Jack The Ripper Forums  - Ripperology For The 21st Century  

Go Back   Jack The Ripper Forums - Ripperology For The 21st Century > Persons Of Interest or Actual Suspects > James Maybrick > The Maybrick Diary Forum

The Maybrick Diary Forum Restricted forum for any and all discussion pertaining to the Maybrick Diary.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old August 6th, 2007, 05:46 AM   #21
Caroline Morris
Author
 
Caroline Morris's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 5,072
Default

Stunning!

Thanks for that, Sir Robert. It has made my morning.

Love,

Caz
X
Caroline Morris is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 26th, 2007, 05:15 PM   #22
SirRobertAnderson
Researcher / Senior Moderator
 
SirRobertAnderson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Noo Yawk
Posts: 3,781
Default Gelatine

Caz said something today on the Casebook that bears repeating....

It's one of the uglier aspects of the ink tests, but the blunt facts are that the Leeds samples came directly from the Diary; AFI's didn't. Even if you want to assume everyone involved in the testing efforts was morally beyond reproach, no scientist worth his salt would test samples that had been stored in gelatine capsules. It's a very permeable surface, and it doesn't take a paranoid to understand that contamination was a very very real possibility.

Quote:
Originally Posted by caz View Post
Samples of ink were scraped from ‘specific blotted ink regions’ in the diary by Leeds University in 1994. The blots and smudges originally appeared at random intervals throughout the text (as can be seen in the 1993 facsimile) but were scraped away for subsequent testing, so presumably the Leeds samples came from the same random intervals throughout the text.

Their chemical analysis produced results which were broadly consistent with those of Dr Eastaugh in 1992. Leftover dots of ink on paper from the Rendell tests in 1993 were transported in gelatine capsules to the UK in 1994 for AFI’s chloroacetamide test. I don’t know if Bob Kuranz (working for Rendell) and Eastaugh before him took their samples from different parts of the diary. But Kuranz repeated and endorsed Eastaugh’s findings.

Love,

Caz
X
SirRobertAnderson is online now   Reply With Quote
Old October 27th, 2007, 03:10 AM   #23
Mr. Poster
Twit
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Twit Town
Posts: 2,601
Default

hi ho

Quote:
no scientist worth his salt would test samples that had been stored in gelatine capsules
It is a reasonable point. I assume these capsules were the usual "pill" type capsules or something?

At any rate, the samples should have been stored in glass, under an inert atmosphere and preferably frozen.

p
Mr. Poster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 29th, 2007, 12:18 PM   #24
SirRobertAnderson
Researcher / Senior Moderator
 
SirRobertAnderson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Noo Yawk
Posts: 3,781
Default

From Shirley Harrison's book, Blake edition:

Page 364:

In October 1994 [Melvin Harris] arranged for samples of the Diary ink to which had been left in the care of Robert Kuranz in America, to be sent (without our knowledge) to Analysis for Industry, an independent laboratory in Essex.

Melvin Harris, Nick Warren, editor of Ripperana, and the Sunday Times commissioned Analysis for Industry to examine six unused dots of the Diary ink contained in a hard unopened gelatine capsule.

Page 365:

Paul Feldman questioned the authenticity of the samples from America, Leeds University was surprised that they were transported in gelatine 'which has an astonishing ability to absorb and interact with with anything it contacts'.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Poster View Post
hi ho



It is a reasonable point. I assume these capsules were the usual "pill" type capsules or something?

At any rate, the samples should have been stored in glass, under an inert atmosphere and preferably frozen.

p
SirRobertAnderson is online now   Reply With Quote
Old October 30th, 2007, 11:58 AM   #25
Robert Smith
Former Member
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Hi Sir Robert,

Shirley Harrison must surely be wrong to write that the Sunday Times was one of the parties, which commissioned Analysis For Industry. They had their own expert, Audrey Giles, who was meant to test the diary ink in August 1993, but, in fact, failed to do so. Furthermore, the ST published their exposé of the diary on 19th Sept 1993, 13 months before AFI reported to Harris on 19th October 1994.

Robert Smith
  Reply With Quote
Old October 31st, 2007, 07:03 AM   #26
Caroline Morris
Author
 
Caroline Morris's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 5,072
Default

Hi Robert, Sir Robert, Mr P,

It would therefore be interesting to know what Bob Kuranz (or Rendell) understood about the situation at the time - ie why the unused samples were being requested and on whose behalf; and whether storage and transportation would leave the samples fit for that purpose.

Love,

Caz
X
Caroline Morris is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 31st, 2007, 12:24 PM   #27
SirRobertAnderson
Researcher / Senior Moderator
 
SirRobertAnderson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Noo Yawk
Posts: 3,781
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Caroline Morris View Post
Hi Robert, Sir Robert, Mr P,

It would therefore be interesting to know what Bob Kuranz (or Rendell) understood about the situation at the time - ie why the unused samples were being requested and on whose behalf; and whether storage and transportation would leave the samples fit for that purpose.
I will be blunt and say it smells to high heavens. Shouldn't the unused samples have been returned to Robert Smith ?

But that's not the most objectionable part. What stinks is the chain of evidence was broken and we have no idea if the samples were contaminated.

I am surprised AFI didn't ask to work with samples taken directly from the Diary. For all they knew they could have been looking at samples from something other than the Diary ! I'm not saying that is what happened - it's highly unlikely - but it does speak droves about the scientific rigor of AFI .
SirRobertAnderson is online now   Reply With Quote
Old October 31st, 2007, 03:17 PM   #28
Mr. Poster
Twit
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Twit Town
Posts: 2,601
Default

Hi ho

I wonder what chemical is used as a preservative in gelatin capsules?

Oooohhh......that was just peevish........

p
Mr. Poster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 31st, 2007, 04:02 PM   #29
SirRobertAnderson
Researcher / Senior Moderator
 
SirRobertAnderson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Noo Yawk
Posts: 3,781
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Poster View Post
Hi ho

I wonder what chemical is used as a preservative in gelatin capsules?

Oooohhh......that was just peevish........

p
I hope it ain't chloroacetamide !

I just reread one of Harris' Diary dissertations, and a question comes to mind. Where's the other capsule these days ?

Fortunately for the truth, Robert Kuranz, the US forensic ink analyst, had retained 12 unused ink-on-paper samples taken from the Diary in Chicago (August 1993). These samples were placed in gelatine capsules (six to each capsule) and kept under optimum storage conditions. Robert Kuranz cooperated by sending over to me one of these capsules; this was then despatched unopened to the laboratories of Analysis For Industry and they were asked to test the six tiny samples for the presence of chioroacetamide.

The subsequent AFI report of 19.10 1994, concluded:-"When the six black ink dots were extracted with acetone and analysed using gas-liquid chromatography procedures chloroacetamide was indicated to be present in the ink used."


http://www.pendemonium.com/diamine_article.htm
SirRobertAnderson is online now   Reply With Quote
Old November 1st, 2007, 03:04 AM   #30
Mr. Poster
Twit
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Twit Town
Posts: 2,601
Default

hi ho

Quote:
kept under optimum storage conditions.
Somehow.......I doubt that.

p
Mr. Poster is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
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

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Leeds Town Hall Silverstealth Victoriana 1 September 13th, 2009 10:11 PM
Let's Discuss Michael Maybrick ! SirRobertAnderson The Maybrick Diary Forum 13 August 4th, 2009 09:47 AM
Let's Discuss 'Maybrick's Last Words'! Archaic The Maybrick Diary Forum 61 July 1st, 2009 07:13 AM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:10 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.10 Beta 2
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright @ Howard & Nina Brown 2015-2022