Author: Christopher T George
Friday, 11 October 2002 - 01:37 pm |        |
Hi, Caz:
A good exercise might be to see if Mike could whip out another 63 pages, preferably including a few more lines from our favorite seventeenth century Whitechapel poet, Richard Crashaw. 
Again though I have to wonder what is on those additional pages of the Diary that Mike has shown to Keith Skinner, and whether or not they are absolutely consistent with the original Diary pages.
Chris |
Author: Caroline Morris
Friday, 11 October 2002 - 02:24 pm | |
Hi Chris,
Indeed.
The thing is, Mike has claimed that Anne actually wrote his composition into the diary. When asked at the April 1999 C&D meeting why the writing doesn't look like Anne's, he said she suffered from multiple personality disorder.
So if Mike produces some more diary entries, and then claims he composed them too, I guess it won't matter what the writing looks like because Anne could have done it in one of her other 'hands'?
Love,
Caz |
Author: R.J. Palmer
Friday, 11 October 2002 - 04:05 pm | |
Caz--Hi. I need to clarify one of your comments above. Yes, I said that I don't believe that the diary is written in the handwriting of Mike Barrett or Anne Graham. 'Believe' is the important word. But I certainly didn't intend to "add strength to anyone's argument" that it would therefore be unwise or extravagant to commission an examination of their handwriting. In fact, if I had $10,000 to blow on the Maybrick Diary, I think I would be obliged to make it my first order of business.
But I'm intrigued. You seem to be saying --indeed you are saying-- that the key diary researchers don't find it a "good chance" that the diary was penned by Graham, Barrett, Devereux, or Kane; indeed, it's such a poor chance that it may not be wise to spend hard-to-get funds on commissioning any handwriting examinations. Do you have a feel for how they have come to this conclusion? Do you sense that it is based some insight into the people mentioned above, or do you sense that it is based on a belief that the diary's sophistication/age makes the "chance" entirely remote?
Thanks, RJ Palmer |
Author: Christopher T George
Friday, 11 October 2002 - 04:27 pm | |
Hi, RJ:
I still believe based on what I saw of the Gerard Kane handwriting samples that I saw in Oxford last year that there is enough of a similarity of Kane's writing not to discount that person as the penman. I had understood that Peter Birchwood was exploring with Alan Gray the possibility of making those samples public.
All the best
Chris |
Author: R.J. Palmer
Friday, 11 October 2002 - 05:28 pm | |
Chris--Hello. How are you? Many thanks for that.
Er...I've noticed at least twice now Caz rather enigmatically alluding to the Kane handwriting samples being discreditted. But it's hard to tell. Perhaps I'm misreading her, but her statements have led me to assume that other members of the Oxford 'summit'--Shirley Harrison, Melyyn Fairclough & Keith Skinner(?)--perhaps came to the conclusion that Kane's handwriting wasn't a match to the Maybrick Diary. Caz--can you make any elaborations? Best wishes, RJ Palmer |
Author: Caroline Morris
Saturday, 12 October 2002 - 07:54 am | |
Hi RJ,
All I’m really saying is that if any of the ‘key diary researchers’ had ever thought there was a chance of nailing the diary penman by paying to have anyone’s handwriting (apart from Maybrick’s) professionally analysed, as you say, one would think they would have made it their ‘first order of business’ – if not from a sense of obligation, from a desire to solve the mystery and put it to bed. You say, from the outside looking in, that if you had the funds you would have made this your priority. All I’m saying is that there are presumably reasons why all those on the inside, including Melvin Harris, have apparently not made it theirs.
We could all speculate about the possible reasons: you might think, as John Hacker suggested recently, that certain researchers began by believing the diary itself to be old, thereby closing their minds to any possibility of a modern forger at work. Others might think the researchers believed the forgery to be too sophisticated for Mike, for example, to have conceived, researched and put together.
I certainly recall posting more than one message from Keith Skinner, explaining to you that the only way forward for him was to try to prove the diary modern by identifying the forgers. Does that suggest to you a reluctance to examine the modern players closely for signs of their involvement in a forgery conspiracy? No, me neither. And I have no reason to disbelieve Keith when he says he is not interested in concealing any such signs, and would have dropped the whole thing long ago had he found them. Keith was, of course, hoping that Melvin had already cracked it, and that it was only a matter of time before he would reveal the proof, which would, naturally, have rendered unnecessary any further commissioning of tests - costly, time-consuming and, if past efforts are anything to go by, unlikely to be conclusive or universally accepted anyway.
Regarding citizen Kane’s candidacy, I was simply observing that, considering his handwriting has been around for quite a while now, and the diary is still being debated, it appears that no one is in any desperate hurry to link the two and wrap it all up – hence I was assuming, though perhaps incorrectly, that Kane was no longer being considered by any of the ‘key diary researchers’, if he ever was, as a serious candidate for the penman.
I am more than happy to see my assumption proved wrong – some evidence that the Barretts and Kane knew of one another’s existence when the former were supposedly handling and placing the penman’s work would be good for starters.
I just find it hard to believe that it has been this hard to track down the penman by now if the diary is modern. And I find it equally hard to accept that it has been for want of trying – on the part of everyone closely involved, no matter what their beliefs.
Perhaps you should be directing your diary enquiries to someone who has claimed to know the answers - I have very few.
Enjoy the rest of your weekend. You too Chris.
