Author: Christopher T George
Thursday, 07 February 2002 - 09:33 am |        |
Hi, Caz:
Ahem. Forget that fantasy, Caz. One of the skeletons in Ms. Cornwell's closet is that she caused a scandal by being named as corespondent in divorce papers filed by former FBI agent, Eugene Bennett, against his wife, Marguerite Bennett, another former agent. See the articles by Charles R. Smith and Karl Vick.
Best regards
Chris George |
Author: Caroline Anne Morris
Thursday, 07 February 2002 - 10:47 am | |
Ah, I see. Not good enough to get Mr. Right or the right (lady) killer. 
Love,
Caz |
Author: Ursula Bell
Monday, 11 February 2002 - 11:17 am | |
| OK... I've studied Jack the Ripper for a long time now... My personal OP is that Sickert could have easily seen those pictures in any newspaper, which is why Cornwell's theory doesn't make a lot of since... Think about all of the publicity that these killings got, plus Sickert lived in the area... A lot of artist draw places that they live at and stories that they hear about... I don't think there is anything unusual about his drawings... I've seen more accurate pictures than his from everyday Joes that know little about the case... My personal feeling is that the name of Jack the Ripper has never even been mentioned... I also don't believe the ripper letters were from the killer... I think the real ripper was much too serious to write letters like those that were sent... I think that would have been too sloppy for the real ripper to have done... I think that all of these women were the ones he wanted dead... They all had something in common that we still to this day don't know about... This is the reason for the killings to have stopped so abrutly... He killed the women that he intended to kill and that's all he intended to do... This is just my theory and I've studied the case for a long time... My point is that I think everyone just guesses just to see if they are right... We will probably never know who the real ripper was, but I highly question the theory of Sickert... However, I am going to check into this theory more to see if I can come up with any more evidence... If I do, I'll post what I find... |
Author: Christopher T George
Monday, 11 February 2002 - 02:50 pm | |
Hi, Jennifer:
Everyday Joes? Are you talking about Joe Sickert? 
Chris |
Author: TS Simmons
Tuesday, 12 February 2002 - 06:41 pm | |
| Cornwell should stick to fiction. The Sickert theory is 100% bollocks. |
Author: Monty
Wednesday, 13 February 2002 - 09:00 am | |
TS,
I think Walter would be beaming with pride over that assertion.
Monty
 |
Author: TS Simmons
Wednesday, 13 February 2002 - 03:34 pm | |
| Thanks Monty. I really don't think it's fair for Walter Sickert to be accused of these crimes with zero (not even circumstantial) evidence. Cornwell's "forensic" analysis was laughable. |
Author: Monty
Thursday, 14 February 2002 - 07:28 am | |
TS,
Non-exsistant I'd say.
Monty
|
Author: TS Simmons
Thursday, 14 February 2002 - 10:34 pm | |
| Yes I agree. I'm sure the next book on "suspects" will focus upon Queen Victoria herself. That's no worse than accusing Gull, JK Stephen, Sickert, or even Maybrick of being the Ripper. |
Author: TS Simmons
Thursday, 21 February 2002 - 08:24 pm | |
| Does anyone know if Cornwell is making her "theory" into a book on the Ripper? If so...what a crime! |
Author: P. Severin
Friday, 22 February 2002 - 05:20 am | |
Yes, and she is saying that she stakes her reputation on the results.
Now is that the SALES results, or the result of ruining what probably was not a bad reputation? |
Author: TS Simmons
Saturday, 23 February 2002 - 08:29 pm | |
| WHAT reputation?????? She hasn't got a reputation. She's raking an innocent painter over the coals based upon her "forensic" analysis of letters that weren't even written by the killer. Cornwell should be ASHAMED of herself. Now if Philip Sugden staked HIS reputation on a suspect, then I'd listen. |
Author: thom bratt
Friday, 05 April 2002 - 04:26 pm | |
Dear Ursula:
I agree, Sickert probably wasn't the Ripper, however there's enough suspicion against him to make him as good a suspect as anyone else in the growing list of suspects. But, I suspect that he was not the Ripper only because I believe that anyone who could commit such horrible murders would not go on to live out a normal (relatively normal) life such as did Sickert.
I do not believe that photographs of the murder victims were published in the newspapers back in 1888. All the depictions regarding the Ripper murders in the newspapers of 1888 that I've ever seen were artist drawings. I believe that Sickert had connections within the police departments and had access to the corpses when they were in the morgues. Some people have said that Sickert had to have been at the murder scenes how else would he have known what the victims looked like? If you look at his paintings that people say are of Ripper victims you might notice that they look more like they were painted from either police photographs or from viewing the corpses in the morgues.
Ripper letters; one or two maybe authentic who really knows.
I believe that all the victims had one thing in common which lead to their deaths, which is; they were all prostitutes. They were very accessible, easy victims. One would not even have to persue them since it was the procedure of their business to approach men and offer their services to them usually in dark out-of-the-way places. I believe the Ripper did not choose his victims precisely, they were chosen because they were accessible. He just needed to kill some one,anyone and again they were accessible.
When I first started getting into the Ripper case, back in the early 1980's, I visited London and went to Whitechapel. Those women were still there...those kind of women. I was approached by several of them as I walked along the streets looking for Ripper murder sites. They would come right up to me..." 'ello dearie can you 'elp out a lady down on 'er luck?" I felt as if I was back in 1888 and approach by Poly Nichols or Liz Stride. It was a very eerie experience. And if you went to Whitechapel today they would still be there...they will always be there.
The Sickert theory is as good as any other since there is about as much evidence against him as any other suspect, but I agree with you that we will never know who was Jack the Ripper, although I find it interesting that the murders stopped shortly after Montague John Druitt committed suicide.
Regards,
Thom Bratt |
Author: Neil Kearns
Monday, 06 May 2002 - 08:25 am | |
Here's a link that will take you to a webpage that displays four of the Sickert paintings under discussion; including La Hollandaise, Summer Afternoon and Camden Town Murder.
http://www.geocities.com/pantherprousa/bacon/schooloflondon02a.html |
Author: Tracey White
Tuesday, 05 November 2002 - 12:00 pm | |
We've just seen the Patricia Cornwell programme here in the uk, and I felt as though she was trying to fit the crimes to the person. I would have been happier seeing her researching some of the other suspects and seeing what results she got from them, rather than just one, and then saying she'd solved the case.
Also, on the paintings that were mentioned, there was a lot of red paint. Surely some of that should have been analysed to see if it was the victims blood....... some detective! |
Author: Jenny Wilson
Tuesday, 05 November 2002 - 12:23 pm | |
I found the Cornwell programme very compelling until i read the article about Sickert on this very site, which gave details about the photographs from the morgue being published in France while he was there and therefore providing a plausible explanation of the similarities between some of Sickert's works and two of the Ripper victims. I am now doubtful as to whether Sickert actually was involved, and maybe just reflected his society's great interest in the case; the gap he left before using these subjects could be down to sensitivity surrounding the case.
At least the programme managed to get a new audience interested in the Ripper mystery, as i am now intrigued and have been reading this site well into the early hours (frightening myself in the process).
Does anyone know where i can see a copy of the painting called *Jack the Ripper's Bedroom*? Is it available online anywhere? |
Author: Mike Landy
Tuesday, 05 November 2002 - 03:21 pm | |
Hi Jenny.
I've just seen 'In the Ripper's Bedroom' at Manchester Art Gallery. It's a small painting, impressionistic, very gloomy. It points to a shabby, sad personality rather than a sexual sadist. Nothing in it is clear, which means that a viewer will interpret it according to his or her feelings or expectations at the time. Which is exactly what the Cornwell did. For me she scores 0 out of 100.
There is no print of the painting, but they'll let you photograph it if you ask them nicely. Alternatively sneak your camera in.
