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:
Motive, Method and Madness: Geoprofile of Jack the Ripper reveals Tabram and Nichols connection. - by MrBarnett 4 minutes ago.
Motive, Method and Madness: Geoprofile of Jack the Ripper reveals Tabram and Nichols connection. - by Batman 36 minutes ago.
Motive, Method and Madness: Geoprofile of Jack the Ripper reveals Tabram and Nichols connection. - by MrBarnett 40 minutes ago.
Motive, Method and Madness: Geoprofile of Jack the Ripper reveals Tabram and Nichols connection. - by Sam Flynn 42 minutes ago.
Motive, Method and Madness: Geoprofile of Jack the Ripper reveals Tabram and Nichols connection. - by Michael W Richards 48 minutes ago.
Motive, Method and Madness: Geoprofile of Jack the Ripper reveals Tabram and Nichols connection. - by MrBarnett 1 hour and 13 minutes ago.

Most Popular Threads:
Motive, Method and Madness: Geoprofile of Jack the Ripper reveals Tabram and Nichols connection. - (113 posts)
Torso Killings: JtR failed amputation. Torso killer was successful. - (21 posts)
Scene of the Crimes: distances between kills.odd - (19 posts)
Mary Jane Kelly: Did Mary Kelly meet the Bethnal Green Botherer? - (10 posts)
Hutchinson, George: Why Didn't the Police Have Schwartz and/or Lawende Take a Look at Hutchinson? - (8 posts)
General Suspect Discussion: Most Ridiculous Theory - (2 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
  #3171  
Old 02-02-2017, 01:02 PM
David Orsam David Orsam is offline
*
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 7,916
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by caz View Post
Which is why, once again, I don't rely on anything he ever claimed about its origins.
No, as I've said many times, nor do I rely on anything Mike has ever claimed about the origins of the diary.

What I rely on is the fact that, after having obtained interest from a literary agent in JTR's Diary but prior to showing the Diary to her, he made efforts to acquire a Victorian diary from a specific decade, specifying that it must contain a minimum of 20 blank pages, and went ahead and acquired a Victorian diary.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #3172  
Old 02-02-2017, 01:08 PM
David Orsam David Orsam is offline
*
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 7,916
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by caz View Post
The answer is right there - if he knew or remembered enough to say 11 days, it was because he would also have known and remembered it all happening within 16 days.

Not rocket science, is it?
Well, in the first place he might have remembered no more than someone saying "It's only taken us 11 days to complete the diary!" so that THIS was what stuck in his mind. It's pure assumption on your part that he must also have remembered it "all happening" within a 16 day period.

In the second place, there is nothing in the affidavit which says that he did not know or remember that it "all" happened within 16 days. The timing of the purchase of the red diary, or its relationship with other events, is not stated other than it being suggested that it occurred before he acquired the guard book from O&L.

So, no it isn't rocket science, and my argument about the 11 days still stands as far as I can see (and has not been answered).
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #3173  
Old 02-03-2017, 02:21 AM
Premium Member
caz caz is offline
Premium Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: East Devon UK
Posts: 6,381
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Orsam View Post
From Anne's point of view, Mike might, at any time, have remembered the name of the bookfinding company or just that it was in Bucks. And then a researcher (or private detective) could have tracked down that company and they would, if being helpful, have revealed that the payment for the diary was made from Anne's account. So, had she lied about it, she would then have had some explaining to do. There was, in other words, a clear risk of the payment being discovered.
Had Anne told a demonstrable lie, yes. But as I suggested, all she needed to do was say "I remember giving Mike a cheque for 25 for some book or other, and being annoyed about it, but I couldn't tell you when that was and I no longer have the cheque book". So what if the payment was discovered without any further help from Anne? What explaining would she have had to do?

Quote:
As for the advert, perhaps you haven't read my post where I set out my thinking that it was the HP Bookfinders that placed the advert (based on Mike's instructions to them as to what he was after). This being so, it is perfectly possible that Mike himself didn't know of its existence. He certainly didn't mention it in his affidavit when one would have thought it would have been useful to him.
Fair point, except that the specifics of the advert, including those oh so 'crucial' blank pages, must have come from Mike, so he could have included those in his affidavit to add more punch. That bit was at least true!

