5 comments about Castle Rouge: A Novel of Suspense featuring Sherlock Holmes, Irene Adler, and Jack the Ripper.

1. I picked this book up at the library one day while I was passing time waiting on my children. The word Castle caught my eye, and the Jack the Ripper plot idea intrigued me. Always searching for(and all too rarely finding) a good writer, I was immediately delighted with the quality of Ms. Douglas' writing. In classic Dickensian style she weilds words in unexpected ways as to be sometimes powerful, sometimes subtle, sometimes shocking, but never ordinary.
   
   The story and characters are in themselves intriguing. By assembling in one story Jack the Ripper, Bram Stoker (author of Dracula) Sherlock Holmes, Nelly Bly, the Prince of Wales, Baron de Rothschild along with other sordid characters, both fictional and non, you have the soup into which Ms. Douglas tosses the reader to stew. We watch as Irene Adler solves both the Jack the Ripper case once and for all, and reveals the source of Bram Stroker's inspiration. Along the way we get to explore the seedy underbelly of late 19th century London, Paris, Prague and Transalvania. It's a scandolusly delicious romp!
   
   If you like historical fiction or mystery, and value skillful writing, I commend you to Ms. Douglas.



2. This heartstopping end to the two book story about Jack the Ripper written by Ms. Douglas has heart-stopping action from the beginning to the end. The book continues the story of Irene Adler's search for her missing husband and her missing companion. The book flips back and forth from Irene and her group and to Nell and Godfrey who are being held captive in a decaying castle in Transylvania. This is a much darker story than Chapel Noir, but the plot is gripping, and as always, Ms. Douglas' period detail is wonderful. I know that I couldn't put the book down. There's not much mystery in this one though, but the theories that are put forth as to the identity of Jack the Ripper are intriguing. This is a wonderful series and Irene Adler is a great character.



3. "Castle Rouge" is the second half of a very, very long novel that begins in "Chapel Noir." You can't read these separately. Just the same, if you're an Irene Adler fan, or are interested in who might really be Jack the Ripper, this two-book novel is one you don't want to miss. See review of "Chapel Noir."



4. This is the second half of the story begun in Chapel Noir, and I liked it both more and less than part one.
   
   Of necessity, this contains some details that are mild spoilers for Chapel Noir, so if you're a spoiler-purist, read no further. And while you're at it, read about Chapel Noir so I don't have to repeat the series background.
   
   
   Castle Rouge begins with both Nell and Godfrey both missing, and Irene joining forces with a reluctant Pink to find them and capture Jack the Ripper, who's apparently resurfaced in Paris. Reports of the renewed appearance of the Golem (from Another Scandal in Bohemia) in Prague, where Godfrey was last seen, make them think he's been there as well.
   
   By this second volume, I was used to, and even enjoyed, the chapters from Pink's POV. She's just as unreliable a narrator as Nell, but her biases are different, and her voice is hers alone. This book also has a fourth first-person narrator in Dr. Watson, who's back in London with Sherlock Holmes, investigating Jack the Ripper from that direction. I'm still not convinced, however, that the chapters from the Yellow Journal POV were necessary. Even though I was more used to the POV switches and the different voices in this second book, there were just too many of them. And I rarely like getting an anonymous villain's POV. I'm not sure why. I'll have to think about that.
   
   Much time was spent on the patterns the attacks made on the maps of London, Paris, and Prague--so much so that I got bored with it. Although I enjoy the mental puzzle aspect of a physical pattern to the killings, it didn't make sense. It's explained later, but the explanation raised other slight objections, and I had trouble buying the ultimate villain's motive.
   
   However, the characters were, as always, stellar, the atmosphere intense, and the suspense dramatic. I won't be forgetting about this series again.



5. one of the most boring books ever. she needs to take some lessons from laurie r king on how to write sherlock holmes

2 comments about Jack the Ripper: The Casebook.

