Cornwell Resolute Over Jack The Ripper Identity

[richardh]

The best-selling crime author tells Sky News' Entertainment Week she has "got to the bottom" of the Victorian murder mystery.

LINK to Sky NEWS REPORT

[GUT]

Wow 3 in 3 months, is this a new record

Edwards - Closed Koz (DNA proves it)

Fish and Lech - Closed Cross (The experts said so)

Cornwell - Closed Sickert (More DNA though hers was first)

So it really was a conspiracy

[Monty]

Wow 3 in 3 months, is this a new record

Edwards - Closed Koz (DNA proves it)

Fish and Lech - Closed Cross (The experts said so)

Cornwell - Closed Sickert (More DNA though hers was first)

So it really was a conspiracy

Yeah, but I caught him.

Monty

[gnote]

"I believe I am at the bottom of it. I do think it is Walter Sickert. But we still won't be convinced because we can't place him at the crime scene and by now the legend is far bigger than the case itself."

Never mind the crime scenes, how about starting with placing him in England (let alone east London) at the time of the murders.

[TomTomKent]

"I believe I am at the bottom of it. I do think it is Walter Sickert. But we still won't be convinced because we can't place him at the crime scene and by now the legend is far bigger than the case itself."

Never mind the crime scenes, how about starting with placing him in England (let alone east London) at the time of the murders.

Gee. I wonder why we wont be convinced the man we CAN'T PLACE AT THE CRIMESCENE is not an absolutely proven solution.

[GUT]

Yeah, but I caught him.

Monty

Missed this one Monty, and a good job of it you did too.

[gnote]

Gee. I wonder why we wont be convinced the man we CAN'T PLACE AT THE CRIMESCENE is not an absolutely proven solution.

lol, I guess some of us are just being fussy.

[pinkmoon]

It is such a shame that someone who has a lot more money at their disposal than the average jack the ripper investigater decides to waste it investigating such an unlikely suspect the money could have been spent in much better ways.

[GUT]

I believe she's now found a Shawl and that Sickert used a fake name!!!

[Amanda]

Ha,ha.....

I believe she's now found a Shawl and that Sickert used a fake name!!!

Well, at least the dear lady's enjoying herself, a bit of harmless dabbling never hurt anyone.
We all know Cornwell's going to do okay with the sales, she's got a huge fan base. However, I think most people will take her Ripper research as fiction, which is the genre that she's best known for.

What with all this shawl business and the Lechmere documentary, I really hope someone comes up with a good read soon.

Amanda

[GUT]

Well, at least the dear lady's enjoying herself, a bit of harmless dabbling never hurt anyone.
We all know Cornwell's going to do okay with the sales, she's got a huge fan base. However, I think most people will take her Ripper research as fiction, which is the genre that she's best known for.

What with all this shawl business and the Lechmere documentary, I really hope someone comes up with a good read soon.

Amanda

To be fair I thought the Lechmere documentary was pretty good, didn't agree with most of it, as it seems to be nothing but speculation, but still good.

[pinkmoon]

Dear old Walter woke up one morning and stopped killing because........

[DVV]

I haven't seen the Crossmere documentary.
Where is it available ?
I'm sure it's fascinating.
Perhaps more than Winnie-the-Pooh.

[eighty-eighter]

I still don't understand what she expected to find in that painting she vandalised.....

Don't think Cross/Lechmere can be dismissed as easily as the other televised suspects over the years. Granted 4/5ths of the documentary is purely speculative and fit the facts to the suspect in the time honoured fashion, but not the bit relating to the crime scene and just after. If you cherry pick just that bit and ignore the rest of the documentary then he was:

1. Proven as the first at the murder scene of Nichols whom had just been slain. A massive connection.
2. Nichols was still warm and indeed could have been dying according to Paul's statement. Where did the killer go so quickly? I visited the murder scene in the late 60's and there was nowhere to hide.
3. He accosted Paul in a rather brazen manner, including physically, as if he half expected Paul to know something he didn't. Almost a fight or flight response.
4. He told Paul that she was dead even though Paul had said he detected signs of life. How was he certain that she was dead when there was no evidence of blood even?
5. He refused to assist Paul to sit the body up, had that of occurred of course it would have been obvious that Nichols throat had been deeply cut.
6. He told pc Mizen that there was a pc already at the scene waiting for him.

These are proven facts. I've not included the timing discrepancies because we can't be certain what time Lechmere left home for certain. I've also not included the fact that Lechmere gave a name he was no longer using as there could be an innocent explanation for this.
For me the jury is still out on just these known facts, and I'd really like to know more about Lechmere's character before dismissing him as a suspect.
For certain if those events occurred today he'd be down the station before you could say Jack the Ripper.

[GUT]

I still don't understand what she expected to find in that painting she vandalised.....

Don't think Cross/Lechmere can be dismissed as easily as the other televised suspects over the years. Granted 4/5ths of the documentary is purely speculative and fit the facts to the suspect in the time honoured fashion, but not the bit relating to the crime scene and just after. If you cherry pick just that bit and ignore the rest of the documentary then he was:

1. Proven as the first at the murder scene of Nichols whom had just been slain. A massive connection.
2. Nichols was still warm and indeed could have been dying according to Paul's statement. Where did the killer go so quickly? I visited the murder scene in the late 60's and there was nowhere to hide.
3. He accosted Paul in a rather brazen manner, including physically, as if he half expected Paul to know something he didn't. Almost a fight or flight response.
4. He told Paul that she was dead even though Paul had said he detected signs of life. How was he certain that she was dead when there was no evidence of blood even?
5. He refused to assist Paul to sit the body up, had that of occurred of course it would have been obvious that Nichols throat had been deeply cut.
6. He told pc Mizen that there was a pc already at the scene waiting for him.

These are proven facts. I've not included the timing discrepancies because we can't be certain what time Lechmere left home for certain. I've also not included the fact that Lechmere gave a name he was no longer using as there could be an innocent explanation for this.
For me the jury is still out on just these known facts, and I'd really like to know more about Lechmere's character before dismissing him as a suspect.
For certain if those events occurred today he'd be down the station before you could say Jack the Ripper.

And this has got to do what, to do with Cornwell's books.