Rating: 
Summary: Not very good
Review: Ms Cornwell's novels are interesting if you have an interest in forensic science and detective novels. They appear to be well researched and flow smoothly which brings about a pleasent read. After reading Portrait of a Killer though, it is my conclusion that Ms Cornwell should stick to fiction. I have no doubt that she investigated the case thuroughly, but her narrative is confusing and unorganized; I can't believe an editor let this fly. I think that a plausable case against Mr Sickert could be made with the "evedence" that Ms Cornwell presents but it is doubtful that she would be able to convince a jury simply because everything seems to be out of order.
Ripper buffs may get a kick out of her take on the facts.
Rating:
Summary: Entertaining Crime Fiction
Review: Walter Sickert is Jack the Ripper because of the horrific experience of having his penis amputated by sadistic British nurses in a dirty London hospital. Here is a stunningly terrifying description of what he went through and how it rendered him impotent and with a lifelong need to murder women. By the way there is no actual proof for anything described (though none of his wives or mistresses specifically denied it). Now that we have these facts let us draw some further conclusions to prove his guilt....For example, Jack the Ripper was in a certain borough on a given date and although correspondence indicates that Sickert was out of the country who's to say he wasn't lying? Are you convinced by these arguments? Good. Neither was I. The case is most definitely not closed. Having said that I enjoy Patricia Cornwell's fiction including this book.
Rating: 
Summary: EXCELLENT AND ENTERTAINING
Review: I do not agree with Ms. Cornwell's critics that her style is choppy and disorganized in presenting her case. Because she was once a journalist, she explores this very complex subject the way a good journalist would. I am a journalist, so I can perfectly understand the logic of her structure. I found the book enormously entertaining and revealing. One is not obsessed with what one is not disturbed by. Mr. Sickert's fascination with the Ripper murders transcends mere interest. And yes, I do agree that an artist reveals the innermost recesses of his/her soul through his/her creations. That the "case is closed?" Probably not. That Ms. Cornwell's evidence is conclusive. Doubtful. Nevertheless, despite the sensationalism of the book's title, which belittles it, this is an impassioned chronicle of a fascinating subject. My only criticism is the passing of judgment on a man who is dead and cannot defend himself. That's probably the main aspect of the book that makes me uncomfortable. However, Ms. Cornwell's conviction is enthralling. I only wish she would have written it as a novel. It would have lost none of its power as a work of fiction.
Rating:
Summary: Portrait of a Killer: Jack the Ripper --case not closed
Review: As a long time fan of Patricia Cornwell's books, this was my first major disappointment with her work. Based on her presentation, the case is not closed! She offers many circumstantial bits and pieces, but is far from proving her case. I am surprised that she would weaken her reputation for careful work by releasing this volume and even more surprised that a publisher would print it. While offering some interesting insights into police work and crime during the era of Jack the Ripper, and while possibly eliminating one or two of the traditional suspects, this work fails to convince and had her "evidence" been presented at trial, I suspect he would have gone free. Patricia, return to writing what you do best and apologize to your fans for this mediocre work. It is not worthy of you.
Rating:
Summary: Portrait of a crank...
Review: I've never read Patricia Cornwell's fiction, so I can't comment on her usual writing style. I can, however, tell you that "Portrait of a Killer" is a disorganised mess that is a primer in how NOT to write non-fiction. Although I wouldn't say I'm a "Ripperologist", I've read a few other books on the subject; the main reason for writing a book of this sort is to convince the reader of the writer's point of view. Patricia Cornwell fails miserably in that aim. She doesn't fail due to lack of compelling evidence: what I was able to sift out of the miasma was as good as the evidence other writers have presented for their personal candidates. Where Cornwell loses the reader is her presentation. From page 1, she is stridently accusing Walter Sickert of being the Ripper. She assumes the reader is as familiar with who Walter Strickert was as she is, so she fails right from the beginning to give the reader a basic biography for her subject. Then, she fails to go over the history of the Ripper cases and the historical figures involved. Because Cornwell assumes the reader has a fairly extensive background on the subject, she jumps around in time, mentions people with no introduction or explanation of their role in the history, and fails to give basic references or citations for facts and opinions she relies upon. A good example of this is Sickert's first wife, Ellen. Approximately 100 pg into "Portrait of a Killer", the only coherent biography we have been given on Walter Sickert is that of his childhood. While discussing the 2nd murder attributed to the Ripper, Cornwell suddenly mentions Ellen in the context of people she introduced Sickert to. The reader has NO IDEA when Sickert met Ellen, how they married, how long they'd been married at the time of the murders; as a matter of fact, this reader would have had no way of knowing who "Ellen" was except that she is mentioned in the caption of one of the pictures included! Cornwell uses Sickert's acting career as a constant basis for assumption that he was able to effectively disguise himself and thus escape detection whilst committing the murders. Yet she never gives the reader any coherent idea of what that acting career consisted of. What training did Sickert have? When did he join Henry Irving's prestigious company? What did he do prior to that plum assignment? etc etc.These omissions make it difficult for the reader to be able to fully follow Cornwell's reasoning. Thruout this book, chapters have no coherent center, jumping about in both era and subject. Cornwell's tone is consistently that of a stridently hysterical believer who seems to think the louder she yells the more persuasive she will be. Her descriptions of life in late-Victorian London, while interesting, tend towards the sensationalistic; at times Cornwell treads dangerously close to "purple" prose. Personally, I recommend "Diary of Jack the Ripper" for readers getting their feet wet on the subject. Whether you believe the Diary is authentic or not, the author of that book at least presents information coherently and informatively. Patricia Cornwell fails on every count.
Rating:
Summary: Open your eyes people
Review: I don't know how anyone could read this book and not be convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that Walter Sickert is Jack the Ripper. Yes, there is a lot of circumstantial evidence, but people are convicted on strong circumstantial evidence every day. Why? Because if the evidence is strong enough, even though circumstantial, it can leave no 'reasonable' doubt. Yes, anyone can say they're not convinced beyond a 'shadow' of a doubt, but 'reasonable' doubt is all that is required. And how often can a person be convinced about anything beyond a shadow of a doubt anyway? Rarely or never. Shoot, I heard enough evidence to indict him on Primetime! Anyone who reads the evidence about the 'Gurney Ivory Laid' paper...knows that Sickert, without a doubt, wrote some of the Ripper letters. That, coupled with the fact that some of his paintings resemble Ripper crime scenes that he couldn't have been familiar with unless he was there, would be enough for a prosecutor to take to a grand jury. Jack the Ripper:Case Closed? ABSOLUTELY!
Rating: 
Summary: A painful, arduous read.
Review: I couldn't wait to finish this book, not because it was so engrossing, but because it was a chore to read through her maze of "evidence" and her scattered, back-and-forth time frame jumping. I won't rehash other problems with the book, since other reviewers here have done such a wonderful job of poking holes in the author's theory and critiqued her writing style. I would merely like to add that it is telling that on the cover of the book the author's name is significantly larger than the title.
Interpret that as you may.
Rating:
Summary: Disappointing
Review: I cannot believe I wasted time reading this book. I usually enjoy Patricia Cornwell's novels, but this one turned out to be a huge disappointment. I agree with the previous reviewer, in that it should have been titled "Walter Sickerst's Biography". I found myself extremely bored with the book and would skip ahead to see if it got any more interesting. The writing is chopping and does not flow. And as far as convincing me that Walter Sickert is the Ripper, Cornwell has a lot more work to do. Don't waste your time or money on this. You'll definately be disappointed.
Rating: 
Summary: Jack the Ripper: Case Confuddled
Review: I love Patricia Cornwell's style of writing for her novels. However, it is not particularly suited to a scholarly research work, especially not one that purports to "close the case" in regards to one Jack the Ripper. The tome could have very well been half its size, were it not for her suppositions and verbal meanderings. Some of the verbiage contains obvious question-begging, such as the subsequent murders (1889) that were unsolved. Cornwell draws no conclusion to the fact that the cases were unsolved, and just leaves to information to hang in the reader's mind. The ending was decidely downletting: there was only a dramatic portrait painted of Sickert, who Cornwell asserts was the Ripper, throwing his late wife's ashes into the wind at his friends. What are we to conclude from that? Cornwell's book may very well have been a more conclusive work IF she had left the drama to be drawn simply from the facts of the case and not her own part in the research or her verbal prowess at argumentum ad hominem. Leave that to your fiction works, Ms. Cornwell, and please us with a new version of "Jack the Ripper" that doesn't insult our intelligence. Readers, I suggest checking out this book from the library, as I did; it will save you money.
Rating: 
Summary: Portrait of a Killer:Case Closed
Review: This book was well written. I could visualize being in the Whitechapel area of London back in the late 1800s. I knew very little about Jack The Ripper, no more. She did a excellent job of proving her case. Wonderful book.
| 
