Rating: 
Summary: Same old guesses, signed by yet another author...
Review: It's amusing to see Ms. Cornwell present her case with the audacious words Case Closed right in the title. Er, psst, it's called research - might want to look into doing more of it next time out. She used to claim to do it for her other books, but now she's seemingly taken a page out of Ambrose's style book, or whomever she actually got her plagarism ideas from, or he his for that matter. Much of this material that is presented in this book as *groundbreaking* and *brand. spanking. new.* has actually been covered many times, in books, magazines, and of course ad naseum on the WWW. Most notably, the core theme here, accusations that Mr. Sickert is JtR, or at least an accomplaice, or one of several real killers (OJ anyone?) has been presented again and again. Most notably, if only for it's controversy at the time, was 1978's "Jack The Ripper: The Final Solution" by Stephen Knight. Mr. Knight's tale dared to develop from hint to whisper to shout, that the highest levels of British government and, eek! not unlike this very week!, even the Crown may have been involved in convoluted coverups. Those weren't new ideas in 1978, much less now a generation on. Well, at least Ms. Cornwell seems as sure of herself as Mr. Knight was of himself during his fifteen minutes. Two stars for balls, or should I say guts? None for originality. If you're a RipperPhile or live under a rock, by all means buy it. If not - Next!
Rating: 
Summary: Case NOT solved; Spoiler Alert (well, not really... )
Review: Patricia Cornwell claims to have spent [money]of her own fortune researching this book. In the end, one wonders if it were worth it. Ms. Cornwell provides a tenuous link between Walter Sickert and one or two "Ripper letters" in the guise of a matching mtDNA sequence, but all that tells us is that Sickert can not be eliminated from the percentage of the population (ranging from 1% ro 10%) that could have written those letters. Considering the fact that the letters that provided mtDNA matches are all considered to be definite hoaxes, Cornwell's theory falls apart like a house of cards. Cornwell should certainly be praised for taking the initiative to fund modern forensic research on the few remaining scraps of Ripperana, but in the end, the results should have been more critically examined. Instead, it appears as though Cornwell decided who the Ripper was first, and then scrambled to find evidence to support it. When DNA matching fell short, she relied on watermark and handwriting analysis, as well as comparisons between drawings on the letters and those in Sickert's sketchbooks. All of this is meaningless, of course, as the Ripper letters she uses are all considered hoaxes. She also fails to discuss the possibility that Sickert was in France at the time of most, if not all of the murders. There is ample evidence that suggests this.
Rating:
Summary: choice of suspect is suspect
Review: I was really curious about this book. I have had a moderate interest in the Ripper case for a long time. I have to be honest, I was disappointed with this book. It feels to me like her choice for the killer was predisposed, and she tilted the evidence to support this. I also think that if you are going to take the time to research a subject and write a book of this size, it would be better to site the sources as you show the evidence, not just list sources at the end. I think Ms Cornwell should stick to fiction, which is what this feels like to me. If you want a better book on the subject, read From Hell. At least the authors of that don't make the claim to have the only answer, and they wrote something entertaining, not dry and boring.
Rating:
Summary: Patricia Cornwell's six million dollar man...
Review: Ms. Cornwell spent six million dollars of her own money researching Jack the Ripper, and the result is this book. Did she really close the case? Unfortunately, no. Walter Sickert was in France while at least four of the five canonical murders took place. There are nearly a half-dozen independent sources, that we know of, that attest to this fact. Only one of those sources, a letter, is mentioned by Cornwell, and then summarily dismissed because there was no post-mark to prove when it was sent. Ms. Cornwell claims to have found a match between Sickert's DNA and the Ripper. This is not true. She found a sequence of mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) on both letters signed "Jack the Ripper" and letters written by Walter Sickert. This is an important distinction. mtDNA, unlike nuclear DNA (which was not found on any of the correspondence), is not unique. A particular mtDNA sequence can be shared by anywhere between 1% and 10% of the population. Ignore the countless problems of DNA contamination and provenance that comes with examining documents over a century old, and you still have the problem that these "Ripper letters" are known to be hoaxes (nearly 600 of them were sent to the press and police from all corners of the globe in 1888 and beyond). On top of that, Sickert's DNA no longer exists - he was cremated after his death. There is no way to tell whether the mtDNA found on Sickert's letters was his, his wife's, a friend's, or that of any of a thousand researchers and students who have handled them in the past sixty years. Although Patricia claims that the evidence she has amassed would be enough for a jury in 1888 to say "Hang him!", I have to disagree. At best, she has found partial evidence to suggest that perhaps Walter Sickert hoaxed one or more Ripper letters. But even if that were proven beyond the shadow of a doubt, there is nothing to suggest that these "Ripper letters" were actually from the murderer. Most students of the case believe them all, with the possible exception of the "From Hell" letter, to be hoaxes. I would suggest that readers interested in the case pick up Phil Sugden's "Complete History of Jack the Ripper", which was just recently reprinted in paperback. Alternatively, you can check out the web site "Casebook: Jack the Ripper," which contains a great deal of information on Cornwell's book, Walter Sickert, and all manner of Ripper-related topics.
Rating: 
Summary: Then end of the great puzzle ? (Not really)
Review: Not for the first time in a century and a quarter the case of Jack the Ripper has finally been solved. Sadly, for Patricia Cornwell, this won't be the last time is if finally solved either. Famous for her "Kay Scarpetta" mysteries author Cornwall throws in lot of money and adds her gripping narrative talent towards proving that the ripper is an artist and dilettante. Her main proof is that he might have written some letters to newspapers claiming to be the infamous Jack. Truth may be stranger than fiction but the annoying part is that it also has to be true. The definitive evidence Cornwell and her crack team find when they examine 100 year old evidence is far from conclusive in most people's opinions. However, most people do not have the kind of money invested in the case that she has, so her bias might be a little strong towards belief
than doubt. Cornwell writes a good story and sets the stage well for London during those horrific months of terror and years of wondering, but her insistence on solving the case definitively takes away a lot of the fun that might otherwise be had. High Marks for enthusiasim. Low for definativness.
