Where do current experts stand on the Diary?

[Haskins]

The Diary of Jack the Ripper. Fantastic book, gripping read. And, as I recall, a lot of ripper experts supported it's authenticity, including the late great Colin Wilson (who first got me interested in this whole subject). Obviously Shirley Harrison and Paul Feldman agree.

But where do the current experts stand?

I know for sure that Philip Sugden and John Eccleston both believe it to be false, as does Nick Warren.

How about Martin Fido, Paul Begg, Donald Rumbelow, Keith Skinner, Stewart Evans, Phillip Hutchinson and others?

I'm just curious for a summary of how the respected experts in the field view the diary.

[Cogidubnus]

Martin Fido, Donald Rumbelow and Keith Skinner would not appear to contribute here of late. Philip hasn't posted for ages. Paul Begg, alas, is seriously ill. I suspect Stewart Evans is the only one from whom you might just attract an answer.

All the best

Dave

[Stephen Thomas]

The Diary of Jack the Ripper. Fantastic book, gripping read. And, as I recall, a lot of ripper experts supported it's authenticity, including the late great Colin Wilson (who first got me interested in this whole subject). Obviously Shirley Harrison and Paul Feldman agree.

But where do the current experts stand?

I know for sure that Philip Sugden and John Eccleston both believe it to be false, as does Nick Warren.

How about Martin Fido, Paul Begg, Donald Rumbelow, Keith Skinner, Stewart Evans, Phillip Hutchinson and others?

I'm just curious for a summary of how the respected experts in the field view the diary.

Well Stewart Evans, the greatest JTR expert, calls it a cheap fake.

Colin Wilson is dead?

[Haskins]

Well Stewart Evans, the greatest JTR expert, calls it a cheap fake.

Colin Wilson is dead?

Yikes, no thankfully. I must have confused him with another author - and too late to edit! I see now how Mcnaughtan got so confused.

Sad to hear about Paul Begg being ill.

[CPenney]

Martin Fido, in his podcast on "The Police, the Jews and Jack the Ripper" calls it an obvious forgery (can't recall his exact quote).

[pinkmoon]

It looks like keith skinner discoverd information back in 2007 which explains the history of the diary .

[Graham]

Since Paul Feldman and Shirley Harrison published their books, which is now getting on for 20 years ago, I really don't think very many people now accept that the 'Diary' was written by James Maybrick and, ergo, James Maybrick was Jack The Ripper. I think Caz would agree with this?

I think at the time of its 'discovery', there were £-signs in a lot of eyes, and I would suspect that a lot of entrepreneurial types saw it as another Hitler Diary, but a genuine one this time.

Speaking purely personally, my only interest in the 'Diary' is (obviously) who wrote it and when, where it was for however many years, and what did Keith Skinner find out about it? On the other hand, if answers to none of these questions are forthcoming, I won't lose much sleep.

Graham

[pinkmoon]

Since Paul Feldman and Shirley Harrison published their books, which is now getting on for 20 years ago, I really don't think very many people now accept that the 'Diary' was written by James Maybrick and, ergo, James Maybrick was Jack The Ripper. I think Caz would agree with this?

I think at the time of its 'discovery', there were £-signs in a lot of eyes, and I would suspect that a lot of entrepreneurial types saw it as another Hitler Diary, but a genuine one this time.

Speaking purely personally, my only interest in the 'Diary' is (obviously) who wrote it and when, where it was for however many years, and what did Keith Skinner find out about it? On the other hand, if answers to none of these questions are forthcoming, I won't lose much sleep.

Graham

Hi Graham,people did have their judgement clouded by the glint of gold the diary offerd.Mr Feldman didn't follow up things that were close to home regarding the diary .I personally held the believe that the diary was written after 1988 by Mike Barrett however meeting Mr Barrett several times I came to the conclusion very quickly he was no master forger .When the truth about the diary comes out we will we be disappointed that there was no conspiracy or nest of forgers and the explanation how it appeared will be very straight forward.

[Graham]

I never accepted that either of the Barretts forged the 'Diary', neither did I accept Melvin Harris' claim of a "nest of forgers" in Liverpool. He said he could name them, but never did. There never was a conspiracy.

With regard to the age of the 'Diary' and the Watch, here again the 'experts' and their various supporters could never agree, a situation which is today being repeated on the "Private Sale" thread of this Forum.

Graham

[Sally]

I've always thought that if the Diary is a forgery, the forgers may have learned from the outcome of Kujau's Hitler Diaries.

Exposed mainly because the paper used for the 'diaries' contained modern paper brighteners and Kujau had used modern ink; a theoretical forger may well have discerned that a manufactured Jack the Ripper Diary would require contemporary paper and ink consistent with the 1880's.

It would've been possible to do that, of course, and perhaps not too far-fetched when one considers the sums of money potentially at stake if a manufactured Diary was accepted as genuine.

[pinkmoon]

Like I said if you take a pen and paper and do a time line of events regarding the diary it is glaring obvious what has happens.No way Mr Barrett forged diary and nobody with an ounce of sense would use him in a scam.

[Graham]

PM,

I think I see where you're coming from....I think also that Paul Feldman possibly made a discovery that didn't fit in with his scenario and possibly chose to believe only what he wanted to believe.

Graham

[pinkmoon]

PM,

I think I see where you're coming from....I think also that Paul Feldman possibly made a discovery that didn't fit in with his scenario and possibly chose to believe only what he wanted to believe.

Graham

Mr Feldman wanted to make a movie out of this so his findings had to be dramatic and maybrick had to be the ripper.He didn't follow up the basic early leads properly and like I said when you draw up a time line the solution looks quite simple.

[caz]

I've always thought that if the Diary is a forgery, the forgers may have learned from the outcome of Kujau's Hitler Diaries.

Exposed mainly because the paper used for the 'diaries' contained modern paper brighteners and Kujau had used modern ink; a theoretical forger may well have discerned that a manufactured Jack the Ripper Diary would require contemporary paper and ink consistent with the 1880's.

It would've been possible to do that, of course, and perhaps not too far-fetched when one considers the sums of money potentially at stake if a manufactured Diary was accepted as genuine.

Hi Sally,

It's a reasonable observation on the surface, but why on earth would a forger, or forgers, hoping to do better than Kujau and stay out of prison, do the research required to get the paper and ink right this time, then make absolutely no attempt to copy their chosen subject's handwriting? They must have known the scrutiny to which their finished product would be subjected, if they used the Hitler Diaries as their 'how not to' guide.

Love,

Caz
X

[Phil Carter]

Hi Sally,

It's a reasonable observation on the surface, but why on earth would a forger, or forgers, hoping to do better than Kujau and stay out of prison, do the research required to get the paper and ink right this time, then make absolutely no attempt to copy their chosen subject's handwriting? They must have known the scrutiny to which their finished product would be subjected, if they used the Hitler Diaries as their 'how not to' guide.

Love,

Caz
X

Hello Caroline,

The answer, to my humble mind, is simply that nobody is perfect and a gaff is nearly always made, large or small.

Those are my 2 pennies for what they are worth.

Even the most well-known modern joker, Jeremy Beadle, got caught out on occasion.....


Phil