| Author |
Message |
    
Stephen P. Ryder
Board Administrator
Username: Admin
Post Number: 3292
Registered: 10-1997
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 23, 2005 - 11:30 am: | 
|
Interesting article from the Independent:
http://enjoyment.independent.co.uk/books/features/article307652.ece
Stephen P. Ryder, Exec. Editor
Casebook: Jack the Ripper
|
Glenn G. Lauritz Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 3983
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 23, 2005 - 12:07 pm: |
|
Very interesting, Spry.
Although quite baffling that she continues her pursuit, regardless of all the counter-evidence and the criticism she's received. I admit I am amazed that she seems prepared to spend probably a few million dollars more on this project.
She gives the word 'obsession' definitely a new meaning.
But you were quoted, Spry! And the Casebook site was referred to as source. Congrats!
All the best
(Message edited by glenna on August 23, 2005)
G. Andersson, writer/historian
|
Caroline Anne Morris
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Caz
Post Number: 2049
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 23, 2005 - 12:22 pm: |
|
Hmmm, Tumblety was known to collect female wombs.
Is there any other kind?
Love,
Caz
X |
Glenn G. Lauritz Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 3984
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 23, 2005 - 12:39 pm: |
|
Ha!
Good one, Caz. 
All the best
G. Andersson, writer/historian
|
Jennifer Pegg
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Jdpegg
Post Number: 2867
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 23, 2005 - 12:48 pm: |
|
Glenn,
spend to make, no doubt she easily got back the money she spent the last time.
Jenni
"You know I'm not gonna diss you on the Internet
Cause my momma taught me better than that."
|
Maria Giordano
Inspector
Username: Mariag
Post Number: 444
Registered: 4-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 23, 2005 - 4:45 pm: |
|
She is beyond nuts at this point. A simple consideration of only the few facts mentioned in the article would lead any rational person to ralize that she's wrong.
Mags
|
Howard Brown
Chief Inspector
Username: Howard
Post Number: 850
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 23, 2005 - 5:07 pm: |
|
Gang...
She was featured recently on the E Channel which hosted a special on "The Minds of Serial Killers" [ It may still be rebroadcast,so keep an eye out..].
The funny thing is that during her segment of the show,they kept flashing a photo of James Maybrick as her dialogue began.
$ 2,000,000 later,she looks a little worse for wear. She brought up the limited number of writing paper with that specific watermark,as well as Sickert being a "sociopath"....
Steve...Has anyone ever approached Ms. Cornwell and brought up the true location of this fistula to her directly? I read a story in Ripper Notes about Sturgis' book on Sickert and his comments on Pats' putting closure to the Case....but was just wondering if she ever had a one on one with him or anyone else.
|
Harry Mann
Inspector
Username: Harry
Post Number: 153
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 24, 2005 - 5:45 am: |
|
Interesting that the newspaper article says she is accompanied by a criminal phycologist.
Hope his criminality is not comprised of fraud. |
Gareth W
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 23, 2005 - 5:17 pm: |
|
Although I don't subscribe to the Sickert theory, it may be useful if her fingerprinting some of the surviving Ripper Letters unequivocally revealed that a common hand was responsible for some of them.
All this assumes, of course, that the fingerprints are still viable and her hired experts can eliminate contamination by the hundreds of people who must have handled the letters over the years. A near impossible task, I'd have thought.
Pity she doesn't seem to want to examine any other surviving documents, too. It'd be the find of the Century if, say, Hutchinson's pawprints were found on a few of the Ripper Letters and on his witness statement!
The odds are ridiculous, I know, but if she's rich and daft enough to embark on this goose-chase she might as well go the whole hog on the offchance that something truly extraordinary turns up ;o)
|
John Savage
Inspector
Username: Johnsavage
Post Number: 465
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, August 26, 2005 - 7:18 am: |
|
Hi All,
A follow up to this story appeared in the Guardian newspaper of 25th. August, suggesting that Miss Cornwell is "barking up the wrong eminent victorian".
