25 YEARS OF THE DIARY OF JACK THE RIPPER: THE TRUE FACTS by Robert Smith

[Mike J. G.]

Having done a quick search on television and radio archives. There has been some interesting broadcasts over the years on the Maybricks.
Mainly concerning Florence and the trial, including-

1951 (radio) Let Justice be done
"A series of programmes to illustrate cases of many kinds in the glory of the administration of justice in British courts.
The*Maybrick*Mystery
Mrs.*Maybrick*was a young American, married to a prosperous Liverpool cotton broker twenty-four years her senior. In 1889, after nine years of marriage,*Maybrick*died in suspicious circumstances and arsenic was found in the body.*
Maybrick*was in the habit of dosing himself with arsenic and other drugs. Mrs.*Maybrick*had also acquired arsenic in the form of fly-papers. The puzzle was to find how the poison got into his body. Further, it was argued that*Maybrick*did not die from arsenical poisoning at all but from gastro-enteritis. The jury found Mrs.*Maybrick*guilty. Most commentators on this case incline to the view that, on the evidence, this was a wrong verdict"

1958 (radio) Famous trials.
The Maybrick case

1965 (TV) *Jury room*
The Friendless Lady by HARRY GREEN*
"The husband dead by arsenical poisoning.... a lover ... the wife on trial for murder or adultery?"

1969 (radio) Trial for murder on Assize.
the trial of Mrs Maybrick*

Feb 1993 (tv) Age to Age.
The trial of Florence Maybrick.

June 1992. (Radio) Victorian hit man
"One hundred years ago composer*
Michael Maybrick,*writing as Stephen Adams, hit the royalty jackpot - he published The Holy City. To this day it is the most enduring of Victorian religious parlour songs. Roger Wilkes tells the story of Maybrick, the man and his music. Producer Diana Stenson"

That's the BBC only, there is no searchable archive for Itv but I know LWT in 1970 did a special as part of their Wicked Women series on the Maybricks, in which James Maybrick was very much the villain who used to hide his wife's letters and invitations from friends to keep her at home. *
it would be interesting to listen and watch these broadcasts just to hear the content.

Apologies if this is old hat.

I'm familiar with some of that stuff, Yabs, but thanks for posting it here. The Maybrick story is interesting enough without the Ripper nonsense, IMO.

I'm kind of torn on whether Flo' was guilty, but I'm leaning towards here being innocent these days, but even then, it's hard to say she was 100% free of any wrongdoing, but the problem is, they were both pretty bad, and the entire home-environment was so shady and tense during the late years.

I kind of doubt that Flo' wanted him dead, but I don't think she was overly sad to see him go, as he'd obviously caused her some grief over the years.

Her trial was totally questionable, for many reasons.

[John G]

According to media reports the new evidence was unearthed by a team led by Bruce Robinson-that alone should set off alarm bells, especially as he only recently named Michael Maybrick as the killer.

Apparently, Robinson has discovered time sheets which prove that three electricians were working at Battlecrease House on the day Barrett contacted the literary agent, with the inference being that the diary was removed from the house, by the electricians, on this day :

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/08/06/true-identity-jack-ripper-revealed-diary-confirmed-genuine/

The story also goes on to mention that one of the electricians drank at Barrett's local pub, The Saddle Inn.

Of course, this is hardly new information. The story concerning the electricians I believe was first unearthed by Paul Feldman a number of years ago and it is very dubious. Thus, when he contacted them they initially denied any knowledge of the diary and stated that none of them drank in The Saddle Inn. However, subsequently one of the electricians contacted Feldman, but changed his story, stating that he would admit to removing the diary in return for money! Feldman also had a meeting with another of the electricians, who lived near The Saddle, and his response was, "What is my confession worth?"

Barrett was having none of it, and went round to see one of the electricians accusing him of lying, despite the fact that the man's "confession" would have provided the provenance Barrett lacked (by this time the owner of Battlecrease House had apparently also got in on the act by asking for 5% of any royalties in order not to contest ownership): see https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=...icians&f=false

It's all very murky!

