Author: Jim Jenkinson
Monday, 04 November 2002 - 12:08 pm |        |
Caz,
'Better to give it out than to receive it'
Yeah ? Where's my cocoa ??
Jim |
Author: Ally
Monday, 04 November 2002 - 12:20 pm | |
Caz,
Yep, yep, you are quite right. Why pretty soon we will be resorting to criticizing her typos rather than giving constructive criticism and all because we find her arrogant. Now that is petty!
Ally |
Author: Caroline Morris
Monday, 04 November 2002 - 12:28 pm | |
Hi Jim,
Bit early for cocoa isn't it? Mine's a Freddie Fudpucker with extra tequila.
For what we are about to receive... 
See ya later, Jim lad.
Love,
Caz |
Author: Christopher T George
Monday, 04 November 2002 - 12:30 pm | |
Hi, Ally:
I have already criticized Patricia Cornwell's typos, e.g., "Steward [sic] P. Evans", "Eddows", and "Tabran".
So I guess there's nowhere to go but up, eh?
I'm sorry, though, but as an editor that type of sloppiness bothers me, and for a writer who professes to care about the victims to not spell the names of two of the victims correctly, let alone to get Stewart's name wrong?
Chris |
Author: Caroline Morris
Monday, 04 November 2002 - 12:56 pm | |
Hi Ally,
Sigh.
In future you can take my silence to mean that I agree unconditionally that all your words directed at me represent scrupulously fair and impartial comment, based on impeccable written evidence - it won't and they don't, but frankly my dear, I'm past caring. And so, I would imagine, is everyone else by now. 
Love,
Caz |
Author: Ally
Monday, 04 November 2002 - 01:05 pm | |
Heya Chris,
I agree with you one hundred percent.. a person whose claim is to reprsent the victims has the basic obligation to spell their names correctly. And typos in a national publication are a wee bit different than a hastily written post. But I am petty and low and have no where to go but up either. Oh well...I like the company down here.
Cheers,
Ally |
Author: Jim Jenkinson
Monday, 04 November 2002 - 01:12 pm | |
Hi Chris,
I half to say, I quiet agree with you. Two much munny spent on publicicity and not enough on poof-reading. What happened to the original ode, for a brief moment I scented immortality. 
Ally, Caz,
To liven things up, you could mud wrestle in a paddling pool, wearing bikinis, in the City Darts.
This is what they want !!
Jim  |
Author: Christopher T George
Monday, 04 November 2002 - 01:38 pm | |
Hi, Jim:
Remember,
The Moving Finger writes; and, having writ,
Moves on: nor all your Piety nor Wit
Shall lure it back to cancel half a Line,
Nor all your Tears wash out a Word of it.
Omar Khayyam
From The Rubaiyat of Omar Khayyam, LXXVI, trans. by Edward Fitzgerald (2nd ed.)
Well, ahem, Jim, I'm sorry that the original version of my poem on Sickert, Cornwell, and the Ripper that mentioned you got revised. The "edit" function is all too handy.
The possibility of having Ally and Caz mud wrestle in a paddling pool, wearing bikinis, in the City Darts has been on my mind as well. Either that or have a three-man tag team of Harris, Begg, and Fido wrestle in a vat of Jello. 
All the best
Chris |
Author: Caroline Morris
Monday, 04 November 2002 - 01:43 pm | |
Hi Jim,
No I couldn't - none of my bikinis fit me at the moment - I'd be more out than in! 
And believe me, the fantasy is miles better than the reality. They wouldn't want it once they knew that.
Love,
Caz |
Author: Timsta
Monday, 04 November 2002 - 04:59 pm | |
Jim:
Good lord, was that a Tiswas quote I spied there?
Regards
PC Timsta |
Author: Ashleah Skinner
Monday, 04 November 2002 - 05:07 pm | |
Cornwall is a confusing lady whose knowledge into the case is a toal joke!
Her so-called documentary was simply to promote her novels and her work into Medical blah blah.
I doubt she has solved the case and frankly my money won't be wasted on such a book.
Its better to stick with Skinner (no relation) and Evans research at least there resarch as a purpose whereas Cornwells simply doesnt full stop.
They are more experienced with their work and simply... i dont know but Cornwell well...
Enough Said?... |
Author: Jim Jenkinson
Monday, 04 November 2002 - 05:59 pm | |
Hi Timsta,
I think it's only fair to have a balance. If Chris T. can quote from the Rubaiyat, I should be able to quote from Tiswas. 
Caz,
More out than in ? I thought that was the primary function of a bikini ! 
All the best
Jim |
Author: Christopher T George
Tuesday, 05 November 2002 - 01:20 am | |
Hi, Jim and Timsta:
Now I am going to demonstrate my absolute ignorance. Who or what is/was Tiswas?
Thanks in advance for the explanation.
Chris |
Author: Stewart P Evans
Tuesday, 05 November 2002 - 01:42 am | |
| Tiswas was a kids' TV programme in the 70's hosted, I believe, by Chris Tarrant or Noel Edmonds. I'm sure ex-fans of the programme will correct me. |
Author: ALAN SMITH
Tuesday, 05 November 2002 - 04:55 am | |
Stewart,
Of course it was Chris Tarrant assisted by the lovely Sally James. Noel Edmonds was on Swapshop on the other side assisted by the loathsome Keith Chegwin. Our school was bitterly divided into two rival camps causing more animosity than that which exists between pro and anti diarists.
Now for a bonus who can tell me where the name "TISWAS" comes from.
Alan |
Author: Caroline Morris
Tuesday, 05 November 2002 - 05:39 am | |
Hi Alan,
Can't claim the bonus I'm afraid. Can you take away two answers and let me phone the audience's friends please? Sorry, wrong show.
Hi Jim,
Did you get your cocoa?
And what did you do with the phantom flan flinger?
Love,
Caz |
Author: Michael Thompson
Tuesday, 05 November 2002 - 05:42 am | |
I believe the BBC documentary will do enormous damage to serious Ripper research. The DNA "testing" was scandalous - if you've watched programmes like Time Team, you will know that if DNA is required from a sample, the investigators immediately don full protective white suits, including overshoes, hair nets, masks etc to prevent contamination of the sample. All the person taking the sample on the documentary wore was a pair of gloves. The fact that both samples showed a possible match could simply be down to the fact that the same person took the samples and contaminated both himself!
The sample from the letter also seemed to be taken from a blood stain - Ms Cornwell ignored the fact that (if the letter was genuine) this blood could have been from the victim, not the killer. The hard facts that a) it is not known whether the killer wrote all or any of the letters and b) that many, many people over the years have handled and therefore contaminated the letters were completely ignored. Even if it could be proved beyond doubt that Sickert wrote one or more of the letters, this doesn't mean he was Jack.
I have an open mind and was prepared to listen to Ms Cornwell's arguments, but she didn't have any! I am very disappointed that the BBC saw fit to broadcast a documentary which was so full of holes and which was basically the Patricia "I'm the world's best investigator" Cornwell show. |
Author: stephen miller
Tuesday, 05 November 2002 - 06:15 am | |
Hi Alan Today is Saturday Wear a smile and leave Keith Chegwin alone!
all the best steve |
Author: Jim Jenkinson
Tuesday, 05 November 2002 - 06:18 am | |
I thought it was 'this is saturday watch and suffer'.
Jim |
Author: stephen miller
Tuesday, 05 November 2002 - 06:25 am | |
Hi Michael I could not agree more I watched it last night on tape and thought the same as you
The taking of the DNA sample did not seem to me to be anywhere near laboratory conditions and if Sickerts DNA was present all that it would prove would be
1 that he handled it
2 that he wrote it
IMHO doesn't make him Jack
Also didn't Dr Ferrara seem very embarrassed when talking about the inspection of the painting
Pinning the Camden Town murder on him did not hold up either
I watched it to decide if I would by her book and I have to say I definitely will not
I have nothing against Patricia Cornwell putting forward her theory she has every right to do so but I got the impression she was desperate for the publicity so that she could recoup her expenditure on the project
all the best
steve |
Author: Jim Jenkinson
Tuesday, 05 November 2002 - 06:51 am | |
Hi Stephen, Michael,
My overall impression of the documentary was that Ms Cornwell became frustrated with the whole project. The results she envisaged from the investgation didn't materialise.
Witness her desire to get back to her life as she was walking along the beach.