1555744%2C00.html,www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,,1555744,00.html
Rgds
John |
Simon Owen
Inspector
Username: Simonowen
Post Number: 234
Registered: 8-2004
| | Posted on Friday, August 26, 2005 - 7:49 am: |
|
That link , it no work ! |
Stephen P. Ryder
Board Administrator
Username: Admin
Post Number: 3294
Registered: 10-1997
| | Posted on Friday, August 26, 2005 - 11:46 am: |
|
It seems the story's not quite over. I've just been informed that Patricia Cornwell has taken out full-page ads in both the Guardian and the Independent (in the words of my source) "attacking her critics." I've not seen these ads - could anyone possibly post scans to the site? Would be interested in reading her latest.
Not sure if they're in today's papers or if they're just slated for printing sometime over the next few days.
(Message edited by admin on August 26, 2005)
Stephen P. Ryder, Exec. Editor
Casebook: Jack the Ripper
|
Jennifer Pegg
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Jdpegg
Post Number: 2875
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, August 26, 2005 - 5:24 pm: |
|
yeah it did that to me to the link i mean (not the thought of a revised Cornwell)
you want
copy that and delete the spaces!
http:// www.guardian. co. uk/comment /story/ 0,,1555744,00.html
whatever go on guardian.co.uk and type in sickert the story you want is the 25th Aug!
(Message edited by jdpegg on August 26, 2005)
"You know I'm not gonna diss you on the Internet
Cause my momma taught me better than that."
|
Jennifer Pegg
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Jdpegg
Post Number: 2876
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, August 26, 2005 - 5:30 pm: |
|
http://www.patriciacornwell.com/ripper_critics.html
from her website
Jenni
ps hope it works!!
"You know I'm not gonna diss you on the Internet
Cause my momma taught me better than that."
|
John Savage
Inspector
Username: Johnsavage
Post Number: 466
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, August 26, 2005 - 7:33 pm: |
|
Hi Jenni/Simon,
My apologies for that mistake in the link, things like that often happen when I try anything technical on the computer.
Stephen,
No full page adverts in the Guardian yesterday or today, but will have a look tommorrow.
Rgds
John |
Dan Norder
Chief Inspector
Username: Dannorder
Post Number: 858
Registered: 4-2004
| | Posted on Friday, August 26, 2005 - 8:39 pm: |
|
Dear Lord, have you seen the nonsense on her site that Jenni linked to? Cornwell is living in a fantasy world.
She really needs to pay attention... I think her idea of rebuttal is closing her eyes, sticking her fingers in her ears and saying "Nah nah nah nah, I can't HEAR you." And she's claiming her critics don't have hard facts, LOL.
The only thing worse with some person with an insanely nonsensical theory he or she holds onto despite all evidence is one who can afford publicity for his or her book over far more deserving theories.
Dan Norder, Editor
Ripper Notes: The International Journal for Ripper Studies
 Profile  Email  Dissertations  Website
|
Thomas C. Wescott
Inspector
Username: Tom_wescott
Post Number: 429
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, August 27, 2005 - 2:01 am: |
|
What's most fascinating about reading her 'attack' on critics is the last paragraph. Gone is the absolute certainty. Her 'proven case' has now become mere 'accusations'.
Yours truly,
Tom Wescott |
Jennifer Pegg
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Jdpegg
Post Number: 2877
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, August 27, 2005 - 6:59 am: |
|
Hi everyone,
its in todays Independent. I do have a copy, if anyone wants to know what it says and save £1.20.
Oh and Stephen you are mentioned again!
Jenni
"You know I'm not gonna diss you on the Internet
Cause my momma taught me better than that."
|
Jennifer Pegg
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Jdpegg
Post Number: 2878
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, August 27, 2005 - 7:03 am: |
|
ps John it wasnt you it did the exact same thing to me also!!
