Patricia Cornwell

[truebluedub]

Hi everyone,
Cornwell's most interesting research only duplicated Jean Fuller's. Also for someone so hung up on science she does not appear to have done anything approaching a literature review (see her errors in naming victims, not knowing Abberline had a suspect). She also does not appear to have a formal methodolology for analysing Sickert's paintings other than looking at them. Even we mere social scientists have a lot sounder scientific tendencies than she does.
Kind Regards,
Chris Lowe

[Jenni Shelden]

To be fair Jeff,

we gave the woman a pretty fair hearing when she published her book - a book she had no need to publish at all if she was unsure of anything - a book backed by a multi million dollar advance if i reember correctly.

She squandered the chance to gain respect when she published that bs

that said maybe her seconbd edtion will be amazing

but i dont hold my breath.

Alson, by calling us all she didnt exactly ender us now did she?

Jenni

[Glenn Lauritz Andersson]

There is no question about it.

It's A: "She is a psychomaniac, attention craving person who has put almost as much money into proving that Sickert is the Ripper".

So that was easily and quickly taken care of.

And again - there is no point in trying to nail Sickert to any of the Ripper letters - unless for pure curiousity - since it is genrally accepted that the Ripper himself most likely didn't write any of them.
It is totally irrelevant if Sickert wrote any of them or not - if he did, he would just be one of 600 frauds who conceived fake letters from the killer.
Cornball missed this whole point - I would hate others to repeat that nonsense approach.

All the best

[Jeff Leahy]

I have admitted that I was wrong on the thing that I was wrong on. Clearly you've got some other priorities other than what you claimed were your reasons for posting here.

OK lets see the real starting piont: Page 1

Very Simple, lets take a poll

A: She is a psychomaniac, attention craving person who has put almost as much money into proving that Sickert is the Ripper, or...

B: She is a beautiful woman who has exposed the Ripper...

I cant see Christines thread..although I'm sure she's a wonderful person...

I beieive that was the actual starting piont..which is fairly contencious in itself.

I beleive that I have demonstrated that for everyones huffing and puffing we will simply have to wait until Peter Bowers examinations are actually available to be discussed..

Which I understand that they will be soon..the delay due to copyright problems out of the control of Peter Bower..

Others of course have tried to prove me wrong and failed..

I apologuise if this has cause offence to anyone..but sometimes getting at the Truth..like getting at the Facts..can prove very stressfull..

[JSchmidt]

NO! it has bloody sweet FA to do with Sickert!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

So why are you cluttering this thread with it? I fail to see what this has anything to do with the topic of P. Cornwell's book.
Please take your vendetta somewhere else. It's getting old fast.
You managed to attack people who behaved rather polite even in the face of your increasingly spiteful and aggressive postings.
If I were you I'd be ashamed.

[Dan Norder]

Begg simply out smarted you again..you have been shown on casebook for what you are... a charletten..

Dan Norder lost but even now he cant admit hes wrong..

I have admitted that I was wrong on the thing that I was wrong on. Clearly you've got some other priorities other than what you claimed were your reasons for posting here.

[Christine]

Who gives an F about Sickert and Corwell..have you not been following this thread?

The person who started this thread, me, and who knows who else. Please take your discussion elsewhere. If people give "an F" about it, they will undoubtedly follow you.

[Jeff Leahy]

QUOTE=Glenn Lauritz Andersson;21305]r Patsy Cornball
All the best[/QUOTE]

Glenn this sought of personal atta[ck is exactly what this whole argument has been about..stop it..your better than this..your one of the indendants..

read the thread

My argument from the start has been for a sense of perspective..not using personal abuse..

If you dish it out..then you get it back..thats exactly what happen with PC's original fisty cuffs..

I said, she said, i said, she said ...

But when I suggested perhaps PC should be given a second Chance..I got stamped on..and when I stamped back by proving them all wrong..they couldn't handel it.....

Well as far as I am concerned, even though i Think shes talking Bo**cks..I am going to give Patricia a fair hearing..

and when she says the people on casebook are a bunch of Klingons, I'll have a very difficult time deffending that accusation..

Although I think its fair to piont out that it only apply's to the minority

[Glenn Lauritz Andersson]

I am with Christine here - enough is enough.
Stop this idiotic off topic nonsense and take it elsewhere.

Not that I am a big fan of Sickert or Patsy Cornball, but still - this is getting just plain tedious.

All the best

[Jeff Leahy]

Well, I hate to be the one to jump into the middle of this, but really this has gone on too long. Could you confine your posts on this thread to discussion of Sickert and Cornwell, please? There are other threads for discussion of who's polite, who's rude, and who's worthy of being listened to.

Who gives an F about Sickert and Corwell..have you not been following this thread?

[Jeff Leahy]

It wasn't intended as a compliment.

I didn't realise that Paul Begg was an expert on watermarks.

Don't try to kid me.

And as you are into taking advice, my advice to you is don't get involved in complex arguments until you are competent enough to conduct them off your own bat.

And clearly I've never stated Paul Begg was an expert on Water marks, I simply ask Paul if Dans statement about the A Pirie watermark was correct.

He informed me it was NOT and Pionted me in the direction of the correct solution...which I have given to you all...

sounds to me like some people have a problem with losing?

as to complex arguments..dont patronize me..I cant spell, i'm not stupid.

[Christine]

Well, I hate to be the one to jump into the middle of this, but really this has gone on too long. Could you confine your posts on this thread to discussion of Sickert and Cornwell, please? There are other threads for discussion of who's polite, who's rude, and who's worthy of being listened to.

[Jeff Leahy]

And here we go again. Jeff's tries to defend Cornwell and Begg by harping on a single mistake I made (which doesn't even change the overall situation) while ignoring all of the evidence posted by multiple people of just a few of the many mistakes Cornwell and Begg made.. not to mention all the mistakes Jeff made earlier in this thread.

Some people just can't play fair or honest, I guess. But then it's clear now that this isn't even about Cornwell, it's about Jeff being used by Begg to launch attacks on other people in the field which he's too cowardly to make on his own.

No Dan Its very simple

You got it wrong..You made a mistake..

Like you always get it wrong...

Because you are carrying out a personal vendetta..

And however you worm, twist and crawl you will not getting out of the simple fact that you F**k up..

Whether I got the information to prove you wrong from Paul Begg
God or Mahamid..at the end of the day, you got it wrong didnt you?

And now your wining its NOt fair..well life isnt fair Dan..

Begg simply out smarted you again..you have been shown on casebook for what you are... a charletten..

Dan Norder lost but even now he cant admit hes wrong..

I beleive Sickert would say Ha Ha Ha

[Dan Norder]

And here we go again. Jeff's tries to defend Cornwell and Begg by harping on a single mistake I made (which doesn't even change the overall situation) while ignoring all of the evidence posted by multiple people of just a few of the many mistakes Cornwell and Begg made.. not to mention all the mistakes Jeff made earlier in this thread.

Some people just can't play fair or honest, I guess. But then it's clear now that this isn't even about Cornwell, it's about Jeff being used by Begg to launch attacks on other people in the field which he's too cowardly to make on his own.

[Jeff Leahy]

This script, does it have anything to do with Sickert? Just curious.

NO! it has bloody sweet FA to do with Sickert!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

(oh I do love casebook ) even Stewarts pomposs ramblings

Thats me off his christmas card list....