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:
General Discussion: Masonic and the number 39. - by Herlock Sholmes 1 minute ago.
Hutchinson, George: Any updates, or opinions on this witness. - by c.d. 10 minutes ago.
Hutchinson, George: Any updates, or opinions on this witness. - by c.d. 18 minutes ago.
Hutchinson, George: Any updates, or opinions on this witness. - by c.d. 25 minutes ago.
Hutchinson, George: Any updates, or opinions on this witness. - by Darryl Kenyon 3 hours ago.
Hutchinson, George: Any updates, or opinions on this witness. - by Abby Normal 3 hours ago.

Most Popular Threads:
Hutchinson, George: Any updates, or opinions on this witness. - (40 posts)
General Discussion: Masonic and the number 39. - (13 posts)
General Suspect Discussion: Joseph Isaacs - (4 posts)
Casebook Announcements: Katherine Bradshaw Amin (1980-2018) - (3 posts)
Mary Jane Kelly: If Mrs. Maxwell Didn't See Mary Who Did She See? - (3 posts)
Non-Fiction: The Mysterious Fred - (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
  #1721  
Old 05-22-2018, 10:22 AM
David Orsam David Orsam is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 7,916
Default

Diary Defender Sleight of Hand number 278:

Let's remind ourselves of what was said in #1684. It was this:

"Still no explanation from David, for why - within 24 hours of Mike's simple but effective reply - he had found out where Eddie lived [and there's no evidence that Feldman knew the address or gave it to Mike - why would he?] and chosen to complicate things himself by going round there to introduce himself as the diary's owner, accuse Eddie of lying and saying he would never do a deal [with Paul Dodd]."

Now it's all changed. Now it's this:

"When Feldman later told Mike that an electrician was prepared to confirm he took the diary from the house, his suspicions would have been confirmed and that's when he went round to have it out with Eddie, at his girlfriend's Fountains Road address."

So, originally, he went there specifically to accuse Eddie of lying. Now he went there to "have it out" with him.. Tomorrow it could be something else.

On today's account, there is no mention of Mike accusing Eddie of lying. In fact, on the new account he's not going to do that because his suspicions have been confirmed and he now believes that Eddie did find the Diary in Battlecrease.

And I reproduce my original post back at #1695:

"We are told (again) that Mike threatened Eddie with solicitors although no evidence has ever been produced of this. Perhaps the world’s leading expert on the subject was in Eddie’s house at the time. What Feldman said about the meeting was this: “Within twenty-four hours Mike Barrett had knocked on the door of the said electrician; he accused him of lying and told him he would never do a deal.” That’s it. Where do the solicitors come from?"

Answer cometh there not.
__________________
Orsam Books
www.orsam.co.uk
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #1722  
Old 05-22-2018, 10:23 AM
David Orsam David Orsam is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 7,916
Default

The clue in the word "scrapbook" is the word scrap! A scrapbook is called a "scrapbook" which is why it's not called a book. If I go into a shop wanting a scrapbook what am I going to be offered if I simply ask for a book?

Did Eddie say he had found a scrapbook? Unless that is the evidence, he appears to have been telling his colleague that he found a book, just like Vinny Dring said he found two old books in the same premises.
__________________
Orsam Books
www.orsam.co.uk
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #1723  
Old 05-22-2018, 10:29 AM
David Orsam David Orsam is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 7,916
Default

I've already explained, on 10th May, in #4654 of the Incontrovertible thread, why Koppenhaver's extract doesn't relate to the Diary ink but for those who can't concentrate, here it is again in all its glory:

REPEAT POST

From RJ's source, namely a 2002 book by Katherine Koppenhaver, entitled "Attorney's Guide to Document Examination" we read this (my bold):

"In addition to the first manufacturing date of ink, forensic chemists have devised a method of testing ballpoint ink samples to give a relative date of the writing. Ink dating can only determine the approximate date a message was penned on paper. According to Erich Speckin, an ink chemist with Speckin Laboratories in a lecture to the National Association of Document Examiners, "In the field of forensic chemistry advances in technology have made it possible to date ink within six months or less.

Ink chemists determine the age of ink by the rate of extraction from the paper and the percent of extraction. They measure how fast the ink can be chemically removed from the paper and how easily it is removed. Ink dries chemically in approximately three and one-half years according to Erich Speckin. By using the rate of extraction, ink chemists can determine the age of the application of the ink to within six months. After the ink has completely dried, the chemist can only state that the ink is over three and one-half years old."

So Koppenhaver was discussing, in 2002, in a book written for American attorneys (thus obviously relating only to the dating of modern documents) a technique for the dating of documents written in ballpoint ink using a method based on recent advances in technology.

The Speckin Forensic Ink Dating Technique(s) can actually be viewed here in this 1998 video, involving a punch, a backer, a vial, a syringe and/or an oven, a plate, a densitometer and a computer and it bears no relation to the type of simple solubility test that would have been conducted by Dr Baxendale:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oKUsdgPOzkw

Let's move along, nothing to see here.

No own goals…
__________________
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 04:00 PM.


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