"You know I'm not gonna diss you on the Internet
Cause my momma taught me better than that."
|
Jennifer Pegg
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Jdpegg
Post Number: 2880
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, August 27, 2005 - 7:09 am: |
|
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4190572.stm
from the BBC website, cheers
Jenni
"You know I'm not gonna diss you on the Internet
Cause my momma taught me better than that."
|
Rodney Gillis
Sergeant
Username: Srod
Post Number: 46
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, August 27, 2005 - 8:46 am: |
|
Jenni,
Thanks so much for posting the article site. Cornwell's assertion that it cannot be proven that Sickert was NOT in England at the time of the murders is just poor reasoning. I remember reading this point in her book. I am a history teacher and while I am not an expert, I can say that forwarding a theory because something cannot be disproven is just not good research. We can't prove that Sickert was not in Madagascar at the time of all the killings either, I just don't see the connection.
I hate to be so negative, but Cornwell's recent investigation may just be a way of wringing a little more money out of her book. Still, she has a theory, just as most of us do, and I wish her well.
Rod |
Gary A King
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Saturday, August 27, 2005 - 5:40 am: |
|
Hi everyone, I'm a bit new to the cornwell bit of this story, but have read her rebuttal of her critics in the papers today. Is there clear evidence that Sickert wasn't in London at the relevant times? That's what scuppers the 'Duke Of Clarence did it' school, right? I feel she has a point if no one is proving him elsewhere..and yeah I know him being in London at the time don't make him the culprit either! Gary |
Gary A King
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Saturday, August 27, 2005 - 6:12 am: |
|
Ok like all newbies I didn't trouble to read the Walter Sickert page on the site before asking the question about his proveable whereabouts during the crimes! Still I'm not sure what's printed there completely sinks her boat (or ferry!) is there anything else? |
winsomedove
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Saturday, August 27, 2005 - 9:41 am: |
|
FROM THE GUARDIAN OF TODAY
Patricia Cornwell and the Jack the Ripper investigation
Saturday 27th August
Dear Readers,
I am writing directly to you to clarify my position in the Jack the Ripper case. My ongoing
investigation is far from an obsession but an excellent opportunity to provide a platform for
applying modern science to a very old, highly visible case in the hope that we might learn
something that could help solve modern crimes. It goes without saying that the Ripper’s
victims deserve justice and the murderer himself deserves to be held accountable, even
if it is long after the fact.
Every time new evidence presents itself – fingerprints, DNA, or documents – I feel I owe it
to both the victims and the man I accuse of this terrible crime to investigate that evidence.
While I do believe that Jack the Ripper was the artist Walter Sickert, I think that the case
is far from closed and further hard evidence and investigation is essential. With this in mind,
I challenge my critics to back their refutations and attacks on my findings with scientific,
investigative and historical fact. It isn’t enough to say something is right or wrong without
showing why and citing legitimate sources and investigative data.
All investigators into the Ripper case should be held to the same standards that I am. For
example, if I claim there is nothing to refute the very likely possibility that Sickert was in
London at the time of a particular murder, I am basing this not only on dates he himself
scribbled on his music hall sketches, but also on a lack of evidence showing he was
anywhere other than in the London area.
My detractors, on the other hand, seem to think it is valid to produce a letter, for example,
that shows Sickert was abroad days or even a week before a murder, thereby proving, in
their eyes, he could not have been in London at the actual time a murder was committed.
I would not get away with such a statement, and this argument would not even constitute
a viable alibi in court. Nor could I get away with calling a forensic paper analysis of Ripper
documents ‘inconclusive’ without offering a single fact to back that up. (On examination,
the Ripper documents showed, among other things, that three Sickert letters and two
Ripper letters came from the same watermarked paper batch of only 24 sheets.)
