What makes Patricia Cornwall so special?!?! How come SHE gets all the limelight?!?!

[Jeff Leahy]

Hold on..when has the Pirate ever been in Patricia Cornwalls corner?

The Pirate has been perfectly consistent on casebook supporting the brilliant research and theories put forward by Rob House. I’ve spent the best part of the last ten years eliminating all but one suspect from my JtR list..and he certainly IS NOT Walter Sickert.

Since when has been suggesting that personal abuse should not be hurled against someone because they, like the Pirate , have a belief in a suspect theory..been classed as support?

Like the rest of you I think most of Cornwells book is tosh, but it seems clear that she has apparently turned up something of interest with regards to one letter and the opinion of an expert paper examiner. Peter Bower.

I have been defending Peter Bower’s corner when it was suggested..liabelously that he had produced results that Patricia Cornwell wanted because he was being paid by her.

Anyone who has met Peter Bower will know this is a ridiculous statement.

It has also been claimed that ‘a number of leading experts’ have ridiculed Peter Bower, again the Pirate says Piffal…name your experts if you have them?

It strikes me that Patricia is in a catch 22…you all demand she publishes NOW, then you demand that she provides proper research and analysis..

Well isn’t that possibly why she has employed Keith Skinner. Could it be that she’s investing money in better research and chasing more leads? A book which she has already stated wont contain the title ‘Case Closed’

I don’t know, all I’ve suggested is that these things take time, if they are to be done properly. Patricia has stated there is to be an updated book and I have no reason to doubt it will come along when its ready, and hopefully this time better researched.

It’s a very different thing believing Sickert had a keen interest in the JtR murders, which he clearly did, and may have involved himself further in the case than was previously thought, than to suggest Sickert as the Ripper, a very different thing.

That’s it Anna, I am certainly not in Patricia Cornwells corner, far from it.

[mac-the-kipper]

Just when you think Pirate Jack is the only one in PC's corner....along comes mac-the-kipper,to back him up....all we need now is a mermaid to appear!

Mac,...hope you don't mind me using your first name...
Do you not detect something a little fishy about this suspect.....

In other words........HE 'AINT JACK THE RIPPER.

I ain't backing anyone up. I just think some people here are giving others a rough ride. I haven't read Patricia's book, nor am I likely ever to. The last JTR book I read was 'Letters from hell' and that was only because I have a passing interest in the letters themselves.

Mac the kipper is a joke I had with Keith Skinner a while back.

Also I believe that Sickert didn't do it. No-one will ever know for sure who it was.

[anna]

You couldn't write this in a comedy routine!

Just when you think Pirate Jack is the only one in PC's corner....along comes mac-the-kipper,to back him up....all we need now is a mermaid to appear!

Mac,...hope you don't mind me using your first name...
Do you not detect something a little fishy about this suspect.....

In other words........HE 'AINT JACK THE RIPPER.

[claire]

Yup, it's called, Jack the Ripper, Case Cash Cow.

[DVV]

You know she's doing that do you? Aren't revisions allowed here?

Are you telling me that she is writing a new suspect-biased book, with someone else than Sickert, in the role of the Ripper?
Funny enough.

[downonwhores]

You're right

Yes Mike. You are right. I always forget her name and always mixed up with Ricci.

[mac-the-kipper]

Would a "very cautious" person write two books about the same unviable suspect?

Amitiés,
David

You know she's doing that do you? Aren't revisions allowed here?

[Mike Covell]

Marie Lewis in "The Ripper" looked and sounded almost exactly like Ricci's Mary Kelly in From Hell. although, Marie Lewis had a better irish accent.

Thought Heather Graham was Mary Kelly in "From Hell"

[DVV]

she is being very cautious given that she realises and acknowledges her errors in the first publication.

Would a "very cautious" person write two books about the same unviable suspect?

Amitiés,
David

[downonwhores]

I Did It!!!!

I did it. I am Jack the Ripper. Why? because I"m down on whores. ha ha

Just saw the movie "The Ripper" on cinemax last night with Patrick Bergin. It was "interesting" to say the least. Although not factual, I love the way it had so many theories that it kept mixing them up. HA HA. I enjoyed it. I thought as a movie, it was better than From Hell. What was interesting to me was how Marie Lewis in "The Ripper" looked and sounded almost exactly like Ricci's Mary Kelly in From Hell. although, Marie Lewis had a better irish accent.

What's the best ripper movie in terms of accuracy and good old movie quality?

[mac-the-kipper]

What's so hard to understand? If you or I as an author, had paid a small army of researchers to undertake tests, examinations, interviews, etc. Then wouldn't we want to be the first to publish these findings?

What's taking so long? Well, given that Ms Cornwell has been slated by most people here I think it's perfectly reasonable to assume that maybe, just maybe, she is being very cautious given that she realises and acknowledges her errors in the first publication.

Let's wait and see.

[Khanada]

Hi Khanada,
wait-and-see?
How long more will you be waiting? And what to see?
Cornwell's book was published 6 years ago, and Bower's work was already supposed to have been decisive.
Better wait for Godot.

If, as some posters assert, Bower's work has not been completely and totally published, then it's hard to judge what one has not read.

This does not mean I think Patsy's book should be on a non-fiction shelf (far, far from it), nor that I think there is some great and shining revelation just waiting to be had. It does mean that I'm willing to give a look to something that might come along later, if indeed it ever does; it doesn't mean I will change my opinion about Sickert being the Ripper (which currently stands at "ha -- as if!").

Again, if it's Cornwell herself making statements that Bower's work says X, Y, Z, without letting the entire work be seen, then I have to think (given her track record) that she really may just be looking at the results and spinning them to suit herself. If it's Bower saying things, I guess I am just inclined to be an eensy-weensy-woo-woo more charitable -- or, at least, I am trying these days to keep the knee-jerk reactions to a minimum.

[DVV]

Hi Khanada,
wait-and-see?
How long more will you be waiting? And what to see?
Cornwell's book was published 6 years ago, and Bower's work was already supposed to have been decisive.
Better wait for Godot.

Amitiés,
David

[Khanada]

Thank you Claire and Brenda.

Basically, for me it's like this. If Peter Bower himself is saying (in essence) that there's more to it than can be disclosed at present, it might amount to something, or still might be nothing at all, but I guess it makes me more willing to play wait-and-see. If it's Patricia Cornwell saying these things, well, frankly, I tend to think that perhaps it is more likely that she is seeing the parts she wants to see. It's a human enough tendency, and everyone's done it at some point, Ripper author or no.

[downonwhores]

Not in France

I don't disagree that Sickertt may have written some letters, he does seem to have an interest in the case and a peverse sense of humour, but they way the she jumps around is ridiculous. She discovers that Sickertt was not in France when one of the murders happened, so he must have been in Whitechapple slaughtering some poor unfortunate. Its bad history if nothing else.

Sickert was in France. Letters from himself and his mom prove it.