Jim |
Author: Eliza Cline
Tuesday, 05 November 2002 - 10:04 am | |
| What irritates me is that the media keeps saying that Cornwell tested "the DNA of Jack the Ripper" and compared it with that of Sickert. Hello--no one HAS the DNA of Jack the Ripper! If it could have been obtained then the police could test it against all the other suspects. All Cornwell got was DNA from one JTR letter widely believed to be a hoax. |
Author: Christopher T George
Tuesday, 05 November 2002 - 10:22 am | |
Hi, Eliza:
You are right that the Openshaw letter may be a hoax as are, it is believed, most if not all of the JtR letters. Unfortunately, Ms. Cornwell appears to believe that some 150 "Ripper letters" were written by the killer, i.e., her chosen suspect, Walter Sickert, no matter that the handwriting in those letters is vastly different.
Chris George |
Author: ALAN SMITH
Tuesday, 05 November 2002 - 11:06 am | |
Hi Steve
Well done 2 tickets to Scunny v Lincoln winging there way to you as we speak.
Does Ian Botham still play for them? |
Author: stephen miller
Tuesday, 05 November 2002 - 11:10 am | |
Hi Alan if you are coming to the game maybe we could meet up for a drink let me know by email
No Botham does not still play for us in fact he never did he just waddled around a bit.
all the best and beat Hull on Saturday.
steve |
Author: Richard P. Dewar
Tuesday, 05 November 2002 - 12:18 pm | |
Hi all,
Cornwell believes the popular mythology that the Whitechapel murderer authored numerous letters to the police - he may have, we simply do not know.
Recently I watched live coverage of the DC sniper case in the U.S. NBC anchor Craig Jarrett, noting that the sniper had written letters to the police, stated that the case was similiar to the Jack the Ripper case in which the killer sent dozens of letters taunting the police.
Rich |
Author: David Radka
Tuesday, 05 November 2002 - 01:14 pm | |
Money, money, money. That's what it's all about, isn't it? Don't they all want to make their money, these charlatan chandala Ripperologists! $$$ is what it is. This is how the money is to be made, big piles of money, all at once: Get yourself an empirical pretext, claim it solves the case, then watch your gusher blow! Thar she blows! Knight, Maybrick, Cornwell...who's next? Doesn't matter, there's a tuna in every sea.
David |
Author: Garry Wroe
Tuesday, 05 November 2002 - 06:34 pm | |
Hello All.
This is probably going to make sense only to British posters who have some knowledge of the English Football Association and its former executives, so my apologies to everyone else. But did anyone notice the striking resemblance between the Sickert archivist and Graham Kelly? Not only do they look alike, their voices are virtually identical. Could this be Ms Cornwell's next investigation, I wonder?
Regards,
Garry Wroe. |
Author: Mark Andrew Pardoe
Tuesday, 05 November 2002 - 07:22 pm | |
Whatho all,
Now for who was Patsy looking? If I remember rightly it was someone who was self-centred and with a massive ego (I am probably paraphrasing). When she sat at home watching poor old Walter on the amateur film; you recall that “wicked old man”; it reminded me of another bloke who was totally self-centred with a massive ego, he even had a big beard as well. He was, of course: George Bernard Shaw. What was GBS up to in 1888?
Cheers, Mark |
Author: Christopher T George
Tuesday, 05 November 2002 - 08:57 pm | |
Hi, Mark:
I am very glad that someone has finally brought up the name of George Bernard Shaw, reformer, social activist, member of the Fabian Society, a gentleman clearly interested in bringing the world's attention to London's East End. I don't know whether anyone has ever noticed that if one rearranges the name "George Bernard Shaw" one finds the anagram
Gnashear be Wrodger
This is clearly ancient Gaelic. Mr. Shaw, being an Irishman, was evidently trying to invoke that bloody forerunner of Jack the Ripper known as Gnashear be Wrodger who terrorized the back alleys of Dublin, Derry, and Limerick before Jack was a twinkle. It is an extreme comfort to me to know that the the author of Major Barbara has been unmasked as Gnashear be Wrodger aka Jack the Ripper!