I welcome everyone to investigate this case and perhaps find new evidence that factually
argues for or against anything I have discovered and presented so far. If it turns out that
something indisputably proved that this notorious killer was someone other than Walter
Richard Sickert, I would be the first to offer congratulations and retract my accusations.
My latest Ripper-Sickert evidence will be published in an updated edition of Portrait of a
Killer early next year. I hope that people will examine the evidence themselves and reach
their own conclusions.
Patricia Cornwell
|
AP Wolf
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 2437
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, August 27, 2005 - 2:01 pm: |
|
Dear old Pat
I would plead with her not to publish the updated edition of her book, but rather to join in with open and honest debate by releasing her latest Ripper-Sickert evidence on this site so that it might be judged by her peers.
It is not all about money and fame, Pat, sometimes a simple truth is more important.
We stand, fall and are judged by simple little truths in the end.
Why publish a book when you can have honest debate here?
This is good fun, publishing is effortlessly boring and trite in comparison, and inherently dishonest.
|
Howard Brown
Chief Inspector
Username: Howard
Post Number: 869
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, August 27, 2005 - 2:53 pm: |
|
Dan...
The first time I saw Cornwell on that C-Span special I got that feeling of being in the presence of a used-car salesman. I still do.
Regardless of whether Sickert was involved,its not what she says,but rather how she says what she does.
You said the magic words,buddy..."afford publicity"..and that she can do. She probably spent more money than Mr. Begg made for "The Facts"... Messrs.Evans and Skinner for the "Ultimate"...and A.P. for "Jack The Myth"...combined in promotion of the first book alone. Now,this next one needs promoting.
The Guardian statement is little more than a promo for the upcoming book...which is her prerogative. I'm glad that she is putting her money where her mouth is...more Ripper publicity could mean more purchases of Ripperologist,Ripper Notes,The Facts,and all the other worthy magazines and articles and support for websites.
I'm just wondering if she will tackle that tricky fistula in this book.
A.P.
You're an authoress...why not contact her to discuss her book ? Maybe she would feel more comfortable if a fellow writer debated her or discussed her work than other people... Have you ever considered that or are you pretty sure she would decline ? Thanks ! |
AP Wolf
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 2438
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, August 27, 2005 - 4:37 pm: |
|
How
I think she needs a friend. |
John Ruffels
Inspector
Username: Johnr
Post Number: 448
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, August 27, 2005 - 5:52 pm: |
|
Did Walter Sickert ever see this sketch?:
FIRST PERSON:"I can prove you are not here".
SECOND PERSON:" No you cannot"
FIRST PERSON:"Yes,I can. Are you in Timbuctoo?"
SECOND PERSON:"No"
FIRST PERSON:"Are you in Mesopotamia?"
SECOND PERSON: " No "
FIRST PERSON:"Are you in Kalamazoo?"
SECOND PERSON: " No "
FIRST PERSON: "Well, if you are not in Timbuctoo, and you are not in Mesopotamia and you are not in
Kalamazoo, you must be somewhere else, is that right?"
SECOND PERSON: " That's right"
FIRST PERSON: " Well, if you are somewhere else you cannot be here!. So there! ".
|
Richard Brian Nunweek
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Richardn
Post Number: 1443
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, August 28, 2005 - 4:17 am: |
|
Hi,
I Believe Cornwall has made a excellent discovery regarding the batch of 24 sheets of paper it proves almost certainly Sickert or someone in collusion with the man wrote at least two Ripper letters.
This cannot be denied.
Was he 'jack' he certainly is my number two suspect if one takes Cornwalls evidence with the painting 'A passing funeral' which depicts two young women looking from a window at something which as indicated from the paintings title is a funeral. then this could be a reflection from the funeral of mjk which two young women allegedly saw a incident and mayby [ just mayby ] the killer witnessed.
Tonque in cheek and highly speculative but if sickert was 'Jack' and he did capture his past in his paintings a possibilty all the same.
