Author: Anonymous
Thursday, 19 November 1998 - 12:41 am |        |
| Smithkey's analysis of the murder of Mary Kelly is often rambling and difficult to follow. In the end, the reader is left wondering why this book was ever written. The only saving grace of this book is the reproduction of the original inquest records. Recommended only for collectors. |
Author: RED DEMON
Saturday, 08 May 1999 - 10:11 am | |
Hello, anyone else you should ever care to come in here,
I probably shouldn't even be writing this yet, as I've just bought the above book, and havent even read it. But I have to comment...
First of all, I felt like I was buying a book for college. And it had that 'Straight from my word processor to you' look about the type-face. But none of that, is important...
CONTENT IS.
And I couldn't help but notice that when he runs the photo of Mary's body in the bed (almost thumbnail size) the caption reads something to the effect..."This is the only crime scene photo ever taken of any of the murders"...Now, for someone supposedly thoroughly researching Mary Kelly and Jack the Ripper, he sure is blind. A quick look in almost any Ripper book of the past 5 years, or even on the message boards here on the casebook would have informed him that there were other photos taken of Mary Kelly's crime scene...at least one other survives today... And crime scene photos WERE taken at other sights...they've just been lost or destroyed.
I look forward to reading your book, John...Which looks to take me all of a half an hour...But, please...ONLY PHOTO???
Yours truly,
RED DEMON |
Author: RED DEMON
Sunday, 16 May 1999 - 01:00 am | |
Hello again, All!
Just a note to warn all others: the other day I spent $26.00 to buy 'JACK THE RIPPER: THE INQUEST INTO THE FINAL VICTIM - MARY KELLY' by John Smithkey III. I have finished reading it all now. ALL 43 PAGES!!! That's right, the book features 43 pages of original text, including the introduction, foreward, and afterword. Nothing in the text displays any original thought, and he in fact seems to be unaware of many facts in the case as it relates to Mary Kelly. I've seen posts here that contained more information and original thought. I'd like to think I've written some of them. In all, the book appears to have come from the 'my cousin owns a publishing company' side of the business. Just an opinion. However, it does contain all the inquest testimony, fascimile's of records, etc. all neatly under one cover. This is the only reason I don't feel totally ripped off. I'm sure it will come in handy one day. I purchased the book by ordering it through Barnes and Noble. It took four months to get to me. Anyway, just wanted to let you know...I'll be back soon. Until then...
Yours truly,
RED DEMON
P.S. 43 pages!!!!! |
Author: Leonard
Sunday, 16 May 1999 - 02:41 am | |
Thanks for the warning Red Demon.
I believe I made a comment about some people using the ripper as a "cash crop".
This seems to be another perfect example of which I spoke. |
Author: mary Halvorson
Sunday, 06 June 1999 - 03:05 am | |
I've read several "ripper books" frankly the
first thing I usually do is skim through
before I buy it
mary |
Author: RED DEMON
Sunday, 06 June 1999 - 02:04 pm | |
Hello Mary,
Yes, I understand what you mean. Unfortunately, in the case of Smithkey's book, I didn't have that luxury. No bookstore in my city stocked it. I had to order it through Barnes and Noble. It took them FOUR MONTHS to get it here. I bought it, and the rest is history. However, I must say that if you are interested in the Mary Kelly aspects of the case, the fact that it has all her inquest testimonies, etc. under one cover is a nice thing, just don't expect any exciting revelations from the author, or any revelations at all, if fact. Thank you. Until next time...
Yours truly,
RED DEMON |
Author: anon
Friday, 23 July 1999 - 07:14 pm | |
When I first read Smithkey's book I felt as though it were put together by inexperienced school children; How right I was!! Read the following article.
"Class Prints Jack the Ripper Book"
http://viking.stark.k12.oh.us/~vv1nc/issue3/jacktheripper.htm |
Author: Mr Anonymous
Saturday, 24 July 1999 - 09:58 am | |
Just curious 'anon'
what books have you written?
What books have any of you written?
Mr Anonymous |
Author: Mr Anonymous
Saturday, 24 July 1999 - 10:43 am | |
you're also being inaccurate 'anon' as the link you point out describes.
for shame.
Are these the comments of a resaearcher or a childish namby-pamby wannabe complainer?
Perhaps you shouldn't be so quick to put others down who at least do what others only wish they could.
Those who can - can. Those who can't - merely post negativity.
And should every "book" be up to Sudgen's level? Hardly. Think about it...the study will also have to be passed along to a new generation - if no one cares after us then it dies along with all these rediculous theories and suppositions - thank God for that one if it happens, but it will also kill comments like yours.
OH and before anyone morron gets any ideas, this is not Smithkey, as I know for a fact that he's not on-line.
Mr Anonymous
(the real anonymous - so get another fake handle 'anon') |
Author: anon
Saturday, 24 July 1999 - 12:28 pm | |
| Well, just which morron [sic] are you then? |
Author: Jon
Saturday, 24 July 1999 - 09:09 pm | |
C'mon people (guy's / Gal's) this isn't important enough for a childish display of testy poste's.
The kids made a class project out of it, and by all accounts did'nt try to pretend to pose as scholars. So long as facts are presented as facts and not distorted into fancifull theories, then all credit to them.
I wish my teacher had the initiative and openmindedness to create a class project of this nature, when I was at school.
The subject is open to everyone, so long as they treat it serious then why critisize it.
