Rating: 
Summary: Fascinating
Review: Patricia Cornwell did such a first rate job at uncovering evidence and crime scene reports that were virtually lost and destroyed through the advent of two World Wars, and she even spent thousands of dollars out of her own pocket investigating this for us. It really miffs me when people degrade this novel, because she put so much into it. I believe she deserves credit, because she has delved deeper than anyone before her. And while I feel that we will never truly know the identity of Jack the Ripper beyond a shadow of a doubt, the theories posited by Patricia Cornwell are undoubtedly a cut above the rest.
Rating:
Summary: A turly good book
Review: I recomend this book for anyone intersted in the Ripper, though I recommend you try NOT to take it personaly as some readers have. Wether or not you argee with her theory and methods, the book is well thought out and a page turner.
Even if you are a fan of Sickert art, I recommed reading this so you at least have a informed opipion of the debate.
Rating: 
Summary: Trying to buy a reputation as a real detective
Review: Patricia Cornwell has a great need to try to prove to the world that she isn't just a fiction writer but someone who can actually catch criminals. Right now she's in the news for trying to solve the "mystery" of how Princess Diana died. Even her fans have got to start to realize that she's in over her head.Take this book. The main problem with it is that she picked the killer before she ever did any amount of research. She even admits it. Someone offhandedly mentions the name of a famous painter, Walter Sickert, that another poorly researched book (Stephen's Knight's thoroughly discredited Jack the Ripper: The Final Solution) claims was involved as someone suspicious. So then Cornwell spends a fortune trying to prove that Sickert did it, and the best she comes up with is that DNA she assumes is his can't be ruled out as being the same as DNA found on a letter claiming to be from the killer. And, while every other researcher thinks that most of the Ripper letters were hoaxes (including the one with the DNA Cornwell tested), she is of the opinion that they are all real. Has she never even talked to a police department about how many hoaxes they get when a serial killer is on the loose? It's also telling that the only people she allows to examine any evidence is the same group of people she has donated gobs of money to and who apparently are afraid to speak out in public to explain that the DNA evidence wouldn't even be enough to hold a suspect for questioning, let alone be useful in a court of law to try to prove anything. The rest of the book is innuendo and outrageous character assassination that would get her sued if Sickert were still alive. And, of course, she glosses over and tries to deny any inconvenient facts that might get in the way, like, say, that Sickert was in France at the time of the murders, obviously didn't have the sexual dysfunction she claims he did because he had several children from various partners, and so forth. She also refuses to attend conferences where reputable ripperology scholars can debate her on any of it and has withdrawn from radio interviews when she knew the host was going to ask questions prepared by an expert on the case. This awful book is what happens when ego and an expensive PR firm replaces legitimate research. If you want to see how real scholars approach the topic, check out the website at www.casebook.org or books by Evans or Sugden.
Rating:
Summary: Disjointed, disgusting, and disdainful.
Review: This dismal tome is the worst book I have ever had the displeasure of reading. So disenchanted have I become with Ms. Cornwell through reading her disputatious novel regarding the dismasting of some disordered artist that I will likely never again read her disposable crime fiction. Most reviewers have noted the disorganized and repetitive nature of the book as well as the arrogant voice of the author. But as difficult as these significant barriers to crafting a readable book may be, worse is her overuse of disturbing violent, sexual and medical imagery which Cornwell evidently thinks can substitute for a compelling argument. A discerning reader will pass on this disagreeable little work.
Rating:
Summary: Well I actually liked it......
Review: Living in Australia, we didn't get all the same hype Americans did when Patricia wrote this book. I vaguely knew she'd been buying paintings and spending millions and people were saying she was crazy....but I believe she became so deeply involved with this project because once she started digging she knew she was onto the truth. I have read every previous book about the Ripper, and I have studied Criminology for many years and in my opinion, she's right. I was convinced, and I went into reading it sceptical. My only criticism is that it ended rather abruptly, but I always think Scarpetta novels do also. I would have liked to have known about the last 20 years of his life, his third wife, the paper landfill in the studio, whether those who knew him at the end - some of whom could still possibly be alive if he died in 1942 - had accounts of his last days, what he spoke of, did he lose his mind? Because serial killers often eventually do go mad (if not executed etc when younger), like Ian Brady (Moors murderer).
I'd love to know what Patricia thinks Sickert would have made of her investigation? If alive today he would have read her books, certainly, and would probably have been rather secretly pleased that such a fine mind took on his psychopathic one.
