Patricia Cornwell

[anna]

Hi Jeff,
Although there is a difference between the two drink related problems,obviously the severity of the addiction..many who even take to drink,sink into a spiralling downward turn in their lives.It is still to her credit that she got herself together enough to be able to write.
Good on you Pat an inspiration to others.
Anna.

[Jeff Leahy]

Hi Pirate Jack,
Nice Post No 396....
Taught me something I didn't know about PC,and that is that she has a drink problem.
I think everyone should take this into account,I have worked with a guy who had a drink problem,who couldn't get himself together enough to even put on his shirt before he got to work of a morning,his hands shook so much,he couldn't do up the buttons,until a few hours after he'd woken up.So let's take that fact about her into consideration.
If she can achieve writing books,which take discipline and determination,with this condition,then I admire her,just for that alone.
A true fact,that you cannot be biased for rational debate.I think people here would have liked just a little more consideration on her part,for those who have superior knowledge than her on their chosen subject.Perhaps with an addiction,she might feel more defensive than most.
The only thing that is puzzling,is why as an experience author who surely has to weigh up the credibility of the main character in one of her books,to protect her reputation,should pick Sickert.Just starting research on him would have turned up the fact that he was in France.Even if he did write the letters,he wasn't JTR.Shaky ground.Wouldn't you just move on,and pick another?
Anna.

Hello Anna

I'm sure Patricia Cornwall went on record at that time as having a drink problem. My understanding is that this is not the case at present however?

And I'm not always certain what is meant by drink problems not all acoholic's are the same, and lots of people drink and don't have a problem or think they don't.

Why Patricia choose Sickert is a matter of record. The suspect was pointed out by John Greive. Patricia seems aware that Sickert was in France at the time of the murders she uses it a reason alibi

Yours Jeff

[Jeff Leahy]

PS Can you all foreget the DNA evidence...

The only minute chance you have..and it is a long shot..is digging up Mary Kelly and seeing if you could get a geographical location for her birth place..

There is no DNA on Jack the Ripper"


That is true of course. But the descendants of the victims are still alive. And their dna CAN be tested against the knife. Plus why would Jack's DNA be on the knife? That's kind of stupid don't u think. Test the living descendants like they did with George Washington and John Adams.

Hello downonwhores

I assume that by the knife your reffering to Don Rumblow's knife currently being shown at the docklands exhibission?

I dont know if you know the history of the knife. But for many years it was kept as a gardening implement in someone's back garden..

I dont see what DNA you would hope to extract from it? The victims or Jacks?

And i dont know if for certain it actually connects to a specific suspect. Although I'm sure I read somewhere it 'MAY' have a connection to Druit.

I spent some time looking into DNA possiblity and came to the conclusion there is absolutely nothing of any use.

The only tiny outside chance is...if they could find Mary Jane Kelly's body.

Which is again a long shot. I dont think it would be as easy as going to her grave and digging, the earth and siol have moved much in the area over 120 years and I'm not totally convinced the current grave stone is an exact X marks the spot..

Then if they could retreive any MJK DNA after all this time, which is by know means certain. Then you might be able to geographically profile where she came from...thats about it..

The catholic church would never allow such an act and having given it some thought I believe she is better left in peace.

Yours Jeff

PS the shawl is probably Edwardian

[anna]

All quiet on the Western Front.

Hi Pirate Jack,
Nice Post No 396....
Taught me something I didn't know about PC,and that is that she has a drink problem.
I think everyone should take this into account,I have worked with a guy who had a drink problem,who couldn't get himself together enough to even put on his shirt before he got to work of a morning,his hands shook so much,he couldn't do up the buttons,until a few hours after he'd woken up.So let's take that fact about her into consideration.
If she can achieve writing books,which take discipline and determination,with this condition,then I admire her,just for that alone.
A true fact,that you cannot be biased for rational debate.I think people here would have liked just a little more consideration on her part,for those who have superior knowledge than her on their chosen subject.Perhaps with an addiction,she might feel more defensive than most.
The only thing that is puzzling,is why as an experience author who surely has to weigh up the credibility of the main character in one of her books,to protect her reputation,should pick Sickert.Just starting research on him would have turned up the fact that he was in France.Even if he did write the letters,he wasn't JTR.Shaky ground.Wouldn't you just move on,and pick another?
Anna.

[downonwhores]

Loved your book on Tumblety as all your books. Keep up the good work Mr. Skinner and thanks to you and Mr. Rumbelow for copying the original police reports and such and putting them together. That was a real inspiration and help to me. What do you think of By Eyes and Ears?

[downonwhores]

Dna

PS Can you all foreget the DNA evidence...

The only minute chance you have..and it is a long shot..is digging up Mary Kelly and seeing if you could get a geographical location for her birth place..

There is no DNA on Jack the Ripper"


That is true of course. But the descendants of the victims are still alive. And their dna CAN be tested against the knife. Plus why would Jack's DNA be on the knife? That's kind of stupid don't u think. Test the living descendants like they did with George Washington and John Adams.

[downonwhores]

Dna

some of the descendants are still alive. Could compare blood on the knife to their dna.

[Stewart P Evans]

Misleading

6. Despite the many flaws in her book there are still some interesting claims that would seem to require further attention ie:
There are letters written by Walter Sickert and letters claiming to be from Jack the Ripper which Peter Bower claims come from the same batch of 24-sheets and which, if Peter Bower is correct, makes it highly probable that Walter Sickert wrote letters claiming to be from Jack the Ripper.
This claim was originally disputed by Dan Norder. However as pointed out by Brenda he has since apologized for disputing these claims. Peter Bower is a respected expert and any claims of Fraud or criminal practice against him are totally unjustified. And Dan rightly saw the error of his ways. I hope we agree on that it took a long time to establish.

This statement is misleading. This claim was not originally disputed by Dan Norder - he merely pointed out and confirmed that the claim had been disputed. It was originally disputed by another document/paper expert and author and Sickert biographer Matthew Sturgis in his 2005 book, Walter Sickert: A Life, see pages 239-240. Sturgis did state the caveat that Bower has not yet published his findings in full. Anyone not au fait with the full debate here might read the above paragraph and be misled into believing that it was a false claim by Dan Norder. There has never been any suggestion of fraud or criminal practice made by Sturgis.

[Sasha]

I believe most people here think that Cornwell's book was a baseless prosecution of Sickett rather than a serious investigation into Jack the Ripper's identity. I personally think she would have spent her time better using her "studies" into the case as fodder for her crime novels. Such a (fiction) novel might even have made a good movie. But the arrogance of the title "case closed", complete absence of evidence or deductive reasoning and the obsequious flattery of "we have done it together" can only do two things: exonerate Sickett and render any serious scholar of the case suspicious of her thesis before they have even opened the book.

Sasha

[Jeff Leahy]

Seriously Ally

Your post is interesting by what it doesn’t say..

We know that lying is often simply a point of view..

As I said, Tit or Tat name calling..

But you don’t appear to have any criticism of any real substance? The big issues.

Could you be finally warming to Patricia?

I’m serious about this, though it may appear ridiculous.

There's not really any substance in your criticism is there?

Its still just insult and name calling at the end of the day?

Nothing more?

Yours Jeff

PS I was being truthful about your podcast appearances, call me what you like, which I’m sure you will..ya much better on the radio even enjoyable..I should know.

[Jeff Leahy]

i think we can all agree one one thing:

Patricia Cornwell is a deceitful, lying media sucking whore. She lied to promote her book. She lied about this entire community of people. She is paranoid, probably delusional and above all a liar.

She has never apologized to the people she lied about. She never will. Until such time as she does apologize, debate is fruitless because it is pointless to talk of forgiving a person for their actions when they haven't asked for it.

In summation: Patricia Cornwell--media sucking whore.


Jeff Leahy--deceitful attention seeking (insert noun here). Also lies and misrepresents what posters have said or claimed to further his agenda. Motivations=murky, tactics=duplicitous and underhanded. Also pointless to debate further.

Yes clearly a step in the right direction, but still lots of work to do

[Ally]

i think we can all agree one one thing:

Patricia Cornwell is a deceitful, lying media sucking whore. She lied to promote her book. She lied about this entire community of people. She is paranoid, probably delusional and above all a liar.

She has never apologized to the people she lied about. She never will. Until such time as she does apologize, debate is fruitless because it is pointless to talk of forgiving a person for their actions when they haven't asked for it.

In summation: Patricia Cornwell--media sucking whore.


Jeff Leahy--deceitful attention seeking (insert noun here). Also lies and misrepresents what posters have said or claimed to further his agenda. Motivations=murky, tactics=duplicitous and underhanded. Also pointless to debate further.

[Jeff Leahy]

All Quiet On The Western Front

All quiet on the western Front.

Excellent it would appear finally this debate is drawing to a close. And I wont have to waste any more time on it.

I thought I’d take the liberty of just confirming a position on which we can agree:

1. The first bit is easy, I think everyone here agrees that on almost every level Portrait of a serial killer..is a poorly written, poorly researched book, that contains wild theorizing, wild speculation, and gross exaggeration of the known facts.

2. I think that we can also agree that despite what is said of Patricia personally, the consensus here is that she almost certainly believes (rightly or wrongly) that Sickert is Jack the Ripper.

3. I think we are agreed, Her book originally received a lot of media attention and had a 'Case Closed' on the cover. Patricia and her publicists behaved ‘gung-ho’ in their claims to have solved the mystery, which clearly she had not. She didn't consult or really acknowledge any Ripper authors. And She incurred some enmity for walking into the field and claiming to have shown ripperologists how to play the ripperologist game.

