5 comments about Jack the Ripper.

1. Only rarely do we get to read books that are as good as this one. Shirley Harrison has solved the mystery of Jack the Ripper's identity, and explains everything in a wonderfully readable style. I could not put the book down. It reads like an incredible mystery novel/historical detective thriller/tragic love story. Highly recommended!



2. David Forshaw doesn't know the half of it.
   
   When it comes to the "unsolved mystery" that is Jack the Ripper, the Ripperology establishment doesn't just shift the goalposts for Maybrick advocates, it lines a brick wall between either end to make sure that nothing goes through.
   
   There isn't the slightest bit of evidence - not the slightest - that Montague John Druitt slaughtered five or more Whitechapel prostitutes in 1888 - just the musings of a police official, long after the fact, who was not even on the case at the time. But one can be a Druittologist without risking one's standing in polite Ripper society.
   
   There's no evidence that Francis Tumblety was the murderer either - he doesn't resemble any description of the Ripper and he might have been in custody when Mary Jane Kelley was murdered. The case against Tumblety is also based entirely on the long-after-the-fact musings of a retired police officer. But one can be a Tumbletonian without incurring the wrath of Mr. Harris.
   
   There's no evidence that Joseph Kelly...but why stretch this out? Just mention Liverpool cotton broker James Maybrick (who bore an uncanny resemblance to one police drawing of the Ripper) and the Maybrick Diary and Watch (which have not failed any test designed to expose modern forgeries) and Ripperologists roll their eyes, foam at the mouth, and have nothing coherent to say - unless it's to demand a 19th century videotape of Maybrick killing prostitutes before even agreeing to consider him as a suspect.
   
   Even without the videotape, the case against Maybrick is exceptionally strong, and a handful of Maybrickians have, for the past twelve years, struggled against the background noise to perfect the case against him - something not demanded for any other suspect.
   
   Shirley Harrison, who first brought the world the Maybrick/Ripper Diary back in 1992, takes pen in hand again to discuss the trials and tribulations that she has undergone since then - and to review the case against Maybrick, as well as the leads that she has followed up on since 1992.
   
   Much of this book seems to be written off of the same template as Harrision's first or borrows from Paul Feldman's book, though there are a few tantalizing clues that have developed since then which don't quite add up to a proverbial "smoking gun".
   
   If the diary and watch themselves are not "smoking guns", then nothing else has been found which amounts to one - and yet...and yet...Ms. Harrison finds nuggets (American rumors of a Ripper diary circulating in St. Louis in 1888, British rumors of a diary written by Mrs. Maybrick in 1889, first revealed by Feldman, memoranda of deceased correspondents who knew or suspected a Maybrick/Ripper connection before the publication of Ms. Harrison's book, etc.) which make the "smoking gun" seem...ever...so...close. Actually, along this line, while Ms. Harrison borrows liberally from Paul Feldman at times, she ignores interviews that he conducted with living Maybrick descendants that really do suggest that their elders carried a terrible family secret to their graves.
   
   And she does allow herself to get sidetracked. In reviewing the evidence against Maybrick - scientific and psychological - she would have done better to leave Sir Jim's astrological reading out of it. That's only going to provide more fodder for her critics to chew on.
   
   It's actually quite amazing that Ms. Harrison, out of an abundance of caution, downplays some of the more intriguing evidence, such as the "Diego Laurenz" letter to the Liverpool Echo, while displaying no caution at all in wasting time and paper on astrological indicators.
   
   Most disappointing of all is that the book does not come close to living up to its promise to incriminate Maybrick as having committed a number of serial murders in Austin, Texas in 1884-5. The jacket cover has the temerity to promise to place Maybrick "at the scene" of these eight murders, which occurred in the space of about a year.
   
   This promise isn't fulfilled, and Maybrick's involvement in the eight Austin murders is left open as just one more tantalizing possibility. The trouble is that the Maybrick Diary itself, (and again, it was Ms. Harrison who introduced us to it) does not even remotely hint that its author committed ANY earlier murders ANYWHERE.
   
   To the contrary, the Diary's author seems to treat serial murder as a brand new game. There is a reference in the Diary to one or two murders in Manchester, England in 1888 that are not regarded as part of the Ripper canon, and the earlier Manchester murder is described as Maybrick's "first". If the diary is genuine, its language downplays the notion of any Maybrick/Ripper murders occurring before March 1888.
   
   I think that Ms. Harrison is trying a little too hard to gild the Maybrick lily here. I also think that the best part of the book might be the postscript written by Liverpool psychology professor David Canter.
   
   Professor Canter doesn't unreservedly endorse the diary as a genuine historical document, but he does provide a wonderfully clever critique of just how accurate it is, how true it rings, and how perfect a forgery it would have to be. At one point, he wonders mischievously what in the world the genius who is supposed to have "forged" it has to gain by remaining silent at this late date.
   
   Professor Canter might well turn out to be the Maybrickian's answer to Melvin Harris - only wittier and more genial. His writing provides a reminder that when the Diary is removed from the clutches of hysterical Ripperologists screaming "Fake!" and shown to students of the human condition, such as psychologists and lawyers, the skepticism largely vanishes and it is regarded as one more intriguing blueprint of that condition.
   
   Surely, as the years go by, more of these students will continue to review this fascinating document, and surely this is one more reason to believe that posterity is on the side of the Maybrickians. Tempus Omnia Revelat!



3. ... these words will be here to warn you. This book has had millions of reprints. It gets a new title every year just so that all the 1 star reviews vanish over for a new term.
   
   The hoaxer admitted forging the diary.
   
   Okay, say the name on the tip of your tongue - The Diary of Jack the Ripper - and watch as the dollar signs flicker before your eyes. It was bound to happen sooner or later. The reason why the Diary is still popular today is because a few Ripperologists attached their name to it and few have had the guts to actually say that they where wrong and walk away from it. The Diary is essentially a mini-volume of notes allegedly written by James Maybrick, around the time of the Whitechapel murders, that sign at the end as "Jack the Ripper". So how does it read? Well it is reasonably fair to say that it is very creative reading and does keep you entertained, but then again that is exactly what it is meant to do. What we know today is that it is undoubtedly a forgery because the owner of the book Michael Barrett simply admitted to forging it himself. End of story, really. So you might enjoy this book but remember that it is only fiction and the case is still far from solved.
   
   What one must remember is that James Maybrick is still a Ripper suspect and was a Ripper suspect long before the advent of the Ripper Diary so don't discount this suspect just on the bases of this book being a forgery.
   
   Click on the authors name and have a good look around. I am sure you will be impressed and the message will finally sink home. Shame about the Ripperologists who went pair-shaped hooking up with this book as the Real McCoy. There have been a few causalities because of it.



4. OK, here's the lowdown: The author takes an alleged diary of James Maybrick which claims he was Jack the Ripper, but the person who "found" it admitted to forging it. The contents of the diary contradict known facts of the case yet mimic errors that were introduced in Ripper books released shortly before the diary was announced. The contents of this diary clearly state that the Ripper had seven victims and seven victims only. There is even a supposed pocket watch of Maybrick's that has his name, his claim to being the Ripper, and the initials of these victims, which conveniently showed up for the first time at exactly the same time the diary did but from some other person. So that's all pretty ludicrous, but some people will believe anything I guess...
   
   Now we have a new book from the same team who tried to push that forgery off on us... But here they claim, what do you know, that Maybrick also killed off a bunch of other people while running around the United States. But these supposed victims died in completely different ways then the Ripper victims did, and there is absolutely nothing that indicates either the Ripper or Maybrick had anything to do with them.
   
   So if you accept the fact that the diary was forged, Maybrick is clearly innocent and this book is bunk. On the other hand, if you want to believe the diary is real, then it's pretty clear he only had seven victims and they were in England, and thus this book is still bunk.
   
   No matter which way you go on the question of the authenticity of the alleged Ripper diary, this book is simply nonsense.
   
   Don't waste your money.



5. I first read Shirley Harrisons 'The Diary of Jack the Ripper' and was completely intrigued. Here for the first time was REAL evidence 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. To date, Shirley Harrison and Paul Feldman have spent many years trying to solve the mystery of this elusive diary and subsequently, the watch. Its been the most expensive Ripper investigation to date. And 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' has been disproved.
   
   Why people are so vehemently against the idea that James 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.
   
   However, as much as I enjoyed her 1998 updated version of the 'The Diary of Jack the Ripper', I found this version to be a complete waste of my time. There was no real evidence to connect James Maybrick/The Ripper to the US killings as the cover of the book suggested. Instead I was treated to a template of her first paperback with a few revisions here and there. Utterly disappointing.

No comments about Jack the Ripper: The Complete Casebook..

No comments about The Visual Encyclopedia of Serial Killers.

2 comments about Uncovering Jack the Ripper's London.

1. What London resident could ever have imagined that the monstrous deeds of a maniac in 1888 would endure for over 100 years? Yet here is is the latest - but certainly not the last - book to chronicle the doings of history's most famous serial killer. Author Richard Jones takes a slightly different tack however in focusing on re-creating the London scene wherein Jack the Ripper did his dirty deeds rather than just recounting the deeds themselves.
   
   Jones' volume is part history, part travel guide to London's West End circa 1888. Using contemporary press acounts, period photographs and present-day images, he does an excellent job of immersing the reader in life in the West End and the effect "Jack" - assuming there was only one murderer! - had on its residents. He very wisely, in my opinion, doesn't spend time running through 'the usual suspects' but concentrates on portraying how terrible life was for West End residents even before the Ripper started stalking its dark and filthy streets.
   
   All in all, a fresh and interesting look at murderous times long ago. Ripper fans will enjoy.



2. Anyone interested in "Jack the Ripper" will surely find this book to be of interest. As a matter of fact, I found it more interesting than any of the previous books I have read about this most famous of all murderers. Each of those books had a story to tell and something to prove, but, although convincing, they didn't necessarily tell the whole story or perhaps even the real story. This book takes a different tack, it simply takes you back to the streets of the Whitechapel District of London in the 1880's and lets you walk with and listen to those who lived there, many of whom were prostitutes living on the streets in fear for their lives.
   
   You will also get to meet and follow the police as they examine the evidence, strive to dampen panic and suppress riots, and struggle to find the killer. In the process you'll likely discover that the police weren't as incompetent and inept as we have been led to believe. On the contrary, you will see that they were up against an almost impossible task - finding an illusive butcher who struck in the dead of night; a man whose ghastly work was made easier for him, and the police's work much more difficult, by the simple fact that his victims willingly led him to the dark and secluded alleyways and darkened yards where he butchered them. You will also find that the problems of the police were compounded by the fact that this all took place in a part of London where, due to the numerous slaughter houses and butcher shops resident in the area, the sight of bloody hands and bloody clothes on the streets was an everyday and every night occurrence.
   
   I approached this book having already read three earlier books about "Jack" each purporting to identify the real villain. And, I must say, until I read each succeeding book, I was firmly convinced that the previous man must surely have been the killer. I finally concluded that only two separate and completely unrelated men were the lone killer (although my favorite of the two has presumably been discredited by the "experts"). Of course, that was a somewhat unsatisfactory result. But with so many potential villains floating around, I naturally found this book to be of particular interest. Would any of these killers, I wondered, hold up under closer, and less biased, scrutiny?
   
   Oddly enough, none of my suspects were even mentioned in this book, and, stranger still, much of the evidence which pointed in their directions appears to have had little or no significance to the case. For example: poisoned grapes - none were found; royal coaches - none were mentioned by any witnesses; "doctor's" black bag - the bag was owned by a man who was hurrying home and just happened to be passing the murder scene (he later identified himself to the police); coins and/or body parts arranged in some ritual fashion - coins were found at one murder scene, but neither coins nor body parts were arranged in any particular way, etc.
   
   So, if you are a Jack the Ripper addict, this book might change your mind on a thing or two, and, if you have a pet Ripper suspect, it may disillusion you a bit. But, if you don't know much about the case, it will surely whet your appetite to know more, and it's as close as you're likely to get to the real story of the Whitechapel murders. As for me, I'm sticking with my suspect until someone can convince me otherwise.

2 comments about The Crimes of Jack the Ripper.

1. I got this as a remainder book at my local bookstore. It is quick to read, covers the events and is basically "Jack the Ripper for Dummies". It's the cut and dry coverage of the murders, suspects, conspiracies, and the author's sumation without getting overly detailed and bogged down. Good book for the casual interest in JtR. However, there are errors and bias.
   
   The author appears to include Tabram in the JtR murders along with Coles and the 'canonical five'. Oddly, the author seemingly leans heavily towards Francis Tumblety but on the final page actual calls out multiple individuals for the deaths (which may account for his apparent inclusion of Tabram & coles). Thusly, JtR was not one person but more of either copycat style deaths or random coincidental murders. Decent enough for the casual reader, good enough to put in your collection, but far from being in the top books regarding JtR (still much better than Cornwell's though).



2. This is by far the best book that I have read about `Jack the Ripper' and his crimes. Of course, they only total five and I am by no means an expert on the subject. Perhaps that's why I found the book to be of such interest. It simply contains a lot of information about which I was unaware, particularly with regard to the numerous suspects.
   
   Three of the previous books which I had read tried to convince their readers that a particular suspect, or suspects, was actually Jack the Ripper and, in the process, introduced a lot of presumed evidence which the reader had no way to verify. The fourth (Uncovering Jack the Ripper's London) took its readers back to the Whitechapel District in the 1880s and walked them through that time and place during the reign of terror. This book went beyond that book and presented a much more comprehensive study of the crimes including a review of 1880s London; an assessment of the crimes, including the autopsy reports; the thoughts of the principle investigators, many reflecting back in their later years; and finally a discussion of the "usual" suspects and Scotland Yard's prime suspects.
   
   I liked the way the author presented his material and his fairly consistent objectivity. But I can't say that I agree with all of his conclusions, particularly those concerning James Maybrick and 'Jack the Ripper's Diary.' And I was more than a little surprised when, at the end of the book, he introduced his own, previously unknown, suspect.
   
   With regard to Maybrick, I couldn't help but wonder: If I had been a workman in Maybrick's old house and had found the diary, would I have told anyone? I don't really know that I would. And I'm not sure that modern FBI profiling can really be applied to a man becoming psychotic through his addiction to strychnine and arsenic. Furthermore, if the presumed forger of the diary was the scrap metal dealer Michael Barrett, Barrett must surely have been the most remarkable scrap dealer in world history. For besides being able to sell scrap metal he was also a world class expert in the psychotic behavior of the human mind. If he could also write, there must surely be samples of his handwriting for comparison with the diary. That would be more conclusive evidence as to whether, or not, he actually wrote it. Still further, I couldn't help but wonder about the two items, said to be unknown to the public, which were mentioned in the diary. I would also have liked to have heard a little something about the twist in the supposed word 'Juwes' as scribed on the wall (but copied and erased), and 'James' as used in the diary. Simply stated, I'm not convinced that Maybrick can be so easily ruled out as a suspect. But, what do I know?
   
   As for the author's introduction of Jacob Levy as a new suspect, previously unknown to the police: I found this to be quite remarkable and a little amusing, especially when he concluded that Levy's death in a mental asylum in 1891 may have been the reason that Scotland Yard officially closed their files on the Whitechapel murders. Why would they do that if they didn't know he was a suspect? And why wouldn't they tell the public? That struck me as particularly strange considering the fact that it followed a chapter in which virtually all of the principle Scotland Yard investigators, many reflecting back years later, said they had no idea who `Jack the Ripper' really was. But still, I can't help but wonder: Who had enough power and influence to close the case and seal the records for 100 years? And why would they do that? No wonder the Royal Family is, and will likely continue to be, a prime suspect.
   
   Bottom line: This book presents an excellent overview of the `Whitechapel Murders' and is quite thought provoking. If you have even the slightest interest in `Jack the Ripper,' you will certainly enjoy it.

5 comments about Jack the Ripper (Mystery Rummy, Case No. 1).

1. This is a great game. Being similiar to rummy its easy to learn yet different enough to make it even more entertaining. The process of collecting evidence and placing victims with scenes as you build a case against a particular suspect is challenging and fun at the same time. My favorite aspects of the game is the explainations on the cards. These explanations give insight into the Whitechapel Murders which occured in the East End of London during 1888. I found them so interesting I am now reading The Complete History of Jack the Ripper to get the full story. An awesome game all around!



2. This game can be fun, but it's also pretty dark. If you really think about what you're playing, it can be a little creepy.
   
   It's a multi-player game where the object is to either catch Jack the Ripper, or ensure the Ripper's escape. Points vary according to which tactic you employ.
   
   Each player creates melds that are specific to Jack the Ripper's victim's: clues, potential murderers and the like - all of these have a certain air of historical accuracy.
   
   The rules take a little practice to figure out, but once you get started it's pretty simple. Like other Mystery Rummy games there's a nice bit of strategy involved.
   
   Out of all the Mystery R. games, this is my least favorite - maybe just because of the theme.



3. This delightful card game is a perfect combination of mystery and rummy. In the first of three installments of mystery rummy the players attempt to solve the Jack the Ripper murders.

   Play truly begins when one of the players plays a Victim card, thus signaling the beginning of the Ripper Murders. Each player tries to form melds (three of a kind or more) of evidence cards against various suspects. As the game progresses new victims are found, evidence mounts, and alabis can be provided. When a player gets rid of all the cards in their hand the round is over. The suspect with the most evidence against them (without an alabi) is Jack the Ripper. Cards pertaining to that suspect are doubled in value for all players. But be careful, if all five victims are revealed, it is possible for Jack to escape, leaving all but one player vitually pointless for the round.

   A little extra strategy is thrown in by allowing a vote during the hand. Each player secretly writes down who they believe will be Jack the Ripper at the end of the hand. Players who are correct score bonus points.

   This is a great rummy game. It's perfect for a quiet night at home with a loved one, or for a small group at a Halloween party. I highly recommend this game.




4. For those unfamiliar with the Mystery Rummy games, the game is played using a special set of cards. The idea is to build melds (as in regular rummy), but game play is affected by a special set of cards (gavel cards) that allow you to draw extra cards from the deck, score extra points, or allow you to retrieve cards from the discard pile. Each of the Mystery Rummy games uses slightly different mechanics and is based on a different mystery.
   
   This is the best of the Mystery Rummy games. It is the most strategically rewarding, offering many opportunities to alter ones position in the game. Also, unlike the rest of the Mystery Rummy games, this game has unique game mechanic which creates tension the longer the game goes on and allows one person to "shut out" the other players even if that player didn't empty their hand (the normal way for ending the rummy game).
   
   Not that the game is difficult to learn, but Ripper is much more complicated than the other games of the series and has many more gavel cards. The complexity creates a wonderful game, but for players looking for something a little less complicated, Mystery Rummy 3 - Jekyll/Hyde offers excellent game play and is much simpler.



5. Takes the traditional rummy game and adds a twist. My husband and I play this game a lot and because of the various ways to get points and win, the game is never the same. We really enjoy it and would like to find a way to put another Case No.

5 comments about Jack the Ripper's Black Magic Rituals.

1. The theory about occult ritual is much better then the masonic ritual theory.I will recommend this book for those who seek occult rituals.The book shows us step by step how the murders ware planned by using a map.And it all will finally come up with a occult symbol where all the victims had been killed in.The suspect in this book is Robert Donston,one who study black magic.If you want to know moore about Donston i recommend The True Face Of Jack The Ripper by Melvin Harris.



2. As I read the other two reviews of the book, I can't help but add that although Melvin Harris also came upon this character ( with the invaluable aid of Andy Aliffe...), Harris was NOT the one to display the MOTIVE for these murders with the Vesica Pisces diagram (much like the Zodiac Killer with his (57 degree) radian diagram like the author,Ivor Edwards has. Edwards did an enormous amount of legwork on this great book...real legwork,actually getting out there and well....I don't want to ruin it for you ! I highly recommend this book by a world class criminologist, Ivor Edwards



3. It should be noted that Bernard O'Donnell was the original researcher into D'onston Stephenson,NOT Melvin Harris. Mr.Harris often gets the credit for O'Donnell's work........



4. This Ripper subject is a very unstable, divided, undecided subject,that of recent has become the ridicule of many a serious arguement.But what is cool about this whole thing is the Hitchcock Fans,and the Sherlock Fans get left behind.And may i say there are many books out there that will cater for those who have no real interest in who the Killer of Whitechapel in 1888 really was.But Ivor in his book shows that he clearly is a man on the right track,and i`m not sure that its anything to do with imagination. It`s about the evidence that is there. (You reading the right book mate?)

   Mr Edwards clearly states his reasons for having Donston as a serious suspect and these reasons past the tests of what is known of the Ripper.
   Unfortunately for the sheep and the diaryists the Ripper story was not solved years ago in between the script pages of a Hitchcock or any other directors movie. Or in the pages of a Sherlock Holmes story. this was an actual event that left serious researchers like Mr Edwards with the spirit to find the answers to this whole puzzle.

