Patricia Cornwell

[DVV]

Patricia has no time to go on boards.
She's reading The Times at Scotland Yard.

[Sasha]

Why are we even discussing this? Cornwell's book came out ages ago. I never read anything so unconvincing in my life. If that's all it takes to close a case then we should be able to convict the Zodiac just as easily for his own crimes and for the Kennedy assassinations! Anyway, I think discussing this chick on these boards just gives her credibility that she does not deserve. Still, if people feel the need to discuss her, shouldn't it go under the subtitle "Books and Authors" or perhaps a new subtitle like "myths and dodgy theories"?

[anna]

EXACTLY.
Brilliant post,Sasha!
Anna.

[j.r-ahde]

Hello Sasha!

I am making this analogy again. So, sorry for repeating myself, but;

Talking about Patricia Cornwell is like talking about Pete Best regarding The Beatles.

He was just a club-owner's son, who happened to be an amateur-drummer at the right time at the right place!

Patricia Cornwell wrote a book and paid some researchers for doing a research fitting for her purposes!

But now the thing in common with both;

Those, who are focused on Jack the Ripper and The Beatles, know, how the things really are.

But unfortunately many of the common people -just listening and reading something in general about the issue - take them seriously!

Maybe that's, why she pisses us off here?!

All the best
Jukka

[downonwhores]

Pc.

Patricia Cornwell is NOT a forensics expert even though she has worked in forensics for years but only as a notetaker and her novels are even that good. Karin Slaughter kicks her ass.
Has anybody done any DNA tests on the bloody knife that was given to donald rumbelow?

[Glenn Lauritz Andersson]

downonwhores,

I agree about Cornwell. I haven't read her Scarpetta novels, but fact remains - apart from that she paid experts to do the job for her and that her book is littered with errors and speculations - that Portrait of a Killer is not very well written. At times the language and reasoning is on juvenile and amateurish level.

As for Rumbelow's knife... I don't know what the point would be of extracting any DNA. The whole point with sampling DNA from an alleged murder weapon, is that you have DNA to compare it with, and we don't. Extracting DNA from only the knife would be useless.
Maybe one could try DNA from the now living descendings of Catherine Eddowes, for example, but it's doubtful anything would remain after such a long time, especially since the knife had been used for a longer period of time in the garden as a digging tool, being cleaned several times, and probably also would be contaminated with a lot of other DNA.
It should also be noted that Cornwell never managed to get hold of any DNA from Sickert himself.

All the best

[Jeff Leahy]

Why are we even discussing this? Cornwell's book came out ages ago.

Exactly my point, lots of water under the bridge. The world has moved on since this books publication and so has Patricia.

Yet some people seem stuck with the position as it was five years ago.

I dont think Sickert did it..which is why I'm back of to the kosminski thread...

However patricia is perfectly in her right to make her case for her favoured suspect..She is also entitled to hire respected experts for further research and invest her money as she wishes..

thats what Ripperology is about..taking the facts and forming an opinion.

We are each free to do the same. Hopefully with out personal abuse. Hopefully with constructive critisism.

Like it or not Patricia's next book will appeal to a differnt and wider audience..and interest in the subject does nothing to hurt ratings generally in the area of .... Jack the Ripper...

Far better she has a book claiming sickert did it, if I'm going to claim someone else did it...Oh Ho Ra for Patricia.

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

[Glenn Lauritz Andersson]

"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"

Exactly, Jeff. That was kind of my point.
I agree.

All the best

[Ally]

[QUOTE=Pirate Jack;28015]

thats what Ripperology is about..taking the facts and forming an opinion.

Patricia cornwell distorted the facts, then when even that didn't fit her pre-conceived fantasy, she invented lies about a man to frame him for a murder she decided he'd committed based on nothing more than her personal whim.

We are each free to do the same. Hopefully with out personal abuse. Hopefully with constructive critisism.

You mean like the personal abuse Cornwell heaped on all Ripperologists everywhere on a NATIONALLY televised platform that was provided to her by virtue of her fame and wealth. A platform that is denied to every other Ripperologist who doesn't have the means to go on them and defend themselves from the scathing attacks and lies that she put out there?

