Author: Michael Rogers
Thursday, 19 November 1998 - 01:06 am |        |
| As you can deduce from the title this very seriously proposes that the Ripper was Prince Eddy, but its being the "True Story" is doubtful. Spiering makes a good case, but other investigators' evidence, such as Eddy being out of the country when some of the killings took place pretty much shoots holes in his argument. Regardless of whether you buy onto his argument, it's still a fun book to read. It also has lots of Eddy photos. Unfortunately its out of print but libraries may have a copy. |
Author: John K
Thursday, 21 October 1999 - 02:00 am | |
This is a very entertaining read, but it clearly crosses into the realm of fiction. The academic and investigative standards used are laughable at best, and much of the text is just conjecture on the author's part. Many of Spiering's so-called "facts" (dates, incidents, etc.) have long since been de-bunked by more serious researchers, and the author has never been willing to back up his more outrageous claims with any physical evidence. Among other things, no one has been able to verify the existence of crucial doctor's notes the author claimed to have found in NYC. Worse, he claims Prince Eddy was being secretly detained on dates when he was seen by large numbers of people performing his public duties. How sloppy!
It is certainly possible that the Ripper case involved some kind of a conspiracy, but not the one depicted here. Even if common sense did not defeat this book's premise, the shoddy data certainly does.
If you are looking for the straight facts on the Ripper, this book is not for you. But if you are looking for a good, trashy read, leap in -- it is so far fetched that you can certainly enjoy it as pseudo-fiction. |
Author: ChrisGeorge
Thursday, 21 October 1999 - 03:34 am | |
Hi, John K:
Without getting into the shadowy world of bogus theories such as those propounded by Spiering and Knight and which you rightly label "pseudo-fiction," I would seriously challenge your statement that "It is certainly possible that the Ripper case involved some kind of a conspiracy. . ." Can you produce any evidence to support such a statement? I think not.
Chris George |
Author: DMR
Saturday, 06 October 2001 - 10:09 pm | |
I found it, it was a dollar. I bought it. I shall draw the shades and read it by flashlight later tonight :}
M |
Author: Tom Wescott
Saturday, 06 October 2001 - 10:38 pm | |
You paid a whole buck for this book? Man, did you get 'ripped' off! 
Seriously, though...I thought the book read like a trashy dime store novel, was completely unconvincing, and as we all know, Spiering referenced as 'evidence' documents of Gull's that don't appear to exist. In my opinion, this one is only for the Ripper book completist.
Yours truly,
Tom Wescott |
Author: DMR
Monday, 08 October 2001 - 10:15 pm | |
Well that I am :} Between Jack the Ripper and Harold and Maude I have oodles of memorabilia that most might find useless. :}
Maudelynn |
