Rating: 
Summary: Case NOT CLOSED
Review: She bases her reputation on THIS?!I, too, had major problems with this book. Pat Cornwell cites many pieces of seemingly irrefutable circumstantial evidence but I have trouble believing that evidence when I see so many illogical or naive conclusions.
I will not detail all my problems with her theory but here are two: One is her ideas about the supposed killer's artistic style. When I saw her interview on a news magazine show she was describing Impressionism! Certainly not all of the Impressionist were murderers! A second is her idea that using prostitutes as models somehow made him a prime suspect. Again, in the times, artists often used prostitutes as models as many "respctable" women would not shed their clothes for an artist. Also, Degas, for one, thought they were more "real" and "alive" than professional models. P.S: Ballet dancers were considered just a step above prostitutes and a number crossed the line. I just cannot take this book seriously. Don't buy it; the other recommended books by a previous reviewer are better.
Rating:
Summary: Circumstantial in the extreme......A 'Ripper' RIP OFF!
Review: Patricia Cornwall's 'case closed' part of her title here is laughable. Her so-called "evidence" is a small fragmented DNA comparison which matches painter Walter Sickert's personal letter sample with one he supposedly sent the police as Jack the Ripper. The problem is that the 'match' without getting too scientific does not eliminate other potential suspects due to the nature and type of mitchondrial DNA compared. She then assumes that his violent paintings somehow reveal him to be the whore-hating murderer who carved his name into the history books. The leaps she makes in her case are far from conclusive based on the fact that she had access to much of the evidence still kept by Scotland Yard. Painting violent pictures of women etc hardly qualifies someone as a fiendish mass-murderer. If this were so, we would have a lot more of our artists locked up on death row. The only really redeeming aspect of the book (and why I gave it 2 stars rather than 1) is the descriptions of Victorian London of that time and some of the character portraits. These showed a novelist's eye for detail and provide a good sense of place and time. My conclusion is that the author should stick to writing the mystery novels which have made her famous. Fiction is clearly her best medium. If you buy this book looking for answers to one of the greatest all-time mysteries--- prepare to be disappointed. Rather than providing a conclusive answer, it merely adds another name to the frustrating list of potential ripper suspects in what has proved to be a cottage industry in the world of crime.
Rating: 
Summary: Portrait of a Killer - Case Closed
Review: If one is expecting a story about Jack the Ripper this is not the book to read. It's a very hard read but a most informative documentary type non-fiction book. The athor did her usual excellent job of writing and her research and investigation was outstanding. If the author is a student or intern, this should have been her thesis. A really inquisitive Jack the Ripper enthusist would be amazed at the detailed investigation and painstaking effort to decipher the information contained in the many, many documents and art work the author and her assistants reviewed. I am convinced that Walter Sicker was Jack the Ripper.
Rating:
Summary: Impressive Research Leading to a Final Answer
Review: Patricia Cornwell has given us the solution to a real mystery this time in her latest book, an investigation into the disturbing life of Walter Sickert, English artist and, it now appears irrefutably true, Jack the Ripper. Cornwell did an amazing amount of research, including DNA analysis of stamps and envelope flaps, and comes up with compelling though circumstantial evidence that Sickert was the Ripper. Sickert has been named before as a possible Ripper or as being involved in a cover up of the Ripper's identity, but Cornwell is the first to actually sew all the pieces together for a complete portrait. Sickert was a tortured man, a psychopath warped by a malformed penis which was made even less functional by botched surgeries when he was a child. He delighted in inflicting pain and in hurting those whom he deemed his inferiors. While there is no smoking gun, no confession or eyewitness account, Cornwell does pile up the evidence against Sickert so that it seems irrefutable. Along the way she also does a good job of convicting the London police of incompetence in mishandling evidence and failing to put the pieces together. She also provides strong evidence that the Ripper had a much longer career and many more victims than those usually awarded him. Furthermore, Cornwell exonerates some of the other Ripper suspects like Montague John Druitt and the Duke of Clarence (second in line to the throne). Even if she had not summed up the case against Sickert so well, this would be a worthwhile book just because it puts to rest the tired old rumors of a Royal and/or Masonic conspiracy behind the Ripper murders. Finally, Cornwell convincingly recreates the sad, impoverished world inhabited by Sickert's victims. London in the late nineteenth century was no place to be if you were poor or especially a poor woman. One feels so much pity for all of these women, forced into prostitution and despised for it.
