If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
My French is not as good as it should be, so it took me quite a while to get through Sophie's book. Both books are full of errors and, in parts, downright silly. I suppose, though, that I'd give the edge to Sophie. Fingering Macnaghten as the Ripper at least had the advantage of novelty.
Pat's biggest mistake, IMHO, was that she made the decision that the letters were real and was determined to stick to that. Everything else was built around that. If the letters had been authentic and she could have gotten decent DNA results, she would have made a contribution right there. If she could have found a DNA source for Sickert and compared the results to those of the letters, she'd have been home-free. She would have proven conclusively that he was JtR or that he was not. It didn't work, and it was her inflexibility that sank her. In reality, it was all she had to work with that was an actual concrete, hands-on source for evidence. If she had taken the view that she was either going to prove he was or was not the Ripper, I think her book might have ultimately been more well received, providing that she waited until all the DNA evidence was in.
"What our ancestors would really be thinking, if they were alive today, is: "Why is it so dark in here?"" From Pyramids by Sir Terry Pratchett, a British National Treasure.
Both books are silly, but Herfort's is clearly the worst.
I observe that Herfort's pals are now claiming that her book is a wonderful novel, full of suspense, etc (indeed, the so-called Lionel Jospin II - what a name... one Jospin is already more than enough- compares it to Hitchcock).
But what suspense? All crimes are narrated in the first chapters, the killer's head is on the cover page (p4), and is, of course, never suspected by the police, let alone to be caught.
Well it appears someone's just voted....as the magical total for Pat has just risen to 9...
Hmm...that's strange...if Khanada didn't vote....are people voting in secret,or has Pat created an account to rig the competition???
I hope this isn't a fiddle!!!!!
Lionel's gonna be pleased when he get's back....14 members of Casebook have voted in his poll ....how'd that 'appen????....especially as half have said they're not voting!
Oh well...that's enough amusement for now....
I shall be interested to read the result Lionel.
ANNA.
Anna! I'm shocked! Are you insinuating that a member this exalted forum would vote more than once?! Au contraire ma soeur! Never! Not us!
"What our ancestors would really be thinking, if they were alive today, is: "Why is it so dark in here?"" From Pyramids by Sir Terry Pratchett, a British National Treasure.
I don't think to my opinion that she is pretty but no importance.
Any ways Alfred hitchcok was not pretty as well but was good film maker and that's what most important. Physikilly patricia cornwell is a beauty comparing to sophie but sophie seem to be very nice insteed.
Horses are nicer though!,,,,,,,,,,and at least Patsy has a brain.....of sorts --------------So Horse **** gets my vote----- and YES I have done that OMG must go and wash my hands!!!!
BTW-Is there any really serious conversation going on here???
Careful!!!! We'll start to think that the lovely Paddy IS Sophie here with that pic posting!!!
No, I Paddy am a dude. Short for Padrick. Also the name of a famous pub down by the shore EE. My only thought in posting her picture is she is an author. We've seen the others, why not her? But if your are offended and feel this is a violation, just say so and I will have admin delete it.
Comment