Patricia Cornwell

[Jeff Leahy]

She surrounds herself with yes men (or, more often, yes women) to stoke her own ego. She's basically bought an undeserved reputation as an expert and uses it to fool her target audience into thinking they are getting the real thing.

The thought complete and utter Bo**ocks as about as articulate as I feel this comment deserves...

Patricia Cornwall is what she is...'A popular Crime Writer'

She has put considerable amounts of money into serious research...

She has never destroyed any paintings as popular 'Myth' would have it..

In fact some of the posts on casebook sound to me like 'Bullying'

I do not buy Walter Sickert as a suspect...but he was, before Patricia's book, a legitimate suspect (Certainly better than some like Maybrick) and he still has some legitimate questions hanging over him....

" was he one of the letter writers?" are you saying Professor Bower is a yes man?

Unfortunately there are some on casebook that simply cant get their heads around how difficult it is to get books published without the publishers putting annoying pressures on authors (and poorly paid Producers)

It was unfortunate that Patricia had 'Case Solved' on her cover..she has openly admitted this..

I commend anyone who spends any time or money on Jack the Ripper research in whatever area they feel fit...it all adds to greater understanding of the case and the period in general..

So why dont you concentrate on getting your publication out Dan...stop 'Bullying' other people, and try and add something to the case instead of the tiered old Patricia Cornwall bashing we all have to constantly put up with..

I do not think that Walter Sickert was 'Jack the Ripper' but I will defend with my life Patricia Cornwalls right to believe so....

(Besides Sickert himself would have loved the epitaph..)

Yours Jeff

PS. If you have any money spare Patricia?

[Jeff Leahy]

Hi Paddy,

John Grieve was one of the two main experts involved in a documentary recently giving their thoughts on the Ripper murders. It had nothing to do with Sickert and instead focused on an unknown local man of foreign appearance. One is left to speculate that when Cornwell asked him about the Ripper that he responded with a suspect that would make a good fictional Ripper for the novel that Cornwell was originally planning to write at the time the two talked and not a serious suggestion. Cornwell, however, apparently fell into the same trap as a lot of people and convinced herself that her fictional Ripper had such a good premise that it *must have been* what really happened.

Yes Dan the Documentary called 'JtR the first Serial killer' a documentary that I counted had 28 factual errors in it...

This stuff really should be left to Ripperologists

[perrymason]

I think that Pat Cornwell does for Walter Sickert what Tony Williams did for the Victorian surgeon John Williams, his relative.....they disparage the name and memories of a fine artist in an era of great artists, and a truly innovative surgeon who worked much of his career helping women with fertility issues, and founded a great tribute to Welsh literary culture. Anything we need to know about either man need not come from either novel. They left their marks in less appalling and bloody ways than was suggested.

Shes a very successful fiction crime novelist who made millions off a very successful fictional crime novel.

Neither of the above added anything to the study.

Lucky for us though we have brilliant writers here among us who do know their stuff on Ripper lore and much more...tips hat to the likes of Mr Evans, AP, Mr Fido..

Best regards all.

[Jeff Leahy]

Shes a very successful fiction crime novelist who made millions off a very successful fictional crime novel.

Neither of the above added anything to the study.

Best regards all.

While I agree with you Michael about being a successful Fictional Crime writer..

It is simply untrue to suggest that none of her research has added anything to the Ripper case..

Indeed as I understand she is still willing to put her own money where her mouth is..which she is perfectly entitled to do...and put that money into serious JtR Research..

Please do try and get your facts straight

Jeff

[perrymason]

While I agree with you Michael about being a successful Fictional Crime writer..

It is simply untrue to suggest that none of her research has added anything to the Ripper case..

Indeed as I understand she is still willing to put her own money where her mouth is..which she is perfectly entitled to do...and put that money into serious JtR Research..

Please do try and get your facts straight

Jeff

Hi Jeff,

Well by my count she has so far only provided insufficient proof that a Ripper letter or two may have been penned by Sickert.

The fact she invested her money into the study since publishing is a result of the addictive aspects of researching these cases, not her altruistic desire to see real progress made in the field.

I give her credit for her apparent commitment to actually researching further, but "Case Closed" it isnt.

Best regards.

[Jeff Leahy]

Hi Jeff,

Well by my count she has so far only provided insufficient proof that a Ripper letter or two may have been penned by Sickert.

Am I the only person that finds this rather significant...acording to Professor Bowers findings Sickert was possibly the authour of some of the Hoax letters...let me remind you that the sender of the Hoax Yorkshire ripper calls is still in jail..

The fact she invested her money into the study since publishing is a result of the addictive aspects of researching these cases, not her altruistic desire to see real progress made in the field.

I give her credit for her apparent commitment to actually researching further, but "Case Closed" it isnt.

Best regards.

What do you know of Patricia Cornwalls altruistic desires...this comment is twaddle...

'Case Closed' it is not..

as I stated ..it is unfortunate that this phraze was put on her book cover...she has publically stated she wish it was NOT...