Rating: 
Summary: Stirring Up Controversy
Review: Cornwall has certainly stirred up a storm of controversy with this one. She takes us back 113 years to the Jack The Ripper murders and paints a very interesting picture of the people and places of that time. Using letters, newspaper articles and police reports, she builds a case against the artist Walter Sickert. I personally found Cornwall's conclusions believable....much more so than other theories I have heard. Reading this account of events was like being a juror and hearing the prosecution's case. It will be interesting to see how many defense 'attorneys' will come forward to present an opposing view. Some of the crime scene pictures included in the book are not for the faint of heart. I would have liked to see more examples of Walter Sickert's paintings, but that might have been difficult to arrange. They are available from other sources of course. Cornwall has a disconcerting habit of introducing a piece of information then dropping it, only to reintroduce it later with a more complete explanation. Although the story is not told in true chronological order, the whole picture does come together eventually. Whether you agree or disagree with the author's findings, this book makes for a fascinating read.
Rating:
Summary: Fascinating!!!
Review: This book is absolutely fascinating, not just for PC's invetigation into Jack the Ripper, but for her absolutely spellbinding descriptions and explorations of Victorian Society. She writes about the period as if she experienced it herself, displaying a deep understanding of the time, and a great knowledge of the era shown in the many, many magical details she incorporates into the writing, which simply make the book come alive. She makes every aspect of the book so damn interesting, and so i did find it very hard to put down (even for non-fiction, which can rarely be termed "exciting")
Aside from her brilliance at describing Victorian life, she argues her case for Jack the Ripper's identity very well, inserting so many small pieces of evidence in with the more major ones that the reader will find it very hard to ignore the strong possibility that Walter Sickert was Jack the Ripper. After all, it is practically impossible that all the many, many pieces of circumstance and just coincidental. Even if a few are, many will still stand and implicate Sickert as the Ripper. I have to say, i am not convinced Sickert is the Ripper, though. (only about 85%) But then, i will NEVER be convinced of the true identity of the Ripper, because the crimes are now so old it is impossible that we will ever know for absolute certain, no matter how strong the cases for several of the suspects are. It is possibly, therefore, a little pretentious of the publishers to proclaim "Case Closed", but then, of course, if they weren't convinced themselves, or prepared to pretend they were convinced, then this book would carry very little credibility. I'm very impressed with the huge volumes of research Cornwell must have done. Ity really shows, not only in how much info she has amassed about Sickert's life, and trhe lives of those around him, but in the masses of period detail. It is incredibly unfair that people have criticised this book so much. It may not be conclusive, but no Jack the Ripper book ever will be. People immediately jump at her throat claiming there is proof that "Sickert was in France during the killings", but not once has anyone mentioned what this proof actually is, where it can be found, etc. And, honestly, does anyone think that this book would EVER have been published if it could be proved conclusively that Sickert was not even in the country at the time? Of course it wouldn't have been. And thus, it cannot be proved. This is a fascinating book, especially in her analysis of the Ripper letters as compared to Sickert's, and Sickert's artwork when compared to the crime scenes (which were seen by very very few people). the evidence of the guestbook is particularly interesting. Also compelling is the psychological portrait Cornwell paints of Sickert, from what she has learned about his actions and the events of his life. All in all, his personality just "clicks" when you think of how similar it is to those of killers already caught... Not necesarrily conclusive, but fascinatingly written, and Cornwell presents a good case.
Rating: 
Summary: Kind of boring
Review: I love Patricia Cornwell's books. This is my least favorite (I never read her Billy Graham Book). It has too much scientific babble going on I get what she is saying but it is boring. I also wish she said how she considered him a suspect to begin with. I have read many different stories of Jack the Ripper both Non-fiction and Fiction and I do not think we will ever really know. She does show how a lot of the crimes happened in a lot of detail but without any real physical evidence just a few journals and speculation. To me this is all kind a myth anyway we do not know if there were 2 people playing the part or one. I do not think that you can say the case is closed. These murders are too old and too many people have tried to figure them out and muddled everything. Too many therories and very little evidence. These murders were tampered with and I read one book that said eventually The Ripper would not have been able to live among society anymore and this guy lived too long. I think he most likely was him or wished he was the killer but she does not convince me enough. Yes her DNA testing does point to the man she says was The Ripper but I have a hard time with any of the theories. I do not think she should say case closed but was an interesting read but kind of boring for her. Otherwise I commend her effort and did enjoy some of the book. Warning some of it is very detailed and will make your stomach turn. Don't eat anything before you read this book.
Rating:
Summary: The Best of "True Crime"
Review: That this book is a success is demonstrated by the passionate love -hate reviews. A "good read"it is, and in the end, that is what we want from Patricia Cornwell. I got the impression that she would very much like to be what she writes, but I don't have that expectation. I thought this book was a good page turner and lovingly researched for a true crime production. Whether it was six million worth, I don't know, but it kept me entertained with all sorts of doubts about her theories and methods. And, what I loved was her very humanizing portraits of these victims. She gave us real human beings in this work. A part of me thinks this should have been worked into a novel, a delightful Cornwell novel. But I admired its passion and willingness to step into the abyss of this controversy and put it all out there. I saw an interview in which said she was "risking her professional reputation"in this book. Well, she really isn't. It is a bit overreaching for the excellent crime novelist to think that her reputation is as a crime investigator. She is very simply one of the very best at what she does best. She writes about bad guys, brings them to justice, keeps us awake at night turning the pages, and just a wee bit nervous about what is outside the window. This book has some of that and gives us a glimpse of her as the newspaper crime writer. It also tell the story of Jack the Ripper as well as it has ever been told. And really, readers isn't that enough? She got all of you ranting and raving, yes she did, all the way to the bank. Ripper industry? Maybe. But, if you can't enjoy this book, maybe it is you, not the author taking her/himself too seriously.
Rating:
Summary: a good read
Review: While I am not nearly as critical or disappointed as are many of the other reviewers posted here, I do find much weight and worth in what they have to say. There *are* some problems with Cornwell's examination of Sickert. She often "goes out on a limb" to use supposed and circumstantial evidence as a way to prove Sickert's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt; while she prefaces or qualifies these assumptions with the fact that she and the rest of the world will never know for sure, I became irritated after a while. The book could certainly be better organized. An actual clinical analysis of Sickert would have been more helpful and perhaps would've provided stronger assurance of Sickert's actions as Jack the Ripper. But, for someone who has not read any previous books or articles examining Jack the Ripper's murders or motives prior to this, I found Ms. Cornwell's book to be interesting, challenging, and strongly suggestive of Sickert's guilt in the Ripper murders. Ms. Cornwell has found new material and some evidence (fingerprints, similar but rare paper watermarks) that she uses to support her premise that Sicker is the Ripper, along with new views on some of the more disturbing paintings and doodles that were done by or are attributed to Sickert. As a social historian, I found her attempts to put the Ripper, the police, and Sickert into their proper context wonderful detail and history. Even if Sickert never murdered anyone, the reader must admit that, at the very least, Sickert was quite an eccentric, even weird, bird whose habits (doodles, compulsive letter writing, the possible defacing of the Lizard Point hotel's guest book, etc.) and artworks were certainly evidence of a dark, pained man. Perhaps now, the truer picture of Sickert-the man, the artist, and his legacy-can be written by his biographers as a result of Ms. Cornwell's book and newly found evidence.
Rating: 
Summary: Um. . .did she want her name on this?
Review: Ms. Cornwell should've put her money to good use and hired an editor to put together this incoherent, rambling mess of a book. Even if she had indisputable evidence as outlined by her audacious title, it still wouldn't save horrible writing and appalling pacing. Her evidence consists of some DNA evidence to prove that Sickert may have written some hoax letters and some in depth analysis of painting which as a trained artist I find laughable. Her painting analysis is outrageous, as any educated art historian knows Sickert painted from photographs almost exclusively. Violence towards women is not all that uncommon among artists by Cornwell's rationale Picasso, Cezanne, Dali, DeKooning, any painter of any version of the Rape of Sabine Women, and any 17 year-old "brooding" artist could paint a picture that would make Cornwell suspicious. As for Sickert the man, yeah he was a jerk prone to outrageous behavior. However, being a jerk is less than being a murderer. About terrible behavior read a biography of Picasso's wonderful attitude towards women or Freud with his attitude towards women and obsession with sex. The point is, while art, like any other profession has its share of disreputable people, Sickert would be by no means the first person to be accused of being a less than stellar person. However, it must be said that lots of less than stellar individuals go through life without killing someone. What about some of the other suspects? Few of them are mentioned in passing and summarily dismissed. Finally, there is resonable evidence that Sickert was in France during the Whitechapel murders. Hmmmm. . not being there does pose a problem. Cornwell also neglects to mention she bought several paintings of Sickerts work, looking for her conclusive DNA evidence to tie her suspect to letters that have been dismissed as mostly hoaxes. She is rumored to have completely destroyed one (inexcusable to those who love art) and I wonder if the others are going to increase in value once her book comes out. Hmmmm. . . . Cornwell, like many Ripper slueths before her, puts the cart before the horse and wants the facts to fit her suspect. I can fully understand the desire to prove beyond a doubt your solution to one of the greatest crime mysteries in the world, but to propose this circumstantial evidence as fact and pronounce case closed is dubious at best.
| 
