|
 |
 |
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
    
John Hacker
Inspector
Username: Jhacker
Post Number: 251
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, February 27, 2004 - 10:29 pm: |       |
All,
I sat down today and had a good listen to the tape of the examination of the diary made by Don Rumbelow's friend "Bill the Bookbinder". The examination took place on 3/19/1998. Present were Bill, Don Rumbelow, Robert Smith, Shirley Harrison, and Keith Skinner. For what it's worth, I thought I would post my observations and impressions. (Please note that based on the tape quality and cheap tape player I used, I might be making some errors here, but these are the impressions I got.)
Everyone present seemed to ask good questions and seemed genuinely interested in getting honest answers from Bill.
I'll try and break the various observations down into broad categories.
Construction of the Diary:
The Diary appears to be a genuine Victorian guard book (Scrapbook). It's half leather bound, and is of medium to lower quality. While the binding methods etc were in use from 1820 through the 1st World War, Bill's impression was that it dated from somewhere in the latter part of the 19th century.
Part of the paper had peeled away from the solid portion of the binding, which was made of strawboard. It's a cardboard like material made from straw pulp and was the cheapest option available.
The staining on the pages is from grease or dirt.
Possibility of Tampering:
Bill saw no evidence of the book having been rebound or tampered with. He felt it was a genuine Victorian artifact, and if the paper was dated correctly there was no reason to doubt any of it.
The only possible tampering he saw as a possibility is that portions of multiple Victorian books could have been assembled into the original binding. He didn't think this likely based on the amount of skill required and the extreme difficulty of finding an exact match. Based on his explanation, I am inclined to accept this as extraordinarily unlikely.
Removal of the pages:
The pages that were removed were removed by a blunt knife or blunt scissors. He seemed to feel scissors were likely. The entire set of pages was not removed in a single go, rather they were removed in several passes. The removal was done as if by a "barbarian".
Availability of similar books:
When asked about the difficulty of finding such a book blank in modern times, Bill said that it would be extremely difficult to find an empty book such as this. However finding one with a portion used would not be particularly difficult, and could be bought at an auction "as is".
The rectangles:
Bill had the impression based on the color that the marks on the first page might have been caused by newspaper clippings, but he wasn't sure of that. (And based on the consistent size it seems unlikely to me.) Additionally, Shirley Harrison made an interesting comment regarding the fragment that was found in the binding and lost in the lab. Apparently it was blue... I have no idea what to make of that.
Chris George and R.J.,
I don't recall which of you brought up the binding/stuffing question initially, but I was wondering if either of you had followed up by trying to track down Bill via Don? It would be interesting to hear what he had to say. From the tape it didn't sound like the diary was "stuffed" in any way, but without asking him specifically I don't know if we can rule it out. My familiarity with book binding is zero.
Regards,
John |
Anthony Dee
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Saturday, February 28, 2004 - 8:46 am: | |
Hi Mr. Hacker
Two things I was wondering about with the Binding and pages. Someone inquired earlier about testing the pages that were cut out. Is there any way to test the torn part of the pages to see how long ago they were cut out? The other question is about the black powder that was found inside the binding. Is there any way they could test the powder to see what it is and how old it is?
Regards,
Anthony |
John Hacker
Inspector
Username: Jhacker
Post Number: 256
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, February 28, 2004 - 10:52 pm: | |
Hiya Anthony,
I don't know of any tests that could be used on the torn part of the pages to see when they were removed. I am checking into it though, as it seems a potentially valuable avenue to persue. I don't have a lot of hope unfortunately, but I'll keep my fingers crossed.
The black powder could certainly be tested more. Eastaugh's conclusion was tentative and not verified, and he was calling for additional tests. Nor was the source ever identified. It could possibly be residue of some sort from whatever occupied the cut out pages. Many substances very similar to "bone black" were used as pigments. Nor was it ever made clear if any similar residue was found between the pages of the diary proper, as opposed to "gutter" of the removed pages.
Regards,
John |
Anthony Dee
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Sunday, February 29, 2004 - 8:28 am: | |
Thank You, John. Hopefully, there will be more testing on the Diary and the pocket watch. and this thing will someday be resolved. Ha Ha !!
(Wishful Thinking)
Regards,
Anthony |
Caroline Anne Morris
Chief Inspector
Username: Caz
Post Number: 804
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, March 01, 2004 - 4:40 am: | |
Hi John (H),
Thanks very much for all your hard work - very constructive and helpful.