Try to get some sleep tonight
Mike |
Author: Timsta
Wednesday, 06 November 2002 - 10:51 am | |
Hi all.
Have had no time to research this, but, given that Sickert was known to have claimed that a previous occupant of his Mornington Crescent flat was JtR, that this might be a depiction of a room in said property?
Regards
Timsta |
Author: Monty
Wednesday, 06 November 2002 - 11:36 am | |
Timsta, Mike,
I agree. It was a claim that his landlady made to him wasnt it ?? That the previous occupant of the room was Jack the Ripper.
I think I caught that in the A-Z.
Mike,
Scarborough boy eh ?? I briefly lived in Cayton. I love that area.
Burgho and Barnaby country.
Watch the cricket festival there and the racing on Olivers Mount.
Its the only place I have found that still have Russian slices in their bakers.
Lovely
Monty
|
Author: Caroline Morris
Thursday, 07 November 2002 - 03:20 am | |
Can I have a slice please?
Russian?
I'm in no hurry.
Where are you from?
Poole.
In Dorset?
I'd recommend it to anyone.
Sorry! Couldn't resist.
You ain't seen me - right?
Love,
Caz |
Author: Mike Landy
Thursday, 07 November 2002 - 07:24 am | |
Monty, Caz.
Now we're getting to it. The clues have been there all along. Russian slices? We knew it was Ostrog all along, didn't we?
Pip-pip.
Mike |
Author: Monty
Thursday, 07 November 2002 - 12:02 pm | |
Timsta,
I was right, it is in the A-Z.
I was reading 'The Ripper legacy' by Howells and Skinner today. Came across a page about an alleged meeting between McNaughton and Sickert in the Garrick club, London.
From this 'alleged' meeting Sickert told McNaughton that the previous inhabitant of his rooms in Mornington Crescent was Jack the Ripper.....his landlady had told him.
He went on to give his name as a Hewitt or Blewitt and that he had relatives in Bournemouth.
From this McNaughton surmised that sickert could have been talking about Druitt.
An old story and probably not true.....but I have a painting.....!!!!!
Monty
|
Author: Jenny Wilson
Thursday, 07 November 2002 - 05:54 pm | |
Hi Mike
thanks for your reply; i would love to see it; did you get any digital photos you could email me (my eagerness makes me forward lol). Manchester is a long way for me and i have commitments which make it difficult to feed my curiosity by taking time out to travel there.
I was born in Scarborough - what's it like there? :o( Left aged six months.
I really think the Cornwall programme should have been more balanced; i don't recall it mentioning that the bedroom had been thought to have been the Ripper's before Sickert occupied it, and she was there just saying *he painted a picture of his own bedroom and called it JtR's bedroom therefore it must have been him*; very misleading for people like me who knew nothing about the case or other suspects.
Am still intrigued but am getting sleep now ;o).
Jenny |
Author: Wolf Vanderlinden
Friday, 08 November 2002 - 04:45 pm | |
Timsta and Monty, Walter Sickert did indeed tell the story that his landlady had told him that he was occupying the same rooms as Jack the Ripper, a young consumptive veterinary student. As Sickert never stated the actual address it is assumed that these were his rooms at 6 Mornington Crescent since this address fits the information given by Sickert. Under the circumstances claiming that Sickert painted his bedroom and called the painting ‘Jack the Ripper's Bedroom' is hardly earth shattering evidence pointing to Sickert's guilt.
Monty, the story in Howells and Skinner's The Ripper Legacy concerning Sickert and Macnaghten originally comes from the 1970 revised edition of Donald McCormick's untrustworthy book The Identity of Jack the Ripper. Stewart Evans has pointed out that this piece of creative writing came out at a time when Tom Cullen's 1965 book, Autumn of Terror: Jack the Ripper - His Crimes and Times, was making waves with Montague John Druitt as prime suspect. Not worth the paper it's printed on I'm afraid.
Wolf. |
Author: Timsta
Friday, 08 November 2002 - 04:55 pm | |
Wolf:
You mean, not even worth the five english pounds I just paid for a copy (McCormick, that is)?
hehe
Timsta, king of ebay |
Author: brad mcginnis
Friday, 08 November 2002 - 11:25 pm | |
Timsta,
Your British, living in the USA and you used "hehe". Geez, is Corny right? |
Author: Timsta
Saturday, 09 November 2002 - 11:38 am | |
brad:
Only if she is postulating that Sickert spent a lot of time on the internet, and hence picked up abominations such as 'hehe', 'heh', 'lmao' and of course ;)
Regards
Timsta |
Author: Wolf Vanderlinden
Saturday, 09 November 2002 - 02:10 pm | |
Timsta, 5 pounds for a McCormick? Sweet.
Wolf. |
Author: Julia Bizzell
Tuesday, 26 November 2002 - 06:15 pm | |
Greetings,
I am new to this site. I became interested in JTR when I was in high school (long time ago) when I wrote a paper and have been interested ever since. I am by no means an "expert" nor am I even really a well-versed novice. I just like to keep updated. I found this site a little over a year ago when my friend asked me about Jack the Ripper. I told her what I knew and then hunted around on the internet. I liked what I saw/read, so I "hung around" and observed. Unfortunately, events conspired against me, we moved, plaque, vermin, monsoons, the tragic death of my computer,and I lost track for awhile. When Patricia Cornwell's book appeared, I nabbed a copy. After two chapters I began to wonder what was going on. I should mention that I am not a fan of Ms. Cornwell's fiction so I thought maybe I was being one-sided in my limited opinions. Then I remembered this site and figured I would take a look and see what other's thought. Nice to know that I wasn't alone.
I went back through the posts beginning in late October and am almost caught up with present time. (Work has been hectic.) I am also only about halfway through Ms. Cornwell's book. Forgive me if I ask questions that have been answered or addressed already.
First, it sounds like Cornwell states that Sickert continued to murder, but never as "drastically" as the Mary Kelly murder. I thought that serial killers rarely changed mo's. I also thought that their killing(s) tended to escalate. I would have thought that the murders after Kelly would have been even more "extreme" for lack of better words. Is it possible for serial killers to "tone down"?
Second, does Cornwell ever consider that the murders were well known. Could Sickert have derived info for the "so-called" ripper-esque paintings from newspaper/journalists, or even street gossip?
Third, if Sickert was so interested in JTR, isn't it possible that he wrote letters to the police as way to "be involved" in the case? Perhaps a sick fantasy that he was JTR?
As for some of the posts, some comments if you please. If an author is considered to "have made it" his name is printed larger than the title, regardless of the subject matter. It's a marketing ploy and it works. Ms. Cornwell's last couple of books made the best seller lists, but were not well liked by most, even her most devoted fans. Yes, they will all flock to this book, but I have already gotten a lot of complaints about it. (I work in a bookstore.) Not just because of her theory, but because it wasn't Kay Scarpetta.
Like I said, forgive me if I am repeating things already covered. Thanks for letting me ramble. |
Author: Richard P. Dewar
Tuesday, 26 November 2002 - 06:31 pm | |
Hi Julia,
Glad to see you posting on the boards. Your rhetorical questions are pretty much on the mark - for the reasons you have outlined, and more, most serious students of the case do not give Ms. Cornwell's allegations much credence.
There are cases in which murderers change MOs - but those are exceptions.
As you have suggested, she provides no evidence to suggest that Sickert was the Whitechapel murderer. The only evidence she does produce suggest he may have written some of the letters. And even that is not definitive.
You are absolutely correct - even if Ms Cornwell could prove that Sickert authored one of the letters (and apparently she cannot), that in no way proves he was the murderer. Most experts both then and today consider most, if not all, of the letters hoaxes.
