top of page
Search

Diary of a Diary Defender

  • Lord Orsam
  • May 6, 2024
  • 1 min read

This was found under my floorboards this morning but I'm sure it's quite ancient and comes from the long-ago historical period when discussions about the diary were allowed:



I can confirm this diary is totally genuine.


LORD ORSAM

6 May 2024


 
 
 

15 Comments

Rated 0 out of 5 stars.
No ratings yet

Add a rating
Martin Howells
Martin Howells
Jun 10, 2024

Hi David,

  • You already know me by name: Martin Howells, one time Ripper author, and scriptwriter/director on Paul Feldman's video "The Diary of Jack the Ripper." I would like to correct you on one point: I am not, and never have been a "Diary believer." The real question for me has always been who wrote it and why?

  • Do get in touch if you'd like to talk further.

  • Best Wishes,

  • Martin Howells

Like
Lord Orsam
Jul 10, 2024
Replying to

I didn't entirely understand why Martin Howells made his comment. He said: "I would like to correct you on one point: I am not, and never have been a "Diary believer." I was somewhat mystified by this because I don't believe I've ever described him as such. At the same time, I certainly do understand that no one wants to be thought of as a diary defender.


He also wanted to tell me/us that "The real question for me has always been who wrote it and why?"


I think the answer to that one is quite easy: Mike Barrett and at least one other, for money.


He invited me to get in touch with him if I'd like to talk…


Like

Guest
May 07, 2024

Sir.


I must protest most vigorously. Your diary does not give a single date! A proper diary should have specific dates indelibly stamped on every page!


Yours,


Maughm Titchell.

Like
Lord Orsam
May 07, 2024
Replying to

When I called it a "Diary" I meant a "Journal". No one in their right mind would call it a "Diary" or even think of it in such a way.

Like

Guest
May 06, 2024
Rated 5 out of 5 stars.

Try as I might I can’t find one anachronism in your diary.

I can only conclude that this is the most exciting and genuine diary I have read in many a year since the Adrian Mole discovery in 82.

This blows both the 1983 Hitler Annual and the 1992 Maybrick summer special out of the water in terms of authenticity.


If you confess to having forged it at some point in the future, I for one won’t believe you.

Like
Lord Orsam
May 07, 2024
Replying to

You won't be laughing so much when you see the watch I bought in a shop. It has scratches.

Like

Guest
May 06, 2024
Rated 5 out of 5 stars.

I hope you called the publishers within a couple of hours of your discovery as any other course of action would be just weird.


I would also seek out a duplicate to hand to the authorities should anyone come knocking as that also seems like a perfectly normal thing to do.

Like
Lord Orsam
May 06, 2024
Replying to

I've already left a message for Martin Earl to call me back. A contract is also in the process of being drawn up with Rupert Crew Limited, and I believe someone called Shirley Harrison will be writing the book. Just to be clear, I do not know any electrician called Eddie Lyons and I didn't meet him down the pub earlier today.

Like

embee5691
May 06, 2024
Rated 5 out of 5 stars.

That parody is totally indefensible David.🙂

Like
Lord Orsam
May 06, 2024
Replying to

Hmmmm....second mention of a "parody" in these comments. I do hope you guys aren't suggesting this diary is a fake. I will defend its authenticity to my dying breath. I am, in other words, a Diary of a Diary Defender Defender.

Like

©2024 by Orsam Music for Bubblegumelicious.

Created with Wix.com

The Sagar Saga: Finding the Missing Ling

In January 1905, former City detective inspector Robert Sagar, who had just retired, apparently gave interviews to reporters of four London newspapers in which he spoke of his knowledge of Jack the Ripper. 

Sagar 1.jpg

The articles containing these interviews, while very similar (indicating that they must have taken place at the same time) are all, nevertheless, a little bit different from each other and, in October 2020, Chris Phillips prepared a helpful comparison of the four reports featured side by side, which can be found here [Chris has now updated them to include the Evening News here].  He had, however, only located three reports from London newspapers, but was aware that there must have been a fourth report because such a report (different from the other three) was carried by some American newspapers, hence he included the Seattle Daily Times (of 4 February 1905) as his fourth report.

I have, however, now located the additional report in a London newspaper.  It was in the Evening News of Saturday, 7 January 1905.  It's not identical to the Seattle Daily Times report but it's close enough, especially in respect of the bit about Jack the Ripper, that, for comparison purposes, what Chris has labelled the Seattle Times report, can be regarded as the Evening News report.  There are, nevertheless, some important differences between the two which I will be discussing. 

So the four "interview" reports with Sagar that we have, are:

1. City Press of Saturday, 7 January, 1905.

2. Evening News of Saturday, 7 January, 1905.

3. Morning Leader of Monday, 9 January, 1905.

4. Daily News of Monday, 9 January, 1905 

A quick glance through these reports reveals that one of them is, curiously, very different to the others.

While the reports in the Evening News, Morning Leader and Daily News all contain quotes from Sagar, the City Press does not.  Its report is written purely in the third person, with no hint that its reporter had ever even spoken to the former detective.

The Morning Leader on the other hand tells us that, 'To a "Morning Leader" representative Mr. Sagar related some of his experiences'.  The Daily News is even more explicit as to when its reporter spoke to Sagar.  Hence, we are told that Sagar spoke to 'a representative of 'The Daily News on Saturday'.

That would seem to make sense.  All four reporters spoke to Robert Sagar on Saturday, 7 January 1905, right?

WRONG!

That's impossible. 

The City Press newspaper was published early on Saturday morning, so that it could not possibly have interviewed Sagar on Saturday and carried a report of the interview in its Saturday edition.  Here is the proof that the City Press was published on Saturday morning in January 1905:

Sagar 2.jpg

I'm a paragraph. Click here to add your own text and edit me. It's easy.

I'm a paragraph. Click here to add your own text and edit me. It's easy.

I'm a paragraph. Click here to add your own text and edit me. It's easy.

bottom of page