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:
Non-Fiction: The Mysterious Fred - by Simon Wood 28 minutes ago.
Non-Fiction: The Mysterious Fred - by rjpalmer 40 minutes ago.
Non-Fiction: The Mysterious Fred - by Simon Wood 1 hour and 18 minutes ago.
Hutchinson, George: Any updates, or opinions on this witness. - by Wickerman 1 hour and 21 minutes ago.
Non-Fiction: The Mysterious Fred - by Simon Wood 2 hours ago.
Non-Fiction: The Mysterious Fred - by rjpalmer 2 hours ago.

Most Popular Threads:
Hutchinson, George: Any updates, or opinions on this witness. - (19 posts)
Non-Fiction: The Mysterious Fred - (9 posts)
Casebook Announcements: Katherine Bradshaw Amin (1980-2018) - (3 posts)
General Suspect Discussion: Kansas Physician Confirms Howard Report - (1 posts)
Visual Media: "Mysteries at the Museum" features JtR Museum - (1 posts)
Shades of Whitechapel: Dennis Nilsen - (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
  #2691  
Old 01-06-2017, 01:03 PM
Iconoclast Iconoclast is offline
Sergeant
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 829
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Orsam View Post
An 1890 or 1891 diary is an LVP diary isn't it?

As I've said already, all a forger needs is for the paper to be of the right period.

If he's got blank pages to work with then all he potentially needs to do is remove the pages with writing on them.

Amazingly, as it turns out, some people won't find this in any way suspicious.
But still he doesn't know that no-one in the LVP were that bothered about dates so his request is either utter madness or else he really was the genius we never thought he could ever have been.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #2692  
Old 01-06-2017, 01:07 PM
Iconoclast Iconoclast is offline
Sergeant
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 829
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Orsam View Post
So a few weeks before producing an amazing LVP diary which, incredibly, reveals the identity of Jack the Ripper, the person who produces that diary is advertising in a trade journal for a genuine LVP diary which contains blank pages.

And you seriously think I need to resort to "a stretching of the imagination" to work out what was going on?
Yes.

His 'confession' tells you that he already had the journal. If his 'confession' was false, then his 'confession' cannot be used against the authenticity of the journal.

It is true that I am struggling to think of a reason why he needed blank pages other than some hare-brained thought to create a copy of what he had in his hands in case he lost it or lost control of it in London.

As I say, I wasn't Mike Barrett so it's hard for me to explain to you why he did what he did unless you are right and his 'confession' wrong.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #2693  
Old 01-06-2017, 01:09 PM
Iconoclast Iconoclast is offline
Sergeant
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 829
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Orsam View Post
I thought that's what you already had been doing.

I'm not Mike Barrett but I can see that a person who is about to forge an LVP diary might find it useful to acquire a genuine LVP diary containing some blank pages.
I agree - if a person was about to forge an LVP diary. That bit, though, is just your interpretation. It's obviously the one you overwhlemingly believe in, and good for you on that score. Personally, I'm not where you're at.

The good news for me is that your belief in your theory is no more damaging to my belief that the journal is authentic than my failure to explain this point about the blank pages.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #2694  
Old 01-06-2017, 01:10 PM
David Orsam David Orsam is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 7,916
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Iconoclast View Post
The issue is not whether or not LVP diaries had dates in them but whether or not Mike Barrett, unemployed scrap-metal dealer, could possibly have known that they didn't.
If Mike forged the Diary then he deliberately did so in a book upon which there was no date. So clearly, if he was the forger, then in his mind he understood that people kept diaries in the nineteenth century which did not bear a date.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Iconoclast View Post
Before you checked for examples on the internet (which Mike didn't have access to) did you also know this?
You might remember that I explained that I myself once kept a diary in a normal exercise book. I also explained why such a method has many advantages.

It has always been my belief that people write diaries in normal books rather than specially printed yearly diaries and I've never had any reason to think it was done differently in the Victorian period.
__________________
Orsam Books
www.orsam.co.uk
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #2695  
Old 01-06-2017, 01:13 PM
David Orsam David Orsam is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 7,916
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Iconoclast View Post
The good news for me is that your belief in your theory is no more damaging to my belief that the journal is authentic than my failure to explain this point about the blank pages.
I really don't understand that sentence.

