http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article … ipper.html
"Top crime writer Patricia Cornwell has claimed she has vital evidence to prove the identity of Britain’s most prolific serial killer, Jack the Ripper.
The bestselling author, 60, has long claimed the legendary Whitechapel killer was in fact influential artist Walter Sickert.
Her original accusations in her 2002 book, Portrait of a Killer: Jack the Ripper – Case Closed, outraged art historians and were dismissed by Ripperologists as ‘improbable’.
But now, in a new book to be released next week, Cornwell claims the proof of Sickert’s guilt lies in the paper he used.
Three of the artist’s letters and two of the grisly, mocking notes the Ripper supposedly sent to police at the time were scientifically analysed and were found to have come from paper run of just 24 sheets, according to the author.
And in addition to the small batch of stationery, the book claims to debunk Sickert’s previous alibis and claims the artist would dress up as the Ripper when creating his paintings.
The American author, who has sold more than 100million books, also claims the artist confessed to a friend that ‘he would not mind having to kill and eat raw flesh’, which she compares to the killer’s reference to cannibalism.
Cornwell has spent millions of pounds investigating the unidentified killer – who killed at least five women in Whitechapel in the late 1880s.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article … z4ZaMLzo00
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook"
looking at some of his paintings…yeah, I can see him being a killer.
The main problem is, virtually nobody who’s researched Jack The Ripper believes the killer wrote ANY of the letters, save for possibly the "From Hell" missive sent to George Lusk. So if anything, Patricia Cornwell destroyed a priceless work of art to identify a guy who might have written a hoax letter or two.
"There are such devils."
-The Pledge
I agree about the letters.I lean towards the lusk letter being genuine because not only did it contain half a kidney,it was the only one not signed jack the ripper.as this name was widely known by the time lusk received it,any hoaxer would have used the ripper signature.I don’t say this is a certainty,but a strong possibility. I think sickert possibly did write a few letters for a bit of grisly fun,but it doesn’t make him the killer.also,what does dressing up like jack the ripper mean?as we can’t be sure who he was we can’t surely have the faintest idea what he wore.maybe sickert dressed in a way he thought the ripper dressed,because he was some kind of class A dickhead,perhaps a top hat and cape,but again it doesn’t make him a killer any more than if I put on a white jumpsuit it doesn’t make me elvis.I read cornwells original book years ago and thought it was largely bollocks
Similar to the story of the JTR suspect who’s DNA was found on one of the victims shawl or something. Also isn’t there a new TV show about the ripper coming out. I think I have seen previews on the history or travel channel. I think the show is called "Time after Time" based on the movie about JTR using H G Wells time machine to escape in time. In the original movie JTR escaped to San Francisco. This time JTR travels to NY.
I agree. Sickert frequently painted violent scenes, like knife fights. And as he was a contemporary of JTR, there was no bigger criminal or newspaper story during that time. Cornwell wrote a great book; for readability it’s one of the best true crime books I’ve ever read. But I don’t buy her hypothesis. She says the letters on the stationary are confessional. However, she never quotes them. My guess is it probably says something like "I’m Jack the Ripper" with no real details that only the killer would know. Sickert may have been obsessed with the case, he may have enjoyed screwing with the police, who knows.
A lot of his paintings are creepy, including one called "Jack the Ripper’s Bedroom," which she says depicts Sickert’s bedroom. And some of the paintings of women do resemble Jack’s victims in death. Who knows, maybe he got a hold of some crime scene photos? She makes a good circumstantial case and like I said, it’s well researched and a good read. I just don’t think there is anything in Sickert’s behavior to indicate he was a raving killer. I think Sickert probably more closely resembled the oft cited description of Jack with a top hat and Gladstone bag than what he probably was, an impoverished resident of Whitechapel.
Like someone else wrote on this forum, I think the only genuine communication from JTR was the "From Hell" letter with the kidney that was sent to George Lusk. I seem to recall the police were high on a suspect who was ultimately sent to Colney Hatch Asylum in 1891. They had eyes on him well before that and felt so confident he was the guy that they pulled all the extra officers they had assigned to the area. Wish I could remember the book. I know it was intimated that it was Kosminski, but I believe there was confusion over his name and it was actually someone else.
I always wondered how one sends a kidney in a letter? I guess the letter must have came with a package. Perhaps they had couriers, but they didn’t have mailboxes back then. I really don’t see how they would have been unable to find out who sent the letters, since you’d have to go to a post office and tell them who your were when sending out a letter. The fact that the letters were apparently anonymously hand delivered just confirms even more that they were hoaxes created by journalists. The real JTR would probably not even know where to send in a letter.
Oh s***! He painted a picture about Jack The Ripper! I guess that must mean that Tom Hansen is the Zodiac Killer, then? Rather ironic that she seems to not understand how someone could make a fictional work based on a real event, since she’s a fiction writer that wrote a book about a real event which happens also to be mostly fictional.
Also it’s called Jack The Ripper’s bedroom and it shows Sickert’s bedroom….first of all, how the hell does she know what his bedroom looked like? Did he also do an identical painting called Sickert’s bedroom? Ok, so maybe she went to his house and no one had changed the linens in 150 years. Now take a look at that freaking painting and tell me whose bedroom it is! Pure idiocy.
Pretty much. Seems she attributes almost all the voluminous correspondence in the archives allegedly from Jack the Ripper to Sickert. And just about every murder that occurred in Great Britain until about 1910.
They did a very similar thing to Zodiac with a partial DNA profile found under the stamp of one of those ripper letters, the one researchers felt was most likely to be from the killer. Turned out to be female. The docu I saw this is on youtube if you search "Jack the ripper prime suspect".
Recently, I bought a copy of Cornwell’s book, "Portrait Of A Killer" because the subject interests me, and the book only cost fifty cents at a 2nd hand store. I got about fifty pages into the book before I became convinced Cornwell was much more interested in advancing a thesis than actually investigating the Ripper murders. I read somewhere that DNA tersting supplied a connection to an individual whose name I can’t recall, but sounded foreign, possibly Slavic. This man was also high on the list of POIs. Anyone know anything about this?
Recently, I bought a copy of Cornwell’s book, "Portrait Of A Killer" because the subject interests me, and the book only cost fifty cents at a 2nd hand store. I got about fifty pages into the book before I became convinced Cornwell was much more interested in advancing a thesis than actually investigating the Ripper murders. I read somewhere that DNA testing supplied a connection to an individual whose name I can’t recall, but sounded foreign, possibly Slavic. This man was also high on the list of POIs. Anyone know anything about this?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aaron_Kosminski This guy. Apparently the ozzy guy doing the DNA made an error but they found seamen, facial matter and blood on the shawl (as far as I recall).
Edit: I`ve seen in the UK that they didn`t find any DNA when the shawl was tested later. Kosminski was the prime suspect mentioned in one of the investigating detectives memoirs but was withheld for years so as not to cause anti-Semitic rioting.
When it comes to the ripper, most books are heavily slanted towards a pet suspect. Cornwell paid 7 million I believe in her search. Fifty cents isn`t bad considering the book likely has all of the crimes and their details contained. I paid about the same for Gary Stewart`s book and many on here paid full price 
My problem with "Portrait of a Killer" is she attributes every letter written to the police as genuine and then claims the letter from Sickert was "confessional." ‘Cornwell never quotes from the letter. There’s a big difference between writing "I’m Jack the Ripper" like every kook does and actually including specific details only the killer would know. But I thought it was a good read. I don’t agree with her conclusion but one of the best true crime books I’ve read just based on composition.