Richard. |
Bob Hinton
Inspector
Username: Bobhinton
Post Number: 357
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, August 28, 2005 - 7:14 am: |
|
Richard,
Sorry to pick you up on this point again but you really can't keep on making statements that something is 'fact' when in reality it is far from.
You write:
"it proves almost certainly Sickert or someone in collusion with the man wrote at least two Ripper letters.
This cannot be denied."
Yes it can - I'm denying it! Cornwell has done nothing of the sort. Let us assume that she has proven that one or several of the letters supposedly from the Ripper were written on a select stock of paper only held by Sickert.
Nothing exists to show that Sickert or 'someone in collusion with the man' wrote the letters, only that the author had access to the paper.
I have in my possession a copy of a letter (I have personally examined the original) written by a genuine, no argument killer. It was written on a piece of very expensive legal paper from a stock held by a retired Judge.
The judge didn't write the letter though - his butler did, who pinched the paper from his masters desk.
A very chilling read it makes too!
Bob
|
russnic
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Saturday, August 27, 2005 - 11:15 pm: |
|
well it sure beats the hell out of the ripper book i am reading at the moment. Uncle Jack by Tony Williams. I have been trying to read this 214 page book for about one and a half months and i still can't get into it and i'm only half way. I keep getting lost as it jumps from place to place. I find it all based so far on a hell of a lot of coincidence. But being the open minded person i am I will finish this book and read any others that come along just to judge for myself. afterall, how can my guess be any more accurate than those who write about it. the killer knows who he or she is and that is how it will rest... |
Kortnie
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Saturday, August 27, 2005 - 2:36 pm: |
|
You know, Glenn Andersson, Galileo was shown "counter-evidence" and received "criticism" - but he was right. The critics and Inquisitors were wrong.
This is only one historical example among many.
When I see the sarcasm and mockery of Cornwell on this site, I realize how jealous you all are of Cornwell who has solved the mystery of Jack. Probably also some misogyny in there with the jealousy.
She is right. Cornwell is right! GET OVER IT!!! |
AmericaninJapan
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Sunday, August 28, 2005 - 10:09 am: |
|
Hi, I am so glad I found this forum! Very interesting. I have just read Cornwell's book and was sold until I got on this forum. I'm glad you all are playing the devil's advocate. My question is, can anyone suggest a theory or a book they feel is the most accurate, or has proper evidence to back the theory up? |
Ally
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Ally
Post Number: 1039
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, August 28, 2005 - 10:51 am: |
|
"She is right. Cornwell is right! GET OVER IT!!!"
Wow Kortnie, that surely was reasoned and logical argument. All those degrees surely serve you well in the debate arena. I noticed not once have you used any actual examples from P.C's book to support your claims, but hey, who needs logic when you can just yell your opinions.
And sweety, I am sure you feel all good beating the breast of womanhood, but I am a woman and I think PC is a crackpot. It has nothing to do with misogyny. A jackass is a jackass regardless of their gender.
There have been plenty of men who have come out with ridiculous theories on this site and they get ridiculed just as much as PC. So get over yourself, douse your bra, strap it back on and try using logic instead of emotion before you convince every man on this board that women really are irrational twits.
|
Christopher Lowe
Sergeant
Username: Clowe
Post Number: 18
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Sunday, August 28, 2005 - 11:10 am: |
|
To American in Japan,
If you can make a reasoned and intelligent argument you can support anything you want. Just try to avoid ruffling peoples feathers to much as some comments on these boards border on slander.
To everyone,
Am I the only one who thinks if this is Cornwell engaging in the Ripper debate and defending her position then let her (it might help if she participated more).
I wonder what prompted her to respond to criticisms now - the new edition perhaps.
|
Bob Hinton
Inspector
Username: Bobhinton
Post Number: 358
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, August 28, 2005 - 11:37 am: |
|
Kortnie,
I see you have fallen back on the old ploy of abandoning reason, logic and serious debate and reverted instead in 'labelling' people who disagree with you.
