Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Transcript Of The Interview With Michael Barrett DISCUSSION Page

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

  • #16
    Originally posted by Keith Skinner View Post
    Your suggestion that Tony's cynicism, (as shared with Mike), was aimed at his daughters not caring about him chimed with an observation my late
    partner, (Coral), made after we visited the daughters in Liverpool in March 2002. As we left the house, Coral remarked that she had thought the daughters were a little too keen to stress how much they had done for their father when he was housebound. Coral wondered whether that may have been to compensate for perhaps feeling guilty at not really having been all that attentive to their father's situation.
    Back to this for a moment....

    So, he got very cynical and this is where I get very reluctant because I never want to be offensive to the daughters because I don’t think it's nice when a person gets cynical, but he did get cynical at the end of the day. I used to say to him “away Tony stop lad, stop lad” you know “stop being so bloody cynical” you know “stop being that way towards your family”.



    I realize that this part of the interview did not make it into the documentary BUT re-reading it I have to say I could understand, if some semblance of this got around at the Saddle - and I'll bet it did - why the daughters would be so vehement in their statements to you.

    IF it's not true, they had to be furious.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by Keith Skinner View Post

      Essentially Bruce implicitly believes the diary was written by Michael Maybrick in order to frame James - a view he has held since reading Shirley Harrison's book at Christmas 1993. I should say here that from the day Bruce and I started thinking about and working on his project together, (circa 1997), I have never agreed with Bruce about this. We had countless discussions around this but I could never come round to Bruce's way of thinking. What I did acknowledge was Bruce's feeling about the narrative. I remember him saying the first two thirds were sheer brilliance and could only have been penned by a serial killer. The final third of the book was rubbish and faked by Michael to implicate his brother.
      That last bit is interesting and something I didn't know.

      I think Bruce's book could have been brilliant but you can't try to pin the murders on Michael and pretty much ignore the Diary in your book. It and the Watch are the elephants in the room.

      Just in case it is not clear to anyone: I don't believe the Diary is the work of Jack the Ripper and it sure as hell wasn't written by James Maybrick. But I do believe Michael Maybrick, or someone sharing his point of view on Florence, had a hand in its creation.

      Comment


      • #18
        Then why was the glaring mistake of Michael supposedly writing prose as opposed to just musical score made?
        Best Wishes,
        Cris Malone
        ______________________________________________
        "Objectivity comes from how the evidence is treated, not the nature of the evidence itself. Historians can be just as objective as any scientist."

        Comment


        • #19
          Morning all,

          Just some thoughts on the questions raised so far. In respect to the Devereux family, I thought that the following might be of interest:

          ‘I recall I spoke to the Devereux family […] they were aware of that which Barrett had said, which was untrue, and stated the same views of him as the Landlord of the pub. In fact, Barrett kept on ringing them about it.’ (DS Colin Thomas, 15th May 2017).

          That closing sentence intrigues me. According to Bonsey, Barrett kept on ringing the Devereux family about the diary - although no date or timeframe is given for when those calls were allegedly made. Just wondering, does this perhaps chime with some of Keith's thinking?

          Originally posted by Keith Skinner View Post
          At the time it crossed my mind that perhaps Mike was trying to create an impression of how close he was to Tony in order to make it seem the most natural thing in the world for Tony to have given him the diary and thereby secure his ownership of it.
          The following accont was given to Shirley from the Landlord of the Saddle, Bob Lee, and is reproduced in her book:

          "Tony [Devereux] used to come here regularly, long before he ever met Michael…Michael used to come in every day and sometimes he’d run errands for Tony when he was ill, but I don’t think they got on particularly well. He didn’t have friends. Tony’s daughters used to come in too – nice ladies, they looked after their Dad. We never discussed the Diary in the pub afterwards…Tony was very quiet, he’d have never said a word. Tony’d never have given Michael anything he thought was valuable. I never saw the Diary – I didn’t know anything about the Maybricks…I wasn’t interested. You never ask questions in this job." (Harrison, 2010).

          Mr. Edward Lyons also claimed to know Bob, and several others who frequented the Saddle.

          Best, James

          Comment


          • #20
            How do you know Michael didn't write prose?