1. this is shawn bravard as an avid jack the ripper student i would like to say thank you to the author for this book.not only is this a good book you get the actual copies of the police files and a couple of jack the ripper letters that you as the reader can make your own judgement of who you think jack was i highly recommend this book and i read this several times beautifully packeged and presented great great awesome



2. The book gets two different ratings from me. First, the information - it's straight forward if not brief but covers more-or-less the basics of events and suspects - three stars. Second, the presentation - great pictures, great cover which actually closes shut with a magnetic overlay flap to hold it shut, and of course the gimmick itself, actually 'pullout' fantastic fascimiles of police reports and a number of the infamous Ripper letters - strong five stars. The presentation and appearances are really that good and a briliant marketing ploy. The writing is strong enough but the information is minimal, no topic gets more than two pages and the coffee-table-sized book is only 64 pages long. The author's refuting of the suspects was lacking and almost whimsical to me.
   
   Overall - is it worth adding to your collection, oh absolutely just for the fascimiles. Is the $24 price worth it - that's up for debate. Basic information for beginners, great gimmick for arm-chair researchers.

No comments about JACK THE RIPPER: QUEST FOR A KILLER.

5 comments about The Mammoth Book of Jack the Ripper.

1. Because the perpetrator of the 1888 London slayings known as the Whitechapel Murders was never convicted as such the case has become the most popular whodunit in history. Every armchair detective in the world has his pet theory as to who the killer was and why he was compelled to slash to death women in the dead of night. Fortunately "The Mammoth Book of Jack the Ripper", published in 1999, is both informative and fun to read. I say fortunately, because it presents a kaleidoscope of conjectures and contradictions from Ripperologists who here present the theories they have published in different books. (Colin Wilson, whose own essay is the last of 16, takes credit for the term "Ripperologist".) This brotherhood is evidently a very chancy clique, characterized by tense camaraderie and frequent animosity. Shirley Harrison, in discussing an alleged Ripper diary (she's supported by Colin Wilson), says an informed debate sank to "a low level of vitriolic abuse". No wonder, with all these different ideas: Paul Harrison and Bruce Paley agree on their working-class suspect, while Martin Fido concentrates on the Jewish aspect, and Sue and Andy Parlour favor the Freemason angle. (Philip Sugden was either not invited to this party or declined the invitation.) M.J.Trow plays a little prank on the reader to indicate how easy it is to categorize anyone -- you, me, Lewis Carroll -- as a serial killer. Then there is the legend of the Duke of Clarence, who married a "model" of the Catholic faith, siring her child. The potential scandal so spooked the Court it sanctioned a series of homicides. All this has been fodder for some extravagant fiction, but as Simon Whitechapel observes: "If the murders were carried out to silence blackmailers, why were they so brutal? Why, in other words, were they so public?" (His own arcane conspiracy theory combines Roman Empire decadence with Victorian kitsch.) A more stable, if less romantic, explanation is the connection between the Irish Nationalist cause and the Conservative government's awareness of similarities in the Whitechapel murders and Fenian terrorist tactics. "The Mammoth Book of Jack the Ripper", well-edited by Maxim Jakubowski and Nathan Braund, offers many bonuses, including a chronology and autopsy reports. At the end is a bibliography, listing dozens of Ripper-related books, about 40 since 1988 alone. There is also a filmography, beginning with something called "Farmer Spudd and his Missus Take a Trip to Town" (1915) and including 1953's "Here Come the Girls", in which Bob Hope is threatened by a character named Jack the Slasher. So who was Saucy Jacky? An insane surgeon? An over-zealous reformer? An angry boyfriend? Peter Turnbull states bluntly: "Jack the Ripper was not a man: he was a myth." On the other hand, A.P Wolf has an article titled "Jack the Myth" in which a favorite candidate is promoted. It is A.P. Wolf who invites us to the party: "Go on, check it out," this Ripperologist writes. "The 'Final Solution' could be yours."



2. This was a breath of fresh air in the overwhelmingly polluted atmosphere of stale Ripper-media. Though it is a thick book, it is a very well written easy read in chronological order. Maxim Jakubowski and Nathan Braund do an exquisit job of presenting the facts and documentation of JtR. In order, each victim's case is presented along with transcripts of their respective documents where available, including autopsy reports & police memoranda. There is little to nill of the authors opinions or "out there" hypothesis and theories of "whodunit" that is so cliche in many of the books as of late. Just the facts!



3. Half of "The Mammoth Book of Jack the Ripper" is a reference book about the Whitechapel murders. It contains witness statements, victim biographies, autopsy reports, police opinions, weather at the time of the crime, and much more. I was really glad to read through this material because the facts are so often distorted or ignored in documentaries about Jack the Ripper. This part of the book is a very important read for anyone interested in the Whitechapel/Jack the Ripper murders.
   
   The reason that I gave "The Mammoth Book of Jack the Ripper" four stars instead of five was because of the other half of the book, entitled "Current Views." This part of the book is made up of modern essays speculating the identity of Jack the Ripper. Most of these essays are (to put it euphemistically) strange and implausible. This is roughly 300 pages in the middle of the book. Martin Fido's essay (David Cohen and the Polish Jew Theory) stood out from the other essays. It was fascinating, well researched, and believable.



4. This book presents a different chapter on a different suspect and each argument is very compelling.
   
   This variety means that the reader is always entertained.
   
   Thoroughly enjoyed it and would definately recommend it.



5. This book originally was released in 1999, re-released in 2005 with the title "Jack the Ripper, the Comprehensive A-Z" (absolutely not to be confused with The Jack the Ripper A to Z) then re-re-released again in 2008 under its original title. This editted book by Jakubowski/Braund gives the reader on overview of the 'canonical 5' murder scenes, timeline, witnesses, police reports, and the "Ripper letters" before presenting the essays by a plethora of Ripper researchers. Unfortunately, these papers on select suspects blatantly contradict each other and generalize far to much with statemnts like "most Ripper researchers accept the 'Dear Boss' letter as real" or that certain situations happened when few researchers actully believe said event happened. In my readings, very few researchers view any of the Ripper letters as being real, but I digress. Onward to the essays:
   
   1. William Beadle supports the suspect of wife murdering William Henry Bury as explained thoroughly in The Trial of Jack the Ripper: The Case of William Bury (1859-89).
   2. Mark Daniel writes about the news image of JtR overshadowing the actual Whitechapel Murderer. No real listed suspect.
   3. Melvyn Fairclough promotes James Maybrick
   4. Martin Fido takes to the McNaughton Memoranda suspect list and looks at the possibility that Kosminksy could be the same person as his proposed Nathan Kaminsky who in turn is feasibly David Cohen.
   5. Paul Harrison lays claim he was the first to point out that JtR was Joseph Barnett, Mary Kelly's last boyfriend. Barnett performed the murders to scare Maryoff the streets and back into his arms.
   6. Shirley Harrison, of course, continues to support James Maybrick but spends much of this essay trying to defend the authenticity of the purported Maybrick/Ripper diary (The Diary of Jack the Ripper: The Chilling Confessions of James Maybrick)which she helped become (in)famous.
   7. Bruce Paley follows the Joseph Barnett theory from Jack the Ripper: The Simple Truth.
   8. Sue and Andy Palour continue their explanation of a Royal Conspiracy to protect Prince Albert (who may have sired an illegitimate child with a Catholic prostitute) in which Sir William Gull heads up a cover-up using J.K. Stephens to do the killings but Stephens was also assisted by Montague Druitt.
   9. Gary Rowlands presents social worker/almost doctor/missionary Thomas Barnardo.
   10. MJ Trow points the finger at Frederick Nicholas Charrington, another missionary/social worker. This well done essay then turns around and says "Gotcha" in an attempt to show others that you can twist and omit enough data to accuse just about anyone. Probably the best entry in the book.
   11. James Tully condenses his book The Secret of Prisoner 1167 (True Stories) to point the finger at James Kelly.
   12. Peter Turnbull calls forth six Ripper murders but does not include Long Liz Stride as one of those six (claiming her ex-lover Michael Kidney killed her). The six referenced murders weren't even performed by one person but rather were copycat killers. This is similarly done in The Crimes of Jack the Ripper by Paul Roland.
   13. Nick Warren has a convoluted mess of Royal Conspiracy, Freemasons, and Irish Nationalists behind the deaths.
   14. Simon Whitechapel rambles on rather incoherently about the occult and apparently names Sir Lawrence Alma-Tadema the murderer.
   15. AP Wolf claims that Alice McKenzie and Frances Coles are "confirmed Ripper Kills" along with the main 5 and that Thomas Cutbush was the perpetrator.
   16. Colin Wilson does some backstepping from the Royal Conspiracy and then seemingly reluctantly agrees the most likely candidate is James Maybrick based on the purported diary and pocketwatch of Maybrick. And rather arrogantly, Wilson lays claim he came up with the term "Ripperologist".
   
   After the essays, the editors put forth brief listings of other suspects. This is followed by possible other Ripper victims including Smith, Tabram, and McKenzie but no mention of Coles. Then there's a weather report for the 5 prominent dates of the murders and a rather extensive bibliography.
   
   Overall, good book for the casual investigator in that it presents multiple theories and suspects. For the more in-depth armchair researcher, there are contradictions between all the papers presented. For me, the most impactful entry was MJ Trow's showing of how anyone can be made to fit a proposal or theory.

5 comments about Dust and Shadow: An Account of the Ripper Killings by Dr. John H. Watson.

1. Writing is a difficult enough job trying towrite in your own style, with your own sensibilities. Trying to take on the writing style of a bygone era, plus one of the most beloved fictional characters of al time is an impossibility. In Dust and Shadow Sherlock Holmes and Dr. Watson take on Jack the Ripper. I tried to like it, but I couldn't. Ultimately, it just doesn't work-too slow, too mannered, too self conscious



2. When it comes to cockeyed optimism, Sherlock Holmes fans are at the head of the class. Time after time, we plop down our money for the latest Holmes pastiche, hoping that 'this one' is finally the book that captures Doyle's lighting in a bottle. Over the years, various authors including some heavyweights have attempted that feat and come a cropper. Happily Lyndsay Faye's DUST AND SHADOW comes as close as I can recall to doing just that. And when you consider this is Faye's first(!) novel, the lady gets high marks in my book.
   
   DUST AND SHADOW pits Holmes, Watson and Scotland Yard against the ultimate bogeyman, Jack the Ripper. When Jack begins his murderous reign, Holmes and Watson, aided by Whitechapel resident Mary Ann Monk, pitch in. Stumbling upon Jack engaged in his 'double event,' Holmes is wounded. After recovering, the search begins anew but now the Baker Street duo is hobbled by an unscrupulous newspaper reporter who twists events to infer Holmes IS the Ripper. Eventually Holmes and Watson realize saucy Jack isn't just interested in murder most foul but is playing a deadly game with them in the bull's-eye.
   
   Overall, Faye did a commendable job in capturing the Holmes-Watson dynamic and the London sense of place and time. The first chapters especially seemed spot-on. While the friendship and love both characters felt towards each other was brought more to the fore than in Doyle's stories, I didn't feel it rang false. Likewise, Holmes' relationship with Lestrade was well-handled, more combative perhaps yet moments of mutual respect were introduced as well. While the Monk character has been criticized as a wish-fulfillment stand-in for the author that weakened the story, I frankly wrote her off as a female Wiggins and kept reading. Given the terror the Ripper created in the minds of English society though, I did feel Faye could done a better job in giving the story a more grim and foreboding atmosphere.
   
   Whatever the novel's shortcomings, I felt it ranks as a mighty fine Holmes pastiche and an exciting novel in its own right. Here's hoping more adventures are in the making. Recommended.



3. LOVED, LOVED, LOVED this book!!!!!!
   Stumbled across it, and decided to read it as I have an upcoming trip to London.
   Well, I couldn't put it down! The characters are colorful and true to Doyle's originals. The plot was exciting and mixed with true history.
   One of the things I loved the best was the street map in the front of the book, which allowed me to be on the heels of Holmes & Watson every step of the way! Now when I go to London I will have that map with me to literally walk through the pages of this terrific journey!
   
   This book MUST be made into a major motion picture! And I will be first in line to see it!
   
   BRAVO Lyndsay Faye! PLEASE give us MORE!!!!!



4. It is so damnably hard to write a Sherlock Holmes story. I know; I've tried, and now I know my limits. But Lyndsay Faye has succeeded admirably not just in crafting a well-written, faithful, Holmes pastiche, but in craating an excellent mystery on its own terms. This book merits being judged by both sets of criteria, and it passes with flying colors.
   
   As a Holmes pastiche, DUST AND SHADOW comes as close to capturing Doyle's slightly ornate (by 21st-century standards) yet energetic prose as it is possible to do. There are a few very slight Americanisms here and there and there are one or two anachronistic words and phrases, but nothing that derails the reader. Holmes and Watson are extremely well-drawn, as are Lestrade, Mrs. Hudson, and a young Baker Street Irregular; the other characters, who are Ms. Faye's creations based either on the facts of the Ripper case or on glancing references in the original canon, are equally well-portrayed. Dialogue is crisp and believable; deductions are sound and persuasive; and Ms. Faye carries an immense amount of research lightly enough so that you don't notice it's there -- in other words, her research does its job without drawing attention to itself.
   
   As a mystery, this book also works quite well. No matter how familiar the Ripper killings are to any reader of crime literature, she has described them with all the shock and horror that one could wish, though with no melodrama or hyperventilating. We actually feel for the people in this book, and we care about what happens to them. The solution is sound, well-considered, and persuasive, and Ms. Faye plays fair every step of the way.
   
   Highly, and delightedly, recommended. I can't wait to find out what she will write next.



5. This author takes you back to 1888, when saucy Jack takes through the streets of London, and environs. The story is well worked and contains some gruesome details and tells of nightmarish activities, which happened to these downtrodden women of the streets. They chose terrible haunts to live because of the circumstances of the times in London and Whitechapel streets. Characters in that period are shown in their really poor lives and their struggles for food, clothes and home.

No comments about Time After Time.

1 comments about Jaclyn the Ripper.

1. After dispatching Jack the Ripper from 1979 to a far future, H.G. Wells and Amy Catherine Robbins travel to his time 1893 (see Time After Time) where they marry. However, so her beloved parents would not worry she returned to tell them what became of their prodigal daughter. In 1906 Wells is worried about his wife who failed to come home, Wells traces her to 2010 Los Angeles.
   
   Meanwhile Jack managed to anchor in 2353 before returning back to 2010 Los Angeles as a woman. While Wells searches for his Amy, he notices an alarming pattern that reminds him of Victorian Whitechapel and San Francisco circa 1979; Jack is back and he obsessively believes he must stop the killer for all eternity.
   
   With two fascinating twists since the events of Time After Time, Jaclyn the Ripper is an exciting fast-paced thriller that never quite gels as the key two antagonists never quite come across as the naïve good vs. the sinister evil of the first book. Still fans of Time After Time, book or movie, will enjoy the return engagement as Jaclyn the Ripper still enjoys the kill.
   
   Harriet Klausner

3 comments about The Ultimate Jack the Ripper Companion: An Illustrated Encyclopedia.

1. An exhaustive record of all official correspondence, case file notes, evidence details and media reports concering the Jack the Ripper/Whitechapel murders of 1888-91. A very thorough research guide for serious Ripperologists. Includes all major case notes and relevant data, as well as a solid collection of photographs and drawings. Recommended for the hardcore Ripper enthusiast, and as a companion to other books on the case, especially Sugden's "The Complete History of Jack the Ripper".



2. This book is a necessary addition to any Ripper library. It is essentially a compilation of contemporary documents, mostly police, inquest and newspaper reports. It covers the major bases, including the individual murders and some documents relating to suspects and police opinions. Although it obviously may not be as comprehensive or up-to-date as one might like, it is one of the few primary source collections on the Whitechapel crimes, which alone makes it worth the read.



3. It is indeed rarest of rare to find a book that is perfectly true in terms of its name, and this book falls under that "category" (are there any other books in that class?). It is trully ultimate as a sourcebook for the "Jack the Ripper" killing that terrorised London and keeps on horrifying us after all these years. Every year we come across new "theories" propounded either by the Ripperologists, or by rank amateurs trying to cash on our queries. But this book remains true and authentic. If at any point in my life I consider myself qualified enough to uplift myself to the rank of a Ripperologist rather than being the curious folk (as at present), I will make a thorough study of everything in this book. Until then, I can merely recommend: "please get hold of a copy of this book by any means".

5 comments about Complete History of Jack the Ripper.

1. There's not a lot I can add to the great reviews other people have given it except to say that this book, while not being released as recently as some others, is still essential reading for anyone with an interest in the facts about the Jack the Ripper case. Sugden is a historian with impeccable credentials and research skills whose insights are a welcome addition to Ripperology.



2. This book is very detailed but you have to be wary of the slants. Sugden writes witness Matthew Packer down and dismisses his important testimony, and he also leaves out an important section of a letter that was published in the Telegraph in November which alludes to the capture of the killer (the "hideous bellowing of the news boys" letter). He also gets the Hanbury Street writing wrong. This was "Five - another fifteen and I give myself up." Sugden has it as "Four - another sixteen and I give myself up" - an absurd message which gets the total right but has changed the components to fit the assumption that the Fairy Fay murder did not happen. The whole point of the message was presumably to keep the public up with the total of victims as there was confusion. If it had been "Four" the message would have said another six or ten surely? Anyway I find the book too academic and morbid and irksome to read, and this is not because of the fascinating subject matter but the way that it is written. Sugden is the best of the modern style of writers but the subject needs a lighter more understanding and insightful historian. This subject needs a sharp-eyed Daniel Defoe, or a Jack the Ripper A-Z with all the rubbish taken out.



3. This is the definitive book on Jack the Ripper. PERIOD.
   
   Philip Sugden knows the history, etc. He doesn't "reach" for facts that cannot be confirmed. It is a remarkable book. The research is unimpeachable. The author has written a classic on this subject.
   
   This book is the best book I've read on Jack the Ripper. (I have read several books on the Ripper.)
   
   Forget the others. This is the book you want if you want to learn about Jack the Ripper.



4. An in-depth history of the most infamous serial killer of all time.
   
   This is a supremely well-researched and factual account of the crimes, the clues, and the suspects.
   
   In the graphic novel, "From Hell" Jack the Ripper is quoted as saying, "One day men will look back and say I gave birth to the 20th Century."
   
   So real you will be transported to fog-shrouded London streets where one hears the footsteps of a malignant stranger approaching!
   
   Curt Rowlett,
   Author of Labyrinth13



5. I love Jack the Ripper history and this book was really great. We went on a Jack the Ripper tour in London and I read it after I got home and it really put everything together that I had learned on the tour.

5 comments about Portrait Of A Killer: Jack The Ripper -- Case Closed (Berkley True Crime).

1. Patricia Cornwells attempt at closing the case of Jack the Ripper intrigued me at first.
   Her main suspect Walter Sickert was already cited by a few other ripperologists as a potentially good candidate for being the real Jack the ripper. In fact there are certain characteristics and habits and possible clues that could tie Sickert in with the behavioral patterns of Jack the Ripper.
   
   Unfortunately Cornwell does not offer any solid evidence that actually can convince us that Sickert was or could well have actually been the Ripper.
   Her DNA testing of Sickerts letters with those of JTRs proves inconclusve.
   Also disturbing is Cornwells narrative which firmly takes the line that Sickert was a serial killer and an insane woman hater, anyone can make accusations but without providing solid facts to demonstrate to the reader and prove that he actually was, the accusation comes across as being absurd.
   
   Nowhere in her book though can she cite solid sources of evidence to prove her point.
   
   I believe this book was somewhat rushed, the research was in some cases very interesting however too many assumptions were made and virtually no actual proof was presented by cornwell that would have cemented her claims as fact.
   
   Overall we are left with a rushed work...perhaps if Cornwell was willng to invest a few more years and if she had recruited the expertise of a few more specialists in crimnology, handwriting analysis as well as historians and DNA experts we may have had a work which would have been more logically laid out with supporting evidence.
   
   If one re reads the book a few times one can start to actually get the sense that Cornwell being a prolific writer of crime novels has somewhat taken liberties and made up a lot of the missing pieces to support her aleady weak argument.
   
   Unfortunately Cornwells work can only be considered in its present form as a deliberate attempt at character assassination, i cannot recommend this work as a good JTR casebook, because t is devoid of any supporting evidence.
   
   Sickert may have been the JTR of old, however this book does not deliver the evidence we need to satisfy that the case is closed...fa from it.



2. Patricia Cornwell makes some interesting observations and has definately convinced me that Walter Sickert was a strange and morbid man who most probably had a fascination with Jack the Ripper (JTR). From the evidence in the book it even seems likely that he may have written some of the Ripper letters (most/many of which are presumed hoaxes). However, in no way did she convince me that she has solid proof that he actually was JTR.
   
   While the book will likely hold your interest, it will ultimitely make you feel you've been duped if you expect to find any REAL and COMPELLING evidence of Cornwell's claim that Walter Sickert was the famed serial killer. In her zeal to prove her case, she employs many flawed arguments and leaps of logic. Since many of these have been documented here by other posters, I won't add my own recitation of them, but I am confident discerning readers won't get far without spotting them. While the lack of a consistent chronological order cited by some didn't bother me too much, the book's ending seems rather strange and abrupt. As best I can tell, it serves no other purpose than to leave a final taste in the reader's mouth that Walter Sickert was a liar and not a particularly good human being. From this, (I can only suppose) the reader is expected to draw the "obvious" conclusion that he was JTR.
   
   I really can't recommend this book to purchase nor even heartily recommend it as something worth the time and effort to read. However, if you wish to do so anyway I recommend you save the money and check it out at the library.



3. My little review will not mean very much coming on the heels of 611 previous ones. However, I have read nearly everything I could wrap my eyes and brain around on Jack the Ripper for many years.
   
   Patricia Cornwell has presented a case that is not only stronger than any other but contains worlds of information that had never been brought to the forefront. She makes connections that, had they been made close on the heels of the crimes, would have possibly led to the resolution.
   
   While some doubters are satisfied to accept the status quo on the identity of JTR, Cornwell has given us a candidate who, at the very least, fits the bill better than any other.



4. First off, I think it was very presumptive and arrogant of Cornwell to have added "Case Closed" to the title of this book. Given her background as a true crime reporter and technical writer for the Office of the Medical Examiner of Virginia, Cornwell already knows that you don't refer to a case as "closed" until it has been properly adjudicated.
   
   Nevertheless, this book proved a fascinating read and I think Cornwell made a good, though not great, case for her theory regarding Jack the Ripper's real identity. Or she didn't make a good enough case to convince me that Sickart was "guilty, beyond a reasonable doubt." And I would be curious to know how Sickart's descendants reacted to this book?
   
   Who was "Jack the Ripper?" is a question that has tantalized criminologists and non-professionals for nearly 140 years. Many other still-unsolved murder cases, British and American, have long-since passed into obscurity. Or what is it about this case that caused it to develop a mystique which persists to this day? Cornwall's book would have frankly been better had she instead analyzed the persistence of intrigue with this case.
   
   By contemporary standards, the 19th century Ripper was unimpressive as serial killers go. Think, Green River Killer, who literally murdered dozens more prostitutes than were ever attributed to the Ripper, before he was caught. Or would Gary Ridgway's real identity still be the subject of heated speculation and unholy fascination, 100 years hence, had he not been caught?
   
   I do want to take strong exception to customer review claims - along with those of Cornwell-bashing bloggers on other websites - that question the validity of Cornwell's DNA research for this book. Analyses of antiquated DNA are neither "unprecedented," nor are scientists incapable of obtaining good DNA and conclusive evidence from 100-year-old-plus samples. Case in point: a 100-year-old plus bloodstained scarf, containing the blood of late Russian czar, Nicholas II, was used to conclusively establish the identity of remains thought to be those of the late czar. Furthermore, DNA tests on extremely antiquated evidence are being routinely conducted by labs. on behalf of archaeologists and museums all over the world.
   
   Also, while it is true that many letters claiming to be from the Ripper (or Whitechapel Killer) were received in the wake of the murders, it is reasonable to presume that forensic experts of the time were adept at distinguishing hoax letters from those likely to have been written by the actual culprit.
   
   My educated guess is: Scotland Yard still has "Ripper" letters on file -- containing unique crime details, known only to the killer and investigators of the time -- that have never been released to the general public. However, someone like Cornwell or one of her expert consultants could have obtained such access.
   
   Therefore, I am confident that despite of any presumptive tendencies, Cornwell was careful to have only had handwriting analysis of letters credibly attributed to the real Ripper.
   
   Nevertheless, Cornwell may be well advised to stick to doing what she does best: writing about fictional crime via her angst-driven but likable alter-ego, Kay Scarpetta -- who so deliciously intersperses performing autopsies with the preparation of Italian comfort food.



5. This book starts off with portraying Walter Sickert as Jack the Ripper with no lead up as to why.
   
   The book proceeds to eliminate some of the more common suspects such as the Duke of Cornwall and others, leaving us with Sickert.
   
   To an amateur like myself, Cornwell presents some evidence that seems fairly convincing, if we know why Sickert is a suspect.
   
   What is really interesting in this book is the history of various aspects of Victorian England. Details of each case. History of the Metropolitan Police. Forensics of the era. Paper manufacture and watermarking. English approach to coroners and medical examiners. All very interesting reading.
   
   I recommend the book, unless you are looking for a scientific treatise.