As far as I am concerned Cornwell is a media sucking whore. She sold herself for money and for the "fame" of making her pathetic fantasy life--where she's a real life brilliant crime fighter--into reality.

I'll tell you exactly what I told Paul Begg, when Cornwell goes on to a public platform, not in some private meeting, and apologizes for slandering and defaming Ripperologists, I'll give her the benefit of the doubt and a second chance. Until then, she and all her apologist lap boys can stick it up their backsides.

[Graham]

Hey, Ally!

Don't hold back, now. Tell us what you REALLY think about Cornwell.
Graham

PS: I did once start to read one of her books. It was crap. Unfortunately, she serves up what the public want and as we all know the public gets what it deserves. As for her Sickert book, I wouldn't allow it in my house having seen the unbelievably distorted documentary she produced. But there again, it's the old JtR syndome - first pick your man, then generate some 'facts' to support your choice, and challenge the world to prove you're wrong.

[Glenn Lauritz Andersson]

Patricia cornwell distorted the facts, then when even that didn't fit her pre-conceived fantasy, she invented lies about a man to frame him for a murder she decided he'd committed based on nothing more than her personal whim.

You mean like the personal abuse Cornwell heaped on all Ripperologists everywhere on a NATIONALLY televised platform that was provided to her by virtue of her fame and wealth. A platform that is denied to every other Ripperologist who doesn't have the means to go on them and defend themselves from the scathing attacks and lies that she put out there?

As far as I am concerned Cornwell is a media sucking whore. She sold herself for money and for the "fame" of making her pathetic fantasy life--where she's a real life brilliant crime fighter--into reality.

I'll tell you exactly what I told Paul Begg, when Cornwell goes on to a public platform, not in some private meeting, and apologizes for slandering and defaming Ripperologists, I'll give her the benefit of the doubt and a second chance. Until then, she and all her apologist lap boys can stick it up their backsides.

Well expressed by Ally here.
Patricia Cornwell defintiely sold out by "doing a Stephen Knight" - namely first pick a suspect, then manipulate the facts and finally attack and insult the critics (often well respected reserachers in the field) of your theory in a personal manner, all in order to sell millions of copies.
The only difference is, is that she bought her own "experts" to do a lot of the job for her - because she simply had the money to do so.

All the best

[Jeff Leahy]

[QUOTE=Ally;28045]

Patricia cornwell distorted the facts, then when even that didn't fit her pre-conceived fantasy, she invented lies about a man to frame him for a murder she decided he'd committed based on nothing more than her personal whim.

Actually of all the suspects I cant help thinking Sickert would have enjoyed the noteriety, he would at least have understood the benefit of publicity and exposure. Ha Ha.

[QUOTE=Ally;28045]

You mean like the personal abuse Cornwell heaped on all Ripperologists everywhere on a NATIONALLY televised platform that was provided to her by virtue of her fame and wealth. A platform that is denied to every other Ripperologist who doesn't have the means to go on them and defend themselves from the scathing attacks and lies that she put out there?

Ah you poor little inocent babies, unable to defend yourselves against the big nasty women....

[QUOTE=Ally;28045]

As far as I am concerned Cornwell is a media sucking whore. She sold herself for money and for the "fame" of making her pathetic fantasy life--where she's a real life brilliant crime fighter--into reality.

I'll tell you exactly what I told Paul Begg, when Cornwell goes on to a public platform, not in some private meeting, and apologizes for slandering and defaming Ripperologists, I'll give her the benefit of the doubt and a second chance. Until then, she and all her apologist lap boys can stick it up their backsides.

Blah Blah Blah...Strange how I got an official warning for this kind of language...

Just get over it...I beleive Kroshov said 'The dog howls, the wind blows and the caravan moves on'

The caravan has moved on...and some of you have been left behind.

[Glenn Lauritz Andersson]

The caravan has moved on...and some of you have been left behind.

And Cornwell never got on it in the first place - she picked the wrong one.

All the best

[Jeff Leahy]

And Cornwell never got on it in the first place - she picked the wrong one.

All the best

Glenn I have no problems with your critism of her book..its basically true..

Its the silly personal abuse, the miss information and the liabling of professional experts, that I take exception too/at.

Besides, as I said she's good for ratings.

have a nice day

Jeff