Love,
Caz |
Paul Stephen
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Monday, March 01, 2004 - 5:30 am: | |
Hi John
Taking a break from the pocket watch I see! Very interesting indeed. Blue eh? If that’s the corner of a coloured postcard then I believe a date of post 1894 is in order. But then the size of the impressions is wrong for a postcard……! .Alternatively, if it’s a coloured visiting card or similar then the diary’s still OK.
Hi Anthony
Wishful thinking indeedy. It would certainly be great to see new and completely neutral tests done on the watch and diary, as those done in the past have become so tainted by both those for and against authenticity.
The trouble is that after the experts have given their judgement, someone who isn’t an expert comes along and decides he was wrong!
Hi Caz
You can e mail me by clicking on my name now. Love to hear from you.
Paul
|
John Hacker
Inspector
Username: Jhacker
Post Number: 258
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, March 01, 2004 - 9:02 am: | |
Anthony,
We can certainly hope for more tests in the future. I'm keeping my fingers crossed.
Paul,
"Taking a break from the pocket watch I see! Very interesting indeed. Blue eh? If that’s the corner of a coloured postcard then I believe a date of post 1894 is in order. But then the size of the impressions is wrong for a postcard……! .Alternatively, if it’s a coloured visiting card or similar then the diary’s still OK."
Actually the watch isn't my main focus currently Paul. I'm mainly working on ink at the moment.
I have no idea what to make of the blue fragment, I just provided the information. Unfortunately the fragment was lost, so we'll never know for sure what it was.
"The trouble is that after the experts have given their judgement, someone who isn’t an expert comes along and decides he was wrong!"
I've noticed that too. When Rendell's team of experts in questioned document examination came and and found the diary to be forgery based on numerous, valid, widely accepted criteria, the denial set in pretty quick. 
Regards,
John |
Paul Stephen
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Monday, March 01, 2004 - 9:21 am: | |
Hi John
“I've noticed that too. When Rendell's team of experts in questioned document examination came and and found the diary to be forgery based on numerous, valid, widely accepted criteria, the denial set in pretty quick.”
I couldn’t agree more. It works both ways, and that’s what I meant.
Too many preconceived ideas as to what the experts findings SHOULD be, rather than what they actually were, is the most frustrating part of this debate to me.
Regards
Paul
P.S. I’m looking forward to hearing about your findings concerning the ink. A subject in which I claim absolutely no expertise whatsoever….
|
John Hacker
Inspector
Username: Jhacker
Post Number: 263
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 02, 2004 - 11:42 am: | |
Paul,
"Too many preconceived ideas as to what the experts findings SHOULD be, rather than what they actually were, is the most frustrating part of this debate to me."
The "experts" are an interesting subject that actually merits some serious discussion IMO. I'm putting together a monster post with my thoughts on the matter which I'll try and have up in a day or two. I think in many ways it's central to the debate in general.
As far as the ink goes, I'm no expert either. But I'm learning. :-)
Regards,
John |
Paul Stephen
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 02, 2004 - 7:58 pm: | |
John
I’m looking forward to the “Monster post” with genuinely baited breath. You’ll have to slow down here a bit or you’ll leave us all behind. Are 24 hours in a day enough for you?….
Another thought….not a very big one but, Bill thought the missing pages were hacked out by a barbarian with a blunt knife, or more likely blunt scissors. Michael Barratt told us in his “confession”, that he removed them with a Stanley knife. Do you have Stanley knives in the US? They’re very sharp indeed.
Regards
Paul
|
John Hacker
Inspector
Username: Jhacker
Post Number: 265
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, March 04, 2004 - 7:10 am: | |
Paul,
Nope. 24 hours a day apparently aren't enough! :-) My wife sat me down yesterday and explained that outside of JtR, there are other things in life. Like garages and basements to clean among other things, so I'm on domestic duty for a few days. It'll probably be the weekend or early next week before I can start posting in earnest again. Sigh.
Yep. We do have stanley knives in the US. And indeed they start out very sharp. I actually used one yesterday when breaking down boxes and cutting cardboard in the garage. By the time I was done, it was hard pressed to butter.
But I certainly agree it's yet another point against Michael's tale.
Regards,
John |
|
Use of these
message boards implies agreement and consent to our Terms of Use.
The views expressed here in no way reflect the views of the owners and
operators of Casebook: Jack the Ripper.
Our old message board content (45,000+ messages) is no longer available online, but a complete archive
is available on the Casebook At Home Edition, for 19.99 (US) plus shipping.
The "At Home" Edition works just like the real web site, but with absolutely no advertisements.
You can browse it anywhere - in the car, on the plane, on your front porch - without ever needing to hook up to
an internet connection. Click here to buy the Casebook At Home Edition.
|
|
|
|
