No comments about Jack the Ripper: Opposing Viewpoints (Great Mysteries Series).

1 comments about Jack the Ripper: Murder Mystery And Intrigue in London's East End (Amazing Stories).

1. The book was well written to keep the reader's interest, but does not go into great detail on the Whitechapel murders.

5 comments about Jack the Ripper: The Final Chapter (Virgin True Crime).

1. Not being a Ripper enthusiast, I had a very hard time plowing through this book. There's evidently a lot of good research behind it, but it's hidden beneath the taunting of the Diary doubters. The whole tone seems to be to whip up the folks who already agree with him. Folks who believe the Diary is a hoax won't be persuaded by this book, and people like me who have no prior knowledge of the controversy aren't likely to be convinced by Feldman's ranting.



2. Feldman's hypothesis is convincing and well-written. Kudos to Feldman, a non-author and not a "Ripperologist" for being able to piece together all the pieces of this complex story. An all-around great book.



3. This book is utterly frustrating to read. The author is stunningly untalented; the raw material he works with is fascinating, yet he manages to make it all seem banal, pedantic and trite, as well as incomprehensible. He totally lacks any type of story telling ability. For example, Feldman devotes PAGES and PAGES and PAGES to tracking down a confusingly-named line of illegimate descendents of his Ripper suspect, James Maybrick. He includes long details of interviews with these folks and even puts numerous photos of them in the photo section of the book. Yet, it turns out that these descendants of Maybrick have ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH the real story, which is the finding of a controversial diary and a watch by yet ANOTHER line of Maybrick illegimate descendants. At another point, Feldman has assembled various legitimate and illegitimate descendants of Maybrick in the drawing room of the house where Maybrick died. Does he tell us the outcome of this Agatha Christie-style assemblage of characters? No, he mentions it in passing, then moves on to yet another section of mind-numbing geneological details. I don't recommend this book, but if you do buy it, skip the narrative (if it could be called that) and go straight to the "cast of characters" guide at the end. This is the most interesting and comprehensible portion of the entire book.



4. In order to save readers from spending money on this shoddily written novel (yes, novel, since it's completely fictional), I will repeat what I said about the forgery ("the diary") itself, since this book is essentially one expanded comment section of the original Maybrick hoax.

   In 1992 a junk dealer from London, Michael Barrett, presented what would become known as "the Maybrick diary", attempting to ping the guilt of being Jack the Ripper on James Maybrick. The "diary" became a media event, and people interested in making money and gain of it have attempted to "prove" its "authenticity"; needless to say, they were unable to, for one simple reason - it is a crude forgery, which was in fact quickly and shoddily updated as new Ripper facts came to light (e.g. when it was revealed that Mary Kelly's heart was missing,
   the forger was in process of creating the "diary" - and he quickly added an awkward note "No heart, no heart..." to the "Kelly section", but forgot to use the same ink to write it!)

   It would take too much space to list literally hundreds of errors and inconsistencies in the "diary", as well as dozens of proofs for its inauthenticity. Instead, a good summary is simply the fact that on 5 January 1995, Barrett admitted to the forgery. To quote his sworn affidavit: "Since December 1993 I have been trying, through the press, the Publishers, the Author of the Book, Mrs Harrison, and my Agent Doreen Montgomery to expose the fraud of ' The Diary of Jack the Ripper ' ("the diary") (...) The facts of this matter are outlined as follows: I Michael Barrett was the author of the original diary of 'Jack the Ripper' and my wife, Anne Barrett, hand wrote it from my typed notes and on occasions at my dictation, the details of which I will explain in due course. The idea of the Diary came from discussion between Tony Devereux, Anne Barrett my wife and myself, there came I time when I believed such a hoax was a distinct possibility. We looked closely at the background of James Maybrick and I read everything to do with the Jack the Ripper matter. I felt Maybrick was an ideal candidate for Jack the Ripper. Most important of all, he could not defend himself. He was not 'Jack the Ripper' of that I am certain, but, times, places, visits to London and all that fitted. It was too easy. I told my wife Anne Barrett, I said, "Anne I'll write a best seller here, we can't fail". Once I realised we could do it. We had to find the necessary materials, paper, pens and ink. I gave this serious consideration. Roughly round about January, February 1990 Anne Barrett and I finally decided to go ahead and write the Diary of Jack the Ripper. In fact Anne purchased a Diary, a red leather backed Diary for L25.00p, she made the purchase through a firm in the 1986 Writters Year Book (...) Sworn at Liverpool in the County of Merseyside, this 5th day of January 1995"

   Stay away from this crude forgery and don't support people who try to peddle it as "the real thing". The same kind of people would try to sell you "splinters from Christ's cross" in the Middle Ages...




5. I first read Shirley Harrisons 'The Diary of Jack the Ripper' in 1993 and was completely intrigued. Here for the first time was something concrete against someone thought to have been the Whitechapel murderer. Evidence that seemed to be more than circumstantial and to my utter surprise everyone seemed to revolt against the very idea. Instead of reading what the book had to tell with an open mind, people automatically claimed it to be a hoax, bashing everything the author implied. Then recently I read the 1998 updated version of the same book, which included new evidence and more information that had come to light during further investigations.
   
   Then I bought and read this book by Paul Feldman. Its been the most expensive Ripper investigation to date. Many years, money and effort has gone into proving the provenance of the diary as well as the watch. And I say provenance because thats what the author is trying to prove ... the origins of the diary as well as the watch ... where it came from ... who had it and how it could possibly have been passed down the family tree. Still today no one has conclusively been able to prove that the diary or the watch is fake. People jumped on the band wagon when Michael Barrett 'confessed' to having supposedly forged the diary. Anyone with half a brain have since realised (as the author did) that this could not possibly have been true. All the evidence he gave to support his 'confession' was immediately and unequivocally disproved. And as I have read some of the reviews posted, many have not read the book properly, because if you had you would soon realise that Barrett does not possess the skill to have produced that document.
   
   Although Paul Feldmans writing style is not the best around, this book makes it hard not to become a believer ... or at least someone who is willing to consider the possibility that the diary (and perhaps even the watch) is not a fake ... and that James Maybrick may well have been the Whitechapel killer.
   
   Why people are so vehemently against the idea that Maybrick could have been The Ripper I dont know. It seems strange that many would rather accuse men with a lot less evidence stacked against them, than seriously consider a man who could clearly have been guilty. Perhaps its a matter of egos ... who knows?
   
   This book, to me, was well worth the read. I was highly impressed with all aspects of the author and his teams investigations. I also appreciated the fact that questions raised by the diarys detractors were all answered in a concise and logical manner. This investigation was no cover up.
   
   Well worth a read!

No comments about Jack The Ripper, monster of Whitechapel.

No comments about Portrait of a Killer Jack the Ripper Cas.

No comments about Jack the Ripper & the Whitechapel Murders: The True Story Through Contemporary Documents.

No comments about JACK THE RIPPER.

1 comments about Jack the Ripper - Infamous London Serial Killer (Biography).

1. All this book has is the main Wikipedia article about Jack the Ripper printed out in book form... or at least the version of that article that was online when this book was put together. While Wikipedia uses a license that allows people to republish its content, which means it's not illegal for someone to have done this, certainly as a reader there's no reason to pay $10 to get what you can get for free online. More importantly, if you look it up online you can click links to read much more detailed information that's available in several additional articles Wikipedia has about Jack the Ripper suspects, victims, books, films and so forth, which this publisher didn't even bother collecting together.
   
   Simply put, there's no reason to buy this, or the other books by this publisher, unless you just like paying good money for a watered down version of something that's available for free online.

No comments about Jack the Ripper : 100 years of investigation / Terence Sharkey.

No comments about Ripper Legacy: Life and Death of Jack the Ripper (New Portway Large Print Books).