|
 |
 |
|
|
|
** This is an archived, static copy of the Casebook messages boards dating from 1998 to 2003. These threads cannot be replied to here. If you want to participate in our current forums please go to https://forum.casebook.org **
Patricia Cornwell's New Book
Casebook Message Boards: Ripper Media: Ripper Media:
Patricia Cornwell's New Book
Author: Ally
Thursday, 13 June 2002 - 04:23 pm |        | Paul and CM,
You two need to keep up. The Irish ate them, don't you know?
Ally |
Author: Chris Hintzen
Thursday, 13 June 2002 - 08:23 pm | | Hi All,
Maybe it's a cover-up? I'm sure someone will come up with a theory that William Sickert was actually an heir to the throne.(Oh wait, maybe William Sickert actually died in his youth, and a mad Prince Eddy took his identity so he could 'Rip Rip Rip'!  )
Wow, I mix this with a few tidpits and I'll have a book, that publishers will just be BEGGING to publish.(Maybe I can get Shirley Harrison or Paul Feldman to get some of their 'experts' to help authenticate the precise date of the crust between my toes? Or maybe I can get Cornwall's 'experts' to do DNA testing on me to find out if I really come from that little ship that crashed in New Mexico in the 30's?)
Best Wishes,
Chris H.
P.S. Counting the millions I'll be making from my book deal already.(Yeah, maybe in Confederate Money!  ) |
Author: TS Simmons
Thursday, 13 June 2002 - 09:46 pm | | Bravo Brad!
Cornwell's theory is rubbish and she's full of it. She stakes her "reputation" on her research. Oh Lord. Will a REAL RESEARCHER write another book on this case??? PLEASE??? |
Author: brad mcginnis
Friday, 14 June 2002 - 12:16 am | | Chris G,
No i cant quote from any dust jacket as I havent read any. Im going on the info given to me by her readers who think she is top notch as a read. One of them is a surgery assistant who was convinced she was an M.E. and not a lady who is easily swayed. I based my post on what people who are her fans have told me. Mea culpa, bad posting on my part. Sorry....Brad |
Author: Tom Wescott
Saturday, 15 June 2002 - 02:38 am | | Christopher & Stan,
I just got finished reading some earlier posts. Stan was referring to my article entitled 'Sickert, Ennui, and the Ripper Letters' in the April 2002 Ripper Notes. Apparently the article made more of an impression on Stan than it did Chris!  I had hoped that I made it clear that I was not laying the authorship of the letters at Sickert's feet, but only perusing a possibility. During my research there were a number of interesting coincidences that could be used to argue Sickert's candidacy as author of some of the Ripper letters (but not necessarily the significant ones). These little items kept burning at my brain until I decided to bite the bullet and write the article for publication. I had hoped that I made it clear that I was writing the article out of duty as an amateur historian and NOT because I put any stock in Sickert as a suspect. In fact, in the second paragraph of the article I wrote that I am 'researching another suspect altogether whom I feel more likely to have composed some or all of the primary Ripper letters.'
Even if Sickert DID write the 'Dear Boss' letter (and I'm not saying he did!) I will state, once again, that his later behaviour of dressing up as the 'Ripper' showed that in his mind the Ripper was the clever 'toff' with the black bag, a fictional 'image' that began with the letters, but is not supported by the most reliable witness testimony. In closing, my own research into Sickert led me to the conclusion that he is not a very good Ripper suspect. As to D'Onston, I have written a rather lengthy thesis on his candidacy as a Ripper letter writer which will be published in the mass market edition of Ivor Edward's book. This thesis explores the possibility that D'Onston wrote ALL the primary Ripper letters (i.e. 'Dear Boss', 'Saucy Jacky', 'Box of Toys', 'From Hell','Openshaw') by presenting an argument for each letter. While I believe the evidence is strongest in the cases of the 'From Hell' and 'Openshaw' letters (a theory first put forth by Chris George), there is evidence which suggests D'Onston was a contemporary suspect (before Bulling) of having written the 'Dear Boss' series of letters. D'Onston needs not to have been the Ripper to have penned any or all of these letters, although in light of recent evidence against him I do consider him a very interesting suspect.
Yours truly,
Tom Wescott
P.S. In private letters now held in a college vault, J.K. Stephen makes reference to September 27th being a significant date to him. Of course, that is the date the 'Dear Boss' letter was received. The plot thickens! |
Author: Andy & Sue Parlour
Saturday, 15 June 2002 - 11:00 am | | Hello Tom,
Good post re letters. We know that D'onston was a man of letters and a good candidate for the writer as Ivor has shown in his book.