If that is your standard of intelligence I am wondering what cereal box your degrees came in!
Bob
PS I have a MA - so what! |
Richard Brian Nunweek
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Richardn
Post Number: 1444
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, August 28, 2005 - 3:33 pm: |
|
Hi Bob,
Nothing is fact in this case it is full of possibly yes, proberly not..
However surely it is a strong possibility that Sickert or a person who had access to his writing material actual sent ripper letters.
With this in mind taking in account his eccentric manner and his type of subject on numerous works it would be easy to pinpoint him as the author.
With this in mind and lets assume that the police at that time were armed with modern day knowledge would he not have been seriously considered taken in for questioning.
Regards Richard. |
Bob Hinton
Inspector
Username: Bobhinton
Post Number: 359
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, August 29, 2005 - 3:18 am: |
|
Richard,
In answer to your question about the police taking him in - no. I think the police would have concentrated more on people who were seen in the vicinity of the crimes - or at least in the country at the time!
Of course there is only one suspect who was actually at the scene at the (approx) time of at least one of the killings - I'll give you a clue his intials are GH.
Bob |
Suzi Hanney
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Suzi
Post Number: 2887
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Monday, August 29, 2005 - 10:17 am: |
|
Hi all
Am still reading and re reading the winsomedove post with amazement.........takes a LOT to shut me up but............ |
Suzi Hanney
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Suzi
Post Number: 2888
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Monday, August 29, 2005 - 10:23 am: |
|
Nice handwriting there!!!!!
Am absolutly staggered by this!!!!!
Suzi (Dip AD, B.Ed!!!!!! for what thats worth!) |
Stephanie D. Riggsby
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Monday, August 29, 2005 - 11:56 am: |
|
Kudos to Ally for pointing out the importance of logic in an argument. Anyone who's taken a Public Speaking class of some sort knows this.
Kortnie, what you have obviously misunderstood from the posters on this page is that we are knowledgable human beings who take into consideration every possible shred of a theory. This enables us the license, poetic or not, to agree or disagree with the points of view of other people. This is not the first time we've shredded a theory. The problem with Patricia Cornwell is that while she is a great writer, and her background in forensic science is long, she is still a "baby" to all of this when you are dealing with writers and ex-police officers and other people who've spent a chunk of lives sorting through the muscle and marrow of this case. I'm one of those people, unafraid to say that at the age of 28 I've been a researcher and amateur Ripperologist for the better part of the last 16 years. I'm also a woman, so believe me when I tell you Kortnie that I am ashamed of girls like you who have the audacity to come on this site with malice and try ignite an argument with those who actually take this charge of this case, nay, this cause, very seriously. You are a bad little girl, and you should have your hand slapped from the dessert tray. |
Suzi Hanney
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Suzi
Post Number: 2891
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Monday, August 29, 2005 - 1:57 pm: |
|
EEEEEEEEEEk well said Stephanie!!!
An amateur Ripperologist!!!!! (dont be daft at the end of the day we all are!!!!!)
Kortnie(!)..I'm sorry but there is a serious aspect to all what you obviously consider as some sort of lighthearted 'fun'..The fact is that the 'facts'are still there to be found and there's the FUN !!
Suzi |
Christopher T George
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Chrisg
Post Number: 1625
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, August 29, 2005 - 3:19 pm: |
|
Patricia Cornwell in the Guardian, August 27, 2005:
"On examination, the Ripper documents showed, among other things, that three Sickert letters and two Ripper letters came from the same watermarked paper batch of only 24 sheets."
Isn't it a fact though that the year in the watermark in the stationery is different, that Sickert's letters bear the watermark 1886 while the Openshaw JtR letter shows the date 1887? How then can they be all "same watermarked paper batch of only 24 sheets"?
