Patricia Cornwell

[Monty]

Jeff,

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..

You seem to have forgotten the attacks upon us (and I use that word as reference to our community) by Patricia.

Yes, she should be applauded but that does not give her the right to insult MY chararcter and my interest in the case.

Nor does it give her the right to exclaim Walter Sickert as a 'sick bastard' and 'killer' when the reality is that she has not proven anything, and that includes letter writing, against the man.

Its deformation of chararcter on both counts. There was no need for it. It was simply done for the hype, yet Im the sad, sick one.

Monty

[Chris]

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?

I think you must have missed my previous response on the Rippercast thread.

Martin Fido is mistaken about this. The earliest surviving admissions register of the Poor Jews' Temporary Shelter are from 1896. Those up to 1914 are available on an online database:

http://chrysalis.its.uct.ac.za/shelter/shelter.htm

[Stewart P Evans]

Thank You

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...
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..
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..
Jeff

Thank you for the kind remarks, but I must make a few comments. I think that quite a few of Patricia Cornwell's problems arose from the fact that she came onto the 'Ripper scene' very late in the day and then proceeded to point out the flaws in previous work on the case and made the claim that she had actually solved it. Combine this with the copious factual errors in her book and her fantastical claims about the letters and, well...

The subject of 'personal attacks', whatever that may mean, is a subject that should be avoided by anyone not directly involved or who does not know the nature of this aspect. For 'personal attacks' in Ripperworld have been so described when only simple criticism or disagreement is involved. It is often difficult to honestly critique a writer's work without receiving accusations of personal attack, animosity or simple 'sour grapes.' It is the nature of the beast and cannot be avoided. Some authors have been downright dishonest and should expect all they receive in return. But egos and reputations are involved here so it is a contentious and volatile area.

[Ally]

For 'personal attacks' in Ripperworld have been so described when only simple criticism or disagreement is involved. It is often difficult to honestly critique a writer's work without receiving accusations of personal attack, animosity or simple 'sour grapes.' It is the nature of the beast and cannot be avoided. Some authors have been downright dishonest and should expect all they receive in return.

All that and a bag of chips.

[Dan Norder]

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

Yes, as I said, she has donated money to groups who do serious research. Yet whenever she hires people to do research on her behalf to try to prove her preconceived ideas, the results have very clearly not been serious science, as they break fundamental rules of how such science is supposed to be conducted, and the people she pays to do this KNOW this to be the case, and some have even said so later.

are you saying Professor Bower is a yes man?

Yes, Peter and Sally Bower are yes-people, in that they were hired guns given money by Cornwell with the expectation of coming up with answers specifically intended to support Cornwell's case instead of performing adequate research under scientific double blind procedures and so forth. The kind of conclusions they reached about the letters are simply ridiculous, and not at all supported by anyone else. The difference there being that these other people are not on Cornwell's payroll. That should say something to you.

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 have already added far more to the case than Cornwell (with an E) or certainly you ever have or likely ever will, so stop your bellyaching. It's not "bullying" to point out when people make errors and intentionally distort evidence to support a theory. In fact, your post was the only attempt at bullying in the thread.

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

She certainly has the right to believe whatever she believes. Like, say, her claims that poor reviews posted on Amazon and elsewhere for her recent novel were the result of a coordinated campaign by President Bush and his cronies in retaliation for not appearing on an aircraft carrier with the President for a publicity stunt to support the war... if she wants to believe that she couldn't possibly have earned bad reviews on her own without it being the result of a political plot to destroy her, all the more power to her.

But her right to believe things does not mean that she can present error-filled nonsense as if it were facts and get a free pass on it. Her right to believe that Sickert wasn't in France at the time of the Ripper murders like all the actual evidence suggests does not mean we should remain silent when she puts highly distorted information out in public and pretends it's the result of unbiased scientific examinations. Her right to believe that Sickert had "evil eyes" does not mean her claims that Sickert was a woman-hating psychopath who could not have sex (when in fact he had quite a few female friends as well as countless lovers and plenty of rumored children) should be allowed to stand unopposed.

If Cornwell wants to be respected as a Ripper researcher, then she needs to do something worthy of respect, just like everyone else. Throwing millions of dollars around to get people who know better to say whatever you want is not acceptable.

[Jeff Leahy]

Jeff,

You seem to have forgotten the attacks upon us (and I use that word as reference to our community) by Patricia.

Yes, she should be applauded but that does not give her the right to insult MY chararcter and my interest in the case.

Nor does it give her the right to exclaim Walter Sickert as a 'sick bastard' and 'killer' when the reality is that she has not proven anything, and that includes letter writing, against the man.

Its deformation of chararcter on both counts. There was no need for it. It was simply done for the hype, yet Im the sad, sick one.

Monty

Few... that was a days mail bag to get through..

I shall take your posts one at a time or it becomes confusing, especially when you've sat through a whole day of intense Final Cut Pro Six but here goes......

Yo Monty

Jeff,

You seem to have forgotten the attacks upon us (and I use that word as reference to our community) by Patricia.

Yes somewhere i guess I've missed these references..I dont remember her posting on casebook at any point, and having read her book do not remember any references to Ripperologists? However if this is true, and I would like to know the context, then its a fair comment..Not that I believe, on the whole, we can't handle a little criticism...were all grown ups..I just havnt seen these personal attacks?

However I do remember insults like 'CornBall' being thrown around...and its sort of natural when you come under attack to hit back....

Jeff,Yes, she should be applauded but that does not give her the right to insult MY chararcter and my interest in the case.

Monty I had know idea that she had in-fact insulted you directly. Is this by phone or email?

Nor does it give her the right to exclaim Walter Sickert as a 'sick bastard' and 'killer' when the reality is that she has not proven anything, and that includes letter writing, against the man.

*%^$£ Hold on a minute..is this not what we all do almost every second of the day on casebook...am I missing something here..has anybody actually proved anything against Kosminski, can we say for certainty Tumbelty hated women, was Druit anything other than a nice chap with a family history of depression...accusing innocent people of being Jack the Ripper seems to be what Ripperologists do..150 suspects..they cant all be guilty...perhaps they are all innocent ! this statement is the pot calling the kettle

Its deformation of character on both counts. There was no need for it. It was simply done for the hype, yet Im the sad, sick one.

...no your certainly not sad and sick..is this actually what you were accused of?

Monty I stand by my statement because I don't really feel Patricia has done much more than make a case for her suspect..admittedly its not a very good case, more holes than a colander, but she is entitled to make that case the best she can......
my annoyance was that Dan Norder made a thinly disguised attack on Keith Skinner a man that has done more for Ripperology than Dan Norder will ever conceive of...

anyway I'd better push on lots to cover

Yours Jeff

[Jeff Leahy]

I think you must have missed my previous response on the Rippercast thread.

Martin Fido is mistaken about this. The earliest surviving admissions register of the Poor Jews' Temporary Shelter are from 1896. Those up to 1914 are available on an online database:
http://chrysalis.its.uct.ac.za/shelter/shelter.htm

Chris I had completely missed this..thank you for your correction.

[Jeff Leahy]

Some authors have been downright dishonest and should expect all they receive in return. But egos and reputations are involved here so it is a contentious and volatile area.

A quote I caught earlier in the week was "There are liars, There are damn liars, and there are Jack The Ripper authors..

Personally I think thats a little hard..they are on the whole more honest than TV producers....

I have nothing against good honest cross fire, by people with passion..

There is a differances between that and attacking things that people can do nothing about..like there sex or race, there glasses...OR being DYSLEXIC!

some people just dont seem to realize when that line is crossed.

[Celesta]

I think she put up a good arguement but too much of it is based on assumptions and possibilitys.
I think she genuienly believes she's right, however the way she draws conclusions she would have managed to convince herself whichever suspect she had chosen.

Emily

Yes, Emily, I think that's a good point. I also think she rushed this book. She researched but missed some things that are still being debated, like whether the victims were all strangled, or not. If I recall, correctly, she concluded that they were. The book's not tight, but rambling, as if it hadn't gone through much of a rewrite phase. Or she was a bit lost because this was a new form of book for her. She tried to put a little mystery novel flare onto it, and that was distracting. Still, I heard her talk on this, and she had an impressive rage for the victims, so she has my sympathy there. Yet, I feel she would have done the victims a greater service, if she had researched better and seen that she had very little case against this artist. As you point out, her attitude was that she had him and her modern methods would prove it. Her assumption that the letters were legit and were the key, led her off the track. That's not to say that some of the letters might not turn out genuine. So I have used all this verbiage to say, I agree with you!

