A New Ripper Book

[Natalie Severn]

Something along the lines of "It couldn't have been me, I was someone else at the time."

It couldnt be a doppelganger thing could it?

[Archaic]

If NONE are 'JTR' Victims why is only ONE of the Non-Victims on the cover?

Hi, Jonathan; thanks for trying to shed some light on this matter. I was quite impressed with Mr. Cook's work on the Murder of Rasputin, the Romanovs being one of my all-time favorite historical subjects, and I look forward to reading his new book on the Whitechapel Murders.

However, in all honesty, Mr Cook's explanation to you which I quote here:

He does not believe any of the murder victims are victims of a "Jack the Ripper" and so the use of any one of the victims photographs would have fallen into the same category of not-victims of the Ripper

JM

only leaves me more baffled then before. > If NONE of the Victims were murdered by a figure known as 'Jack the Ripper', surely the most logical subsequent thought in that sequence would be to conclude that NONE of the bloody death scenes of that 'category' of Murder Victims belongs on the cover, let alone the bloodiest and most appalling one!

- Isn't it a reasonable conclusion, based upon the premises we have been given, that therefore NONE of the famous 5 belong on the cover of this book? I ask in all sincerity; I do not wish to be argumentative, but only to understand this issue and all its myriad implications more fully. In fact, that's also my goal in choosing to research the Ripper case. [/B] I want everybody to know that I'm always to hearing new viewpoints, and I welcome them.

I just want to add that really enjoy the Podcasts, and I offer my Best Regards to you and to Mr Cook. -Archaic

[Robert]

Something along the lines of "It couldn't have been me, I was someone else at the time."

[Tom_Wescott]

If Jack the Ripper was innocent, why didn't he step forward at the time and offer an aliby? Answer THAT one, Mr. Cook!

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Jeff Leahy]

Unless someone comes up with a "Jack the Ripper" was a football croud theory?

Now you come to mention it

Pirate

[Robert]

I'd be surprised if Jack the Ripper didn't murder at least half a person.

[Jeff Leahy]

Yes you made me laugh also Anna

Stewart Evans said at the 2007 conference, that anyone who comes up with a jtR theory and is prepared to put his head above the parapet, better be prepared to take flack. (or similar wording)

I don’t think Andrew’s decision to put his head above the parapet is being questioned. I’m a big supporter of that.

It’s the choice of book cover and why he choose the words ‘Case Closed’ that has the angry mob baying for answers.

and of course he reads casebook. However posting on a public forum is a matter of choice not requirement.

I’m sure Jonathon would give him a fair hearing where he might feel less…threatened? Intimidated? Under flack? but its his chioce.

I know I certainly wouldn’t post here

Pirate

[m_w_r]

The guys barking mad if he thinks there was no "Jack The Ripper"..
Most of us agree on three of the victims being by the same had...if not,there would have had to have been five maniacs walking around Spitalfields,all with the same idea in mind,over the same few months...
I mean.............it's not over likely,is it.

Anna raises a relevant point here. In the pre-publicity article in the Times, and available via this link, Cook mentions two contemporary victim count-ups which did not dovetail with Macnaghten's total of five: one being that of Percy Clark (three victims), and the other that of Thomas Arnold (four victims). Of course, the familiarity of Macnaghten's view is always subject to critical challenge. But the fact that the various policemen's retrospective enumerations failed to tally is a fact already known - Walter Dew, for example, fancied seven, and Edmund Reid nine - so I don't see any reason to mention Clark or Arnold unless you're sticking with three as a minimum. I haven't read the book and don't know anything more about it than anyone else, but I'd be surprised if the thesis was that all the murders were by separate hands.

Just one other thing - the same article describes Clark's view as "forgotten". It was certainly remembered as recently as 2005, since it's mentioned in Nick Connell's excellent biography, Walter Dew - The Man Who Caught Crippen, in which he says, "Percy Clark was sure that one man committed three of the murders, but he 'would not like to say he did the others' (p.43).

Regards,

Mark

[babybird67]

anna

you made me smile!

[anna]

Well said,Tom!

It's just an excuse,he could come on here,to explain his crackpot theory..

The guys barking mad if he thinks there was no "Jack The Ripper"..
Most of us agree on three of the victims being by the same had...if not,there would have had to have been five maniacs walking around Spitalfields,all with the same idea in mind,over the same few months...
I mean.............it's not over likely,is it.

...if he really must write a fantasy book,

Perhaps he should have tried Mills and Boon,and used the name Daphne.

[Cap'n Jack]

'Lastly, for now, I'll inform you all that Andrew Cook donates 100% of the proceeds of his books to various charities, so he is not personally profiting from the sale of this book.'

That sort of sounds generous, JM, but the publisher will be getting 90% of the income earned, and the author 10%, if he is lucky, so will Sutton be throwing that at the disembowelled naked prostitutes fund or what?
To be honest with you JM, I find the situation even more precarious now, that a respected author is funding charities through his agreed use of an image showing a naked and brutalised woman murdered for no good reason that he can explain.
Basically Cook is dealing with an image on the cover of his new book which most decent people find indecent, and it is up to him to deal with that situation, but he plainly is not doing that. He is fluffing.
As I'm a charitable man as well, I'll make him an offer.
I will take over the publication of his new book, with a new cover, and I will split the deal at 50% each, he can give his 50% to charity, and my 50% will pay for the production and distribution of his book.
At no profit to me, but at least my soul is clean.

[Tom_Wescott]

While JMenges is free to endorse Cook's actions and promote his work, I'm not quite as convinced. Andrew Cook does not need to do an interview, he merely needs to post on here like the rest of us. Think he doesn't visit the Casebook? Think again.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Jeff Leahy]

Hi Jonathon

Well if anyone can get the interview, you’re the man to do it, so good luck. I think we’d all like to hear Andrew Cooks side of the argument, I will probably purchase the book, although I hold little hope that it will contain anything that convinces me that Nichols, Chapman and Eddowes were not killed by a single serial killer, known as Jack the Ripper.

But given his glowing recommendation I will certainly give Andrew the time of Day.

I cant quite see why if Kelly was killed by JtR or a lone copy cat it makes any difference to the use of this image on the front page of a book.

Is Andrew Cook suggesting that ‘Case Closed’ is some sort of ironic joke at theorists like Paticia Cornwall? (Whose own new book is due next year)

I’m sorry I really didn’t get any of these excuses and the comment ‘just read the book’ does seem having your cake and eating it…

If your reading this ANDREW COOK why not do an interview and tell us why we should purchase a copy?…And why you choose this cover?

Pirate

The way I see it……while we have these crack pot theories clogging up the air waves it’s very difficult to get anything sensible done.

[Christine]

The book doesn't seem to be available anywhere; Amazon.uk says "temporarily out of stock," Amazon.com says "out of print." Other outlets I checked don't have it at all. I'm not sure what this means. It could be because Amberley Press doesn't distribute through normal channels, or something else.

[Tom_Wescott]

And yet none of this has anything to do with the cover of the book, which by using the name 'Jack the Ripper', feeds into what Cook apparently regards as the 'myth' of the lone killer.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott