Patricia Cornwell - Walter Sickert - BOOK 2

[Abby Normal]

All
whats her case against sickert in a nutshell? I'd really like to see someone answer this as in also making the case for him. Thanks in advance!

[jmenges]

All
whats her case against sickert in a nutshell? I'd really like to see someone answer this as in also making the case for him. Thanks in advance!

http://www.casebook.org/dissertations/dst-pamandsickert.html

JM

[PaulB]

http://www.casebook.org/dissertation...ndsickert.html

JM

That's all a bit old hat now, Jonathan.

[PaulB]

All
whats her case against sickert in a nutshell? I'd really like to see someone answer this as in also making the case for him. Thanks in advance!

It might be best to read her book. The Kindle version is cheap enough. She is very sincere in her belief that Walter Sickert was Jack the Ripper, but what I might pick up on in her book as interesting may not be the same as you or the same as Patricia. As I say in the current Ripperologist , I'm intrigued by the possibility that Walter was the source of Joseph's story.

[Abby Normal]

http://www.casebook.org/dissertation...ndsickert.html

JM

Thank you.

[miss marple]

Where did she get Sickert's DNA from?

Miss Marple

[Geddy2112]

Where did she get Sickert's DNA from?

Miss Marple

Didn't she destroy some of his paintings? Or am I making that up?

[miss marple]

I think she did destroy a painting but unless he licked the canvas how did she get his DNA? How is destroying a Canvas helpful? You paint with brushes not your fingers.The canvas would have been handled many times . Its all a bit dodgy. She is such a monomanic that blaming Sickert for the ripper murders is not enough, she thinks he did practically every murder in the first quarter of the 20th century. She really likes to over egg the pudding.


Miss Marple

[Pcdunn]

Letters, always letters...

Where did she get Sickert's DNA from?

Miss Marple

Supposedly from a "Ripper letter". This science article explains the problems with all of the DNA "identifications" of JtR:

http://mysteriousuniverse.org/2014/09/this-is-the-third-time-dna-has-revealed-the-identity-of-jack-the-ripper/

[dantheman]

I think she did destroy a painting but unless he licked the canvas how did she get his DNA? How is destroying a Canvas helpful? You paint with brushes not your fingers.


Miss Marple

Numerous ways dna could have been on the painting. Saliva traces from sneezing/coughing, etc.

She was very thorough in regards to WS letters and paintings, after all she believes he's jtr.

-Dan

[PaulB]

Just for the record, Patricia didn't destroy any paintings by Walter Sickert or anyone else. She bought a painting and it was damaged in transit. I think she explains in her book how the story became twisted into her having destroyed a painting. The insurance and other documentation pertaining to the damage was and for all I know still is in her files. Also, I think (I don't have a copy of the book to hand at the moment so can't check and confirm) you may find that she doesn't make a big thing out of the MtDNA in her book, but states what her experts found and pretty much leaves it to the reader to draw their own conclusions.

[Ginger]

I suppose one must tip one's hat to her for tenacity.

[Fantomas]

Cornwell and Robinson's egomania taint every word of their fascinating but wrong tomes. It is easy to become rapt by the euphoria of conspiracy theory - you hold all the cards if you say the moon is made of cheese and everyone is an alien, for example, so who, in your head can prove you wrong? Hence Trump for example.

So, as an explainer of Trump to a frazzled, logical mind, Cornwell's book is reassuring - ah, presumption and whimsical assertion are meat and drink to every egomaniac!

[Abby Normal]

well, unless she can establish that he was even in London in the fall of 88 and not in France then the rest is pretty much moot, IMHO. I think as a baseline if your going to put forth a candidate for a valid suspect, you need to baseline at least establish that!

after that, she would need to confirm that his handwriting matches said letters.

has she at least done any of these two things?

[PaulB]

well, unless she can establish that he was even in London in the fall of 88 and not in France then the rest is pretty much moot, IMHO. I think as a baseline if your going to put forth a candidate for a valid suspect, you need to baseline at least establish that!

after that, she would need to confirm that his handwriting matches said letters.

has she at least done any of these two things?

Yep. There are dated music hall sketches which suggest he was in London and not in France at the time of several of the murders. As for the handwriting, the letters are from the same small batch of paper which in the opinion of the paper expert, Peter Bower, is as probable to have been sold to one person as it can be. The argument is therefore that the handwriting was disguised, to which one might say "yea, right", but one would have to have good grounds for disputing the considered conclusion of a world renowned authority on paper. You also have the opinion of the authority on Sickert's art, Anna Gruetzner Robins, that many of the Ripper letters were identifiably by Sickert. I have no idea whether they do or not, by I'm impressed by the weight of these authority's opinions.