I confess to being a little prejudiced upon seeing the title of this Doc. After all, there have been as many Ripper identity theory shows as grains of sand, and I had watched my share of them. I decided, however, to give this a chance for no particular reason, and I'm glad I did. What was initially startling to me, was that they were talking about an actual alleged diary of the Ripper. I had thought the use of the word diary in the title, was for verisimilitude. I had never heard of this controversy, and this Doc is more than 24 years old. The Doc leaves you to draw your own conclusions at the end. My general feeling is against authenticity, for many different reasons, that I wont give here. This Doc is riveting, and will draw in the viewer, which all good Docs of its kind should do.
My reasons for and against its authenticity are irrelevant. Its for you, the viewer, to decide. Is it authentic? Only you can be the judge. This Doc aired in 1993. In 1995, Barett swore out affidavits, but I wont introduce that here. Those interested in more info about this, and other information on Maybrick, should do a search of his Wiki, and later day info on The Diary of Jack the Ripper.
My reasons for and against its authenticity are irrelevant. Its for you, the viewer, to decide. Is it authentic? Only you can be the judge. This Doc aired in 1993. In 1995, Barett swore out affidavits, but I wont introduce that here. Those interested in more info about this, and other information on Maybrick, should do a search of his Wiki, and later day info on The Diary of Jack the Ripper.