Chris
(Message edited by ChrisG on August 29, 2005)
Christopher T. George
North American Editor
Ripperologist
http://www.ripperologist.info
http://christophertgeorge.blogspot.com/
|
Kevin Braun
Detective Sergeant
Username: Kbraun
Post Number: 134
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, August 29, 2005 - 4:21 pm: |
|
You know I have to laugh. PC was absolutely certain and 100% sure and now we get...
"While I do believe that Jack the Ripper was the artist Walter Sickert, I think that the case is far from closed and further hard evidence and investigation is essential"...
I wonder how many more "case closed" titles are in the pipeline?
|
Jennifer Pegg
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Jdpegg
Post Number: 2893
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, August 29, 2005 - 4:40 pm: |
|
Kevin,
yes she shouldnt have called it case closed if the case was far from closed now should she?
Jenni
"You know I'm not gonna diss you on the Internet
Cause my momma taught me better than that."
|
Dan Norder
Chief Inspector
Username: Dannorder
Post Number: 863
Registered: 4-2004
| | Posted on Monday, August 29, 2005 - 4:59 pm: |
|
Cornwell's been getting a lot of free publicity through press coverage of her ads. Some of it is definitely backfiring, though. Here's one of my more favorite ones:
Ripped wide open: Cornwell`s strange obsession
I missed the "Klingon brigade" comments earlier. How amusing.
Dan Norder, Editor
Ripper Notes: The International Journal for Ripper Studies
Profile Email Dissertations Website
|
Howard Brown
Chief Inspector
Username: Howard
Post Number: 884
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Monday, August 29, 2005 - 5:12 pm: |
|
Kevin Braun:
Thanks for pointing that out regarding her re-opening a closed case. It went right by me the first time I read it.
How
P.S. Dan: Thanks very much for that link. Goo find !!
(Message edited by howard on August 29, 2005) |
Robert W. House
Inspector
Username: Robhouse
Post Number: 268
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, August 29, 2005 - 5:54 pm: |
|
I think Stephen should challenge her to a debate... he has been featured in that article, and clearly the Casebook is known as somewhat of a clearinghouse on Ripper research. Someone needs to step up to the plate... I havent even read her book, and don't intend to, even though I owned it up until this weekend when I sold it at a yard sale for 25 cents.
RH |
Dan Norder
Chief Inspector
Username: Dannorder
Post Number: 865
Registered: 4-2004
| | Posted on Monday, August 29, 2005 - 6:08 pm: |
|
Hey Rob,
Well, it may be worth a shot, but she's turned down all attempts to engage in fair debate with anyone who has offered so far, going so far as to pull out of media interviews if she heard that the person invited people with expert credentials about the case. She'd much rather buy advertising, make her own documentaries about how smart she is, and lie about the evidence (sorry folks who defend her, but here claims that there is no evidence he was in France at the time can only be called a lie at this point) than let people honestly discuss the case and point out her errors where she can;t back out of them.
Dan Norder, Editor
Ripper Notes: The International Journal for Ripper Studies
Profile Email Dissertations Website
|
Catherine Ann
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Monday, August 29, 2005 - 12:31 pm: |
|
I don't suppose really that Sicket being the ripper is any more far fetched than it being the Duke of Clarence. For myself I've a feeling that the ripper was probably somebody not even on the suspect list. What about this Swansea man who reckons it was his relative who was a royal physican and travelled around a bit? This theory has has much grounds as any other theory. If we are to believe that the work was just "one" man's work, then he'd have to be able to move around rather swiftly and easily. He most definitely would've gotten caught if he'd done his "work" today because of the forensic evidence. As we will probably never know for definite who the ripper was, one can only speculate. I've not seen any solid proof yet that points to one particular suspect.
PC probably did a lot of research and a lot of work has gone into her book, why slate her for this just because you disagree with her findings? I disagree with a lot of what's being said on the forums but surely there's a way to get your message across without insulting people.
|