Quote:
Accordingly, if she didn't know about the advert, there would have been no obvious reason for Anne not to 'confess' to having paid for the diary or to have handed over the payment details.
Well quite. That's what I have been trying to say all along. As I don't personally believe Anne did know about the advert, nor indeed why Mike wanted another diary to compare with the one he already had, she had no reason not to give Keith all the details she had about the red diary and the payment. She also handed over the diary itself. What I question is whether she would have done all that if she was well aware that Mike had obtained it in the first place as part of their joint diary forging enterprise.

Love,

Caz
X
__________________
"Comedy is simply a funny way of being serious." Peter Ustinov


Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #3174  
Old 02-03-2017, 02:41 AM
Premium Member
caz caz is offline
Premium Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: East Devon UK
Posts: 6,381
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Orsam View Post
Before he spends any money he wants to know that there is someone who is interested in JTR's Diary.

So on 9-10 March 1992 he finds out that Doreen is interested.

It is now worth spending some money on a Diary and materials. The text has already been drafted, or at least seriously considered, and it is not going to take a very long time simply to write it out in manuscript.

So it's really all about finding a diary from the period. We all know what happens next: A bookfinding company is instructed, then the 1891 diary is acquired (not suitable), then the Victorian guard book is acquired.

Or at least that's what I think happened next.
Except that here again you talk about Mike not wanting to spend his money before sounding out Doreen to check there would be enough interest in the publishing world in Jack the Ripper's confessional diary to justify his expenditure.

He didn't spend any of his own money on either item, if what you 'think' happened next did happen next. Anne paid for the red diary, but not until a month after Doreen had already seen the guard book. And according to Mike, Anne's father had coughed up for that one.

Love,

Caz
X
__________________
"Comedy is simply a funny way of being serious." Peter Ustinov


Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #3175  
Old 02-03-2017, 03:16 AM
Premium Member
caz caz is offline
Premium Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: East Devon UK
Posts: 6,381
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Orsam View Post
The short point I'm trying to get at is if Mike was in the process of preparing a transcript why did he also want to write out extracts of the Diary for Doreen?
Do you not see why this is a pointless question? We know Mike's enquiry was made within just a day or two of his first conversation with Doreen. Only he knew his reasons for making that enquiry. We don't know when Mike and Anne began the process of preparing the typescript, nor when the idea first occurred to one or other of them, or was put to them.

There are a couple of references in the May to photocopies of the diary itself being received and a typescript being prepared, but Shirley only received a copy of the latter the following month.

Love,

Caz
X
__________________
"Comedy is simply a funny way of being serious." Peter Ustinov


Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #3176  
Old 02-03-2017, 03:57 AM
Premium Member
caz caz is offline
Premium Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: East Devon UK
Posts: 6,381
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Orsam View Post
Well Caz it may be because you have repeatedly stated in this thread that the Diary was an 'old hoax'. For example,

"My current thinking is that it is an old hoax" (7 August 2013, #1111)

"My own theory is that the diary is a much older hoax" (9 August 2013, #1146)

"My take is that it has to be an old hoax" (13 October 2016 #1995)

"Old 'hoax' is what I personally favour" (18 October 2016 #2025)

"I also believe it to be an old hoax." (6 December 2016 #2088)

And also because someone resembling you and posting under the name 'Caroline Morris' on JTR Forums in a thread entitled "Stuart Cumberland & The "Florence Maybrick Diary"" said on 2 September 2011:

"But for me it would strengthen my gut feeling that someone wrote the diary in the immediate wake of the trial - someone who possibly read Flo's diaries and ran with the idea of turning Jim into the very Devil, since his widow had been turned into a she-devil."

and

"If a highly literate medical student could have gone to the trouble to wind Lusk up with that gruesome parcel and letter, with no guarantee of a reaction, why could a similarly enterprising student or Punch writer not have done the same with the diary, depositing it in Battlecrease House, for a Maybrick family member, servant or new occupant to come across and muse over?"
I'll ask you again, David. Where have I actually 'claimed' or 'stated' that the diary is what I personally believe it to be?

