Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

New : Michael Maybrick As The Diarist

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • New : Michael Maybrick As The Diarist

    Thread for the possibility that James Maybrick's brother was the author of the Diary.
    **************
    To Join JTR Forums :
    Contact [email protected]

  • #2
    Why would he write it?

    P

    Comment


    • #3
      I think/hope Robert will be expanding on his idea. If anyone could get it under the floorboards it would be Michael. And the handwriting isn't too bad a match either.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Paul Butler View Post
        I think/hope Robert will be expanding on his idea. If anyone could get it under the floorboards it would be Michael. And the handwriting isn't too bad a match either.
        It's hard to condense a 50 minute talk on MM as Diarist into a few posts. A DVD release of the evening has been threatened....Much of the talk was about playing medical detective on James Maybrick. He wasn't poisoned....he died of a disease he contracted in the 1870s. Before you even start to think about who the Diarist was you have to see if you can determine who or what really killed James Maybrick. It clarifies a lot. And the good news is that James talked a lot about what his doctors were giving him. And the course of treatment consistently points to a virtually certain conclusion with respect to what ailed Sir Jim.

        I am packing for a trip to Cleveland to visit my youngest. When get back I will take a stab at more explication.

        For now, I'll tell you what got me started down this dark road. The ending of the Diary simply makes it very hard to believe the Diarist is James Maybrick. He foreshadows PRECISELY the charges that will be levied against Florence - that she poisoned him with some extra doses of his "medicine". It has to have been written posthumously.

        The modern day point of view is that Florence was innocent. The Diarist is fingering her for murder in precisely the manner the Home Office put forth.

        Both the modern day point of view as well as the contemporary holds that James Maybrick was a drug addict. The Diarist doesn't hold those views. His drugs are medicine and he's not taking them for thrills. This demands explanation because every single book on the Maybricks holds James up as a druggie. Everyone "knows" he died as a result of all the drugs he took. Well, the books are wrong and the Diarist avoids this minefield.

        So I starting thinking who might hold such views? Who might be really pissed off at Flo and "Sir Jim" after the trial? After Florence herself, who lost the most after the trial? Who wound up resigning from his beloved clubs and lodges?

        To be continued.....

        Comment


        • #5
          If members are uninterested in the theme of thread or simply want to 'state their case' by merely applying dismissive remarks unlike the post Sam Flynn posts after this one..refrain from doing so.

          This thread is intended for people who give the possibility of Michael Maybrick being the author of the Diary from this point on. No exceptions.

          One of the major 'events' or mysteries in the 130 year history of the Case has been the appearance of the Diary. It would be quite an achievement if the authorship could be ascertained.
          To Join JTR Forums :
          Contact [email protected]

          Comment


          • #6
            If Michael was the author, then he was brilliant at disguising his handwriting, which is possible I suppose. In all sincerity, I see no resemblance between the two.

            Comparison.jpg

            The formation of the letters aside, Michael Maybrick's writing actually looks like that of an adult. The diary's writing, by contrast, could easily be that of a teenager. I'm not saying that a kid wrote the diary; it's just an informal way of categorising the two styles.
            Kind regards, Sam Flynn

            "Suche Nullen"
            (F. Nietzsche)

            Comment


            • #7
              Gareth:

              As you can see, I undeleted it....it is relevant to the discussion.

              I simply want people to contribute rather than crack jokes on this thread.
              To Join JTR Forums :
              Contact [email protected]

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Howard Brown View Post
                Gareth:

                As you can see, I undeleted it....it is relevant to the discussion.

                I simply want people to contribute rather than crack jokes on this thread.
                We're not trying to form a pro-Maybrick club here....just trying to avoid repetitive posts on issues that have been hashed out for ages. No one needs to think MM was the Diarist to discuss the issue.

                I'm not trying to give myself ridling room but when I said MM was the Diarist, I am certainly open to idea that his wife may have helped him, he might have been mentally ill or sick OR the Diarist merely shares MM's points of view on the Maybrick case. I am reluctant to cross the Steels off the list of potential scribes. Let's not forget Lady Monkswell was a famous diarist in her own right.

                It is impossible however to argue that Michael doesn't come off well in the Diary. He's the good guy in all this, followed by Edwin. Everyone else gets dragged through the mud. That alone raises an eyebrow.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Cheers, guys.
                  Kind regards, Sam Flynn

                  "Suche Nullen"
                  (F. Nietzsche)

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Thanks Gareth...
                    To Join JTR Forums :
                    Contact [email protected]

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Sam Flynn View Post
                      The formation of the letters aside, Michael Maybrick's writing actually looks like that of an adult. The diary's writing, by contrast, could easily be that of a teenager. I'm not saying that a kid wrote the diary; it's just an informal way of categorising the two styles.
                      But the Diarist doesn't use a uniform hand throughout. There are sections which do look like a normal person's handwriting, and there are parts where it is anything but uniform. And as Debs points out there are places where it even bears similarity to Michael's.

                      The variations quite clear in Robert Smith's facsimile. Sometimes it is even demonstrated within a single sentence.

                      Someone trying to sell us a story would have been more consistent IMHO. Why use several scripts, especially one that appears deranged?

                      The Diary on the other hand was hidden and not trying to sell anyone a story in 1889. Hence little attention to the niceties. But what is not disguised is the author's rage; that still comes through loud and clear in 2017.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        If Michael wrote the document in his later years it might account for a messy hand.

                        There was a poster on here years ago who wote a book on MM as ripper i think. I havent read it.

                        Did Robinson just rehash his work or develop it more?

                        I just cannot get my head round MM writing it- mostly because there is no logical reason for him to have done so and then hide it. As opposed to just chucking it on the ever presentt victorian fire had he not wanted it to come to light.

                        P

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by SirRobertAnderson View Post
                          But the Diarist doesn't use a uniform hand throughout. There are sections which do look like a normal person's handwriting, and there are parts where it is anything but uniform.
                          Indeed, the diarist often can't even write in a straight line, which isn't something that could be said of Michael Maybrick's writing.
                          And as Debs points out there are places where it even bears similarity to Michael's.
                          I can't see the remotest similarity, I'm afraid.

                          If MM did have a hand in writing the diary, it doesn't look like it was the hand that held the pen.
                          Kind regards, Sam Flynn

                          "Suche Nullen"
                          (F. Nietzsche)

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Hi Lars


                            Michael's hand in 1911 was in his later years, and it's a steady hand. He has a couple of peculiarities : he writes his surname and that of his wife as 'May brick,' and he puts a horizontal line above the capital 'W' in 'I of W' and 'Wife.'

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              A general thought would be, why would a person hide a diary under floorboards? Specific to this thread, why would MM hide a diary in that way?

                              Some other thoughts: Was the diary completed, then secreted? Was there ever a loose floorboard so the writer could write a bit, hide his work, take it out to add, etc? (Like teenage girls have private diaries and hide them, etc. At least in my day teenage girls did that. Now I think they put all intimate feelings on social media in a quest for instant fame or something.)

                              Writings have been hidden due to political pressure, such as Nazi occupation or in the middle ages when the Bible was being translated outside accepted circles. Surely these considerations would not apply to Victorian England except that the diary claims to record JtR's crimes. Who would the writer fear? The servants? Family members?

                              Unless under the floorboards was once easily accessible, then putting the diary there and nailing it in would guarantee the diary would be more of a time capsule.

                              Just some thoughts.
                              The wickedness of the world is the dream of the plague.~~Voynich Manuscript

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X