why is there no evidence that shows sir jim was in liverpool

[cotty]

at the time of the murders?

[Mike Covell]

Hi Cotty, do you have your daily where about published in magazines, newspapers, trade directories or other official documentation?

[Bob Hinton]

Relevance?

at the time of the murders?

Why should he be in Liverpool at the time of the murders? There are plenty of other places he could be - London for instance, where he could join the other 2 million people who were in London at the time!

[cotty]

Hi Cotty, do you have your daily where about published in magazines, newspapers, trade directories or other official documentation?

Nope, I have my personal blog for that.

[cotty]

Why should he be in Liverpool at the time of the murders?

Um cos he lived in Liverpool

[Crystal]

Why should there be evidence that he was in Liverpool at the time of the murders? What evidence would you hope for or expect? Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. There may once have been evidence which no longer exists, there may have never been any evidence at all, but he still may have been in Liverpool at the time. It's impossible to know.

[harry]

Cotty,
Or in London.

[Bob Hinton]

Um cos he lived in Liverpool

Are you saying that people in the 1880's always remained at home? Or does the possibility that in building the greatest Empire the world has ever seen, some of them might have travelled not occur to you?

[Crystal]

'the greatest Empire the world has ever seen' was the Roman Empire, I think you'll find, on which, incidentally, the British Empire was modelled. People did travel, yes, and extensively too. Surely the point here is that nobody knows where Maybrick was at the time? I place no particularly significance on that, I'm sure the same is true of a great many people - it doesn't make them murderers, or even particularly suspicious.

[cotty]

Hmm I can see that youre all leaning toward this crazy idea that sir jim might not be jack the ripper.
What i don't get is, how would the hoaxers have known that it was impossible to know where sir jim was at the time of the murders?

[caz]

Hi Crystal,

You ask: Why should there be evidence that Maybrick was in Liverpool at the time of the murders?

Well, no reason really. But it's a pity, considering how much of a big deal was made of his death and the trial of his widow for murder, in 1889, that more records were not kept of his trips to various chemists and doctors for his chemical fixes. I'm pretty sure without looking it up that one chemist testified that Maybrick would pop in up to five times a day for his arsenic pick-me-up and one of his doctors reported that he had complained of severe headaches between August and November 1888.

If I had read that, while planning a certain little false confession (I'd have done it to pay the bugger back for the appalling and selfish habits that led to dearest "Bunny" suffering a living nightmare for the rest of her days, and would have made it a very short suicide note, like Monty's - and definitely no poetry ), I think I might have worried just a tad that records could have survived of just one visit or consultation that would have put paid to my dastardly plans before I got past my first historian with a CSE in the Maybrick Trial.

As an aside, I do wonder about the person who would leave fresh flowers on the grave of a man who drugged himself up to the hilt and womanised his way round the world, before leaving his wife to cope with the inevitable consequences of leaving a ton of arsenic around the house and writing to Michael suggesting they do a post-mortem to try and find out what had been the matter with him! What did he think was the matter and who did he think would get the blame?

Love,

Caz
X

[ChrisGeorge]

I'm pretty sure without looking it up that one chemist testified that Maybrick would pop in up to five times a day for his arsenic pick-me-up and one of his doctors reported that he had complained of severe headaches between August and November 1888.

Hi Caz

You remember correctly.

"a chemist (Edwin Garnett Heaton) from whom Maybrick obtained his 'medicine,' said that Maybrick came into the shop on Exchange Street East as many as five times a day to get his 'pick-me-up.'"

From Maybrick Case on LawBuzz

[Sam Flynn]

I wholeheartedly agree, Crystal.

Whilst today's technology could allow us to implant chips in everyone's body so that we can track them, it would be a logistical, and moral, nightmare to achieve. Certainly, there is no earthly way of pinpointing the movements of anyone who lived 120 years ago with any great precision.

The best we could realistically hope for would be "he was in X, Y or Z town on A, B and C dates". Even if that were done - and even that's unlikely, because the records are patchy at best - we'd still be left with the impossible task of placing him at a murder scene. If nobody saw the Ripper in the act of murder at the times they were committed, we certainly will never be able to do so.

As with Prince Eddie, Neill Cream and Ostrog, however, it is quite possible that we could demonstrate that Maybrick was elsewhere. However, Maybrick isn't quite in the same ballpark as the other three, because with them we have the benefit of official records that show they weren't in Whitechapel at crucial times.

[Soothsayer]

What i don't get is, how would the hoaxers have known that it was impossible to know where sir jim was at the time of the murders?

Excellent question, Cotty, sir!

Our hoaxers went to significant effort in the detail behind the diary, and luck graced them time and time again - not least in this, that Maybrick was not on record as having been placeable away from Whitechapel at the time of the murders.

Those of us who are open to discussion understood perfectly what you meant when you asked why he wasn't on record in Liverpool.

One of the tricks on this Casebook when a reasonable person such as you asks a good and penetrating question is to nitpick around the issue rather than cut to the core of it.

[The Good Michael]

What i don't get is, how would the hoaxers have known that it was impossible to know where sir jim was at the time of the murders?

They couldn't find any information as to his whereabouts, so he was an ideal choice for their suspect. Well... except for the part that every rational person could see it was a tale.

Mike