I was perplexed at some of the criticism levelled at the book, such as not being able to offer 100% proof - did anyone honestly expect that?? How on EARTH could anyone provide that?! As Patricia said, if Sickert himself had confessed to being the Ripper no one would have believed him. Pages and pages of postmortem reports have not survived the years, so the criticisms against Patricia are largely unfounded and should instead be blamed on time, thieves, the wars, any number of things but she did brilliantly with the material she had to work with, and her painstaking DNA testing was admirable. Bravo to you Patricia, I believe you.
Rating: 
Summary: Innocent Until Proven Guilty....
Review: I love Patricia Cornwell's fiction books...and that's where I think her strength is...in fiction. Portrait of a Killer is an interesting account of her discoveries while investigating the 114 year old Jack the Ripper case. Cornwell asserts that the identity of Jack the Ripper is Walter Richard Sickert, case closed. I find this a bold pronouncement considering that Cornwell did not provide the reader with one definite shred of evidence that clearly and unequivocably pointed to Sickert as the Ripper. What she did do, was provide alot of circumstantial evidence that when put together does make an interesting but unproven case against Sickert. Cornwell boldly inserts her opinions as if they were facts when recreating the Victorian era and what might have happened on the streets. She makes conjectures about interactions between the victims and the Ripper, conjectures about what might have occured between Sickert and the people he interacted with and conjectures about what the police did and didn't do. The fact of the matter is, Cornwell has forgotton that a man is seldom convicted on circumstantial evidence and it is only conjecture and coincidence that Cornwell presents. Yes, Walter Sickert painted pictures of violence, yes he has stationary similiar to the one the Ripper notes were written on, yes he had operations in his childhood that may have rendered him impotent, and yes he was odd..but this all amounts to an educated guess. Is it fair to write a book based on an educated guess? In my opinion it's Jack the Ripper, case still unsolved.
Rating:
Summary: Fascinating
Review: I could not put this book down once I started it. My skin crawled when I stared into the eyes of Sickert in the photos and read the accounts of his childhood medical experiences. Whether or not you believe the theories, this book gives a disturbing and memorable account of life in London the late 1800s. Ms. Cornwell obviously did extensive research into the various 'Ripper' theories and compiled a thrilling book which keeps the reader turning the pages and jumping at every noise. I read a library edition of this text and was so enthralled that I purchased a copy for my personal library.
Rating:
Summary: Great topic - bad science
Review: As a Molecular Geneticist myself, I was very interested in reading this book when I heard about the DNA evidence that was included. What an incredible disappointment! I have never seen such an example of science done badly. What little evidence that is presented (very disjointedly I might add) is drowned by the plethora of assumption and stretching of the data. There were many times I wanted to bring out my red pen to correct the atrocities in this book. I honestly do not know Patricia Cornwall's credentials beyond that she worked for a coroner (but in what capacity? It seems she must done secretarial or janitorial work to have this little knowledge of the topic). Her reasoning is extremely hard to follow, maybe because she is holding it together with such tenuous threads. I guess I would sum up this book in one word -- "aggravating." Please don't present yourself and your work as "Case Closed" when your case is not based enough on true scientific evidence and method to even bring the case to court.
Rating:
Summary: Jack the Ripper - ONE woman's theories
Review: This book was suggested to me by a friend who is a fan of Patricia Cornwell. Realizing that I am a fan of true crime, she thought I would enjoy this book. While I finish every book I read, I could not bring myself to finish this book. I thought it was terrible. First off, Cornwell uses the word maybe so liberally that its usage in itself challenges her credibilty. At times, she seems to be throwing theories around as if she is throwing spaghetti against the wall to see if it will stick. Cornwell spends nearly 15 pages describing the potential abnormailities of her suspect's penis. She spends pages throwing around these possibilties. This is not the type of reading I want to unwind to in the evening. All of her theories are based on circumstancial evidence. Realistically, a mildly compelling case can be made for almost anybody living in London during this time. The identity of Jack the Ripper will probably never be known. In this book, Patricia Cornwell has written some amateur caliber fiction, but she certainly has not brought us any closer to knowing Jack the Ripper's identity.
Rating:
Summary: Slow read
Review: I found this to be a hard read. The author jumped all over the place and made it hard to follow. I don't think she made a good case against the "Ripper" no matter how hard she tried to tie unrelated facts together. Most of it was speculative at best with little or no hard evidence.
|
