Author: Anonymous
Tuesday, 22 December 1998 - 08:14 am |        |
PROOF WILL SOON BE FORTHCOMING THAT THE MAYBRICK DIARY WAS ACTUALLY WRITTEN BY DR THOMAS DUTTON.
NEMO. |
Author: Oracle
Tuesday, 22 December 1998 - 10:29 am | |
| Absolute and sheer nonsense! |
Author: Christopher-Michael
Wednesday, 23 December 1998 - 04:12 am | |
I don't know why I'm bothering, but -
If the Diary were written by that old "microphotography" fraud Dutton, then that pretty well stamps it a bloody fake after all, doesn't it? |
Author: Paul Begg
Wednesday, 23 December 1998 - 08:54 am | |
Poor old Dr. Dutton. To be so cruelly served at this festive time.
Words were attributed to him by Donald McCormick. Whether any of those words were actually Dr. Dutton's own remains open to question, particularly the definition of microphotography, which may simply have been McCormick's own. Branding Dutton a fraud on the basis of this seems a tad unfair. |
Author: Anonymous
Saturday, 26 December 1998 - 01:03 am | |
| Has anyone else read the confession of Michael Barrett stating that he himself wrote the diary along with his wife, Anne? |
Author: Paul Begg
Saturday, 26 December 1998 - 01:29 pm | |
Has anyone else read Mike Barrett's retraction of that confession issued through his solicitor? Or read his subsequent confession and his subsequent retraction and his confession and his retraction and...? And has anyone else noted the circumstances under which the confession was made and the observations and conclusions of the journalist to whom the confession was made?
Sadly, what Mike has said doesn't make the "Diary" genuine or a forgery. It just makes it difficult (okay, impossible) to know what bits of anything he's said might be true. |
Author: Alison Ings
Monday, 04 January 1999 - 05:33 pm | |
| The Maybrick diary and subsequent investigation has been the subject of extensive criticism, unfortunately I have not found any detailed criticism that exposes the real faults with the document or the research. I think that rather than damn it out of hand, due consideration should be given to a proper and detailed analysis of the information contained within those documents and the information known about the murders. If however such work exists I would be grateful if somene could point me in that direction.I |
Author: NivekElad
Friday, 05 March 1999 - 09:00 pm | |
| Could Somebody Please E-Mail Me With All Of The Facts Associated With The Diary. Thank You |
Author: Jon Smyth
Friday, 05 March 1999 - 09:35 pm | |
Hi NivekElad
or is it Kevin Dale, or just Kevin? ...never mind :-)
To compile all the 'facts' (so-called), associated with the Diary and related issues would take far more time than you might imagine, and certainly more space than we would normaly alot for a regular email.
You must obtain two books, Shirley Harrisons 'The Diary of Jack the Ripper' and Paul Feldmans 'JtR, The Final Chapter'.
These will give you a good background into the controversy, but they are from a biased point of view, so read with an open mind.
And how much of what you read is 'fact' or cunningly presented plausibilities is entirely up to you to determine.
Overall I think your question is easier asked than answered.
Jon |
Author: Anonymous
Saturday, 06 March 1999 - 04:09 am | |
| You could sum it up in one word, C - R - A - P |
Author: VT newbie
Saturday, 06 March 1999 - 10:18 am | |
Hi, all. It seems to me that the the dispute over the authenticity of the diary would be resolved by a professional handwriting analysis. It is my understanding that Maybrick left a handwritten will which was admitted into probate and thereby presumably confirmed to be his writing, and there may be other papers still in existence which were indisputably written by him. If the handwriting of those papers does not match the diary, then Maybrick couldn't have written the diary. At least, I can't conceive of him dictating such secrets for anyone else to write for him. As bold as he was in carrying out the killings the way he did, I can't credit even Jack with having that much gall.
Or has this been done and the results were inconclusive?
Cheers! |
Author: Nikki Dormer
Sunday, 07 March 1999 - 03:40 am | |
Hey VT,
Yep, done and inconclusive...sort of. There's some dispute over whether or not the will is actually written by Maybrick - there's a theory that perhaps his brothers wrote it to their specifications while he was incapacitated. If this is the case, and once again no-one can prove it wasn't however much they argue to the contrary, then we're back to square one.
Anonymous, I know you're going to have something to say to this, don't bother, I don't wanna hear it.
Nikki. |
Author: Caroline
Sunday, 07 March 1999 - 12:54 pm | |
Yeah, but Nikki,
'Fraid you ain't never gonna stop him, 'cause he kinda likes it here. I think he must be quite fond of us in his own way. Have you noticed how my hounds of the Baskervilles are out for his blood and he just keeps on dishing the dirt just the same. He is impervious to bullying. Shall we prove we can be too?