Love,
Caz |
Author: John Dow
Monday, 14 October 2002 - 08:55 am | |
(puts hand up)
Excuse me?
Erm. I didn't write the diary. Does anyone want to take a handwriting sample so I can be eliminated?
|
Author: Monty
Tuesday, 15 October 2002 - 10:04 am | |
John,
You didnt ???
Damn....I put a monkey on you at 33-1.
Cheers mate
PS couldnt you just pretend and I give you a honest split...60-40...I cant say fairer than that ! |
Author: ALAN SMITH
Wednesday, 16 October 2002 - 11:29 am | |
Monty,
What do you mean 33/1? I think John must be considered one of "None of the above" in the list I posted and therefore would be 1/33.
Unless of course I have a rival bookie on the boards in which case a turf war is inevitable.
Alan
p.s. I havent seen the monkey, is the cheque in the post? |
Author: Monty
Thursday, 17 October 2002 - 11:41 am | |
Alan,
The monkey has escaped the post and was last seen running in the direction of la rue morgue.
I can give you a pony and trap along with 2 elephants, a wombat and a naked Cyril Smith.
Monty
PS Rival bookie ??? Havent you heard of honest Caz ?? |
Author: John Dow
Friday, 18 October 2002 - 05:42 am | |
Monty, I shall see your pony and trap, your paltry elephants, your wombat, and - god help me - your naked cyril smith and I shall raise you:
Two and a quarter imperial pounds of rancid badger's entrails, a quart of root beer, two bags of repaired eggshells (eggs removed), 29 small brown ferrets, and a chicken sandwich. |
Author: Caroline Morris
Friday, 18 October 2002 - 06:14 am | |
Hi All,
In the great ripper tradition of theories regarding famous people, perhaps in 100 years from now, they will be wagering about famous Liverpudlians who may have written the diary.
I'll start the ball rolling with the following cheeky scousers and Monty can supply the odds:
Jimmy Tarbuck (anagram of J Maybrick Tum)
Stan Boardman (anagram of Mr. Satan Bond)
Cilla Black (anagram of Kill Cabal C)
Ken Dodd (anagram of Odd end K)
Have a great weekend all.
Love,
Honest Caz |
Author: ALAN SMITH
Friday, 18 October 2002 - 06:54 am | |
Caz,
Isnt remarkable how the 4 most irritating gits this side of the rockies all hail from the same city.
By jove they are worse than the Jaymans, Chuck.
Ho Ho
Love
Alan |
Author: Chris Jd
Friday, 18 October 2002 - 12:14 pm | |
Caz:
isn't Chris T a famous Liverpudlian?
:-)
Christian |
Author: Christopher T George
Friday, 18 October 2002 - 12:30 pm | |
Hi, Christian and Caz:
You must both have too much time on your hands.
Hope you both have a great weekend!  
Will I see you both at the Britannia Adelphi Hotel in Liverpool, August 15-17, 2003 for the next UK Ripper convention?
Chris George |
Author: Monty
Saturday, 19 October 2002 - 07:55 am | |
John,
Imperial pounds ???? What year are you in ??
Weve gone metric down here mate. Besides, I only except Socialist ounces.
Caz,
To me the diary has always smacked of Roger McGough.
Monty
|
Author: Caroline Morris
Saturday, 19 October 2002 - 09:44 am | |
Thanks Chris - I'm trying to give up the and though. Otherwise, by the time I get to Liverpool in August 2003 I'll have curves the size of Coventry and arteries as tight and furry as Sooty's you know what!
I truly hope you will see less of me there - in the nicest possible way of course.
Hi Monty,
Dunno, but whoever wrote those diary rhymes wants smacking.
Christmas save the whores mole bonnett
damn the bitches damn Michael
Give Sir Jim his due
He detests all the Jews
For he has no favourite men
As he runs away to his den
Absolutely shocking - no wonder even the author crossed these lines out. 
Love,
Caz |
Author: Christopher T George
Sunday, 20 October 2002 - 08:55 am | |
Hi, Monty:
Well I have met Roger McGough and I have to say that such a writer is "cleverer" than anything seen in the Diary. That's not to say though that there may have been some intelligence behind the Diary who remains to be unmasked.... probably not Roger though, in my opinion.
All the best
Chris |
Author: Guy Hatton
Monday, 21 October 2002 - 06:19 am | |
Chris -
Met? About twenty years ago, I had McGough and Brian Patten stay in my house overnight after giving a charity poetry reading at Leeds University. One thing that remains painfully clear to me after all this time is that he is not only cleverer than the Diary author, but also could withstand the effects of the contents of Mr. Patten's well-stocked jiffy bag better than I or any of my housemates! Heaven knows what he thought I was rabbiting on about! A truly remarkable gentleman.
Cheers
Guy |
Author: Christopher T George
Monday, 21 October 2002 - 10:14 am | |
Hi, Guy:
I am pleased to learn of your literary interests. I knew the late Adrian Henri better than I know McGough or Patten, although I attended a reading at the Royal Albert Hall in 1984 with those three esteemed Liverpool poets plus Allen Ginsberg, Gregory Corso, Basil Bunting, Roy Fisher, and some up and coming younger poets. I went back stage afterwards to hobnob with the literati and we adjourned to the Chelsea Arts Club for a reception afterward that went on into the early hours of the morning. Quite a memory.
All the best
Chris |