It was very interesting to note your P.S. mentioning J.K. Stephen who must rank as another prime candidate. He also was a man of many letters and a writer of verse, some I might add very good. We have all of his books of poems, and all first editions, where a place in the front cover has been reserved for signing by the author.
Many of his poems are cryptic and contain double meanings. J.K. had just the mind to compose some of those letters. |
Author: Tom Wescott
Saturday, 15 June 2002 - 11:43 pm | | Parlours,
Thanks for the response. Since Stephen was in no way associated with the Ripper case until the 70's, I don't actually think he was involved with any of the letters, at least I don't have a reason to. I meant the P.S. as a bit of a joke. But I do believe D'Onston is a very good candidate, and considering that Sickert was in fact interested in the Ripper case I must admit that he can't be ruled out (as a letter writer).
I would love to have a complete collection of Stephen's poetry. I'm not a collector, per se, and wouldn't want to pay and arm and a leg, but I'd love to have the poems. To my knowledge, they haven't been published in years. It's a shame.
Yours truly,
Tom Wescott |
Author: Andy & Sue Parlour
Sunday, 16 June 2002 - 07:16 am | | Tom, re J.K.Stephen. Sue and I have often thought about re-publishing J.K's works. Irrespective of any connections with the JTR case. The poems deserve it just on merit, the whole collection contains verses that are humourous, sad, sublime, and at the same time show J.K. Stephen as a person who was a deep thinker, and born much before his time. His verse is timeless, we have taken the precaution of ascertaining the copyright information to Ten Bells Ltd.
If there was enough interest perhaps we could publish an edited version to keep cost's to a minimum. |
Author: Tom Wescott
Sunday, 16 June 2002 - 11:13 pm | | Andy,
That sounds great. What do you mean, 'Ten Bells Ltd.'? Would that be a small Ripper publishing firm of yours? I always thought it would be a great idea if there could be a small publishing house devoted to publishing not only old Ripper works, but works related to the Ripper, such as the Stephen collection (and a D'Onston collection, something I'd consider doing if I can ever find a copy of Patristic Gospels!), but also original works from authors who want to publish something outside of normal publishing house interest; many authors would like to write their theories or researches down, but it may not equal full book length, although being far too long for an article. Other writers may want to publish a collection of articles they've written, etc. With the Casebook, Rupert Books, Loretta Lay, eBay, Abe.com, etc there are plenty of ways to market the books to their core audience and keep costs down by producing them in the no frills, but quality manner of, say, Stephen Ryder's 'The First Fifty Years of JTR', and selling them at a reasonable price, perhaps even offering a book club 'subscription'. Of course, I don't have the capital to begin even thinking of such a venture, but it sure would be a nice thing to see. It sucks being an idea man with no money!!!
Yours truly,
Tom Wescott |
Author: Jack Traisson
Monday, 17 June 2002 - 12:41 am | | Men and Women (from 'Lapsus Calami' by J.K. Stephen)
1. IN THE BACKS.
As I was strolling lonely in the Backs,
I met a woman whom I did not like.
I did not like the way the woman walked:
Loose-hipped, big-boned, disjointed, angular.
If her anatomy comprised a waist,
I did not notice it: she had a face
With eyes and lips adjusted thereunto,
But round her mouth no pleasing shadows stirred,
Nor did her eyes invite a second glance.
Her dress was absolutely colourless,
Devoid of taste or shape or character;
Her boots were rather old, and rather large,
And rather shabby, not precisely matched.
Her hair was very far from beautiful
And not abundant: she had such a hat
As neither merits nor expects remark.
She was not clever, I am very sure,
Nor witty nor amusing: well-informed
She may have been, and kind, perhaps, of heart;
But gossip was writ plain upon her face.
And so she stalked her dull unthinking way;
Or, if she thought of anything, it was
That such a one had got a second class,
Or Mrs So-and-So a second child.
I did not want to see that girl again:
I did not like her: and I should not mind
If she were done away with, killed, or ploughed.
She did not seem to serve a useful end:
And certainly she was not beautiful.
The 202 page reprint (1896, 1898, 1905, 1909, 1912 etc.) of 'Lapsus Calami and Other Verses' by James Kenneth Stephen is readily available for $10-$20. 'Quo Musa Tendis?' is also usually available (though a little harder to find) but still can be purchased for $20-$40.