3. We are all agreed that the arguments between Patricia and others (i.e. ripperologists?) took place at least four to five years ago. (I don’t think anyone has come up with a more recent date? But I’m happy to take any contradictions on board.

4. Events in the UK at that time. Cornwell was criticized personally in the press. A TV programme was broadcast (which I missed) Cornwell was critically mauled, her book came out, Cornwell was again critically mauled. Cornwell was informed by FBI friends that Ripperologists were laying in wait for her in England, Cornwell believed her FBI friends, to the extent of having bodyguards when she filmed a UK TV programme. Cornwell made comments about Ripperologists… Ref: editorial in Ripperologist no.44 December 2002. She clearly believed she was threatened.

5. Some pretty personal stuff was said about Patricia: ‘anorexic, bulimic, drunk at the wheel and out of control…difficult, obsessive, driven. Her head full of fear…’ (The Independent, 20 October 2002), Some of which at that time (her drinking for instance) may have been justified. However I think we are all agreed this happen Four to five years ago.

6. Despite the many flaws in her book there are still some interesting claims that would seem to require further attention ie:
There are letters written by Walter Sickert and letters claiming to be from Jack the Ripper which Peter Bower claims come from the same batch of 24-sheets and which, if Peter Bower is correct, makes it highly probable that Walter Sickert wrote letters claiming to be from Jack the Ripper.

This claim was originally disputed by Dan Norder. However as pointed out by Brenda he has since apologized for disputing these claims. Peter Bower is a respected expert and any claims of Fraud or criminal practice against him are totally unjustified. And Dan rightly saw the error of his ways. I hope we agree on that it took a long time to establish.

7. Despite the fact that we agree that Patricia’s book is not very good. for lots of stated reasons above Ally has admitted that there is nothing fabricated, fraudulent or criminal in its content....which sort of means its much like any other wildly theorized JtR book.

8. It is agreed that since the disagreement that took place at least four or five years ago, Patricia has employed the best, a perfectly respectable Ripperologist with an impeccable provenance, to do further research for her, which he is currently doing. And Keith Skinners character is not in question by anyone hear…(I Hope?)

9. Patricia has agreed that ‘Case closed’ was not justified and has agreed to change this statement on her next book.

10. Well I’m not certain there is a ten apart from the fact that personally a lot of people on these threads do not seem to like or trust Patricia Cornwall despite the fact that they have never met her (I Gather one or two have and may have more personal disputes), however the majority have not and incidentally I have not met her either, so its difficult to form a personal perspective.

Well there it is as it stands.

I would just like to add that I have been called various names, which are untrue. And perhaps have had a flavour of what Patricia may have experienced. My MOTIVATION as Ally has asked is simply to find rational argument and considered debate. If I had been accused personally by Patricia of course I might feel differently. but that argument works just as well in both directions.

My claim is simply that none of the animosity that exists between the two parties really boils down to anything more than simple name calling..all of which happened some time ago. All of which is rather childish.

So I’m saying if we continue to carry the baggage from four years ago, and ignore the olive branches totally, we are in danger of approaching anything Patricia says through jaundiced and biased eye…

Which I do not believe is good for rational debate.

Anyway its good we’re finally getting somewhere. Lots more love about. Well done.

Good night all

Pirate

[Jeff Leahy]

Jack.......thanks?? I think?? But what you call a "personal attack" is founded on the truth of the way Cornwell lives now, and on the things she has said, in public, to cameras that happened to be running at the time. While I've been known to doubt the truth of what I see on camera, I usually don't doubt what I see in person. I've seen her in action, live and in person, and she really is a bit (or MORE than a bit) paranoid. She said she had chosen to leave Virginia for an estate that was planned for security because she felt it had become necessary. While not naming Ripper folks specifically, she did much more than imply that all the nutters on these boards were gonna get her someday and she was preparing or any eventuality. That sounds pretty freaky to me....
J

It sounds pretty freaky to me also. But then neither you or I are famous. And there are plenty of examples of famous people being storked and killed. John lennon, jill Dando etc etc.

Yours Jeff

PS I have no personal quawells with you or any other poster hear. And what I said was meant in genuine spirit. Beleive it or not I even enjoy the Queen of Mean when she's Podcasting. I have a personal greivance with one person and one person only..he knows who he is. So please do not confuse my distaste for one poticular poster to colour your veiws of me personally.

Even if we differ of our opinion of Patricia Corwall/well

[Jeff Leahy]

Sorry Magpie

I'm having a very bad Word blindness day..its stormy hear and it causes headaches...

Should read: SAMANTICS. sorry

PS everyone please forgive spellings