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:
Lechmere/Cross, Charles: So if you live in Bethnal Green, you won´t kill in Whitechapel? - by caz 2 hours ago.
Lechmere/Cross, Charles: So if you live in Bethnal Green, you won´t kill in Whitechapel? - by caz 3 hours ago.
Lechmere/Cross, Charles: So if you live in Bethnal Green, you won´t kill in Whitechapel? - by caz 4 hours ago.
Lechmere/Cross, Charles: So if you live in Bethnal Green, you won´t kill in Whitechapel? - by Batman 4 hours ago.
General Discussion: Mary Kelly Jack the Ripper celebrity ghost box session interview - by Bridewell 4 hours ago.
Lechmere/Cross, Charles: So if you live in Bethnal Green, you won´t kill in Whitechapel? - by Abby Normal 4 hours ago.

Most Popular Threads:
Lechmere/Cross, Charles: So if you live in Bethnal Green, you won´t kill in Whitechapel? - (46 posts)
Scene of the Crimes: The Nihilist Club ie. Berner Street - (1 posts)
General Police Discussion: City of London Precincts and Divisions involved in the Investigation - (1 posts)
General Discussion: Mary Kelly Jack the Ripper celebrity ghost box session interview - (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
  #4691  
Old 05-11-2018, 12:48 PM
David Orsam David Orsam is offline
*
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 7,916
Default

Ultimately the issue of whether Robert Smith's 2012 sample has bluish undertones or not is irrelevant. The reason for this is that we have Nick Warren's contemporary sample, written with Alec Voller's Diamine Ink, dated 26 January 1995.

I posted an extract from this sample and I don't think there can be any doubt that it looks similar to the Diary ink.

But you don't even have to take my word for it or question the quality of the photograph (itself a desperate tactic) for we have Melvin Harris saying, as I quoted yesterday, but which has, so far, been ignored:

"Nick in the enclosed letter even comments on this saying “…the effect is very watery, astonishingly so at first.” Indeed the Diamine ink I have seen is so close to the ink on the Diary pages that I regret that Smith and Harrison did not take your advice and write something down on a blank page back in January 1995. "

(NB. my original transcription of "your Diary pages" was wrong and should have been "the Diary pages")

Harris was, here, enclosing a colour copy of Nick Warren's sample for Voller's inspection and saying that it was "so close to the ink on the Diary pages". As we know, Voller commented in 2001 that the sample was indeed similar to the Diary ink (and I am paraphrasing there).

Yet, Warren's 1995 sample does not look very much like Robert Smith's 2012 sample.

I do not claim to be able to explain this but might I suggest that, as the bottle of ink went missing for 16 years, it may be that the bottle that was found in an attic in 2011 might not actually have been the same sample provided by Voller in January 1995. Perhaps it was a bottle of post-1992 Diamine which had been purchased from the Bluecoat Art Shop and which Shirley confused herself in 2011 into thinking was Voller's recreated pre-1992 sample. If the anonymous letter received by Smith was also written with post-1992 Diamine Ink purchased from the Bluecoat Art Shop then that would explain why they are similar (if they actually are similar, for which evidence is awaited).
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #4692  
Old 05-11-2018, 12:51 PM
Scott Nelson Scott Nelson is offline
Inspector
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,223
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Orsam View Post
One minute you want a definition then the next minute you want an identification.
Actually both in the same minute. But I am interested in the definition of a "Diary Defender". Anyone know?
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #4693  
Old 05-11-2018, 12:54 PM
David Orsam David Orsam is offline
*
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 7,916
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scott Nelson View Post
Actually both in the same minute. But I am interested in the definition of a "Diary Defender". Anyone know?
I already discussed this on the forum Scott. As I suspected, you just haven't been following.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #4694  
Old 05-11-2018, 12:57 PM
David Orsam David Orsam is offline
*
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 7,916
Default

I see the latest person to be smeared is Nick Warren. And he's a real doctor (unlike the imaginary one who gets cited so much). It's the usual desperate tactic. When the evidence is irrefutable throw in a smear or two, because that's really going to work.

And, incidentally, I don't recall saying that I photographed the original letter written by Nick Warren.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #4695  
Old 05-11-2018, 02:08 PM
Sam Flynn Sam Flynn is offline
Casebook Supporter
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Wales
Posts: 11,186
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by caz View Post
Why would Mike even be looking for details of Crashaw's life and works to begin with, when researching the ripper and Maybrick? And what were the chances of finding such absolute gems?
The same questions could be asked of any hoaxer at any time, Caz. Chances are, whoever wrote the diary just found these Crashaw poems in books. The biographical links and the Times Crossword bit strike me as being the same kind of curious coincidence whether we're talking about Mike or a non-Mike hoaxer.

To turn your question on its head: "Why would a non-Mike hoaxer even be looking for details of Crashaw's life and works to begin with?"
__________________
Kind regards, Sam Flynn

"Suche Nullen" (Nietzsche, Götzendämmerung, 1888)
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #4696  
Old 05-11-2018, 02:27 PM
David Orsam David Orsam is offline
*
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 7,916
Default

Regarding the Crashaw quote and the Sphere book, I can't confirm the truth of any of this, but this is what appears in what is, I assume, a previously unpublished note by Melvin Harris:

"A book and other documents that were "evidence" were mentioned to private detective Allan Gray by Mike Barrett, at the beginning of August 1994. No title was given. Mike also mentioned that he had left his "evidence" with his solicitor. At that time Gray took just passing notice of this claim. He is not a Ripperologist, and at that juncture he was simply employed to trace Anne and Mike's daughter . But in the first week of September Mike extended his engagement and asked Gray to help him "prove" his forgery claim so that the story could be sold to a newspaper. He said that his earlier actions could dry up the royalties and he wanted some compensation for this. It was at that point that Mike first NAMED the book as a " 'Sphere' book about poems". Let me underscore this: this partial naming took place in the FIRST WEEK of September 1994. His disclosure of the location of the Crashaw lines to Mrs Harrison, did not take place until much later, on 30th September. But he had earlier said to Gray that he had kept the book "up his sleeve". He had not told the Liverpool reporter about this book, since they "wanted everything for nothing" and made no offer to pay anything at all. Here let me register that Allan Gray will back this up with a statement meant for publication."
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #4697  
Old 05-11-2018, 03:05 PM
Iconoclast Iconoclast is offline
Sergeant
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 883
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam Flynn View Post
Did the Victorians use phrases like "off-day", though? I doubt it. Besides, the diary refers to "A one off instance", not simply "AN off instance", which doesn't work. (Compare "I'm having a one off-day", which doesn't work for the same reason.)
This is the diffrence between the critical eye and the black and white of 2018 and the full-blown technicolour of the dust and dirt of 18889 and 1889.

You write as though everyone writes what is already prepared in the head. Just like speech, what we write is largely what is spun in the pre-articulatory loop before being pronounced so it inevitably becomes error-prone and grammatically-imprecise.

Maybrick wrote in the here and now, not in the retrospect of a hundred years. He wrote "A" and then "one" and people in the north of England to this day still say "a one" (my own mother does it, much to our amusement) and whether he meant it or not, he left it, because it wasn't important, it was for his eyes only, and he didn't care. The "off instance" followed and his grammar and context and meaning are impeccable because they were what he wanted to write in the moment of wriiting and he absolutely didn't care about the critical eyes of an audience he never thought once to have. Pardon my grammar.
__________________
Iconoclast
Soldier of Fortune, Man of Peace, Destroyer of Images, Nice Guy
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #4698  
Old 05-11-2018, 03:13 PM
David Orsam David Orsam is offline
*
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 7,916
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Iconoclast View Post
Maybrick wrote in the here and now, not in the retrospect of a hundred years. He wrote "A" and then "one" and people in the north of England to this day still say "a one" (my own mother does it, much to our amusement) and whether he meant it or not, he left it, because it wasn't important, it was for his eyes only, and he didn't care. The "off instance" followed and his grammar and context and meaning are impeccable because they were what he wanted to write in the moment of wriiting and he absolutely didn't care about the critical eyes of an audience he never thought once to have. Pardon my grammar.
So you accept that "one-off" as in "one-off instance" was not an expression that Maybrick could have used?
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #4699  
Old 05-12-2018, 12:46 AM
Iconoclast Iconoclast is offline
Sergeant
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 883
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Orsam View Post
So you accept that "one-off" as in "one-off instance" was not an expression that Maybrick could have used?
Why would I need to, my good Lord O?

If I believe that he intended to write something quite different ("one off-instance"), that has no bearing on whether or not I believe he could have written "one-off instance" as clearly I don't believe that that was what he was intending to write.

But - moving on from your little non sequitur there - I am happy to address the question nevertheless: At this point in time, I accept the evidence which has been put to us by you - that no-one could have writeen "one off instance" (as it is written in the journal) in 1888 or 1889 and meant by it "one-off instance". If - in saying this - you could read that to mean that I "accept that "one-off" as in "one-off instance" was not an expression that Maybrick could have used" then, I guess, yes, that is what I accept.

Until, of course, the evidence comes along that proves that Maybrick could have meant to use that term after all.

But none of that is particularly relevant if Maybrick could have meant "one-off instance" or "one off-instance" because clearly either work. If you are compelled to sacrifice the former (as the evidence you present us with suggests we must), you can still have the latter.

I can sense the dusty encyclopaedias hurtling from the shelves of Orsam Manor as I type. A new theme is to be researched and no stone is to be left unturned ...
__________________
Iconoclast
Soldier of Fortune, Man of Peace, Destroyer of Images, Nice Guy
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #4700  
Old 05-12-2018, 12:58 AM
Sam Flynn Sam Flynn is offline
Casebook Supporter
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Wales
Posts: 11,186
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Iconoclast View Post
But none of that is particularly relevant if Maybrick could have meant "one-off instance" or "one off-instance" because clearly either work.
Not so. "One-off instance" is the only one that works, because there is no such thing as an "off-instance", whether hyphenated or not.
__________________
Kind regards, Sam Flynn

"Suche Nullen" (Nietzsche, Götzendämmerung, 1888)

Last edited by Sam Flynn : 05-12-2018 at 01:00 AM.
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 12:36 PM.


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