Recently read:
There are a couple of books concerning the alleged diary of jack the ripper purportedly written by James Maybrick found in the early 90's. The so-called ripper diary saga got blown wide open by the characters involved - Michael Barrett who first wanted to publish it had numerous problems (including the break up of his marriage, alcoholism etc) & issued various contradictory statements (first it was genuine, then he forged it, then someone else forged it, then genuine again). A journalist Paul Feldman got hold of the story & wanted to make a film (I think he made a book, but am not sure on the film). Reading between the lines, he became exceptionally zealous in his belief in the diary. Another team of journalists (Shirley Harrison et al) were also trying to prove provenance. So in this competing world, you also had the debunkers (such as Melvin Harris, a ripperologist, who co-incidentally had a book with a different suspect coming out at the same time) and the Times newspaper (who were still smarting from publishing hitlers diarys, then found they were faked).
All in all, it has never been proven whether the diary is fake or genuine (typical with anything JtR related). Maybrick WAS in Whitechapel (from Liverpool) at the times of the killings. The diary alludes to certain seeming facts that were not allegedly in the public domain until 1987.
The whole thing is complicated by the alleged finding of James Maybricks watch...
This book is a more balanced view of the diary find, & the process of it entering into the public domain. An interesting read. If anything it highlights how easily carried away we can be by our beliefs...