You do know the difference, I take it?

But thanks for going the extra mile to find and quote the above. I'm flattered that you consider I'm worth it.

Love,

Caz
X
__________________
"Comedy is simply a funny way of being serious." Peter Ustinov



Last edited by caz : 02-03-2017 at 03:59 AM.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #3177  
Old 02-03-2017, 04:16 AM
Premium Member
caz caz is offline
Premium Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: East Devon UK
Posts: 6,381
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Orsam View Post
The point was no more that you said that Doreen issued her invitation to Mr Barrett (not Mr Williams) to bring the diary to London whereas 'Inside Story' says that the invitation was issued to Mr Williams - and Barrett only revealed his identity in a subsequent telephone conversation. Just trying to get the facts straight Caz.
'Inside Story' says the initial letter to Mr Williams confirmed Doreen's interest in seeing the diary 'in due course'. Mike subsequently told Doreen his real name so she was then able to write to Mr Barrett when confirming the time and date of their meeting.

Love,

Caz
X
__________________
"Comedy is simply a funny way of being serious." Peter Ustinov


Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #3178  
Old 02-03-2017, 04:33 AM
Premium Member
caz caz is offline
Premium Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: East Devon UK
Posts: 6,381
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Orsam View Post
What is the purpose of these questions?

Why not ask how Mike 'raised' the money to eat lunch or drink beer?

Who cares how he 'raised' the money for his train fare?
Well you seemed to care very much about Mike's budget for forgery materials and argued that he needed to be sure of Doreen's interest before splashing out unnecessarily. We know he didn't splash out on the red diary or the guard book if Anne paid for the former and her father the latter. But someone paid Mike's train fare to London, before he could possibly know if Doreen's interest would survive once she saw the fruits of his and Anne's 11-day labour.

If you don't care whether money played any part in Mike's wooing of Doreen, I certainly don't. It was you who brought the money into it so you could explain why Mike began wooing Doreen before he even knew if it was possible to obtain a suitable book for the forgery.

Love,

Caz
X
__________________
"Comedy is simply a funny way of being serious." Peter Ustinov


Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #3179  
Old 02-03-2017, 04:40 AM
Premium Member
caz caz is offline
Premium Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: East Devon UK
Posts: 6,381
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Orsam View Post
You said you wouldn't rely on any of Mike's actions to tell you who wrote the diary.

I find that a rather strange unless you think he fakes his actions.

The logical extension is that even if Mike was reliably seen to have been writing the diary you wouldn't believe he wrote the diary because him writing the diary was an 'action'.
I'm rapidly losing the will to live here.

Okay, I wouldn't rely on any of Mike's known actions to provide the truth about the diary's origins.

The logical extension of this is that I don't believe for one second that Mike was seen writing the diary, 'reliably' or otherwise. Clearly if he was, nobody has yet come forward to spill the beans.

Love,

Caz
X
__________________
"Comedy is simply a funny way of being serious." Peter Ustinov


Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #3180  
Old 02-03-2017, 05:06 AM
Premium Member
caz caz is offline
Premium Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: East Devon UK
Posts: 6,381
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Orsam View Post
In other words, are you saying that Mike attempted to acquire a Victorian diary with blank pages in March 1992 while being in possession of the Maybrick Diary so that he could one day claim to have forged the Maybrick Diary and thus mislead investigators into thinking he was not in possession of the Maybrick Diary in March 1992?
No.

I find the idea as silly as Mike's actual claim to have included a reference to the Poste House in the diary in case he might one day want to come clean as its author and prove it with his funny little 'deliberate mistake'.

Mike was trying desperately from June 1994 to use anything and everything he could find that might help him claim inside knowledge of the diary's creation. The red diary was one of his better ideas, I'll grant you. But was it all his own idea, or did he show this diary to Alan Gray in the latter part of 1994, who had the brainwave and helped him milk its potential significance? Why no mention of it prior to January 1995 if Mike had known perfectly well for at least six months how he could use it to his advantage?

Love,

Caz
X
__________________
"Comedy is simply a funny way of being serious." Peter Ustinov


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 05:13 AM.


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