George Michael's Faith is pounding out of my radio at the moment. How about yours?
Loads of love,
Caroline |
Author: tom wescott
Monday, 08 March 1999 - 12:04 am | |
| put quite simply, Maybrick is far and away the best candidate as the ripper. he is also the only one with material evidence backing up the claim. let's not forget the particle found in the "Maybrick watch" which dated it back several decades and probably more. If it's legit, then the diary is legit. If the diary's legit than the "Dear Boss" letter is legit. And, most importantly, if they're all legit, then Maybrick was the ripper. Also, can anyone out there tell me in all honesty that this book isn't the most convincing out there? |
Author: Jon Smyth
Monday, 08 March 1999 - 02:12 am | |
Tom.
In all honesty,.....I think you have a lot of studying to do, so I won't keep you, but....
It doesnt take a decree in Law to find the weak links in this whole diary/watch fiasco.
I get the impression that you are a newcomer to this enigma, certainly you betray the naivety of a beginner, which is not anything new to many of us here, we'll give you time, and hope you can develope an open mind.
Without which you will learn little but amuse many.
:-)
I wish you all the best, Jon. |
Author: Nikki Dormer
Monday, 08 March 1999 - 06:44 am | |
Too true Caz, too true. However, writing it made me feel better and we can only hope that he decides to leave it alone. It astounds me how you always manage to sound so chirpy...it's so refreshing!!
Tom, don't get me wrong here, I agree with you, but you will enevitably get bagged for that opinion...trust me I know!! However, opinions can change, can they not and when Caz reveals her new suspects, perhaps all that we know will be turned upside down.
Love Nikki. |
Author: Nikki
Monday, 08 March 1999 - 06:46 am | |
| By the way Caz, I've got semi-charmed life coming out of my radio at the moment. I love that song. |
Author: D. Radka
Monday, 08 March 1999 - 08:32 am | |
Speaking of the radio...
Do any of you Brit cats remember Adam Faith? The Dave Clark Five (creators of "the Tottenham Sound"? Absolutely primeval compression British rock. I remember it so well from grade school.
David |
Author: Matthew Delahunty (Dela)
Monday, 08 March 1999 - 03:03 pm | |
Hello all,
I've not been wanting to say much on the diary of late but a point that Tom raised needs some addressing.
It has often been said that the diary lays claim to the Dear Boss letter. I'm afraid I can't agree. Nowhere in the diary does the author lay claim to the Dear Boss letter - that's merely an interpretation which many have made and I think it may be a leap. All the author says is that he is going to send Central another. Another what? Another letter? Another rhyme? To say that the earlier thing he sent Central is the Dear Boss letter is putting words in the author's mouth. In fact, in the diary entry after the double event the author writes "Perhaps next time I will keep some of the red stuff and send it courtesy of yours truly". Yet in the Dear Boss letter a week earlier the author of that letter wrote that he had previously taken a bottle of the "red stuff" away but it had dried out. Nowhere in the diary does the author mention taking away his victim's blood.
This inconsistency may mean the author of the diary, if authentic, is not the author of the Ripper letters. Or it may just be that Maybrick did write them and was playing with the police in his letters. It may mean that Maybrick wrote to Central revealing the name Jack the Ripper in a rhyme and someone else used the name to produce a fake but more newsworthy letter. But in the end all these type of theories are speculation. Let's determine the facts of what the diary actually says first.
Whether the diary is authentic or a hoax I think it is wrong to say the author laid claim to the Dear Boss letter. All we can objectively say is that the author lays claim to something which he sent to Central News.
Dela |
Author: Christopher T. George
Monday, 08 March 1999 - 07:49 pm | |
Hi, Dela:
We could take the Paul Begg line of reasoning here. Similar to the way when the author says "Poste House" it is not clear that he means the present-day Poste House in Liverpool, and that by habit he spells the word "post" with an "e," it could be any post house. So how do we know that writer means the Central News Agency? The writer only says "Before my next will send Central another to remember me by." There is a Central Station in Liverpool. Using Paul's line of reasoning, perhaps he means he will send something to Central Station? Of course, I am being facetious, in case you have not guessed. I think the writer definitely means the Central News Agency, and since he is writing in the style of Dear Boss -- "red stuff," "ha ha" underlined, "yours truly" and so on -- we can guess that he is implying that he wrote Dear Boss. But this is where the Diary falls down because, as we have discussed before, the writing does not match Dear Boss and nor does it match Maybrick's known handwriting. I do not want to hurt anyone's feelings, but I am being sincere when I say that I fear that someone is having a very big laugh at those who take the Diary seriously.
Chris George |