Yours truly
At Peace in Baltimore |
Author: Spryder
Tuesday, 05 November 2002 - 09:55 pm | |
| On Monday, November 11, Patricia Cornwell will appear on the Today Show to talk about her new book, Portrait of a Killer: Jack The Ripper—Case Closed. The Today Show airs nationwide on NBC, from 7:00 to 10:00 in the morning. |
Author: Spryder
Wednesday, 06 November 2002 - 12:27 am | |
Due to the enormous interest arising from Cornwell's book I decided to throw together a "primer" for people new to the case, who might not understand some of the rather large assumptions her theory rests upon. It can be read at:
http://casebook.org/dissertations/dst-pamandsickert.html
Please let me know if you notice any inaccuracies, or have any points you think should be included. Thanks! |
Author: Harry Mann
Wednesday, 06 November 2002 - 04:04 am | |
Let us not forget,when talking of Sickert,the prime reason he is alledged to have given for the commencement of the Ripper murders.That is, to cover up a liassion between Prince Eddy and a shop girl,a secret marriage and the birth of their child.
Now can any of the forementioned be proven.It appears not,yet at least to my knowledge,there might be basis for some suspicion that those events took place.
At least forty years before Joseph Sickert gave his story to Stephen Knight,there was rumor and talk of a royal connection to a family named Crook.This family too had its origins in Scotland,and in the 1880's were living in the midlands of England,just as had been told to Knight.It was not a wide based rumour,perhaps not even mentioned outside the family concerned,but the belief was real with them.
Coincidence?.Fanciful imagination?.Well I am not a person likely to hold myself up to redicule.I know of the family and the rumour from when I was a Child,and I'll be Seventy Five this month.
Coincidence?.Again maybe,but if it is the same Crook family of whom Annie Elizabeth was once a member,then there could be a source besides Joseph Sickert,that could lend weight to at least
one part of the Sickert story having substance.
Perhaps Cornwall does have knowledge of this thread,so I for one will withhold condemnation of her for a while. |
Author: Christopher T George
Wednesday, 06 November 2002 - 05:05 am | |
Hi, Spry:
I think we can be sure that Patricia Cornwell is going to be on all of the major shows in connection with her book. Thanks for letting us know about her Today show appearance.
All the best
Chris |
Author: Christopher T George
Wednesday, 06 November 2002 - 08:48 am | |
Hi, Harry:
Thanks for bringing up the Crook family story and the fact that it appears to have predated Stephen Knight's use of the story, as told to him by Joseph Sickert, in Knight's 1976 Royal conspiracy book, Jack the Ripper: The Final Solution, in which the artist Walter Sickert, Joe's alleged father, plays a bit part. I don't know whether you are aware though that Patricia Cornwell's theory owes nothing to the story of Annie Elizabeth Crook's supposed marriage to Eddy, Duke of Clarence and Avondale, nor to Joseph Sickert. Cornwell's theory is based instead entirely on her presumption that Walter Sickert was a serial killer.
Best regards
Chris George |
Author: Jim Jenkinson
Wednesday, 06 November 2002 - 10:05 am | |
Dear Chris,
I can't help to wonder if Ms Cornwell is correct, in her projection of 30 or 40 victims. This would elevate Walter Sickert quite high, in the All Time table of mass murdering painters, presently headed by a Mr A. Schickelgruber of Austria.
Jim |
Author: Jim Jenkinson
Wednesday, 06 November 2002 - 10:18 am | |
Hi Garry,
I note your comments about Graham Kelly. I also noted the DNA expert sounded like "Brains" from "Thunderbirds".
Where are International Rescue when you need them ? 
Jim |
Author: Kevin Braun
Wednesday, 06 November 2002 - 10:27 am | |
Spryder,
Got "Page no longer exists..." on the primer link. Thanks for the Today Show info.
Take care,
Kevin |
Author: Spryder
Wednesday, 06 November 2002 - 10:33 am | |
| Sorry Kevin - I've been requested by Putnam to withhold any reviews of the book until Friday, so I've removed the primer for now. It will be returned to the same location on Friday morning. |
Author: Christopher T George
Wednesday, 06 November 2002 - 11:24 am | |
Hi, Spry:
Is it Friday or is it Monday, November 11 for the embargo on reviews? I believe Ripperologist and other publications have been asked to embargo their reviews until Monday.
All the best
Chris |