Cheers,
John |
Author: Scott E. Medine
Monday, 17 June 2002 - 09:37 am | | I have been really busy the last two months, so forgive me fro tagging into this conversation so late. Earlier in the thread, people were saying they will buy the book after taking shots at Ms . Cromwell. Wolf V said he would buy the book despite the huge knot in his stomach or something to that effect.
Now I’m about to date myself a little bit here, but I remember when MTV was all heavy metal. This was before the started going mainstream by showing Michael Jackson videos. In an interview with Ozzy Osbourne on the Head Banger’s ball, Ozzy responded to Christians burning his albums by saying; “They can burn my albums all they want. I don’t care. They have to buy them first.” As a young metal head I thought that was cool. I still do think its cool but he has a point.
When I was promoted to detective, my first assignment was the gang unit. Part of my job was listening to rap music and watching movies such as Colors , Boyz in the Hood, New Jack City etc.... it was considered part of intelligence gathering. These new movies and rap music served as primers for gang members. What was done in the movies and sung about in the music was sure to follow on the streets. This is just one way gangs and their philosophy migrate into smaller towns. While listening to some Chicago based rap artist I suddenly remembered Ozzy’s quote. I realized damn....even though the department is reimbursing me for this tape this cat is making money off of me. About this time a book was released entitled Monster, Portrait of an L.A. Gang Member. The book was an autobiography by Monster Cody Scott who is still considered one of the most prolific killing machines bred in the mean streets of South Central L.A. Gang officers bought the book, gang members were buying the book and some college sociological courses made it required reading. I was assigned to the homicide division by that time. One night while we were executing a search warrant on a known gang member I found a copy of the book in the bedroom of our suspect. Parts of the book were highlighted and underlined. Interestingly enough there was also a copy of the U.S. Army’s Ranger Handbook and several Special Forces manuals on guerilla warfare and explosives present as well. Anyway, I remember thinking I got to read this book. So that weekend I set out toobtain a copy from Barnes and Noble then I remembered Ozzy’s quote. Hell I wasn’t going to give this guy any money. So I turned the car around and headed for the library.
I will probably read Ms. Cornwell’s book, as soon as the Athens-Clarke County Library obtains a copy of it.
Peace,
Scott |
Author: Christopher-Michael DiGrazia
Monday, 17 June 2002 - 09:55 am | | Final word on the Cornwell video -
I recieved an e-mail this morning from James Kouten, director of the Virginia Institute for Forensic Science and Medicine, before which audience Patricia Cornwell discussed her Sickert theory. I had asked whether the VIFSM had sold out of the product, whether there were problems with it or whether Miss Cornwell or her publisher had asked the video be pulled:
"Dear Mr DiGrazia - I have no knowledge of Ms Cornwell changing her position. The Institute had a limited number of tapes and we had more requests than we anticipated. Sincerely, James Kouten."
So there it is. And to match Scott's sensible post above, it appears a lot of people will be putting money into Cornwell's pocket. I don't plan to be one of them, however, since we press baron types get our review copies for free, don'cha know. . .
CMD |
Author: Robin
Tuesday, 25 June 2002 - 07:45 pm | | Hi to one and all,
If you are interested in Cornwell's views on the Ripper please do try:
http://www.abcnews.go.com/sections/community/DailyNews/chat_patriciacornwell1207.html
I discovered and read this article earlier this evening, and have now recovered sufficiently to share it with others - well, I fail to see why I should suffer alone!!!
Read it and weep, fellow-but-more-knowledgable-than-I-Ripperologists!
Robin |
Author: Yazoo
Tuesday, 25 June 2002 - 09:55 pm | | Cornwell speaketh:
"You also have to remember that even though "Jack the Ripper" has been gone for a very long time, he has continued to influence other violent offenders and it is time for his myth to be dispelled and for him to be relegated to the grave, where he belongs."
Well, she and I partially agree on one thing; but since JtR has long since bedded down in his grave, we must find an alternative 'future' for old Jack. And nothing near so pleasant as a grave...once we find him, of course.
Yaz |
Author: Shana Mcnelly
Thursday, 15 August 2002 - 03:44 pm | | I personally think that Patrica Cornwell has a good theroy. And its very surprising that she is placing her whole reputation on this one thing. And Sickert seems like a good logical guess. And I plan on buying the book to look further into things. Patrica Cornwell on PrimeTime Thursdays was the thing that made me want to learn more about JTR.
