Patricia Cornwell - Walter Sickert - BOOK 2

[FISHY1118]

If you read all the responses to your request for proof in the thread Patricia Cornwell - Walter Sickert - BOOK 2

then you must know that what you are requesting is physically impossible.

If so, it is strange that you would continue to request something you know to be impossible.

Nonsense

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

Are you saying you can produce the original letter it with the full date on it .?

If you read all the responses to your request for proof in the thread Patricia Cornwell - Walter Sickert - BOOK 2

then you must know that what you are requesting is physically impossible.

If so, it is strange that you would continue to request something you know to be impossible.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

Are you saying you can produce the original letter it with the full date on it .?

I refer you to # 260 of the thread Patricia Cornwell - Walter Sickert - BOOK 2

from which I quote:



Keith responds:

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


I suggest you take up the matter with Keith Skinner.

As I said, I am not a researcher.

[FISHY1118]

Are you saying that conclusive evidence was not produced that the letter was dated 6 September 1888?

Are you saying you can produce the original letter it with the full date on it .?

[Aethelwulf]

because of SY's undoubted role they played in protecting JTR and Astrakhan Man. One just needs to know where to look...

Martyn

Can you provide some evidence for this without reference to 'wait for the book'? I can't be the only one that finds this beyond far-fetched as per my previous criticism of such ideas. You are saying the SY knew the ID of JTR and covered it up, which should be backed up by proof.

[mpriestnall]

Keith Skinner:

Happy to respond to Martyn's query.

I wasn't involved with the first edition of Patricia's book published in 2002 but the circumstances of her meeting with DAC John Grieve and introduction to JTR are as described in her book. Have you read it for yourself? I've never had any reason to doubt this is what occurred, especially as I have heard it direct from Patricia. I remember when I first read it I thought it strange that John should seemingly be putting at the top of his list the Stephen Knight solution, but he doesn't actually go that distance - plus Patricia herself rejected Knight's theory. Here's what Patricia wrote and it is probably pretty close to what John said as I've witnessed the way Patricia records conversations in her ever present notebook. A legacy from the time she was a reporter...

"There's one other interesting chap you might want to check out, as long as you are going

to look into it. An artist named Walter Sickert. He painted some murder pictures. In one of

them in particular, a clothed man is sitting on the edge of a bed with the body of the nude

prostitute he just murdered. It's called The Camden Town Murder. I've always wondered

about him."

It seemed curious that John should be pointing Patricia towards what most people (including myself) believed to be the murder of Emily Dimmock in 1907. But a century later in 2007 I took Patricia to meet Jean Overton Fuller who insisted this series of sketches related to a Ripper victim. Now comes the part I am hazy about or rather have never explored. When I asked Patricia if John had elaborated on why he had an interest in Sickert it turned out that John is a keen artist and has a family connection somewhere along the line to Jean Overton Fuller. So Knight, it appears, forms no part of John's thinking. (I should say I doubt very much if it has anything to do with Scotland Yard protecting JTR and giving disguised clues to Patricia. Or, as I have heard it suggested, simply winding up Patricia.) However, John's family association with Jean Overton Fuller is truly something I have been rather remis in following up with John but your query has galvanised me into action. So thank you!

Best Wishes -KS.

JM

Hi Keith

On reflection and with regard to your response, I very much doubt my theory now about John Grieve. That said, I am aware of a connection between Sickert to people at the very centre of the case and can therefore see how Sickert could have easily learnt of JTR's identity. It's quite possible that it is this knowledge that sparked Sickert's interest in the case and that everything else involving him and the case has just snowballed from that knowledge.

I quite enjoy the irony that a former SY man has inadvertently given (or reinforced) a potential lead to JTR via Sickert because of SY's undoubted role they played in protecting JTR and Astrakhan Man. One just needs to know where to look...

I did read Patricia's first book a long time ago and your take on how John Grieve suggested Sickert to her works at lot better than mine! Thanks for sharing that information about John's link to Jean Overton Fuller and answering my query so fully.

Best wishes,

Martyn

[mpriestnall]

Thanks JM for passing on my question to KS. Appreciate it.

MP

[Aethelwulf]

There is good but rather long essay about Sickert's Camden Town paintings on the Tate site here: https://www.tate.org.uk/art/research...crime-r1104355. Fairly convincing read that Sickert was a very good artist and the nude/bed/prostitute/murder paintings were actually part of a wider genre. The most interesting section is under the sub-heading Genre: The nude, the prostitute, the murder victim about 1/3 of the way down.

[jmenges]

I would like to know how and what words John Grieve used when he suggested Sickert to Patricia Cornwell.

If Grieve said something like "Sickert is man needing closer inspection" rather explicitly suggesting he would be someone to look at as a suspect for JTR, then I wonder if Grieve was suggesting Sickert as a clue to finding JTR through Sickert rather saying he was actually JTR (which he surely wasn't).

I can connect Sickert to someone at the centre of the case (if my candidates for JTR and Astrakhan Man are valid, and I'm sure they are).

As I expressed on CB, once or twice(!), my view is that SY protected JTR and Astrakhan Man therefore I can see how Grieve would want to give a disguised clue to JTR, rather say anything transparent to Cornwell.

Did Cornwell pick up the ball, and run off in the wrong direction?

I would appreciate if someone could ask Keith for his take on the nature of how Grieve suggested Sickert in the first place?

Thank you,

Martyn

Keith Skinner:

Happy to respond to Martyn's query.

I wasn't involved with the first edition of Patricia's book published in 2002 but the circumstances of her meeting with DAC John Grieve and introduction to JTR are as described in her book. Have you read it for yourself? I've never had any reason to doubt this is what occurred, especially as I have heard it direct from Patricia. I remember when I first read it I thought it strange that John should seemingly be putting at the top of his list the Stephen Knight solution, but he doesn't actually go that distance - plus Patricia herself rejected Knight's theory. Here's what Patricia wrote and it is probably pretty close to what John said as I've witnessed the way Patricia records conversations in her ever present notebook. A legacy from the time she was a reporter...

"There's one other interesting chap you might want to check out, as long as you are going

to look into it. An artist named Walter Sickert. He painted some murder pictures. In one of

them in particular, a clothed man is sitting on the edge of a bed with the body of the nude

prostitute he just murdered. It's called The Camden Town Murder. I've always wondered

about him."

It seemed curious that John should be pointing Patricia towards what most people (including myself) believed to be the murder of Emily Dimmock in 1907. But a century later in 2007 I took Patricia to meet Jean Overton Fuller who insisted this series of sketches related to a Ripper victim. Now comes the part I am hazy about or rather have never explored. When I asked Patricia if John had elaborated on why he had an interest in Sickert it turned out that John is a keen artist and has a family connection somewhere along the line to Jean Overton Fuller. So Knight, it appears, forms no part of John's thinking. (I should say I doubt very much if it has anything to do with Scotland Yard protecting JTR and giving disguised clues to Patricia. Or, as I have heard it suggested, simply winding up Patricia.) However, John's family association with Jean Overton Fuller is truly something I have been rather remis in following up with John but your query has galvanised me into action. So thank you!

Best Wishes -KS.

JM

[mpriestnall]

I would like to know how and what words John Grieve used when he suggested Sickert to Patricia Cornwell.

If Grieve said something like "Sickert is man needing closer inspection" rather explicitly suggesting he would be someone to look at as a suspect for JTR, then I wonder if Grieve was suggesting Sickert as a clue to finding JTR through Sickert rather saying he was actually JTR (which he surely wasn't).

I can connect Sickert to someone at the centre of the case (if my candidates for JTR and Astrakhan Man are valid, and I'm sure they are).

As I expressed on CB, once or twice(!), my view is that SY protected JTR and Astrakhan Man therefore I can see how Grieve would want to give a disguised clue to JTR, rather say anything transparent to Cornwell.

Did Cornwell pick up the ball, and run off in the wrong direction?

I would appreciate if someone could ask Keith for his take on the nature of how Grieve suggested Sickert in the first place?

Thank you,

Martyn

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

Her paper expert Bowers claimed it wasn't just paper from the same manufacturer, but paper from the same run--ie., the same individual roll of paper was used in two or more Ripper letters and in some of the Sickert correspondence. Make of it what you will.

It's one big delusion in my opinion: Sickert writes all the letters, commits all the murders, all over the country, and sends letters with British post marks from France!

[rjpalmer]

Why does Cornwell attach so much importance to the paper Sickert used? Short of him manufacturing his own paper, he must have bought the stuff. If he bought it, other people could have.

Her paper expert Bowers claimed it wasn't just paper from the same manufacturer, but paper from the same run--ie., the same individual roll of paper was used in two or more Ripper letters and in some of the Sickert correspondence. Make of it what you will.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

With respect to jmenges i dont see his adjudication as proof of anything .

It seems to prove that we are all in Patricia Cornwell's hands.

I would like to see the original just as you would - or at least a copy of it - but do not see any reason to doubt that the date included the year.

Obviously, she could reproduce the letter herself, but I think she is unlikely to do so for reasons that are obvious.

[FISHY1118]

My understanding, from Jmenges' comments, is that the date 1888 is on the same letter.

I don't know why you didn't see it.

I thought you would be satisfied with his 'adjudication'.

With respect to jmenges i dont see his adjudication as proof of anything .

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

Exactly, so why is it so elusive if all the experts have seen it and dated it ''1888'' it should be fairly easy to find .

My understanding, from Jmenges' comments, is that the date 1888 is on the same letter.

I don't know why you didn't see it.

I thought you would be satisfied with his 'adjudication'.