Portrait Of A Killer: Jack The Ripper -- Case Closed and over one million other books are available for Amazon Kindle. Learn more
Have one to sell?
Flip to back Flip to front
Listen Playing... Paused   You're listening to a sample of the Audible audio edition.
Learn more

Portrait of a Killer: Jack the Ripper - Case Closed Hardcover – Nov 11 2002


See all 25 formats and editions Hide other formats and editions
Amazon Price New from Used from
Kindle Edition
"Please retry"
Hardcover
"Please retry"
CDN$ 24.17 CDN$ 0.45

Customers Who Bought This Item Also Bought

NO_CONTENT_IN_FEATURE

Product Details

  • Hardcover: 352 pages
  • Publisher: GP Putnam And Sons; 1st edition (Nov. 11 2002)
  • Language: English
  • ISBN-10: 0399149325
  • ISBN-13: 978-0399149320
  • Product Dimensions: 23.6 x 15.7 x 4.1 cm
  • Shipping Weight: 726 g
  • Average Customer Review: 2.4 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (487 customer reviews)
  • Amazon Bestsellers Rank: #795,275 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)
  • See Complete Table of Contents


Inside This Book (Learn More)
Browse and search another edition of this book.
First Sentence
Monday, August 6, 1888, was a bank holiday in London. Read the first page
Explore More
Concordance
Browse Sample Pages
Front Cover | Copyright | Table of Contents | Excerpt | Index | Back Cover
Search inside this book:

Customer Reviews

2.4 out of 5 stars
Share your thoughts with other customers

Most helpful customer reviews

Format: Hardcover
I agree with many of the other posters here. Cornwell has attacked the reputation of Sickert in this book, providing circumstantial evidence that in no way proves Sickert was indeed Jack the Ripper.
She interchanges "Sickert" for "Jack the Ripper" in a weak attempt at trying to fool the reader to believe the two were indeed the same person. She consistently uses "proof" such as "there is no way to prove otherwise" when accusing Sickert of being in the vicinity of the murders when they occur. She accuses that because he sketches women's body parts that he is fantasising in his sketches about dismembering their bodies. She says Sickert liked to take long walks, just as the Ripper supposedly did. She tries, rather weakly, to attribute every Ripper letter sent to the police, and even every letter written to the newspapers, to Sickert, simply because there is no proof that he is not responsible. And, Sickert used chalk, as the Ripper supposedly did after one of the murders. You could probably replace Sickert with at least 1,000 other individuals living at the time and come up with the same "proof."
Cornwell's writing style is very disjointed and jumps around from place to place and from time to time, which makes it difficult to put together timelines. Her tone is almost stream-of-consciousness, in that she seems to be discussing one aspect of the murders, then suddenly changes direction because she suddenly thinks of something else.
I'm sure the author put a lot of effort into gathering the information for this book, but perhaps she should stick to fiction and not accuse the dead and defenseless of one of the most infamous crimes in history.
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No Sending feedback...
Thank you for your feedback. If this review is inappropriate, please let us know.
Sorry, we failed to record your vote. Please try again.
Format: Hardcover
Patricia Cornwell utilizes 300 pages or her new book to convince us of her belief that artist Walter Sickert was the infamous "Jack the Ripper." She is absolute in her conviction and has stated publicly that she is willing to "stake her career" on her findings. As a trained scientist and clinician, I would argue that Ms. Cornwell's findings are entirely unconvincing and that the majority of her conclusions are based on speculation.
Although she makes an admirable attempt to link DNA in correspondence written by Sickert with DNA in letters purportedly written by "the Ripper," the results are not conclusive or exclusionary. She is forced to give this evidence (which had it been conclusive would have been very strong) short shrift in her text and builds her case by speculating on Sickert's psychological make-up, his behavior, and his whereabouts. Indeed, the amount of guessing she engages in is so extravagant that I found myself putting the book down and laughing at times. Just a few examples:
1. Speculating that Sickert was deformed, sexually impotent and hated women (and murdered them)due to a fistula of his penis. The speculation of psychological problems related to a physical condition might be acceptable, if she had convincing evidence that the physical condition existed, which she does not.
2. That most of the letters purportedly written to the press and police by Jack the Ripper were legitimate AND written by Sickert. First, it is extremely unlikely that the Ripper cases, which received so much press at the time, would not result in a multitude of false letters and correspondence. To think otherwise is absurd. Second, the penmanship and literacy of the letters varies greatly.
Read more ›
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No Sending feedback...
Thank you for your feedback. If this review is inappropriate, please let us know.
Sorry, we failed to record your vote. Please try again.
Format: Hardcover
I was interested in this book because of the prime suspect, Walter Sickert. Sickert was a genuinely good and important English artist and I was surprised that he is considered "the Ripper" by Cornwell. She makes a fun, readable case but that doesn't mean it's convincing if you look at other viewpoints. I find her psychology rather silly and she seems ignorant of certain facts about 19th century artists, such as the fact they often painted prostitutes as models. In addition, her interpretation of Sickert's artwork wouldn't be taken seriously by any Art Historian and is highly subjective. Nevertheless, I found it pretty entertaining reading and I hope it will make people take a look at Sickert's actual artwork, which is pretty good.
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No Sending feedback...
Thank you for your feedback. If this review is inappropriate, please let us know.
Sorry, we failed to record your vote. Please try again.
By Michelle on Nov. 13 2002
Format: Hardcover
To start with, this book is very good. It tells you who, when, and where the whole time. Cornwell always let you know what she was thinking and wrote her side of the story and never left anything out. If she was unsure, she would say she was. She never led me down the wrong track. I'm a big fan of her and so is my mother.
This book had it all. The only reason I didn't give it a perfect 5 stars is because she sometimes started talking in so much detail about something that I felt like I was in school again. It was a good read. I would suggest this book to adults, not children.
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No Sending feedback...
Thank you for your feedback. If this review is inappropriate, please let us know.
Sorry, we failed to record your vote. Please try again.
Format: Hardcover
Patricia Cornwell claims to have spent [money]of her own fortune researching this book. In the end, one wonders if it were worth it. Ms. Cornwell provides a tenuous link between Walter Sickert and one or two "Ripper letters" in the guise of a matching mtDNA sequence, but all that tells us is that Sickert can not be eliminated from the percentage of the population (ranging from 1% ro 10%) that could have written those letters. Considering the fact that the letters that provided mtDNA matches are all considered to be definite hoaxes, Cornwell's theory falls apart like a house of cards.
Cornwell should certainly be praised for taking the initiative to fund modern forensic research on the few remaining scraps of Ripperana, but in the end, the results should have been more critically examined. Instead, it appears as though Cornwell decided who the Ripper was first, and then scrambled to find evidence to support it. When DNA matching fell short, she relied on watermark and handwriting analysis, as well as comparisons between drawings on the letters and those in Sickert's sketchbooks. All of this is meaningless, of course, as the Ripper letters she uses are all considered hoaxes. She also fails to discuss the possibility that Sickert was in France at the time of most, if not all of the murders. There is ample evidence that suggests this.
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No Sending feedback...
Thank you for your feedback. If this review is inappropriate, please let us know.
Sorry, we failed to record your vote. Please try again.

Product Images from Customers

Most recent customer reviews

Search


Feedback