*~Shana~* |
Author: Dan Norder
Friday, 16 August 2002 - 09:11 am | | Shana,
Well, I can certainly understand why someone who doesn't yet know anything about Jack the Ripper (other than, perhaps, fictional treatments such as the From Hell movie) would see a slick segment on a primetime news program and think it makes some sense.
Even a little bit of research and logic shows that her case, as presented so far, is very flimsy. For example, the piece assumed that Jack the Ripper might have actually written the letter that was tested. The program didn't explain why anyone would assume that. Further I can't think of any reason why anyone would, as the concept of Jack the Ripper sending off letters is more fostered by fictional treatments and legends than anything resembling fact.
Even the person who ran the DNA tests Cornwall cited on that segment says it's unlikely that Sickert has been linked to the letter, and this while Cornwall paid him. And even if he is linked to the letter that certainly doesn't prove he was the ripper, just someone who pretended he was. And that's nothing new as he used to fantasize about being the ripper and dress up like he thought the ripper would look like. As has been stated here before, why would someone who was the ripper and knew what he was like have to pretend and then get the facts all wrong?
As far as Corwall staking her reputation on her theory -- what reputation? She's a fiction author and has no reputation other than being someone who can sell made up facts to people.
Congratulations on your new found interest, just don't take Cornwall at her word until you read work by more established researchers.
Dan |
Author: Shana Mcnelly
Saturday, 17 August 2002 - 03:18 pm | | Dan,
'From Hell'? I watched five minutes of it, it was horrible, Your right, I don't know everything about Jack The Ripper, but I know more then most 14 year olds would even care to look at, I study, and I learn, and I listen.
Cornwall has a good point, and Sickert could be ripper, and a lot of his paintings show information and have similar aspects to the murder victams remains.
I definatly dont think it was Dr. Gull suspect, as cornwall said 'The bodys were badly mutilated' and a doctor wouldnt have hacked, stapped, sliced, and diced like that.
I almost think that the Ripper was a skitzophrinic, not like Dr. Jeckle, Mr. Hide...but if he was a doctor, a total life and brain system change had to take place for him to kill like that.
I also agree that the ripper was right handed, but most people do.
Cornwall has a reputation,and yes, her books are fiction, but real facts, ideas, places, etc are in her books. As I said in my 'Im New' post, I still have lots of information to read about, many more things to study, and Im going to watch the Jack The Ripper moive on the 'True Stories' channel tonight. Lucky for me my mom knows a lot about the Ripper, and is passing that information to me, and she also supports me in learning more, that gives me the upper hand for a lot of things.
*~Shana~* |
Author: TS Simmons
Sunday, 08 September 2002 - 10:40 pm | | Dear Shana; Stay in school, and read this book "The Complete History of Jack The Ripper" by Philip Sudgen. Cornwell's theory is not a good one, it is 100% rubbish.
Dan; BRAVO to you. You have articulated my thoughts exactly on Cornwell's awful theory. If SHE had done ANY research herself, she would have discovered that the Ripper most likely did not have any contact with the letters. Cornwell HAS NO REPUTATION, she is a FICTION writer who worked as a morgue attendant, and police reporter briefly. She's looking to cash in/gain notoriety on the Ripper case. Her theory is 100% rubbish. Case closed. I am beginning to become pessimistic, as I feel that there will never be another legitimate text written about the Ripper. |
Author: bertje
Friday, 08 November 2002 - 03:05 am | | she was on bbc last week promoting her book.
"Cornwell HAS NO REPUTATION" not because she's a fiction writer but she's been involved in a lot of scandals including her lesbian lover trying to shoot her husband, a drunk driving carcrash, and her demolishing a sickert painting.
i'd stake that kind of reputation on anything anytime.
what it actually means is: i'm betting that this book will give me somesort of a reputation.
(she can't expect to gain more then $6mil from this, plus she's already good for over $100 mil)
after reading the first chapter on these pages i decided i'll not even bother to read it from the library.
"For Walter Sickert to imagine Whistler in love and enjoying a sexual relationship with a woman might well have been the catalyst that made Sickert one of the most dangerous and confounding killers of all time."
ugh.
and what's so f*cking special of a painting called "jack the ripper's bedroom" if the artist boosted about having rented jack's room (see the lodger theories) and -just as most people here- had an obsession about the murders?
if the better written and better researched "from hell" comic is filed under "fiction", consider putting this under "hovel".
great tv review at:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/tv_and_radio/story/0,3604,822862,00.html
did anyone read j.o. fuller's sickert book? |
Author: Monty
Friday, 08 November 2002 - 12:15 pm | | Bertje
Calm down, calm down.........we've all had a pint !! 