The best that can be said of Ms Cornwell's book is that she shows it is possible that Sickert wrote some of the letters that today are considered hoaxes. Yet, she cannot even prove that.
I hope you enjoy the Casebook and continue to post.
Rich |
Author: Mike Landy
Wednesday, 27 November 2002 - 06:50 am | |
Hi all.
I just looked up Sickert on the 1901 Census.
He is interesting, even if he's not a genuine suspect. There is no Walter or Richard. Not surprising, since he was often out of the country. Among the 7 Sickerts, all in London, is Bernhard Sickert, living in Kensington, ages 38, listed as Artist Painter. Anyone know anything about this? Wally would have been 41 in 1901.
Good site this. It brings you closer to the murders when you find people like Frederick Abberline, retired chief inspector of police, and George Chapman, 35, publican of Southwark (who gave his birthplace as USA).
www.census.pro.gov.uk/index.html |
Author: Paula Wolff
Wednesday, 27 November 2002 - 09:01 pm | |
Dear All,
This will probably be the least "intellectual" post here or anywhere, but I just wanted to say that I am sick to death of Walter and Patricia. There's nothing there, nothing to mull over or argue about. I wish we could move on and get on to someone who REALLY might have been the Ripper. It just seems like we are flogging a dead horse. Well, anyway, I do wish a Happy Thanksgiving to all that love the day and are thankful.
Ta,
Paula |
Author: Stuart
Thursday, 28 November 2002 - 04:10 am | |
Got to agree with that.
Paula, intellectual doesn't always mean "better" or "right". Trust me...I work in IT. :-) |
Author: Peter Wood
Thursday, 28 November 2002 - 08:13 am | |
If you are sick to death of them you don't have to post on their threads, you could go and make a case against someone else.
Patricia Cornwell's case is her opinion. Whether it is right or wrong it deserves as much respect as all others who would call themselves ripper authors.
As Paul Begg keeps drumming into me: Shoot the theory, not the theorist.
Peter. |
Author: Ivor Edwards
Thursday, 28 November 2002 - 04:39 pm | |
| Hi Stuart, I placed a quote at the front of my book which reads, 'The most intelligent of people are not necessarily the wisest' I have known some intelligent people to be no more than fools at the end of the day. |
Author: Ivor Edwards
Thursday, 28 November 2002 - 04:48 pm | |
Peter, Why dont you make Paula happy ? Take her out and wine and dine her and over the After Eights or Ferrero Roche you can tell her all about D'Onston as being the most likely suspect.
PS. You know it makes sense. |
Author: Peter Wood
Thursday, 28 November 2002 - 05:07 pm | |
Ivor
I fear that by the time I have wined and dined Paula we would no more want to discuss D'Onston being Jack the Ripper than we would want to look at each other's etchings. As a gentleman I would take her to see a play or a concert, then drop her off home and politely decline her offer of 'coffee'.
I don't drink coffee until the third date.
Also, I don't eat chocolate.
Romeo. |
Author: Ivor Edwards
Thursday, 28 November 2002 - 07:06 pm | |
| Listen Romeo, Just do what you are told to do and wine and dine Paula and convince her D'Onston was the ripper. Dirty Harry's Cafe in Smithfield is the venue whether you like it or not.I'm picking up the tab on this one so don't go thinking my middle name is money or that my last name is Cornwell!!! furthermore do not go getting ideas above your station with all this chat about poncy plays and concerts.If she offers you coffee consume it and the same goes for the chocolate. This is my cause at stake here not yours!!!!!! |
Author: Harry Mann
Friday, 29 November 2002 - 02:57 am | |
Ivor,
Careful with my name.And if Peter's on a date offer him only pickled onions. |
Author: Howard Brown
Friday, 29 November 2002 - 07:33 am | |
| Dear Peter.......They grow 'em really pretty, down there in Texas and I'm sure Paula is no different...This is also a rare opportunity to see a Welshman pick up the tab....Go for it,Peter ! |