Here's to the next generation of Ripperologists (cheers)
Jon |
Author: Mr Anonymous
Sunday, 25 July 1999 - 10:39 am | |
Obviously a 'maroon' [sic & all] like yourself, ANON!
Cheers, Jon!
The real Mr Anonymous |
Author: Caz
Sunday, 25 July 1999 - 09:09 pm | |
To the next generation indeed Jon.
Cheers all, whether it be anon or Mr A, we'd miss all of 'em if they left us, and I would not wish a handful of them on my worst website :-)
Love,
Caz |
Author: JOHN SMITHKEY III
Saturday, 25 September 1999 - 04:50 pm | |
I just purchased a my first computer and thought I'd check out the message boards. I feel as though I must write some comments here as I am the author of the book JACK THE RIPPER THE INQUEST OF THE FINAL VICTIM MARY KELLY. First, i will not comment on the many outright cruel staements that were made, but I will defend some specific areas. First Red Demon makes a point tat he spent $26.00 for the book, and then had to wait 4 months for it. I checked this complaint and found that he had a choice of that or the lower priced $15.00 book. He had a free choice I do not set the prices. He should also blame Barnes&Noble for the 4 month wait. I checked with my accountant and it took Key Publications over 7 months to receive any payment for the books that were sent to B&N. So Mr. Demon actually did better than we did!! He's wrong regarding the crime scene photo of Mary kelly. It IS THE ONLY photo taken at the crime scene. the other victims photos were taken at the morgue. Demon further stated that"photos were taken at other sights. They've just been lost or destroyed". But he offers NO PROOF in his statement to back he up!! well prove it Red Demon.
Also I would like to thank Mr Anonymous for writing the nice comments and coming to me defense in this message board. If anyone would like to read another rreview, please consult SCarlet Stree Magazine Issue No. 34 or Ripperana No.29, July 1999.
The comments about the typestting were very unfair. The vocational high school has EXACTLY the same equipment as does ANY typestting service. Perhaps these same people that comment negatively about us using a vocational high school would care to check out the prices of typesetting, they would agree with our desision to use the vocational departments of the high school. |
Author: ChrisGeorge
Saturday, 25 September 1999 - 07:27 pm | |
Hi, John:
We are very pleased to welcome you to the Net. Thank you for your clarifications in regard to your book. Red Demon though is correct, there are two existing photographs of the Mary Jane Kelly crime scene. The second (smaller) photograph may be seen in Evans and Gainey's "Jack the Ripper: First American Serial Killer" and Shirley Harrison's "The Diary of Jack the Ripper." The photograph was taken from the side of the bed next to the wall, looking toward the windows and the door.
We have had some discussion of the two existing photographs on these boards. Look under "Ripper Victims: Specific Victims: Mary Jane Kelly: The Kelly Crime Scene Photographs." Stewart P. Gainey has confirmed that there is no known THIRD photograph known to exist but that there are two known today. Christopher-Michael DiGrazia in a message of on Sunday, March 14, 1999, 07:50 pm, added the following in regard to what was done in terms of making a record of the Kelly crime scene:
"There were several photographs taken of the devastation in Number 13, as well as schematic drawings (presumably much like those done by Mr Foster for the Eddowes inquest). We learn this from testimony by Dr Bond during the MJK inquest.
Unfortunately, no-one knows what has become of those [other] photographs and drawings. Considering that the second MJK photo was only recently discovered and that Ripper material does occasionally get sent back to the Yard anonymously, there is a slight chance some unseen disjecta membra (as it were) will come to our notice. It is more likely, however, that just as Donald Rumebelow so often laments in his book, most Ripper-related photographs have long since been tossed away."
Chris George |
Author: ChrisGeorge
Saturday, 25 September 1999 - 11:03 pm | |
Hi, John:
In my prior post, I meant of course Stewart P. Evans not Stewart P. Gainey.
Chris George |
Author: Ashling
Sunday, 26 September 1999 - 06:28 am | |
Welcome to the boards John S. Hi all.
We might be talking at cross-purposes here. I believe John's main point is that Mary's case is the only one in which photo(s) (that are known to exist) were taken of the body while the victim's body was still at the crime scene. On the other cases, photo(s) of the victim's body were taken at the morgue or whatever.
The issue gets muddied by the fact that until a few years ago, the majority of the Ripper World only knew about one photo of Mary's room - and now we have two ... But only one is shown in John's book.
Hope I haven't confused anyone further.
Janice |
Author: Jane T.
Sunday, 26 September 1999 - 06:58 pm | |
| On one of the other boards, mention was given to a female reporter who visited No 13 Millers Court.She wrote an article, did she take pictures? I think I read there were still stains on the wall. Who in actual fact moved there after the murder?? |
Author: Wolf
Monday, 27 September 1999 - 02:46 am | |
Jane, Kathleen Blake Coleman (nee Watkins), known to her readers as "Kit", wrote for The Toronto Mail in 1892 when she journeyed to London, extensibly to write articles on the disappearing London of Charles Dickens. Kit also visited the sights of the Ripper murders in order to document the conditions of the victems and the London poor. She took no photographs but did interview the women of Miller's Court. Elizabeth Prater was still living above number 13 and it was she who took Kit downstairs into the room. The occupant was one "Lottie", who had been a friend of Mary Kelly and who had lived "furthur up the court" at the time of the murder. Lottie may have been either Lizzie Albrook or Elizabeth Foster.
Wolf. |