I completely understand the pressures authors and Directors are put apon by publishers and broadcasters....Thats the realities of the business..get over it..grow up..

I understand that this phraze will not appear on the updated book..lets hope so...

Now can we all stop this nasty unjustified Bullying..and leave Patricia Cornwall to get on with her work in peace.

Yo Patricia some of casebook loves you..

[Stewart P Evans]

Patricia Cornwell and Jack the Ripper

Patricia Cornwell (2002) - " I became interested in Jack the Ripper very accidentally. I was asked if I wanted to go to Scotland Yard, and I'd never been to Scotland Yard and one of my methods in my books is I always try to cover a branch of law enforcement that I have never exposed myself to. And Scotland Yard was one of those so went over and I met John Grieve and I was told that by the way he's a Ripper expert. And so he offered to take me on a retrospective visit of the crime scenes."

John Grieve (2002) - "People have talked about Walter Sickert since almost the time of the murders to such an extent that the catalogue of a recent exhibition about him saw it necessary to dismiss the suggestion that he was Jack the Ripper. But in considerable detail which is not something you normally find in an exhibition catalogue."

[Jeff Leahy]

Hello Stewart

I hope your speech goes well on Saturday, unfortunately I'm doing a motion Graphics course and will be unable to attend.

While what Machael says about you, AP and Martin is correct, there are also brilliant JtR minds that avoid casebook because of petty infighting and unjustified name calling (like: CornBall) that sometimes goes on..

If you will excuse the name dropping..I finally met your freind Don Rumblow on Tuesday (one of my all time Bally hero's) I was saddened by his comments at being unwilling to post on casebook because of precisely such things. That is a loss to us all...a bit less attack, more humility and generosity would do us all good..

Dan Norders comments seemed to me directed at Keith Skinner who we all know is one of the Greatest JtR researchers and currently working for Patricia.

Perhaps Dan Norder would like to make a public appology for his yes man statement?

Yours Jeff Leahy

[BillyE]

I believe the post I'm writing could be put up under any category on the Casebook forum. There is indeed to many posts that are more along the lines of undercutting someone's sensibilities, rather than curtiously debating the various aspects of the case. This seems to be particularly true when it comes to the suspects, but it permiates the entire message board.

Patricia Cornwell has sold enough books to demonstrate she has talent in writing crime fiction, and isn't the first writer of fiction to turn attention to true crime. While although I totally disagree with her conclusions, and her assertion that the case is closed, and indeed even her bruised ego, and lashing out when her conclusions are questioned, she is entitled to her conclusions. This isn't because she has the money to back-up her claims, but because her beliefs are just as valid as anyone elses, no more valid, but no less valid. My personal feelings are Ms. Cornwell may well have slandered the name of the good artist, but given his propensity to relish anything Ripper related he may have appriciated being listed as a suspect. So, who knows?!

Anytime you name a suspect, and list how and why you think said suspect did it you open yourself up to criticism. Stan Russo has named Sickert, and J. K. Stephen. He won't go into any further detail pending an upcoming book, but he should prepare himself for the barage of criticism that will come. Ripperologist great Martin Fido has backed off his "Nathan Kaminski" suspect name for the seemingly more palitable "David Cohen" because of pressure, I'm thinking, from his publisher. It just goes to show if you name a suspect you make yourself pretty vulnerable to the Ripper masses. I have absolutly no doubt if I were to make my opinions on the Ripper known I'd have to build an underground bunker to escape the backlash of the posters of this forum alone.

All this is just to say the following: sure, feel free to disagree. Debate vigerously, but with courtesy. Viciously attacking someone with a different opinion will only fuel the fire that so often threatens to burn this forum down. It only causes the person you've attacked to attack you in kind. Nothing good ever comes of this. But then again, what do I know?! :-D

[jmenges]

Ripperologist great Martin Fido has backed off his "Nathan Kaminski" suspect name for the seemingly more palitable "David Cohen" because of pressure, I'm thinking, from his publisher.

Incorrect. Fido cites Adam Wood as the one who told him that Kaminsky was a "bridge too many". It was Martin Fido's publisher who in fact encouraged him to research the asylum records for Kosminski himself rather than just suggest that the records be searched, as was his intention in the original book pitch. (see rippercast's show @ 5min). It was then that he found Kaminsky, prior to finding Kominski, and almost too late to get the later into the book. I believe Fido still believes Kaminsky a good candidate for 'Leather Apron'.

What has been included or excluded in the new A-Z on this topic I do not know, but I might be able to ask him, since we're (spoiler) trying for the Begg/Fido show this weekend.

JM

[BillyE]

I had listened to the Martin Fido episode of the Rippercast, as I never miss one. I had interpreted Dr. Fido's answer on the Kaminski issue as that he had to back away from Nathan Kaminski and back to the more accepted "David Cohen" name. Thank you for the correction. The core of my point remains the same. How unfortunate it is a person names a suspect only to be bombarded with negative hateful responses, rather than respectful discussion and debate on merit. I'm sure you'll agree with me on that. :-)

[Stewart P Evans]

Martin Fido and Kosminski

Martin Fido has been credited with historically identifying Aaron Kosminski as being Macnaghten's 'Kosminski' (and Anderson's Polish Jew) and finding the said Aaron in the asylum records in 1987 during his pioneering research.