Your failure to explain the request for blank pages is absolutely fatal to the notion that the Diary is genuine.

I'm not sure what "theory" I'm supposed to have other than that I can't think of any other explanation for Mike Barrett seeking to acquire an LVP diary with blank pages in March 1992 other than to use to forge the Diary which he would shortly produce for Doreen.
__________________
Orsam Books
www.orsam.co.uk
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #2696  
Old 01-06-2017, 01:13 PM
Iconoclast Iconoclast is offline
Sergeant
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 829
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Orsam View Post
But everything I have been saying about Barrett's affidavit is based on him getting the date of January 1990 wrong as the date on which the Diary was written.

And everything I have been saying is based on adjusting the chronology to fit in with known dates.

What we know is that Barrett advertised for an LVP diary with blank pages in March 1992 so I have adjusted the chronology to fit in with that known date.
Have you also remembered to adjust the inconvenient chronology of Tony Devereux's death to roughly March 1992? If you have, fair enough, I think you win this one. If you haven't (and I'm assuming can't) then you have to wish away the fact the Mike Barrett's confession tells us either that he had the journal in his hands before August 1991 or else his confession is not something to be relied on. In that event, you have your magic single-bullet theory for March 1992 but no confession from Mike Barrett anymore.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #2697  
Old 01-06-2017, 01:19 PM
Iconoclast Iconoclast is offline
Sergeant
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 829
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Orsam View Post
If Mike forged the Diary then he deliberately did so in a book upon which there was no date. So clearly, if he was the forger, then in his mind he understood that people kept diaries in the nineteenth century which did not bear a date.



You might remember that I explained that I myself once kept a diary in a normal exercise book. I also explained why such a method has many advantages.

It has always been my belief that people write diaries in normal books rather than specially printed yearly diaries and I've never had any reason to think it was done differently in the Victorian period.
Come on, David. No-one would call such a blank notebook a 'diary'! They would call it a notebook, and then go on to write their 'diary' within it.

Barrett advertised for a diary. You and I know perfectly well that a diary is a diary and a notebook is a notebook. We know perfectly well the difference now and - I'm assuming - the difference then. The internet has not only made the world smaller for us but it has also done that to history. Mike didn't have that luxury.

And for the record, the journal of James Maybrick is NOT a diary!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #2698  
Old 01-06-2017, 01:23 PM
Iconoclast Iconoclast is offline
Sergeant
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 829
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Orsam View Post
I really don't understand that sentence.
It does make sense, I promise you.

Quote:
I'm not sure what "theory" I'm supposed to have other than that I can't think of any other explanation for Mike Barrett seeking to acquire an LVP diary with blank pages in March 1992 other than to use to forge the Diary which he would shortly produce for Doreen.
Do you mean the one after the one he 'confessed' to writing in the Maybrick journal before August 1991, yes?

Whatever happened to that second one, by the way?
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #2699  
Old 01-06-2017, 01:23 PM
GUT GUT is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: I come from a land Down Under
Posts: 7,331
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Iconoclast View Post
Come on, David. No-one would call such a blank notebook a 'diary'! They would call it a notebook, and then go on to write their 'diary' within it.

Barrett advertised for a diary. You and I know perfectly well that a diary is a diary and a notebook is a notebook. We know perfectly well the difference now and - I'm assuming - the difference then. The internet has not only made the world smaller for us but it has also done that to history. Mike didn't have that luxury.

And for the record, the journal of James Maybrick is NOT a diary!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
well there's the answer to the thread title, the "Duary" is refuted.
__________________
G U T

There are two ways to be fooled, one is to believe what isn't true, the other is to refuse to believe that which is true.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #2700  
Old 01-06-2017, 01:25 PM
David Orsam David Orsam is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 7,916
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Iconoclast View Post
Agree with you entirely up to the bit where you think even Mike Barrett would be dumb enough to seek a diary from a period of time (1890) in which his chosen protagonist had already engaged in a spot of pushing up the daisies.
But obviously he's not going to write his Maybrick Diary in a diary bearing the year of 1890.

So I just can't see what you think the problem is. The paper will be from the right period which is the important thing.
__________________
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 11:18 AM.


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