[Jeff Leahy]

Yes, as I said, she has donated money to groups who do serious research. Yet whenever she hires people to do research on her behalf to try to prove her preconceived ideas, the results have very clearly not been serious science, as they break fundamental rules of how such science is supposed to be conducted, and the people she pays to do this KNOW this to be the case, and some have even said so later.

Serious Science..serious science..what the 'F' are you talking about, what planet are you on...serious science like the Maybrick Diary tests perhaps..shall we all measure the exact quantity of chlorocitimide required?

Yes its a nice gimmick, but the fact is that you are never going to get any DNA, as there are NO surviving artifacts connected directly to the case...The shawl is a fake, the letters are Hoax, the Diary is a Hoax, the knife sat in the garden to long, and the photo-fit produced by your favorite TV program, looks more like Fredie Mercury than it does JtR......bad research..

The unsung heroes are the people who trawl through records..people like Stewart, Chris Scott, Ap, Rob House, and yes.. Keith Skinner..who as you well know is currently doing work for Patricia...I haven't a clue what work..I dont really care..I just object to people like you stabbing my heroes in the back... probably because of some childish vendetta about your publication.

Yes, Peter and Sally Bower are yes-people, in that they were hired guns given money by Cornwell with the expectation of coming up with answers specifically intended to support Cornwell's case instead of performing adequate research under scientific double blind procedures and so forth. The kind of conclusions they reached about the letters are simply ridiculous, and not at all supported by anyone else. The difference there being that these other people are not on Cornwell's payroll. That should say something to you.

are you really so nieve as this Dan...Have you never ventured into the the world of Maybrick Diary? One thing is for certain if you find me a scientist willing to prove something I'll find you Five willing to prove the opposite...

Some of us simply are not as frightened of scientific gobbledy gook as you appear to be...Science...Smiance...its simply alchemy..

The fact is that if you find one scientist willing to say one thing, I'll find you another five willing to say something else...that is what I do for a living. Grow up.

I have already added far more to the case than Cornwell (with an E) or certainly you ever have or likely ever will, so stop your bellyaching. It's not "bullying" to point out when people make errors and intentionally distort evidence to support a theory. In fact, your post was the only attempt at bullying in the thread.

Well yes Dan..now we see your true colours..lets bash the DYSLEXIC..Lets make fun at Jeff's spelling lets all have a good laugh at teh fact that Jeff jumbles his words up....you find that very funny dont you Dan...probably as funny as I find it when I have to look at your photographs or pictures...ew each bring different talents to the world of Ripperology...I confess that I am nevr going to write a classic book..I leave that to people who are capable of doing so..my hero's..but I have talents to offer also...I offer those with a camera and edit suite..and actually I think I'm pretty damn capable of doing a bettr job than anyone has done before..because I CARE ABOUT RIPPEROLOGY.

I realize my research achievements are small compared with others, but I am proud of what I have done..like re-uniting Hannah Taifords family...doesn't seem like much to you cheeses but it meant a lot to me..

I guess knocking on farm doors in Hunton might seem like a big Joke to you, but actually..and I mean this sincerely..I'm having fun!

She certainly has the right to believe whatever she believes. Like, say, her claims that poor reviews posted on Amazon and elsewhere for her recent novel were the result of a coordinated campaign by President Bush and his cronies in retaliation for not appearing on an aircraft carrier with the President for a publicity stunt to support the war... if she wants to believe that she couldn't possibly have earned bad reviews on her own without it being the result of a political plot to destroy her, all the more power to her.

I'm not even going there Dan..the fact is that the Iraq war was a massive mistake by the American people..the sooner you get rid of Bush and vote in Hilary or Abarma the better...

But her right to believe things does not mean that she can present error-filled nonsense as if it were facts and get a free pass on it. Her right to believe that Sickert wasn't in France at the time of the Ripper murders like all the actual evidence suggests does not mean we should remain silent when she puts highly distorted information out in public and pretends it's the result of unbiased scientific examinations. Her right to believe that Sickert had "evil eyes" does not mean her claims that Sickert was a woman-hating psychopath who could not have sex (when in fact he had quite a few female friends as well as countless lovers and plenty of rumored children) should be allowed to stand unopposed.