Martin had just about 'put his manuscript to bed' when his publishing people gave him the opportunity to add extra material. Martin decided to use the documentation on Cohen and Kaminsky. Returning to the records Martin accessed the admissions and discharge book which went into 1891, and there he found Aaron Kosminski, together with an address, his brother's name, and his occupation. Which just goes to show that you can never take your research too far.

[Stewart P Evans]

Ripper Authors

Hello Stewart
I hope your speech goes well on Saturday, unfortunately I'm doing a motion Graphics course and will be unable to attend.
While what Machael says about you, AP and Martin is correct, there are also brilliant JtR minds that avoid casebook because of petty infighting and unjustified name calling (like: CornBall) that sometimes goes on..
If you will excuse the name dropping..I finally met your freind Don Rumblow on Tuesday (one of my all time Bally hero's) I was saddened by his comments at being unwilling to post on casebook because of precisely such things. That is a loss to us all...a bit less attack, more humility and generosity would do us all good..

Yours Jeff Leahy

Thank you for that Jeff, yes I am well aware of Don's feelings regarding all things Ripper.

Unfortunately the in-fighting goes way, way back and pre dates the modern era. It is probably to be found in just about every area of historical research and writing where personal theories and opinions are so much to the fore. In fact it is very much a part of human nature. It reached an unprecedented level of acrimony when the 'diary' entered the public debate forum and the bitterness is still very much around today. In the Farson/Cullen days we had Farson accusing Cullen of stealing his Druitt material, an accusation that Cullen always strenuously denied.

All this would certainly make for a very revealing, and entertaining book on 'A History of Ripper Writers and Research' and you wouldn't believe some of the material that I hold in my files. But it is not, and perhaps shouldn't be, for publication.

[Monty]

Stewart,

Patricia Cornwell (2002) - " I became interested in Jack the Ripper very accidentally. I was asked if I wanted to go to Scotland Yard, and I'd never been to Scotland Yard and one of my methods in my books is I always try to cover a branch of law enforcement that I have never exposed myself to. And Scotland Yard was one of those so went over and I met John Grieve and I was told that by the way he's a Ripper expert. And so he offered to take me on a retrospective visit of the crime scenes."

John Grieve (2002) - "People have talked about Walter Sickert since almost the time of the murders to such an extent that the catalogue of a recent exhibition about him saw it necessary to dismiss the suggestion that he was Jack the Ripper. But in considerable detail which is not something you normally find in an exhibition catalogue."

You are killing me here !

All this would certainly make for a very revealing, and entertaining book on 'A History of Ripper Writers and Research' and you wouldn't believe some of the material that I hold in my files. But it is not, and perhaps shouldn't be, for publication.

So, if I was to throw down an 'indecent proposal' type offer, you would still decline it?

Monty

[Jeff Leahy]

Yourself, Martin Fido, Paul Begg, I gather Rob House and Neal Shelden.....sounds like a day out with fantasy league Ripperology...I will try and gate crash the pub next door later.

The 'Diary' the thing of all ills! I think Don said that speculation at the time on its value went 4 million and upwards.

Actually while your correct that the infighting has always been there, its not actually as bad as it sounds..Ripperologists can be pretty cool more than that (and I include you in this) generous...

The history of information being shared and opened to each other is pretty good in the Ripper world and I've always found Ripperologists more than helpful sharing information and theories.

Money however does always rear its ugly head, there does seem to be some collective thought that someone somewhere is making money out of Jack The Ripper...I've just never come across them.

Perhaps that is why Patricia has really come in for such stick..I dont know.

What i do know is that any serious research (and I'm not talking about what TV people call research) takes patience, hardwork and lots of time. And that persons time takes money (because he has to pay the mortgage and feed himself.

So if someone like Patricia Cornwall comes along and puts her money into paying for serious research then she should be applauded and thanked..not put down with personal insults. God knows there are few enough people willing to do so..

Perhaps if she was made a little more welcome she might make the odd appearance...and I'd like to hear what she has to say...as I like to listen to anybody with something interesting to say on Jack the Ripper. Perhaps fund a little more research..

The Cohen debate forinstance...I gather from martins pod-cast that no-one has ever checked the records of the Jewish rest home he used as an address..as this address was a temporary home for newly arrived immigrants it might very well tell us if Cohen was in the country at the time of the murders?

There is tons of research that could be done....and everybody has the right to argue and debate there favored suspects because those suspects are all part of Stewart's (unwritten) history of Ripperology...as Stan Rosso pointed out in his pod-cast..thats what ripperology is about, arguing the toss on a very intricate piece of history...

However that is not the same as condoning personal attacks and we should be very careful not to do so..

Anyway I'd better fly...will hopefully see some of you late saturday...may I urge everybody to try and make these speeches...one off opportunity

have fun

Jeff