   And you know what ? I think Ivor Edwards has done a fantastic job. The book is written well. The illustrations are great and anyone who passes this book by, MUST be related to P Cornwell.

   Roslyn Donston is a very likely suspect in the Ripper story, and if you want an accurate detailed log on the documents and findings from that period i suggest you put your hands in your pockets for those nuggets and get this excellent publication.

   "A keen Ripperologist`s must have book" Tee.
   A keen Ripperologist. London




5. I would rate this book up there with "the greats" on the Ripperology reference shelf. Mr. Edwards did an excellent job of organizing his thoughts along with the case facts, making this a very easy and pleasant read. It definitely changed my perspective on how I view certain pieces of evidence in the Ripper murders, (which I won't mention so as to not spoil this book). This is a must read for any person with a greater than normal interest in the case. While I personally don't agree with all of Mr. Edwards theories regarding the "rituals", I do feel that a strong case has been built to show that D'Onston was most likely the infamous Jack the Ripper.

1 comments about Black by Gaslight.

1. Set in the same time period here is a book not only rich in descriptions and dialogue fitting that era, but also a refreshing contemporary to Sherlock and his Watson. The author has obviously gone to great lengths to make this story true to that era.
   
   Bright, bold and independent, Lady St Claire finds herself embroiled not only in a hunt for a dangerous madman, but becoming enmeshed in a deepening affection for the reluctant prostitute she rescues. Together they become a formidable team risking their lives to stop a man bent on murder.
   
   What starts out as an inquiry in retrieving some errant love letters soon takes Lina into Whitechapel at the start of the "Jack the Ripper" murders. Rescuing Rhiannon and assuring her safety at her home, Lina's determination soon uncovers a disturbing link to the murders. She and Rhiannon join forces with Sherringford Pike an investigative detective and begin a journey into the dark side of love and infatuation.
   
   Having long been a Sherlock Holmes fan, I found this a welcome addition to that tradition. The characters are finely fleshed out and their interactions witty and enjoyable. A refreshing read with women both passionate and intelligent, and a plot filled with twists and turns that keep you turning the page.

1 comments about Portrait of a Killer: Jack the Ripper -- Case Closed (SIGNED).

1. Have read about four books on the enigma of Jack the Ripper and I think
   this one is it! It gives you identity of Jack the Ripper - great writing
   bravo for the writer and the great research she did.

5 comments about Jack the Ripper A to Z.

1. This book written in encyclopedia form, lists all the people associated with the Jack the Ripper murders such as witnesses, informants, suspects, residents, inspectors, etc. There is a summary for each person mentioned, which is very informative. This is an excellent source to have by your side when reading other books on the Ripper. It is invaluable!



2. I had to write a research paper on the Ripper murders, and I found this book invaluable. Grab it as soon as possible. I reccommend it 100%



3. I found this book extremely well researched, well done begg,fido and skinner. I have been interested in the jack the ripper mystery for some years now,and this book was the first to introduce me to such little known suspects as william h piggot.He was arrested in a public house not far from whitechapel after causing a disturbance, and was found to have a torn bloodstained shirt in his possession plus a severe bite mark on his hand(the day after a ripper murder).Then there was edward mckenna, arrested for suppossedly threatening people with a knife.When he was taken to the police station for questioning and told to empty his pockets, they contained amongst other things several metal and cardboard boxes!(the ripperologists out there will know) that a month after mckenna was arrested,Mr lusk recieved a human kidney delivered by post in a (cardboard box). These little gems of knowledge have been brought to life in this alphabettically arranged guide of who's who ,from the bobby on the street to the head of police investigations.A breath of fresh air, much better than the usual claptrap about the prince of wales etc.



4. In his Foreword to this reference book, Donald Rumbelow states that "contrary to popular belief, the pre-occupation with the Ripper is not anti-feminist".

   Oh, thank you for the sour persimmons, Donald Rumbelow. Now all can revel in the mystery of Jack the Ripper with clear consciences and without having to worry about being affiliated with those horrible (chooey!) anti-feminists.

   And your clarification was necessary because, as everyone knows, when we are not blowing up abortion clinics, anti-feminists are indeed in the habit of committing serial murders of women and ritualistically using their blood to brew our sacred malt liquor.
   Sheesh!

   And Rumbelow also states that he has no doubt that the mystery will eventually be solved. He wrote that in 1991 before the Maybrick Diary was publicized, but some of us think that the Maybrick Diary contains the solution to the mystery, and yet the debate rages on.

