Anybody else see the article (it was on the front page of the National Post up here) about Cornwell's search for Jack the Ripper?

Apparently she's convinced that Walter Sickert - the artist also named as an accomplice in Stephen Knight's discredited 'Prince Eddy' theory - in fact dunnit after all. The idea here seems to rest on coincidental imagery in his paintings 'that only the killer could have known...'
She's gone so far as to buy several Sickert paintings and tear them up looking for (literally)bloody evidence, which naturally has teed off quite a few UK art lovers. But she says she's determined to put her 'whole reputation on the line' for her theory.

Comments?

Some of her reasoning is suspect. She claims that William Sickert "never painted something he didn't actually see", but it's impossible to verify this. Artists and their interests and imaginations evolve. I used to draw mostly Lamborghinis and profiles of people in high school. Now I draw three quarter views, caricatures, from reference, etc. Sickert could easily have evolved into this interest. It also doesn't occur to Cornwell that Sickert himself could've developed an interest in the Ripper himself, or in grotesque imagery in general, and obtained photographs of such crimes for reference.

I'm also ticked that on the 20/20 segment that on this, they mentioned the first Ripper letter, and the "From hell" letter, but never even mentioned that the first one, the one where the writer named himself Jack the Ripper, was a fake, and the the second one, which was only signed "From Hell" was authentic, since it included a piece of the most recent victim's kidney, and that he wrote it because he was angry that a hoaxer was taking credit for his crimes.

The 'Ripperologists' over at the Jack the Ripper Casebook site don't seem to think much of her case, either.
I'm also surprised to learn from their posts that Cornwell isn't - as I originally thought - any kind of investigative or forensic specialist. So the 'reputation' that she's so grandly putting on the line rests largely on a series of fictional crusading-medical-examiner thrillers...and one 'straight' police procedural that got some of the worst reviews I've ever read.
Man, I wish authors would just stick to writing...

If you want to read a book by someone who does know what they're talking about kerriem, I recommend John Douglas' The Cases that Haunt Us. Douglas is a criminal profiler who can determine all sorts of different things about a criminal from little things at a crime scene. In the book, Douglas examines a number of cases throughout history that are either unsolved, or about which questions linger in the public mind. The Ripper case is the first one up, followed by the Lizzie Borden case, the Lindbergh baby kidnapping/murder, the Boston Strangler, the Zodiac Killer, JonBenet Ramsey, etc.

Douglas is the leading expert on criminal profiling. In his 25 years with the FBI, he pioneered criminal investigative analysis, he conducted the first organized study into the the motivations of many types of criminals, including rapists, arsonists, serial killers, spree killers, gunmen who snap, etc., and his methods have been used and adopted by law enforcement organizations around the world. In addition to his numerous true-crime books (The Anatomy of Motive blew me away), he has authored the very manuals and texts that law enforcement organizations and use in their investigations and in their training.

Scott Glenn's character in The Silence of the Lambs was based on him.

I actually have read The Cases That Haunt Us, and - being something of an unsolved-mysteries buff - enjoyed it tremendously. You're right, Douglas's work is fascinating...albeit I can only imagine what kind of a toll endless hours of delving into the psychotic mind must take on profilers.

I find I get more out of mysteries/thrillers in general when they're based around brain work, as opposed to icky physical details (a la Mo Hayder's Birdman, which is as near as a book ever came to making me toss cookies.)

Douglas's work is fascinating...albeit I can only imagine what kind of a toll endless hours of delving into the psychotic mind must take on profilers.

It almost killed him.

Again, The Anatomy of Motive was the first of his books that I read, and it was AWESOME! I highly recommend it kerriem. He even has a test of three cases at the end of the book where he gives you some facts at the scene, and you have to figure it out. I don't recommend Obsession, however, which, while still fascinating for the same psychoanalysis, is depressing for all the tragedy, repetetive after reading Motive and a bit dry, lacking in an original central theme as Motive and Cases had.

I just purchased and started to read Patricia Cornwell's "Portrait of a Killer" which is the book about her Point of view of Jack the Ripper and the comparisons to Walter Sickert. Now, even though I'm only at the beginning, I am finding how she is writing it, very interestingly. She tends to draw in the reader, and brings out some wonderful points of the frame of mind of the Victorian era, and what possibly could Jack the Ripper, and Sickert were probably thinking at that time.
THough, I am glad to be reading other's view of Cornwell's works, and other works into Jack the Ripper, but I wanted to let you all know, that I just started this book, which is out, and I like it, so far.

I just ordered that through the Quality Paperback Club, and with the points I had accumulated with it, ordered another one along with it for free. Can't wait to get started on it.

I saw something about her theory on TV last week. Well, it looks like she's wrong if you believe the others. For example Sickert was on vacation in France while Jack was busy in London...

Apparently members of the media like her opinions because they are asking her about the Ramsey suspect. I didn't catch the interview but I would think that they would want to get a person who has actually done this sort of work, such as John Douglas, rather than a writer.

Speaking of John, I bought "The Anatomy of Motive" a while ago, due to Luigi's recommendation, and am about halfway through it.

Does anybody else think her books have been going downhill since "The Last Precinct"? I thought TLP was excellent but IMO "Blow Fly" was awful, worst of the series. It was as if somebody else was writing it. I'm currently reading "Preditor" but so far I'm not too impressed. Hopefully her next book, assuming there is one and I read it, will include the capture/death of the "Warewolf."

I agree she has. I hated "The Last Precint" but I thought "Predator" was okay not her best but okay. I think she needs to trim down some of the characters and try to figure out a way to bring in some new blooks without resurrecting who was supposedly dead.

inblackestnight if you want authors who are similar to Cornwell try Karin Slaughter, Robin Cook, or Kathy Reiches. All are very good and I highly recommend them at my store on a regular basis.

Thank you for the recommendations Bajoran, I don't think I've heard of any of those authors. Aside from Cornwell, I've also been reading Jeffery Deaver & James Patterson from this genre. I agree that she should've left Benton dead, which is one reason I despised "Blow Fly", but Lucy started to get on my nerves in that book and have only gotten worse since.

Part of the problem is that she doesn't know what to do with Lucy because she's been kicked out of the CIA, FBI, DEA and ATF what does that leave for her to do. Also I hate that the mysterious medical condition that appeared in "Predator" and why did Lucy keep it secret from Scarpetta? I mean she told Benton. When I got to that part ot the book its like WHO CARES? She needs to take a long hiatus to get some new ideas. Because all of her non Scarpetta novels are just horrible and I don't even have to pay for them. That's one of the few perks of working at a bookstore is that I get to check books out.

I don't recall Lucy ever being in the CIA, and I believe she was just working with the DEA, but Lucy should just stick to computers and leave the field work to people who are more professional and less impulsive. I'm only about a third of the way through "Predator" but I think I know what you're talking about.

One way Cornwell can get back her reader's attention IMO is to finally go after the "Warewolf". I don't remember him even being mentioned since he got away in "Blow Fly".

One of the authors you mentioned, Kathy Reiches, is her books the inspiration for the semi-new TV series "Bones"? Her book titles aren't very good but the TV show is quite entertaining.

Just finished "Predator" the other day and to quote Bajoran, "okay not her best but okay." The book kept building up to this huge climax but it fell through big time. The high point of the story was covered in a couple short chapters, one of which was the last chapter. Call me old fashioned but I like some post-climax storyline.