Rating: 
Summary: Interesting read for Ripper fans, but no hard facts.
Review: If someone were to ask me what this book was about I'd say it was about Jack the Ripper, his victims and how he did his dirty & evil deeds. It is an intriguing book that takes you through foggy streets of the infamous Whitechapel district. It paints a sinister portrait of Jack the Ripper by including letters & excerpts from the time of the murders. A Ripper fan will very much appreciate the ambiance of the book & all the facts that accompany the actual murders. As for the fact that Walter Sickert is indeed Jack the Ripper, this is most definately the author's opinion. Could Sickert be Jack the Ripper? Yes, he could. But anyone else could have been him too. Just because a man is a bit strange, dark & bizarre & happens to live in London during the times of the Ripper murdersdoes not make him the Ripper. Yes, I agree some things do match up and he would give some people reasons to beleive so, but there is still the lack of any real evidence besides the author's opinion that she knows who the Ripper was. Unfortunately, the author's deductions were made without any DNA or any scientific proof which should shelve this book in fiction not true crime. Yes, the occurances were true crime but her opinion is solely her own.
Rating: 
Summary: The Proof Is In the Handwriting
Review: I had high hopes for this book. I saw the title "Case Closed," and thought that no one in their right mind, especially someone with a reputation such as Patricia Cornwell's, would make such a claim unless they had the goods. Wrong! As I read, I kept waiting for something, *anything,* in the way of good evidence, to show up in those pages. Even though nothing ever did, I kept pushing through, since I had spent good money and didn't want to think I'd been snookered. The denoument for me came when I got to the handwriting samples. Having read a little on handwriting analysis, I had a good time comparing the writing of Sickert with the other alleged "Ripper" letters. The little details you look for in handwriting - letter endings, "i" dotting, "t" crossing, fullness/height/shape of letters - were so different as to be startling obvious. I'd been taken! I immediately came to Amazon to check out the reviews (I'm assuming there were none when I bought the book, as I would have avoided it like the plague if I had read reviews such as these), and was both sickened and satisfied to see that I had been right all along about how nonexistent a case Ms. Cornwell had against Mr. Sickert. Thank goodness for the wonderful people at Amazon, and their generous return policy! I wrapped that book up quicker than you could spit, and sent it back (in pristine condition, I might add :-), and will get a much *better* book the next time around (I'm thinking of "The Complete Idiot's Guide to Handwriting Analysis :-J).
Rating: 
Summary: A NOVEL IDEA
Review: Every few years, theories pop up that are supposed to explain the identity of Jack The Ripper. I have little doubt that with modern criminal investigation methods, the identity could be discovered if the crimes were committed today. However, it seems Patricia Cornwell has molded the evidence to fit her suspect rather than letting the evidence lead to the suspect. Let's not be fooled by reviews, no DNA is available for comparisons since her primary suspect was cremated. The glue that holds the theory together seems to be, that if we believe that Jack the Ripper was a psychopath and we think Walter Sickert is Jack the Ripper THEN Walter Sickert must be a psychopath and capable of committing the atrocities and all behaviour that led to the acts. (Some of his) IMPRESSIONIST art portrays peripheral violence and suspicious characters in dark, dismal surroundings(Hmmm, I wonder what diabolical deeds Charles Addams can be accused of). Being constantly reminded that the suspect's whereabouts cannot be determined at many key periods; just leaves me to either accept the author's interpretation, or to scoff. I'm sorry to say that I scoff. BUT, what do I really know anyway. I guess it's possible that her theory could be DEAD ON TARGET (pardon the pun). The two stars that I give are for her vivid descriptions of not-so merry ol' England's dark underside and her numerous factual observations not her conclusions.
Rating: 
Summary: Incredibly Intense
Review: For years I have been fascinated by the story of the "Ripper" but wondered why no one was attempting to use modern forensic methods to solve the case. Finally Paricia Cornwell has done it! This work is brilliant and intense. Her descriptions are traditional Cornwell, graphic, detailed, and descriptive.She not only details the murder scenes, she also gives a history lesson on policing in the late 19th century and explains how DNA works in the crime laboratory of today. Her horror at what she has discovered and her revulsion at the conclusion is evident. I couldn't put it down and have recommended it to many of my friends and patrons at my library. If she hasn't solved this "unsolvable" crime then no one can. I believe she has.