Monty..who hasnt read the damn thing yet but fears he may agree with you !!
|
Author: Robert Habenicht
Thursday, 26 December 2002 - 01:41 am | | | I have been a long time lurker on this site and have and a couple of weeks ago I watched the TLC special Jack the Ripper: Case Closed by Patricia Cornwall. I have done a fair bit of research myself on the case and into the psychology of a sexual sadist. After watching this show I have never been more repulsed or disgusted by what could have been a serious look into the possible candidate of Walter Sickert. But I sat down to watch the special and it was ludicrous. The special was barely about Jack the Ripper and the case itself, it was nothing more than an hour long commercial for her book. The show was barely even looked at the case and focused on her writing career and just how much money she had spent on a pathetic publicity stunt. Her conclusion was already predetermined which lead her to find anything that enabled her to somehow strengthen her opinion about Sickert. The “layers of circumstantial evidence” she has used such as the painting by Sickert titled “Jack the Ripper’s Bedroom” and many others were stretching it as far as the Lewis Carroll theory. The idea that an operation as a child to correct a malformation on the penis as brutal as it might have been, leading to a series of killing is ridiculous. The kind of trauma that most often leading to someone becoming a sexual sadist is a form of psychosexual abuse that lasts for years. If Carroll had wanted to kill someone for his mutilation it would have been doctors for forever scarring him not prostitutes on the street. This special is a worthless piece of trash that should have been printed in the “Weekly World News” next to I had Hitler’s, grandson’s lovechild in Atlantis, not produced by TLC and the BBC. |
Author: Robert Habenicht
Thursday, 26 December 2002 - 01:43 am | | | I meant "If Sickert had wanted to kill someone for his mutilation it would have been doctors for forever scarring him not prostitutes on the street. This special is a worthless piece of trash that should have been printed in the “Weekly World News” next to I had Hitler’s, grandson’s lovechild in Atlantis, not produced by TLC and the BBC. |
Author: Christopher T George
Thursday, 26 December 2002 - 10:36 am | | Hi, Robert:
Yes, I knew you meant Sickert not Carroll.  Thanks for giving us the benefit of your views on the TLC special on Cornwell.
All the best
Chris |
Author: Paula Wolff
Thursday, 26 December 2002 - 10:02 pm | | Hey Robert,
Jump in with all four feet and join the fray. No one particularly likes our Patsy and most cordially hate her "conclusion" and not too fond of her. So welcome to blood and gore, mostly hers. I think she's so off base, I can't and haven't even addressed the issue. When I think of what her 6 million could have done for other people....
Oh well, you're on your own now. Have a great time!!!
Paula
PS Nice to have you unlurking. I think there must be a "Lurkers Anonymous" on this board. :D |
Author: jennifer pegg
Friday, 27 December 2002 - 02:03 pm | | hi
thought this might amuse you
patrica cornwels new bk on JTr was in the fiction section of my bk shop! |
Author: John Savage
Friday, 27 December 2002 - 07:18 pm | | Hi
Today I was browsing through Miss Cornwell's book in my local Waterstones, and happened to glance on the photos of the watermarked letters, said to be sent by Sickert and JTR.
For anyone who may have the slightest interest I believe that the name in the watermark A PIRIE probably refers to the paper mill ALEXANDER PIRIE & SONS LTD., of Aberdeen Scotland. (1774-1962)
The numbers underneath (86 in one pic and 87 in the other) would either be the mills identifying number, or a reference to the year of manufacture.
If it is the year of manufacture, this was usually added to watermarks of papers made for the legal profession.
I have no idea if this will be of any help at all, but I just thought I would share the info.
Happy New Year To All |
Author: Christopher T George
Saturday, 28 December 2002 - 12:07 pm | | Hi, John:
The numbers you are referring to are indeed the years of manufacture of the paper, 1886 and 1887, which shows that the paper of the Sickert letter and the Openshaw letter are not a "match" since they were made in different years, and Sickert's letter moreover has his address printed on the letterhead.
Best regards
Chris George |
Author: John Savage
Saturday, 28 December 2002 - 02:49 pm | | Hi Chris,
Thanks for that clarification, and as I said before, papers manufactured with a date in the watermark, were usually destined for the legal profession, so how Sickert comes to have his printed stationery on a paper made for lawyers I don't know. I haven't yet read Miss Cornwell's book, but because of the controvercy it has caused, I just wanted to make clear to others, something which was obvious to me.
Best Regards,
John Savage |
|
|
|
|
