One-on-One with Andrew Cook

[Jeff Leahy]

Phillips: "The wound was inflicted by drawing the knife across the throat. A short knife, such as a shoemaker's well-ground knife, would do the same thing".

On Eddowes: The wounds on the face and abdomen prove that they were inflicted by a sharp, pointed knife, and that in the abdomen by one six inches or longer.

I see no mention of a rounded blade. We have no idea of the exact way Srtide was attacked, we cant even be certain the same knife inflicted all the wounds on Eddowes though it would seem probable.

I’m saying that it can’t be stated as FACT that Stide was cut with a different knife to Eddowes, only as a possibility.

Any ideas which page I should be looking at in Scotland Yard Investigates?

Pirate

PS the boot scraper comment was intented as a joke..

[Jon Guy]

PS Hi Jon, yes I'm aware of that. However Cook specifically mentions the rounded knife presumably referencing the one that was found. i believe its impossible to tell the exact length of a knife from a cut, it has even been suggested that more than one knife was used on Eddowes..they didn't know for certain. She might even have fallen on a boot scraper...

Hi Jeff

It is possible to tell the length of a knife from a cut, this is done through body position and the angle of the incision, precisely what Dr Phillips did.

Any suggestions that more than one knife was used on Eddowes, and the Stride boot scraper theory are contemporary speculation, and certainly nothing the Doctors involved at the time put forward.

[caz]

Even, even better, Andrew Cook's sole defence of his despicable cover is that:
'It says what it does on the tin.'
And there was little old me thinking that 'it does what it says on the tin'.
I need a whisky.

Hi Cap'n,

Are you sure he didn't mean it that way round?

I would give Cap'n Cook some credit for acknowledging as much with more than a touch of self parody (I assumed) - ie his book exploits a real murdered and mutilated woman on the tin and excuses it on the inside by saying: "Well they started it".

Priceless.

Out of the mouths of babes with nappies as tight as their publishing deadlines...

Love,

Caz
X

[Jeff Leahy]

“I cant agree with that…hm arr…when people talk about the murders..(something about lots more unreported murders?) Bye and Bye…In answer to Paul Begg’s question Best and Lincoln Springfeild etc, its well answered in Stuart Evans and Donald Rumblows ‘Scotland Yard Investigates’ and ‘letters from Hell’ I wont repeat that, I fully endorse that. That effectively is the answer I believe?”

Again I ask where in ‘Scotland Yard Investigates does in mention Harry Dam, Best or Springfeild?

Pirate

PS Hi Jon, yes I'm aware of that. However Cook specifically mentions the rounded knife presumably referencing the one that was found. i believe its impossible to tell the exact length of a knife from a cut, it has even been suggested that more than one knife was used on Eddowes..they didn't know for certain. She might even have fallen on a boot scraper...

[Jon Guy]

There is, as he probably well knows, no evidence that Liz Stride was cut with a different knife to Catherine Eddowes.

It’s a Myth.

Hi Jeff

To be fair, Dr Phillips did state at the inquest that due to the position of the body, and the angle of incision, it is unlikely that a long bladed knife was used. Noting that Eddowes was killed by a knife with a 6-8 inch blade.

[Chris]

Jeff

I thought he said "Letters from Hell".

[Jeff Leahy]

Hi everyone

I have now been scratching my head all morning over Andrew Cooks reply to Paul Begg’s question in which he asks us to check Scotland Yard Investigates by Evans and Rumblow? For an answer.

I have been digging through for a couple of hours now and can find no reference to Harry Dam’s supposed confession. Indeed checking through the index at the back of the book I can find no reference to either Dam, Best or Springfield.

Did Andrew Cook simply make this up? Did he actually not have a clue what the question was about? Did he reference the wrong book?

I am now total confused and puzzled and would welcome any explanation or pointers in the right direction to which page I should be looking at in Scotland Yard Investigates..

Many thanks for your help casebook.

Pirate

[Chris]

A. P.

I'd be a bit more impressed by your "simple sword of truth and trusty shield of British fair play" act if, just once, when you got your facts muddled and accused someone of saying something they hadn't, you acknowledged that you'd got it wrong. Instead of trying to cover it up with another set of dubious accusations.

[Jeff Leahy]

Yes interesting that for a man wishing to cut through the Jack the Ripper myth that he choose to eliminate Stride with a myth. There is, as he probably well knows, no evidence that Liz Stride was cut with a different knife to Catherine Eddowes.

It’s a Myth.

The source of this story appears to come from the discovery of a rounded blade. However there is no proof what so ever to connect it as the murder weapon in either case.

If your going to start criticizing other authors perhaps its best to get your own facts straight in the first place.

Pirate

[Cap'n Jack]

Well, Chris, you wouldn't, would you?
This is all old camp to me, I was there almost twenty years ago, when dinosaurs like Cook strolled the planet, and 99% of the world, and London, didn't believe they ever existed.
What a crazy notion that is.
Almost as crazy as a man who is offended by a Victorian top hat on the cover of a book, but quite happy with a naked disremembered (deliberate sp) woman on his cover.
Do you not think, old boy, that his contention that the press were responsible for the creation of the Ripper, rather falls down when it was in fact a London coroner that first linked the series of crimes?
He likes Tumblety.
I warned you.

[Jeff Leahy]

Then why ignore the marginalia?

[Chris]

And then he compounds all of that by claiming that the Littlechild letter is a better primary source than the Macnaghten memo.

Jonathan can correct me if I'm wrong, but I think what actually happened is that he was asked whether private correspondence like the Littlechild Letter and perhaps the Macnaghten Memoranda were more credible than Anderson's memoirs, and he agreed that private correspondence was more reliable than things written for publication.

I don't think your characterisation of his treatment of Macnaghten is very accurate either.

[Cap'n Jack]

Indeed, Pirate, you highlight many of my own concerns here.
I particularly enjoyed the way Mr Cook toyed with Macnaghten, in that when it suited his purpose, like in the murder of Tabram, Mr Cook blessed Macnaghten with peculiar insight, and then roundly damned him for everything else that didn't suit his strange purpose.
And then he compounds all of that by claiming that the Littlechild letter is a better primary source than the Macnaghten memo.
I need anothet whisky, and a gun.

[Archaic]

Thanks, Jm!

Hi, Jonathan, thanks for the interview with Andrew Cook, and thanks for trying to get an answer to my questions about 'Penny-A-Liners' and 'Journalistic Profits & Motives'.

I listened carefully, but I'm still not sure as to the answer... When you asked if the journalists actually made money on the increased newspaper sales, I believe Mr Cook remarked something to the effect that ''It went higher than that.'' Hmmmm... I'll listen again.

You did a great job, as ever, and I'm impressed you got the interview up as a Podcast so quickly!
Thanks again for all your efforts; they are much appreciated! -Archaic

[m_w_r]

Hi chaps,

I reserve my final judgement until we have seen the book, but the problem with suspect theories has always been "theory-first, evidence-second" thinking. I fear that similar problems may affect no-suspect theories.

Regards,

Mark