Rating:
Summary: More bodies on the pyre
Review: If anything, this book is perhaps proof that the Jack the Ripper obsession will never die, if only because it's unlikely it will ever be solved, at least 'conclusively'. The book is arrogantly sub-titled 'Case Closed', and of course, it's anything but a closed case that Walter Sickert was Jack the Ripper, or that James Maybrick was the Ripper, or Lewis Carroll was the Ripper, or the royals were involved, etc. I'm not sure what to make of the whole business anymore. There are now close to 20 suspects in the Ripper case, and indeed in the 1990s alone quite a few new suspects appeared on the scene thanks to research and fanaticism on the part of various writers. Now Cornwall has thrown herself into it, and it's somewhat troubling. Of course, at the end of the day, there's no smoking gun. There hasn't been a smoking gun, and given that the murders took place in 1888, and evidence and various records are long gone, it's highly unlikely there will be a smoking gun. The whole business already inspired someone to forge a 'Ripper' diary and try to pass it off. This has since been debunked numerous times, with the author himself swearing that it's a forgery, yet people still believe it. Every year someone discovers someone who was in London in 1888, hated women, etc, etc. Folks who are interested in the Ripper may peruse this book, but it's clear from the 'evidence' and the layout that this is anything but 'Case Closed', if anything, it says something about Cornwall, who writes about her own doubt to this theory. And admittedly, while there are some nice coincidences, and Sickert indeed may have been a bit off his rocker, and indeed may have penned Ripper letters (of which there were many fakes), it's no more convincing than several other theories of the past ten years. Notice the '71% off' price tag of this book, which shows you something in comparison to other books on the subject. There are much better books about the whole case, and you'll likely learn more from those if you care. It would be nice to put the whole Ripper case to rest, finally. The energy and resources some folks have put into 'solving' this business is becoming more alarming. Recommended if you must, but it's hardly a 'final chapter'.
Rating:
Summary: Absolute tosh: says more about Cornwell than Sickert
Review: I can't think of another character assassination that is as unfounded as this, based as it is on pure conjecture and highly selective and inconclusive 'evidence'.
And just think of the irony of a writer who has based her entire written output on lingering over the sordid details of murder and mutilation claiming that Sickert was a violent psychopath because of the subject-matter of his paintings. Talk about the pot calling the kettle black! This book reveals more about the neuroses and obsessions of Cornwell's own sick mind than it does about Sickert. Rather than 'case closed' on Sickert, it is 'case closed' on Cornwell. Cornwell's reputation as a writer of FICTION remains intact.
Rating:
Summary: Very Interesting Book, Too Much Detail
Review: If you want to know absolutely everything about this killer, this is the book. Sometimes the details are too gory, but that's not Ms. Cornwell's fault. She has done an extremely thorough job and her case is quite convincing. For me, there is too much detail, too much history, too much about the man she preports to be Jack the Ripper. But, thats only me. For others the detail would be just right. It is a fascinating book and she has done a supurb job. A nice change from the Kay Scarpetta books, which I really like.
Rating: 
Summary: Patricia has solved the case in a very convincing way!
Review: Using her multi-talented background as a forensic expert and considerable amount of her own money, Patricia has compiled such a massive amount of circumstantial evidence against one suspect that is would be impossible to suppose that anyone else could be the "Ripper." Unfortunately, far too many people want this cold case to remain open to continue their own 'cottage industry' of speculation, articles, etc., but anyone willing to consider the case she has built, the logic of her arguments, and the overwhelming circumstantial evidence to support her conclusion will agree with her conclusions.
Rating:
Summary: Still not sure...
Review: Hmmmm. I doubt that the world will ever really know the truth about the Jack the Ripper case, especially since in the Green River Killer case, some experts such as former PI Joyce Spizer believe that the killings were the work of more than one murderer. Spizer specifically names Glen Rogers, "The Cross-Country Killer," as a Green River suspect, and also, interestingly, the murderer of Nicole Brown Simpson and Ron Goldman, a hypothesis supported by Donald Freed's book on the OJ case. Spizer's assertion is bound to spark as much controversy as Cornwell's, although both experts' opinions should be given more weight because of their experience, Spizer as a PI and Cornwell as a forensic pathologist.
Leaving aside the question of whether Cornwell is correct in fingering Walter Sickert as the 19th-century killer, I found her thought processes, her CSI-type investigation (and very human Sherlockian analyses) and her portrait of 19th-century London engrossing. There is a good deal of poetry in the treatment of a gruesome subject. Most affecting is the way that the poverty in London emerges as an even greater crime than the Ripper's butchery of women. Most serial killers follow a profile, with the exception of course of the DC snipers and Aillen Wuornos in which a prostitute, far from being a killer's victim, herself became the attacker. Serial killers like Glen Rogers do target "throwaway women," who sadly still exist today, as alive and well in modern America as in 19th-century London.
Cornwell's writing style is sensitive and masterly. I love the way that she takes an image from a chapter, for example, a dark lantern or three keys, and uses that as the chapter title. Her writing style is certainly vivid and evocative.
Although I couldn't make up my mind whether Cornwell proved Sickert as the Jack the Ripper suspect, for me that wasn't the point. I enjoyed the book.
|