[Graham]

Some time later Feldman said that he no longer believed that the Diary had been abstracted from Battlecrease; rather what the electricians found, or claimed to have found, were some old documents. I find it difficult to accept the story that they took whatever it was to Liverpool University - why there? If it was anything of any perceived value then I'm sure there would have been a book or antique dealer in Liverpool who could have helped them. And as has been said, you don't just roll up at a large urban university and get to see someone straight away! Feldman discovered the true meaning of being 'on the make' if he hadn't done so already. As he said elsewhere in his book, in Liverpool money talks....!

I actually enjoyed Feldman's book, even though I was fully aware after the first couple of chapters that it was largely bullshit! He was an entrepreneur and had Ripper-based hit movies in his sights! I think he jumped to far too many conclusions as a result of his 'interviews' with Billy Graham, and quite why he went after obscure descendants of James Maybrick in the Cambridgeshire Fens I never really understood. Hoping to find some proof of his theory concerning Billy Graham's descent, no doubt. But it was entertaining reading for all that, and he did I think add to our knowledge both of the Diary and the Maybrick Case. Worth a scan if you've never read it.

Graham

[StevenOwl]

I think he jumped to far too many conclusions as a result of his 'interviews' with Billy Graham, and quite why he went after obscure descendants of James Maybrick in the Cambridgeshire Fens I never really understood. Hoping to find some proof of his theory concerning Billy Graham's descent, no doubt.

I believe Feldman initially suspected that Anne was descended from James, so I guess that's why he was intent on tracking down any info on obscure Maybricks.

I must say I find Feldman's Billy Graham interview quite curious; could Anne really have primed her dad well enough to let Feldy interrogate him and for him not to slip up with any of the info he gave him? There's no way I could get either of my parents to do that and they're younger and in better health than BG was at that time.

[Kaz]

Worth a scan if you've never read it.

Graham

100% agreed. you can now pick up a copy on ebay for around £3 (you reading this, Mike?)

Respect to the late Paul Feldman, he dug up some valuable info, aswell as concocting some... probably

[Elamarna]

I don't really get too involved in the diary debates.
However the apparent "new evidence " regarding the timesheets could be easily asses if the following questions were answered.

When is the first date there were builders in the house?
Do the timesheets prove the floorboards were first lifted on a set date?.

I was at Roberts talk in London, and I deeply regret I did not ask these question there.


Steve

[Graham]

I believe Feldman initially suspected that Anne was descended from James, so I guess that's why he was intent on tracking down any info on obscure Maybricks.

I must say I find Feldman's Billy Graham interview quite curious; could Anne really have primed her dad well enough to let Feldy interrogate him and for him not to slip up with any of the info he gave him? There's no way I could get either of my parents to do that and they're younger and in better health than BG was at that time.

From what I recall of his part-transcripts of those interviews Feldman didn't actually receive a direct answer from Billy regarding his forbears and possible descent from Florence Maybrick. I can't say I got the impression that Anne had primed her father before the interviews, but I guess it couldn't be ruled out. Billy was seriously ill at the time, and probably didn't care one way or the other. There's no doubt that he was scooting around the Fens in an attempt to establish Anne's descent, or the descent he wished to believe. Soon as I can lay my hands on The Final Chapter I'll read it again to refresh my memory.

Graham

[Henry Flower]

"Throughout all this, Mr Smith has never wavered from his belief that the document is genuine.

He explained: "I have never been in any doubt that the diary is a genuine document written in 1888 and 1889.

"The new and indisputable evidence, that on 9th March 1992, the diary was removed from under the floorboards of the room that had been James Maybrick’s bedroom in 1889, and offered later on the very same day to a London literary agent, overrides any other considerations regarding its authenticity."

Does he not understand how damning to his reliability and credibility statements such as these are? He virtually confesses himself a True Believer impervious to evidence. The profoundly dishonest notion that electricians' timesheets alone override any other considerations regarding its authenticity unfortunately means we can and probably should discount much, if not all, of what he has to say.

This is not how historical enquiry works. This is a sales pitch pure and simple.

[StevenOwl]

From what I recall of his part-transcripts of those interviews Feldman didn't actually receive a direct answer from Billy regarding his forbears and possible descent from Florence Maybrick. I can't say I got the impression that Anne had primed her father before the interviews, but I guess it couldn't be ruled out. Billy was seriously ill at the time, and probably didn't care one way or the other. There's no doubt that he was scooting around the Fens in an attempt to establish Anne's descent, or the descent he wished to believe. Soon as I can lay my hands on The Final Chapter I'll read it again to refresh my memory.

Graham

If Anne didn't prime Billy then she must have been very confident that he would reel out a well-established story that would be tantalising enough to convince Feldy (who I'm sure had already convinced himself) and that Billy wouldn't once slip up and ruin the provenance that she was trying to sell. As you say, Billy doesn't quite say exactly what Feldy wants to hear, but as far as I can recall he doesn't say anything that goes against what Anne was claiming either. Like I say, it's all very curious.

[Graham]

If Anne didn't prime Billy then she must have been very confident that he would reel out a well-established story that would be tantalising enough to convince Feldy (who I'm sure had already convinced himself) and that Billy wouldn't once slip up and ruin the provenance that she was trying to sell. As you say, Billy doesn't quite say exactly what Feldy wants to hear, but as far as I can recall he doesn't say anything that goes against what Anne was claiming either. Like I say, it's all very curious.

Feldy himself admitted he wasn't an experienced and accomplished interviewer, and that he should have got Keith Skinner in there with him. I kind of get the impression that he was putting words into Billy's mouth, but IIRC Anne didn't seem all that concerned. Curious ain't the word.....

Graham

[Herlock Sholmes]

There's no way to get around the fact that the writer names a pub which didn't exist. I find it funny that people who do not live in this city can just pretend as though there were pubs by that name when I've tried harder than most to actually figure out whether one did, and I've found nothing, and it ain't for a lack of trying, I can tell ya. The big giveaway is in the "e" on Poste.

It's equally hard to get around the fact that there are phrases in there which do not reflect the period.

Harder still is the handwriting issue.

And even harder still is the fact that the writer literally writes a listed item in the exact same manner as it was written a century after the fact.

So far, I've yet to see one decent explanation for any of those issues.

Ok, I'll paint the target on my back and post again. I apologise in advance for the length of this post by the way. I'd like to start by, again, stating 4 points:
1. I am not pro-diary (although it shouldnt matter if I was.) I am simply someone who is not 100% convinced that it is a forgery at this point in time.
2. I am definately not an expert on the diary (or the whole ripper case for that matter.)
3. I'm also pretty certain that I'm not stupid or gullible and I certainly don't have any vested interest in the diary.
4. If an absolutely killer fact emerged that categorically disproved the diary my response would be 'oh, ok fair enough.' I wouldn't burst into tears or feel personally wounded.

And so, the 4 points:

'Poste House.' - I totally accept your points Mike. I suppose, from a personal viewpoint, part of my thinking is: would a forger who had taken the trouble to age documents and do the necessary research be so suicidally stupid as to invent an easily disprovable pub? I just think that it can't be impossible (improbable you may say) that the pub could have been known to a few as The Poste House especially as Post Office and Post House were apparently interchangeable terms. As Maybricks family lived near to it maybe it was what his dad called it and so in Maybrick's head that was what he called it. I've even heard it suggested that it didn't necessarily have to mean a Poste House in Liverpool? I'm not saying anything as a fact. I'm just saying that, to me, this could be a possible answer.
Tin matchbox empty - This one always bothered me the most. Smith's argument is that 2 lines down is the line 'decided Sir Jim to strike.' He believes that this type of inversion is because it's in the form of a poem and the writer used this method to help the 'flow' of the poem. I'll leave that for everyone else. Who knows? It's not impossible. Yes it's a 'coincidence' compared to the police list but it can't be impossible that 4 words could be employed in the same order. It should go without saying that I have no issue with anyone who doesn't buy the explaination.
Handwriting - This is a personal opinion but I've always felt a) has there ever been in the history of forgery an example of someone forging a document without even attempting to forge the handwriting of the alleged subject?
b) that it can't be impossible that Maybrick who saw himself one one hand as a 'gentleman born,' saw the ripper as his dark side (his Mr Hyde if you will.) Yes Mike, it's a pity that it's never been tested to see if there are any detectable traits of Maybrick's known hand (or even Mike Barrett's) but, as you will accept, there's nothing I can do about that.
'One-off instance - This phrase gives me nightmares! It was pointed out by David that 'one off' used as a metaphor for something that happened only once was not in use at the time as there was no written evidence. It was used in industry, evidenced in either1903 or 5, as a one off job or pattern. A part or job only done once. I expressed doubts that it wasn't impossible that it could have been used earlier although I accepted that David was overwhelmingly likely to be correct. Now, and I'm only repeating Robert Smith here, he says that he has found the phrase 'one-off duty' used in 19th century prisons (in Jonathon Green's Dictionary of Jargon.) And so, if this is correct (and I'm not saying it is) then one off appears to have been used as a metaphor for something that occurred once and so phrases like 'one-off event' 'one-off occasion' 'one of instance' could have been used. Yes, it will be said, why hadn't an example survived in writing? Who knows? Has every phrase that's ever been used survived in writing? We surely can't have written records of every single phrase ever employed in the English language?

So there it is. I'm not saying case closed. Or 'how can you not believe it!' I'm just stating a mixture of what's been said by others plus a bit of my own opinion for what it's worth (not much I hear you say.)

There are many doubts about the the diary and so many lies have been told about it that there is a cloud. For myself I completely accept that the likelihood is that it's a forgery but, as yet, at this point in time, I'm not totally convinced. I certainly could be, even probably am, wrong. Soon I'm certain everyone will have a very thorough rebuttal by David Orsam. I can only give my opinion as it stands. There is no conclusive evidence that it's genuine but there is, in my own opinion, no killer fact that disproves. There are, obviously, a host of questions, doubts, lies, claimed coincidences etc but with my own brain being all that I have I remain, slightly unevenly and uncomfortably, on the fence.

If posters here still believe that I'm either 'gullible,' 'foolish' or 'biased' then there's not much that I can do about that.

[Ally]

"The new and indisputable evidence, that on 9th March 1992, the diary was removed from under the floorboards of the room that had been James Maybrick’s bedroom in 1889, and offered later on the very same day to a London literary agent, overrides any other considerations regarding its authenticity."

Still waiting to find out what the "new" and "indisputable" evidence is. So far I've not heard anything that is new or indisputable.

[Ally]

100% agreed. you can now pick up a copy on ebay for around £3 (you reading this, Mike?)

Respect to the late Paul Feldman, he dug up some valuable info, aswell as concocting some... probably

Still waiting for you to list that horde of experts. And waiting....

[StevenOwl]

'Poste House.' - I totally accept your points Mike. I suppose, from a personal viewpoint, part of my thinking is: would a forger who had taken the trouble to age documents and do the necessary research be so suicidally stupid as to invent an easily disprovable pub? I just think that it can't be impossible (improbable you may say) that the pub could have been known to a few as The Poste House especially as Post Office and Post House were apparently interchangeable terms. As Maybricks family lived near to it maybe it was what his dad called it and so in Maybrick's head that was what he called it. I've even heard it suggested that it didn't necessarily have to mean a Poste House in Liverpool? I'm not saying anything as a fact. I'm just saying that, to me, this could be a possible answer.

Correct - the Diarist says he "took refreshment at the Poste House" when deciding that the location of his killing spree was going to be in Whitechapel, London. They don't say the Poste House is in Liverpool. They don't actually say it's a pub either.

[Kaz]

Still waiting for you to list that horde of experts. And waiting....

When did I ever mention 'hordes'?

Experts in the field have been questioned, their opinions are in books which you're so keenly willing to boo-hoo.... (they're all in on it...)


If you think you've got one over on me ...good for you