In the early 1990s, a diary surfaced in Liverpool that was allegedly written by Jack the Ripper. Since then there have been as many believers as non-believers in the authenticity of the book.
So how did the diary appear after all this time? Its owner was a Liverpudlian, Michael Barrett, who stated that a friend gave him the diary in May 1991 and that this friend died a few months later without having revealed how he came by it. Nothing beyond these sparse facts is known, so extreme caution is called for when trying to establish its authenticity and its contents.
The diary contained confessions ostensibly made by a businessman from Liverpool by the name of James Maybrick, who claimed to be the Whitechapel murderer. Maybrick was a real person, a cotton merchant who visited London frequently on business, but there are insufficient details of his daily movements to indicate where he might have been on the dates of the murders.
On the face of it, the diary had all the signs of being genuine, with pages torn out and passages scribbled out. Yet, when it first came to light, instead of laying to rest for ever one of the greatest criminal cases of the previous century, it did the opposite, leading some self-styled Ripper experts to say it was genuine and others to dismiss it as a forgery.
Experts in the fields of paper and ink who examined the diary stated that the diary was written on paper of the Victorian era and that the ink also could have been of that period. However, when the handwriting of the diary was compared with that of James Maybrick’s will, they did not match. Some who wanted to believe that the diary was authentic tried to sidestep this problem by suggesting that the will was a forgery.
In any case, Maybrick’s age is wrong for him to have been the killer. At the time of the first murder, he was 50, according to the diary, but none of the witnesses who claimed to have seen a man with a Ripper victim described a man as old as this.
Many people suspected the diary was a modern forgery. Then, in 1995, Michael Barrett issued an affidavit in which he confessed to having forged it with the help of his wife. Later he retracted some of his confessions, but, over the subsequent years, restated them in further affidavits. He claimed that he had been forced by verbal threats and physical assault, which he reported to the police, to retract his original confession. Extracts from the affidavit of 5 January 1995, in which he admitted to forging the diary and explained how it was done, are transcribed below, and I firmly believe this statement to be true.
I MICHAEL BARRETT, make oath and state as follows:–
That I am an Author by occupation and a former Scrap Metal Merchant. I reside alone at XXXXXXXXXXXX. …
Since December 1993 I have been trying, through the press, the Publishers, the Author of the Book, Mrs Harrison, and my Agent Doreen Montgomery to expose the fraud of ‘ The Diary of Jack the Ripper’ (‘the diary’).
Nobody will believe me and in fact some very influential people in the Publishing and Film world have been doing everything to discredit me and in fact they have gone so far as to introduce a new and complete story of the original facts of the Diary and how it came to light.
The facts of this matter are outlined as follows:–
I Michael Barrett was the author of the original diary of ‘Jack the Ripper’ and my wife, Anne Barrett, hand wrote it from my typed notes and on occasions at my dictation, the details of which I will explain in due course.
The idea of the Diary came from discussion between Tony Devereux, Anne Barrett my wife and myself, there came I time when I believed such a hoax was a distinct possibility. We looked closely at the background of James Maybrick and I read everything to do with the Jack the Ripper matter. I felt Maybrick was an ideal candidate for Jack the Ripper. Most important of all, he could not defend himself. He was not ‘Jack the Ripper’ of that I am certain, but, times, places, visits to London and all that fitted. It was too easy.
I told my wife Anne Barrett, I said, ‘Anne I’ll write a best seller here, we can’t fail’.
Once I realised we could do it. We had to find the necessary materials, paper, pens and ink. I gave this serious consideration.
Roughly round about January, February 1990 Anne Barrett and I finally decided to go ahead and write the Diary of Jack the Ripper. In fact Anne purchased a Diary, a red leather backed Diary for £25.00p, she made the purchase through a firm in the 1986 Writers Year Book, I cannot remember their name, she paid for the Diary by cheque in the amount of £25 which was drawn on her Lloyds Bank Account, Water Street Branch, Liverpool. When this Diary arrived in the post I decided it was of no use, it was very small. My wife is now in possession of this Diary in fact she asked for it specifically recently when I saw her at her home address XXXXXXXXXXXXXX. …
I feel sure it was the end of January 1990 when I went to the Auctioneer, Outhwaite & Litherland, XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX.
It was about 11.30am in the morning when I attended the Auctioneers. I found a photograph Album which contained approximately, approximately 125 pages of photographs. They were old photographs and they were all to do with the 1914/1918 1st World War. This Album was part of lot No. 126 which was for auction with a ‘brass compass’, it looked to me like a ‘seaman’s Compass’, it was round faced with a square encasement, all of which was brass, it was marked on the face, North South, East and West in heavy lettering. I particularly noticed that the compass had no ‘fingers’. …
When I got the Album and Compass home, I examined it closely, inside the front cover I noticed a makers stamp mark, dated 1908 or 1909 to remove this without trace I soaked the whole of the front cover in Linseed Oil, once the oil was absorbed by the front cover, which took about 2 days to dry out. I even used the heat from the gas oven to assist in the drying out.