            We do know he wrote lyrics to at least one of his songs.

            Comment


            • #21
              The 'diary' suggests that Michael Maybrick was prolific at writing verse and we know that is not the case.
              Best Wishes,
              Cris Malone
              ______________________________________________
              "Objectivity comes from how the evidence is treated, not the nature of the evidence itself. Historians can be just as objective as any scientist."

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by Paul Butler View Post
                How do you know Michael didn't write prose?

                We do know he wrote lyrics to at least one of his songs.
                Correct. A Warrior Bold, in fact. He used the pseudonym Edwin Thomas.

                It's actually one of the reasons I believe the Diary was written by either Michael, or someone that knew him well and shared his views on Flo. The entire document is basically about how smart and wise and amazeballs Michael was.

                As an aside the lyrics to A Warrior Bold kinda read like the Diary with all its melodrama and hideous doggerel.
                Attached Files

                Comment


                • #23
                  Keith, James, and Caz: I've been meaning to ask you about MB's "stroke". I know he also claimed to be terminally ill with cancer at some point.

                  Do you give credence to the claim of a stroke?

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by Cris Malone View Post
                    The 'diary' suggests that Michael Maybrick was prolific at writing verse and we know that is not the case.
                    Sorry to keep on, but how do we know that isn't the case?

                    (Actually, all the diarist says is that Michael was better at it than James.)

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by SirRobertAnderson View Post
                      That last bit is interesting and something I didn't know.

                      I think Bruce's book could have been brilliant but you can't try to pin the murders on Michael and pretty much ignore the Diary in your book. It and the Watch are the elephants in the room.
                      That is precisely what I thought too Robert. In fact, it's difficult to see why Robinson picked on Michael at all.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by SirRobertAnderson View Post
                        Correct. A Warrior Bold, in fact. He used the pseudonym Edwin Thomas.

                        It's actually one of the reasons I believe the Diary was written by either Michael, or someone that knew him well and shared his views on Flo. The entire document is basically about how smart and wise and amazeballs Michael was.

                        As an aside the lyrics to A Warrior Bold kinda read like the Diary with all its melodrama and hideous doggerel.
                        Absolutely. The diary doggerel much more resembles Victorian parlour song lyrics than poetry. I'm certain that's what the diarist intended, whoever he or she might have been.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by Paul Butler View Post
                          Absolutely. The diary doggerel much more resembles Victorian parlour song lyrics than poetry. I'm certain that's what the diarist intended, whoever he or she might have been.

                          Yet ere he died, he bravely cried
                          I've kept the vow I swore;
                          So what care I tho' death be nigh,
                          I've fought for love, and die.


                          That uncannily sounds like the Diary verse.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by SirRobertAnderson View Post
                            Correct. A Warrior Bold, in fact. He used the pseudonym Edwin Thomas.

                            It's actually one of the reasons I believe the Diary was written by either Michael, or someone that knew him well and shared his views on Flo. The entire document is basically about how smart and wise and amazeballs Michael was.

                            As an aside the lyrics to A Warrior Bold kinda read like the Diary with all its melodrama and hideous doggerel.
                            Hi Bob,

                            I thought Maybrick went under the name Stephen Adams, which would (as with his other compositions) make him the composer of the musical score with Edwin Thomas as the Lyricist. If I am incorrect, I am open to being enlightened.

                            https://www.loc.gov/item/ihas.100004170/
                            Best Wishes,
                            Cris Malone
                            ______________________________________________
                            "Objectivity comes from how the evidence is treated, not the nature of the evidence itself. Historians can be just as objective as any scientist."

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by Cris Malone View Post
                              Hi Bob,

                              I thought Maybrick went under the name Stephen Adams, which would (as with his other compositions) make him the composer of the musical score with Edwin Thomas as the Lyricist. If I am incorrect, I am open to being enlightened.

                              https://www.loc.gov/item/ihas.100004170/
                              Edwin Thomas was MM's pseudonym. (Livia Trivia's find from awhile back. I believe it is mentioned in Bruce's book)

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Bob:

                                Was Edwin Thomas Michael's only pseudonym that you can recall ?

                                I might be mistaken, but I thought I found a song which he wrote under a different name....the lyrics that is.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X