Rating:
Summary: Not Worth a Flip
Review: ...at least two stars for effort and being so damn silly! i'm not one to be a party of a pooper, but this book sucks the big green weenie. good photos tho... .
Rating:
Summary: Truly appaling
Review: I have always been interested in forensics and behavioral psychology, so when I saw this book on the shelves I bought it immediately. I have never been so disgusted with a book in my life. Both Cornwell's writing and her "evidence" are just embarrassing. All this book proves is that her ego has far surpassed her talent. The majority of her "evidence" consists of: "There's no reason to suspect he wasn't in London that night," or "he might possibly have walked home this way." Her so-called forensic evidence (DNA and handwriting) are inconclusive and less than convincing. The entire book is nothing more than any of her other books: fiction. I'm embarrassed to even own it. Try John Douglas's nonfiction instead if you want real criminal science.
Rating: 
Summary: Intriguing, But Not For the Faint of Heart
Review: This is the first Patricia Cornwell book I have read, but I enjoy reading true crime novels as well as historical fiction. I have been fascinated by the Jack the Ripper murders for quite a long time, because the perpetrator was never brought to justice. I have not read any other "Jack the Ripper" books, because none appeared to be more than intellectual rhetoric and conjecture. Through the frenzied prose, one can tell that Cornwell not only studied the Ripper, but has truly vested herself in finding the truth. She has brought together a collection of research never studied by one person, and added scientific testing (including DNA) to further her cause. The only warning I have is that the subject matter is dark. You may have read true crime before, watched the Sopranos, and seen shows about the Ripper on the History Channel, as I have. The depths of depravity that Cornwell's suspect is purported to have sunk will still amaze and horrify you. There were evenings where I could not sleep because my heart was racing and my stomach was churning from disgust over the atrocities that were committed not only in the Ripper murders, but several other murders that Cornwell alludes may have been caused by her suspect. Despite the gore, I couldn't put it down. An excellent read.
Rating:
Summary: Dull and a Boring
Review: I can only get through 3-5 pages before my eyelids get heavy. This book lacks organization. Each chapter jumps from one topic to one another. If Cornwell is trying to confirm Jack the Ripper's true identity, the organization of her case is haphazardedly done. I think I will use the pages to start fires in my fireplace.
Rating:
Summary: The case is certainly not closed
Review: If this book reveals anything it is the grotesque hubris of Patricia Cornwell herself in giving her book such a ludicrous title. She had added nothing to the debate as to the identity of Jack the Ripper and has instead pushed her theory about Sickert, irrespective of the lack of real evidence. The author truly seems to believe that if she could prove that Sickert wrote the ripper letters, which she can not, then it would prove beyond a shadow of a doubt he actually committed the murders. The fact it has subsequently emerged that Sickert was almost certainly in France with his family the night of the double murder also makes her conclusion dubious in the extreme. I have never read any of Cornwell's fiction but I assume it must be somewhat more worthy than this drivel. A feeble effort and a waste of money.
Rating:
Summary: Why Sickert? Because I say so, that's why
Review: As an historian, art historian and scientist, Ms Cornwell makes a great crime novelist. Poorly constructed and edited, I had the distinct impression this book was written in a hurray for publication. Whole passages could have been cut, such as the potted history of police and coroners, and the hypothetical description of how the murders would have been investigated in the modern day US. Ms Cornwell comes across as an outsider, and dare I say it, an American outsider, who is suspicious and critical of UK authorities and commentators. I can't help thinking the lucrative Jack the Ripper industry must have been very attractive to this popular crime writer. The only authority behind her assertion that the case is solved is Her Considerable Presence - 'I say so. Do you know who I AM?' I am really pleased that she was in Aspen when the penny dropped at various points but was it really necessary to tell us? If you think the reading public is stupid, think again! One of the most telling moments of her art criticism is when she innocently informs us that close forensic examination of paintings reveals brushstrokes. I would seriously be interested in an art historian's critique of her methods, because even an unqualified reader such as myself can see that it is flawed.
|
