|
 |
 |
|
|
|
** This is an archived, static copy of the Casebook messages boards dating from 1998 to 2003. These threads cannot be replied to here. If you want to participate in our current forums please go to https://forum.casebook.org **
Archive through July 01, 2001
Casebook Message Boards: The Diary of Jack the Ripper: General Discussion:
The Maybrick Diary:
Archive through July 01, 2001
Author: Caroline Anne Morris
Wednesday, 27 June 2001 - 06:56 am |        | From Keith Skinner to Chris George
Chris – many thanks for your response of Friday June 22 2001 – 12:39 pm
Shirley and I are trying to meet up with Peter Birchwood (and hopefully Karoline Leach) before the Bournemouth convention. I may not even be there myself now, so it would be good to sort out something in the next few weeks.
Thank you also for defining your parameters. What specifically fixes this timespan of 1987-1992 for you? I would respectfully suggest you have set yourself an unrealistic, although commendable, exercise to, objectively and fairly, build a profile of the unknown pen person, based on an analysis of the textual composition. How can you possibly efface Mike Barrett, Anne Graham, Tony Devereux, etc., from the equation? All your thinking, surely, must be geared towards their participation because, by definition, you are starting from a pre-conceived position of a modern hoax where the hoaxers have been identified.
There is nobody else in the loop Chris.
Best Wishes
Keith |
Author: Caroline Anne Morris
Friday, 29 June 2001 - 05:59 am | | From Keith Skinner to Peter Birchwood
Misleading posts I leave in your extremely capable hands. You are a past master of creating these – as evidenced by some of your contributions to the boards.
I will correct an impression for you though. I did not know of the exchange of e-mails between you and Shirley Harrison. For the last three weeks, prior to Caroline posting my message to you on Friday June 22, 2001 @ 11:43 am, all I ever heard from Shirley was of the difficulty she was experiencing in eliciting a response from you. So, once again, your posturing presumption is incorrect.
Why not share with the board your opinions concerning taping of the discussion – which will be as much for your reference as it will be for us? I would have thought recording our meeting to be an obvious and sensible precaution, given your distrust and suspicion about us – certainly about me anyway.
I now understand from Shirley that a date and venue looks like it has finally been set. Well, I’m looking forward to the meeting which I anticipate being forthright, confrontational, blunt and direct.
But we may resolve a few issues.
Such a shame Melvin Harris will not be present, although it now must be abundantly clear – even to you – that, apart from publicly and totally failing to prove his case against the Diary, he is also equally clueless about its origins. But I expect Melvin is wisely heeding his own dictum of, in his best interests, keeping his head down and staying mute. |
|
|
|
|