Sickrt wasn't Jack the Ripper, we are agreed, however I have studied art..and the fact is that he wasn't a very good artist...if Sceptic Blue will forgive my football analogy..

Walter Sickert was the Vini Jones of the Art world..the English dont like it , but the fact is that Anglo Saxons are good at craft and trade.....they have never produced a good artist..how can you seriously compare him to Degas? The French, the Italians even the Spanish make great Art.....the English make Art like they play football...just ask the Irish, Welsh and Scots...

Last weekend I went to the Matisse Museum in Nice..that is Art!

Believe me Patricia is doing walter Sickert a favour

If Cornwell wants to be respected as a Ripper researcher, then she needs to do something worthy of respect, just like everyone else. Throwing millions of dollars around to get people who know better to say whatever you want is not acceptable.

Well she's Not is she..Patricia is a crime fiction writer..and a very good one...I believe..as i would..shes employing people who can..theres no disgrace in that...

Each to there talents

Its Just sometimes Dan Norder we really wonder what peoples talents actually are..and if you are what you say you are, a little more humility wouldn't go amiss.

Yours Jeff

PS please do not make the mistake of thinking that the fact that I am dyslexic make me stupid

[anna]

Suppose there had to be SOMEONE who liked Cornwell.....
and here he is!
By the way,corncerning the end of your post 21,Pirate Jack....it went something like...Yo!Patricia,some of Casebook loves you..........
Pray tell,who else apart from your goodself is included in this statement?
Having tried to get interested in reading just one of her books before completely giving up on civilisation as we know it,I would GLADLY leave Patricia Cornwell to get on with her writing in peace....at the end of a launch pad in the hope that NASA would take pity on us all,and let some unsuspecting aliens receive a gift that is guaranteed to bore them to tears.
Hey!Iv'e just come up with the perfect solution to getting a look at them....they're bound to try to return it.
BUT WE WILL BE READY FOR THEM.

[Cap'n Jack]

I don't mind Ms Cornwell at all.
Anyone who generates that amount of venom from the Ripper community is okay by me.

[Jeff Leahy]

Suppose there had to be SOMEONE who liked Cornwell.....
and here he is!

You have plainly and clearly failed to read my posts..

My case is simple, and it has nothing to do with Sickert as a suspect...

My case is about respect, and people having the right top argue fore whichever suspect they feel, without personal abuse being fired..

My case is that I have not, so far, seen evidence that Patricia Cornwall has been firing personal abuse..and that her attack on Sickert is no different to that directed at any other suspect..

Please read what is said..not what you interpret as being said.

By the way,corncerning the end of your post 21,Pirate Jack....it went something like...Yo!Patricia,some of Casebook loves you..........
Pray tell,who else apart from your goodself is included in this statement?
Having tried to get interested in reading just one of her books before completely giving up on civilisation as we know it,I would GLADLY leave Patricia Cornwell to get on with her writing in peace....at the end of a launch pad in the hope that NASA would take pity on us all,and let some unsuspecting aliens receive a gift that is guaranteed to bore them to tears.
Hey!Iv'e just come up with the perfect solution to getting a look at them....they're bound to try to return it.
BUT WE WILL BE READY FOR THEM.

Well actually there are many people who are sick of silly name calling at Patricia..casebook is not the only forum in the world..but I am happy to stand alone against 'bullys'..... I've done it before and I will always stand for what I beleive...

Then your post goes off into some strange rant about aliens..what planet are you on? is this some kind of cross atlantic humour bye pass?

Just trying to make some sembelance of what it is you are actually trying to say?????

[Jeff Leahy]

I don't mind Ms Cornwell at all.
Anyone who generates that amount of venom from the Ripper community is okay by me.

Ah haa! a bunch of land lubbers I would say me harty..full for talk but no spunk in um'

[Monty]

Jeff,

The insults Cornwell threw were in a documentary she did, news interviews she gave promoting her book and, I do believe, her book.

They were aimed at researchers of, and those interested in, this subject of Jack, of which I am one. So yes, I take it as personal.

Monty