   What would have to happen in order for the mystery to be solved to the satisfaction of MOST, let alone EVERYONE? In the wake of the Maybrick storm, Rumbelow's prediction seems naïve today.

   But notwithstanding the Forward, this is a very good reference work, usable for both novice and expert, for which the editors, Paul Begg, Martin Fido, and Keith Skinner deserve much credit.

   They appear to have overlooked no detail of information or speculation or tradition associated with Jack the Ripper. When one sees an entire entry devoted to "Smith, H - Undertaker of Hanbury Street, who supplied hearse for Annie Chapman", one must acknowledge that the editors truly appear to have left no stone unturned.

   Maybe they went a little too far. Does it advance the study of the Ripper mystery to list every fanciful movie or TV show based on that theme, including the Star Trek episode "Wolf in the Fold"?

   The authors are modest enough about what they have done and do not vouch for 100% accuracy, but as corrections are brought to their attention, they appear to be dutifully acknowledged and included in each new edition of this book.

   Where there are disputes, the authors usually present all sides well and demonstrate impartiality in their analysis. Usually. I especially appreciate their presentation of the dispute over the "Lusk kidney" (genuine kidney removed from Ripper victim, Catherine Eddowes, or medical student hoax?)

   But what's this - "(O)n the basis of handwriting analysis, there currently seems little doubt that Maybrick did not write the Journal"? Uh - no. Even the most stalwart Maybrickian might have to admit that the handwriting in the diary is a problem, but that remark from "A to Z" unacceptably crosses the boundary between impartial analysis and opinion.

   And what of the famous "Dear Boss" letters written to the Central News Agency, which were signed "Jack the Ripper", from which the East End murderer acquired his legendary nickname? If the letters were contemporary hoaxes and weren't written by the murderer, it isn't really accurate to refer to the murderer as "Jack the Ripper".

   When the editors solemnly intone (correctly) that "most researchers" have concluded that the letters were indeed hoaxes, I am inclined to believe that they are slyly using the weight of majority opinion to browbeat the reader into agreeing.

   Begg and Fido are certainly part of the "growing consensus" on this issue - do they ever advertise a willingness to go AGAINST the consensus?

   And yet, among other things, the "Dear Boss" letters were taken seriously at the time by the police and were written by someone who appears to display the extreme cocksureness of the serial killer. They were written by someone who seems to know that human blood thickens quickly and can't be saved for later use as ink. And they were written by someone who seems POSITIVE that more murders are yet to come. Moreover, they are written in the same hand as that which wrote a threatening letter to a police witness who might have seen the murderer - hardly the work of a hoaxing publicity hound.

   So why the consensus AGAINST the authenticity of these letters? Could it be that most Ripperologists have their own favorite suspects, who were unable or unlikely to have written the "Dear Boss" letters, and that these Ripperologists merely alter their view of the letters to conform to their own pre-drawn conclusions?

   Begg and Fido wrote about the Ripper before publishing this reference work. Each of them named a different poverty-stricken lunatic semi-literate Polish Jew as the most likely Ripper candidate. Neither of their candidates could have written in the good copperplate hand that wrote the "Dear Boss" letters. Are Begg and Fido expediently allowing their objectivity to be clouded by taking false reassurance from the opinion of "most researchers"?

   Ripperologists are confident about issues such as this because of consensuses that they learn about by reading the works of Ripperologists. Did the police operate this way? No wonder Jack was never caught in his lifetime.

   In their published commentary about Jack the Ripper, Begg, Fido, and Skinner have proven themselves to be of impartial disposition and advocates of fair treatment for all points of view. They have shown themselves to be friends of the truth, whatever that truth may prove to be. But I am reminded of a book on realpolitik that I once read, in which it was observed that a friend is someone that you can trust 80% of the time.

   With that in mind, a rating of four stars out of a possible five seems quite appropriate.




5. This book is basically an alphabetized glossary of every person that conceivably had anything to do with the Jack the Ripper story. Even masochist-poet Algernon Charles Swinburne was proposed as a Ripper suspect! It's an intriguing and helpful catologue of names and brief biographies focusing on Ripper connections. This book will appeal especially to those readers who already have some knowledge of the case from books.

   David Rehak
   author of "A Young Girl's Crimes"