I'm fairly curious about this "clue" angle. On the surface it seems ridiculous: why a clue now, and not with any of the earlier crimes? I'm of the opinion that none of the taunting letters were written by the actual killer (though I would love it to be so), so the idea that JtR was playing a game of cat and mouse, of which this shawl/runner clue is one part, hasn't any basis. (I also don't believe that the fabric was ever in Mitre Square, as you know ... but leaving that aside ...)
But it smacks so much of bad fiction that it makes me curious about the case Edwards makes for it (and I'm another who won't have a chance to see the book until it's released worldwide later this month).
But it smacks so much of bad fiction that it makes me curious about the case Edwards makes for it (and I'm another who won't have a chance to see the book until it's released worldwide later this month).
Comment