Shelden]

Its fair to say we wouldnt link them without the diary and to a lesser extent watch.

Jenni

[RavenDarkendale]

But no one has yet found anything showing he wasn't in Whitechapel when needed, just as there is no evidence outside the Watch and the Diary that indicates he was.

No proof that he wasn't isn't evidence, it's speculation at best. Certainly the diary and the watch can be called evidence, if you believe them genuine. But if the two had never surfaced, would we still be able to suspect Maybrick? I think not.

Long Liz might not appreciate that.

With her dead, I'm sure she'll forgive me. Once dead, she could care less who did the dirty deed!

The two attacks outside Whitechapel that the Diarist lays claim to....problem is it's not clear from the text that the women actually died.

True. I am not talking about any particular incident, I feel that a serial killer like JtR would have other victims.

Please excuse the shouting.

NOWHERE IN THE DIARY DOES "FM" APPEAR. IT'S NOT IN THERE.

OK, I feel calmer now.

True! But as Tempus has explained ad infinitum, the wording was, and is:
An initial here and an initial there will tell of the whoring mother.

Maybrick's Ripper candidacy lives and dies with the Diary and the Watch.

Therein lies the rub, there is reasonable doubt concerning the validity of both. To accept or reject the diary and the watch, one must decide which set of experts with which one agrees. I still believe "Unproven" to be the right verdict, unfortunately we cannot with certainty vote "guilty" or "not guilty".

I have never understood why Diary threads have to be nasty.

Possibly because there are few other suspects with such a divided argument on evidence. People don't mean to be nasty, they just try to make a point.

Well, Royal Conspiracy supporters can do a heap of vitriol throwing over their theories, bless their dear little hearts!

Always discuss like gentlemen and you don't have to apologize for loosing your temper and/or name calling. You also won't find yourself pacing off 15 paces while holding a dueling pistol...

LOL

Darkendale

[Casebook Wiki Editor]

True! But as Tempus has explained ad infinitum, the wording was, and is: An initial here and an initial there will tell of the whoring mother.

I know what the phrasing is. I've read the text more times than is healthy lol.

But you can't show me how "an initial here and an initial there" leads to "FM" on the wall.

All I am saying is that if we want to debate/debunk the Diary, let's not have it saying things it doesn't in fact say. There's enough that IS there to sustain a debate....

[miakaal4]

Dredging the river Mersey might throw up Jim's knife, but there are probably hundreds of bits of metal in the area of Battlecrease and who would pay for such a mad scheme?
If Maybrick did it, there may be something else out there showing a link. The item in the lost property for a Mr Milbrac for example?

[RavenDarkendale]

But you can't show me how "an initial here and an initial there" leads to "FM" on the wall.

Nor would I try to, but I'm certain Tempus would point out that Maybrick's "whoring mother" could only refer to Florence Maybrick, and her initials are FM.

I have said elsewhere that the braggito of the diary and subtle clues are diametrically opposed to each other. I haven't changed my mind.

Darkendale

[Victor]

the wording was, and is:
An initial here and an initial there will tell of the whoring mother.

Couldn't the initials be WM?

WM = "whoring mother"
WM = "Whitechapel Murderer"

KR,
Vic.

[Casebook Wiki Editor]

Nor would I try to, but I'm certain Tempus would point out that Maybrick's "whoring mother" could only refer to Florence Maybrick, and her initials are FM.

Tempus is allowed to see whatever he wishes, but even he can't change the text. Whatever is on that wall is probably an artifact of the photographic process. But it ain't in the Diary.

Simon Wood has seen a lot of things in these photographs as well.

http://www.casebook.org/images/rip62-sample.pdf?

I have said elsewhere that the braggito of the diary and subtle clues are diametrically opposed to each other. I haven't changed my mind.

I believe performing literary criticism on the Diary leads to strange conclusions. What is the "real" Jack the Ripper Diary supposed to sound like? I think a lot of these guys are tigers in their minds and cowards in the real world.

And what are the subtle clues to which you refer??

I don't expect you to change your mind, Raven. In over a decade on the Casebook Diary threads - probably longer - I have never seen anyone change their mind. They start with their conclusion, and repeat and rinse again and again.

[Casebook Wiki Editor]

Couldn't the initials be WM?

WM = "whoring mother"
WM = "Whitechapel Murderer"

How about there ain't no initials on that wall?

No that anyone cares, but I wouldn't count on the "whoring mother" being Flo. Flo's mother was a real piece of work. The "actual" Sir James married Florence thinking he was going to get his mitts on her mom's money. Didn't pan out.

[Jason]

that simon wood piece is very thought provoking to say the very least, just had a 15 minute scan of what he wrote and lets just say i will be setting an hour or two aside to read it fully.

[Kaz]

In all seriousness I am wondering something. Without the infamous diary and watch for evidence, what ties James Maybrick to the crimes?

Coincidence's, many of them, but nothing more.

the DIEGO LAURENZ letter, whitechapel (liverpool), the lost property, the initials, his London link. Just a few off the top of my head... Seeing as there is so many I'm surprised more work hasn't been done, unless they have and they've ALL lead to dead ends???

Wish I had lots of money and a Sherlock Holmes brain, I'd love to get to the bottom of this!

Ps, wheres SOOTH!?

[Victor]

How about there ain't no initials on that wall?

Hi Sir RA,

I completely agree, there are no initials on the wall or in the photo, I was just looking for another explanation for the line in the Diary.

KR,
Vic.