Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Patricia Cornwell - Walter Sickert - BOOK 2

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by FISHY1118 View Post

    Good too see your true to form in not coming up with the evidence you yourself claimed to exist,if you cant post it dont say it . As the saying goes ''put or xxxx, up .

    It is not a matter of my claiming anything.

    If an author who claimed to have seen the evidence had been wrong, someone would have revealed the mistake or deception long ago.

    What you are saying looks like a variation on the popular allegation on this forum that I am misrepresenting my opinion as fact or that I am presenting assumptions as facts.

    As I have stated repeatedly, I am not a researcher, nor have I claimed to be one, and it is not reasonable to expect me to view all original documents before being entitled to refer to them or quote from them.

    I am bound to ask whether you apply to everyone else the same high standard you are applying to me.
    Last edited by PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1; 11-29-2022, 03:23 PM.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by jmenges View Post

      Eleanor Sickert's handwritten letter is from Maison Throude, Rue des Bains, St Valery-en-Caux, Seine-Inferieure and the date of Sept 6th 1888 is written by her at the beginning of the letter. On the reverse of the envelope is stamped Croydon - Sp9 88 - E. If it's of any use I can post my amateurish transcript of the letter from the microfilmed copy at the Tate Archive? It was the reason I traced the original collection and bought them for Patricia Cornwell because the microfilm was such a nightmare to decipher and I could not work out what related to what! I can't post the original letter and envelope without permission from Patricia.

      KS

      Here is Keith Skinner's transcript of Eleanor Sickert's handwritten letter from Sept 6th 1888.



      Click image for larger version  Name:	WS961.jpg Views:	0 Size:	142.0 KB ID:	813396




      Click image for larger version  Name:	WS962.jpg Views:	0 Size:	148.0 KB ID:	813397




      Click image for larger version  Name:	WS963.jpg Views:	0 Size:	149.5 KB ID:	813398




      Click image for larger version  Name:	WS964.jpg Views:	0 Size:	150.0 KB ID:	813399





      JM
      Last edited by jmenges; 07-14-2023, 07:32 PM.

      Comment


      • Thanks for posting this John/Keith.

        Sickert is in France on the 6th of September and not only does Eleanor make no mention of returning she actually says: “We walk a good deal, the country is very pretty and I have just taken an …………… for a fortnight at the ……… so we go and always have a good place to sit in.”

        So on the 6th she’s just “taken a …… for a fortnight” clearly proving that they were staying well past the 6th.

        Now that is an alibi. Sickert is elimnated.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post
          Thanks for posting this John/Keith.

          Sickert is in France on the 6th of September and not only does Eleanor make no mention of returning she actually says: “We walk a good deal, the country is very pretty and I have just taken an …………… for a fortnight at the ……… so we go and always have a good place to sit in.”

          So on the 6th she’s just “taken a …… for a fortnight” clearly proving that they were staying well past the 6th.

          Now that is an alibi. Sickert is elimnated.
          Hello Herlock,

          But didn't Cornwell get around that by saying that Sickert could have quickly crossed the channel back to England at any time and then returned to France?

          c.d.

          Comment


          • As for staying past the 6th, that is only their stated intention. But what if they find out the place where they intended to stay was hosting a convention of life insurance salesmen so they said "well, screw that. Plus the French are pretentious jerks and don't appreciate my art. Let's return to England immediately."

            People can change their minds. The letter certainly constitutes a strong argument but in no way is it a smoking gun sufficient to eliminate Sickert all together.

            c.d.

            Comment


            • Just to avoid any potential confusion dear readers...not that I really see any...
              "Ellen" was Sickert's wife, often called Nelly. Eleanore was Sickert's mother. Penelope Noakes is a/k/a Penelope Muller, a friend of Sickert's mother and this letter is from his mother. Walter and his wife Ellen were separated at the time and not writing letters to or about each other.
              Sickert's mother also mentions him being in France on August 19. as in this letter on September 6, and there is "the archivists" dated letter on September 18 from the artist Jacques-Emile Blanche. Cornwell presumes Sickert was back in London in "the autumn" as he wrote Blanche back on his 'London stationary' and then positively puts him there on September 28 dating his Collin's Music Hall sketch. While she admits to the difficulty in locating Sickert on any given day, Cornwell insists that Sickert could have crossed the Channel in a three and one-half hour trip and reach the Whitechapel murder sites "easily".

              JM

              Comment


              • From Keith:

                The Sickert posting generated a couple of responses which I felt I could comment on for information purposes. Sickert was definitely back in London at the time of the double event and the Kelly murder. As I recall he was doing some Music Hall sketches in Islington over that weekend but I am relying on memory. I'm pretty sure that Patricia used this fact in her 2017 revised and updated version. The whole tone of the Eleanor Sickert correspondence (to me) is of Sickert spending a relaxing time with his famly in St Valery En Caux during August and the first part of September. As I recall it was a family retreat I believe where Walter could be reunited with his brothers and mother. I did go to St Valery En Caux in 2008 which is a delightful little fishing port in Normandy some 20 miles west of Dieppe and the drive from Dieppe to St Valery took about 30 to 40 minutes as I remember through fairly undulating countryside. It was difficult for me to envisage Sickert making the same journey from St Valery to Dieppe at night either by pony and trap - or bicycle - in order to catch a ferry across to Newhaven and from there into Whitechapel to murder a woman - and then make the return journey back to St Valery and not be missed. I think I also looked at contemporary ferry and train times and it just didn't play for me. You couldn't just cross the Channel at any time. I know I urged Patricia to make the same journey as I wanted her to experience it for herself but unfortunately she was not able to which I thought was a great shame.

                KS

                ——

                JM

                Comment


                • Originally posted by c.d. View Post

                  Hello Herlock,

                  But didn't Cornwell get around that by saying that Sickert could have quickly crossed the channel back to England at any time and then returned to France?

                  c.d.
                  Hi c.d.

                  I can’t remember to be honest. There’s no mention of such an intention though.

                  Comment


                  • Can I ask Keith (or anyone else for that matter) a question please on a related matter?

                    Was is the likelihood that Joseph Gorman was the son of Walter Sickert? If so, what is the evidence to support the idea or is the 'jury still out' on that question? Or has it been definitely ruled out? Has Keith (or anyone else for that matter) looked into the matter?

                    Thank you.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by mpriestnall View Post
                      Can I ask Keith (or anyone else for that matter) a question please on a related matter?

                      Was is the likelihood that Joseph Gorman was the son of Walter Sickert? If so, what is the evidence to support the idea or is the 'jury still out' on that question? Or has it been definitely ruled out? Has Keith (or anyone else for that matter) looked into the matter?

                      Thank you.
                      I have little doubt that Joseph was the illegitimate child of Walter Sickert and there was a kernel of truth in the story Walter Sickert allegedly told Joseph at some point between 1925-1942. It's worth reading Chaper 11 (The Royal Conspiracy) of Patricia Cornwell's 2017 updated and revised edition of her book.

                      Best Wishes

                      Keith

                      ****

                      JM

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by jmenges View Post

                        I have little doubt that Joseph was the illegitimate child of Walter Sickert and there was a kernel of truth in the story Walter Sickert allegedly told Joseph at some point between 1925-1942. It's worth reading Chaper 11 (The Royal Conspiracy) of Patricia Cornwell's 2017 updated and revised edition of her book.

                        Best Wishes

                        Keith

                        ****

                        JM
                        Thank you Keith and JM for the reply to my question.

                        I appreciate it.

                        I'll be checking out my copy of the book later today!

                        Martyn

                        Comment

                        Working...
                        X