I then removed the makers seal which was ready to fall off. I then took a ‘Stanley Knife’ and removed all the photographs, and quite a few pages.
I then made a mark ‘kidney’ shaped, just below centre inside the cover with the Knife.
This last 64 pages inside the Album which Anne and I decided would be the Diary. Anne and I went to town in Liverpool and in Bold Street I bought three pens, that would hold fountain nibs, the little brass nibs. I bought 22 brass nibs at about 7p to 12p, a variety of small brass nibs, all from the ‘Medice’ art gallery.
This all happened late January 1990 and on the same day that Anne and I bought the nibs we then decided to purchase the ink elsewhere. …
Anne Barrett and I visited the Bluecoat Chambers Art shop and we purchased a small bottle of Diamine Manuscript ink. I cannot remember the exact price of the Ink. I think it was less than a pound.
… We decided to have a practice run and we used A4 paper for this, and at first we tried it in my handwriting, but we realised and I must emphasise this, my handwriting was too distinctive so it had to be in Anne’s handwriting, after the practice run which took us approximately two days, we decided to go for hell or bust. …
Several days prior to our purchase of materials I had started to roughly outline the Diary on my word processor.
Anne and I started to write the Diary in all it took us 11 days. I worked on the story and then I dictated it to Anne who wrote it down in the Photograph Album and thus we produced the Diary of Jack the Ripper. Much to my regret there was a witness to this, my young daughter Caroline.
During this period when we were writing the Diary, Tony Devereux was house-bound, very ill and in fact after we completed the Diary we left it for a while with Tony being severely ill and in fact he died late May early June 1990.
During the writing of the diary of Jack the Ripper, when I was dictating to Anne, mistakes occurred from time to time for example, Page 6 of the diary, 2nd paragraph, line 9 starts with an ink blot, this blot covers a mistake when I told Anne to write down James instead of thomas. The mistake was covered by the Ink Blot.
Page 226 of the Book, page 20, centre page inverted commas, quote ‘TURN ROUND THREE TIMES, AND CATCH WHOM YOU MAY’. This was from Punch Magazine, 3rd week in September 1888. The journalist was P.W. WENN. …
When I disposed of the photographs from the Album by giving them to William Graham, I kept one back. This photograph was of a Grave, with a Donkey standing nearby. I had actually written the ‘Jack the Ripper Diary’ first on my word processor, which I purchased in 1985, from Dixons in Church Street, Liverpool City Centre. The Diary was on two hard back discs when I had finished it. The Discs, the one Photograph, the compass, all pens and the remainder of the ink was taken by my sister Lynn Richardson to her home address, XXXXXX XXXXXXXXX. When I asked her at a later date for the property she informed me that after an article had appeared in the Daily Post, by Harold Brough, she had destroyed everything, in order to protect me.
When I eventually did the deal with [the publisher] Robert Smith he took possession of the Diary and it went right out of my control. There is little doubt in my mind that I have been hoodwinked or if you like conned myself. My inexperience in the Publishing game has been my downfall, whilst all around me are making money, it seems that I am left out of matters, and my Solicitors are now engaged in litigation. I have even had bills to cover expenses incurred by the author of the book, Shirley Harrison. …
I have now decided to make this affidavit to make the situation clear with regard to the Forgery of the Jack the Ripper Diary, which Anne Barrett and I did in case anything happens to me. I would hate to leave at this stage the name of Mr Maybrick as a tarnished serial killer when as far as I know, he was not a killer.
I am the author of the Manuscript written by my wife Anne Barrett at my dictation which is known as The Jack the Ripper Diary. …
Yours Truly – Michael Barrett.
Sworn at Liverpool in the
(Signed)
County of Merseyside, this
5th day of January 1995. Before me: (Signed)
A Solicitor Empowered to Administer Oaths
D.P. HARDY & CO.,
Imperial Chambers,
XXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXX.
It would have been of great interest if the whole issue of the diary had been the subject of a criminal investigation. The police would have had the diary examined by professional experts who could have determined whether it is a forgery. Handwriting samples would have been obtained from those allegedly involved in the creation of the diary, in order to test its authenticity. Even so, as often happens in such situations, others would have tried to refute the findings of the professionals, whatever conclusion they had reached, and we may still have been left in doubt as to the truth.
James Maybrick died in 1889 from arsenic poisoning. His wife was accused of murdering him.
Was Maybrick Jack the Ripper? The answer is no. Did Maybrick write the diary? Again the answer is no. For me, Michael Barrett’s affidavit quoted above provides wholly convincing detail of how the alleged diary came to be forged.