Best suspect book?

[JTRSickert]

Hi all,

What does everyone think is the best JTR suspect book? A book that is careful and sticks to the facts and presents it's case through non-fantastical means and has a credible author.

In my opinion, I've always thought Robert House's book on Kosminski was the best one, mostly because (aside from the reasons I listed above), he doesn't say that he was JTR, but why he was considered the #1 sus pect at the time.

[Nemo]

Definitely Helena's recent work about George Chapman, "Jack the Ripper at last?"

I haven't actually read Tim Riordan's "Prince of Quacks" about Tumblety but I would think that's up there somewhere going by the reviews and comments about it

[JTRSickert]

Thank you Nemo.

[Cogidubnus]

George Chapman

Until recently it would have been Rob House on Kosminski, but now it'd have to be Helena...

All the best

Dave

[Tom_Wescott]

Does Helena's book qualify as a 'suspect' book since, from what I've heard, she argues against Chapman as a Ripper suspect and not for him?

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Nemo]

I'd say so Tom

Chapman has been considered a suspect and if you are interested in him as such then Id recommend Helena's book which may change your opinions somewhat

PS
I just noticed there's something wrong with the times on current posts - yours shows as 11.30am and at the bottom of the page it says it is 12.30pm GMT whereas it's approx 7.20pm - strange

[Paddy]

Rob House's book on Prime Suspect Kosminski so far, as it is backed by facts and leaves it to us to decide....

Pat.....................

[Tom_Wescott]

I have trouble thinking of Helena's book as a 'suspect' book or even a Ripper book, but to each his own. And I don't think that answer was in keeping with the spirit in which JTRSickert asked his question.

Although in dire need of an update, I'd put 'The Lodger' by Evans & Gainey up at the top of the list along with Rob House's book. However, I can't agree that House's book was in any way unbiased, though it would be stupid to expect it to be.

There's actually a number of suspect books I've enjoyed even though I was not convinced by the conclusions. The Diary books come to mind, as well as Euan McPherson's book on Bury. Ripper Legacy was a lot of fun. And Cornwell. A well-written suspect book is often easier to read for me at this stage than yet another dry run of 'the facts'.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Barnaby]

Clearly it is VINCENT ALIAS JACK.

[Barnaby]

There's actually a number of suspect books I've enjoyed even though I was not convinced by the conclusions. The Diary books come to mind, as well as Euan McPherson's book on Bury. Ripper Legacy was a lot of fun. And Cornwell. A well-written suspect book is often easier to read for me at this stage than yet another dry run of 'the facts'.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

Hi Tom,

What is your opinion of Tully's book on James Kelly? I find Kelly to be a very interesting person of interest, despite the lack of evidence.

Barnaby

[HelenaWojtczak]

I have trouble thinking of Helena's book as a 'suspect' book or even a Ripper book, but to each his own.

Many thanks to Dave and Paul for "voting" my book as the best.

Tom's comment puzzles me. I present a suspect's back-story, then list the reasons people have given to suspect he was the Ripper, then analyse those reasons. Sounds like a perfect blueprint for a Ripper suspect book to me.

Where is it written that a book about a JtR suspect HAS always to be trying to force people to believe that the person was the Ripper? It's THAT kind of attitude that makes people suppress any evidence to the contrary, and overblow, or - worse still - to invent a pack of lies to back up their arguments.


Helena

[Sam Flynn]

Tom's comment puzzles me. I present a suspect's back-story, then list the reasons people have given to suspect he was the Ripper, then analyse those reasons. Sounds like a perfect blueprint for a Ripper suspect book to me.

It's far too good a biography for that, Helena. Besides, it seems to me that most "Ripper suspect books" have, as their raison d'être, a hell-bent desire to "sell" their suspect to the reading public. That's how I'd characterise a "Ripper suspect book" anyway.

Whilst you've produced a book about a Ripper suspect, it offers a whole lot more. If it must be classified as a "Ripper suspect" book then, like only a few others (Tully's included, I'd say), it stands out from the crowd.

[The Good Michael]

Tully's book was unputdownable for me. He does stretch things a bit, and I so wish he could have published Kelly's confession/journal so we could have read for ourselves about his misadventures upon leaving England, but the character of Kelly himself plus the inability to dismiss him, makes him viable, and perhaps all thanks is due to Tully. Long sentence there.

Mike

[Tom_Wescott]

Many thanks to Dave and Paul for "voting" my book as the best.

Tom's comment puzzles me. I present a suspect's back-story, then list the reasons people have given to suspect he was the Ripper, then analyse those reasons. Sounds like a perfect blueprint for a Ripper suspect book to me.

Where is it written that a book about a JtR suspect HAS always to be trying to force people to believe that the person was the Ripper? It's THAT kind of attitude that makes people suppress any evidence to the contrary, and overblow, or - worse still - to invent a pack of lies to back up their arguments.


Helena

Hi Helena. I've never considered Chapman much of a Ripper suspect. And what I was saying was more along the lines of what Sam Flynn said after me. JTRSickert was asking about suspect books that argued FOR a suspect...yours doesn't, so I thought that should be pointed out.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Tom_Wescott]

Hi Tom,

What is your opinion of Tully's book on James Kelly? I find Kelly to be a very interesting person of interest, despite the lack of evidence.

Barnaby

Good book about a very unlikely suspect. A bit outdated now, but a very solid factual effort for its time, considering the resources available to authors then.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott