Portrait Of A Killer: Jack The Ripper Case Closed (edition 2003)

by Patricia Cornwell (Author)

Members	Reviews	Popularity	Average rating	Mentions
4,508	94	2,673	(3.06)	67

2.5 stars
Amazing. Just amazing. An, at times, entertaining delving into the one person's mind and thinking, namely the author's. She definitely does not like Walter Richard Sickert. Which is fine. The artwork the man produced certainly does not appeal to yours truly, but I don't find the figures in them to be anywhere as menacing as Ms. Cornwell evidently does.

Most of her evidence is circumstantial and flimsy. When she kept going on and on about the watermarks found on the Ripper letters and those used by Mr. Sickert in his correspondence, I found myself rolling my eyes. Just about anyone could get hold of those types of paper to use for the letters. In fact, I poked around and found this interesting quote on Casebook: Jack the Ripper - Patricia Cornwell and Walter Sickert - a Primer (which I recommend reading):

In the case of the watermarks, journalist David Cohen made an interesting discovery. He spoke with Nigel Roche, curator of the St. Bride Printing Library in London, who told him that there were only around 90 paper mills operating in the U.K. in the late 1880s. Pirie was one of the largest. And while the Joynston/Monckton's brands may not have been as popular as Pirie, we are still talking about a very small number of possible paper manufacturers for the time period. If you examine 600 different contemporary documents, eventually you'll likely find examples from most of those mills.

Things that truly bothered me:
~~ the -er- almost loving detail she uses to describe the "horrors" of surgery during the 19th century and the dangers inherent to such things, especially to a five or six year old boy. The trauma of which then became the basis for Cornwell's assumption on Sickert's "violent fantasies" against women. And, it turns out, the area she's gets fixated on isn't the area which would have been operated on. And she is fixated on that one particular area of the male anatomy
~~ her constant low viewpoint of the poor women who were murdered so brutally that we still haven't really moved beyond their murders. There's never a hint of compassion in the tone of the writing (nor the narration for that matter. I find I really don't enjoy Katherine Reading's voice)
~~ she never gives any real consideration to the men (and a few women, it turns out) who were the actual suspects at the time of and after the murders. With a simple wave of her hand, they become mere background noise.

While I don't recommend this book, I do recommend this website's collection of other people's reviews (and yes, I was inspired by the first one on the page): https://www.amazon.co.uk/product-reviews/0316861596/ref=cm_rdphist_1?ie=UTF8&amp...
(

)

fuzzipueo | Apr 24, 2022 |

English (84) Spanish (4) French (3) Swedish (1) Italian (1) Danish (1) All languages (94)

date ▼ | votes

Showing 1-25 of 84 (next | show all)

For some reason, this book just could NOT hold my attention. I was disappointed because I had so looked forward to reading it. (

)

thatnerd | Mar 2, 2024 |

Very well written, readable, yet questionable premise. Purports to solve the Jack the Ripper case. Author's problem is that she immmediately gives us her conclusion that Walter Sickert committed the crimes, but then only gives us circumstantial evidence and coincidence as her ?proof?.

derailer | Jan 25, 2024 |

I found this book very interesting and convincing that Walter Richard Sickert, an English painter, could have been Jack the Ripper. The circumstantial evidence found by Ms. Cornwell was thoroughly researched and overwhelming. We'll never know whether or not Sickert is the famous killer; however, his paintings and lifestyle support the claim. I did learn more about the East End of London in the 1880s than I wanted to. Several English writers, such as Charles Dickens, and artists came to Five Points in New York to view the squalor and drunkenness. I can't imagine why when they had their own putrid slums right there at home. (

)

PaulaGalvan | Jul 30, 2023 |

She takes the slightest bit of circumstantial evidence and tries to turn it into fact. She presents situations initially as hypothetical, but then bases later conclusions upon the belief that these are true. When read with an unbiased mind it is clear that the author started with the presumption of guilt and built a convoluted and laughable tale to try and justify her verdict. (

)

blueskygreentrees | Jul 30, 2023 |

Having recently sworn off Cornwell's fiction, I decided to give this last title on my shelves a try, more out of a passing interest in the crimes than out of any sense of rehabilitating Cornwell's writing. Sure enough, Cornwell's bitter pride still shines through in this attempt to identify and convict a man in the court of public opinion. Cornwell knows enough about behavioral analysis to get her into trouble. Certainly, Sickert bore an unusual interest in the gory and sensational crimes, and probably had a similar unnatural interest in violence, particularly against women. But the evidence in his paintings and writings doesn't pass the smell test for evidence of guilt, Cornwell herself admits he was around the crime scene areas and the places where the victim's plied their trade. It's not much of a stretch to think that Sickert simply collected images and impressions from these experiences to include in his work, including his writing. All of the imagery would've fueled his active and creative imagination and tapped into his taste for violence. And Cornwell also admits Sickert was quite the performer, a seeker of attention. Again, it's not tough to imagine his use of the collected information to create more of a stir around his work. There's nothing definitive to prove Sickert's guilt, not for lack of Cornwell trying to convince everyone. But the strength of her personality can't make her take on things into any certainty.

The redeeming characteristic in the book is Cornwell's surprising research abilities. More than anything, the book carries a great flavor of Victorian England.

3 bones!!! (

)

blackdogbooks | May 7, 2023 |

I couldn’t handle this book. It came off as if the author had a grudge against the Sickert family and wrote this just to drag their name through the mud. Now, of course I’m not saying that’s what they did, but that’s the way it read. All of the stated facts are peppered with maybes and this could have happened. I misquoted in one of my updates for this book, but it actually spends a few paragraphs talking about Sickerts nurse, and how she could have been an alcoholic and mistreated her patients, and then finishes with, but I don’t know anything about Mrs. Whateverhernamewas, she could have been a teetotaler. If there’s no proof either way, why include it, and why spend paragraphs talking about the negative aspects that you don’t know about, but a sentence taking it back.

Sickert might or might not have been the Ripper, but this book actually does a disservice to convincing me he was. If the hypotheticals were left out and just the cold hard facts that could be proved presented it would have gone a lot further as a credible book.

Definitely NOT Case Closed... (

)

MrMet | Apr 28, 2023 |

Patricia Cornwell is a very good writer of crime fiction. I have enjoyed several of her novels featuring Dr Kay Scarpetta. But I think she should have stuck to the fiction. This 365-page tome is full of speculation, but completely lacking in evidence. It was widely panned when published and Cornwell’s response was to write an even longer version, still without any evidence.

There are many theories regarding who was the infamous Whitechapel murderer who terrorised London in the 1880s. The idea that the painter Walter Sickert may have been the killer had been around for a while when Cornwell wrote this book. None of those authors proved Sickert’s connection to the crimes. Cornwell did not succeed either. The case is most certainly not closed. (

)

ericlee | Jan 24, 2023 |

Uf, un plomo bastante endeble. Y eso que me lo recomendaron calurosamente...

Nunca leí un libro de Kay Scarpetta, el conocido personaje e esta autora y después de éste no me da la más mínima gana de hacerlo. (

)

Marlobo | Dec 24, 2022 |

In the case of the watermarks, journalist David Cohen made an interesting discovery. He spoke with Nigel Roche, curator of the St. Bride Printing Library in London, who told him that there were only around 90 paper mills operating in the U.K. in the late 1880s. Pirie was one of the largest. And while the Joynston/Monckton's brands may not have been as popular as Pirie, we are still talking about a very small number of possible paper manufacturers for the time period. If you examine 600 different contemporary documents, eventually you'll likely find examples from most of those mills.

)

fuzzipueo | Apr 24, 2022 |

This is one of the best non-fiction books that I have read; very well written, well detailed and extremely informative. Patricia Cornwell's research is not only fascinating but compelling and convincing.

Cornwell's research presents damn near irrefutable, extensive forensic evidence that Walter Sickert is Jack the Ripper. Cornwell does an amazing job explaining the psychological profile of Walter Sickert that adds to her proof that he very well could be the infamous Jack the Ripper. She holds nothing back, giving us readers, in great depth, all the gore and gruesomeness.

She also tells, in great detail, of the deplorable conditions the poor had to endure in 1880’s London, England, which I found captivating.

I have always been fascinated with all things related to Jack the Ripper. So much so that when in London, my husband and I did the “THE ORIGINAL JACK THE RIPPER MURDERS TOUR”, https://www.jack-the-ripper-tour.com/.... Now whether or not Walter Sickert is The Ripper, I couldn't say 100% one way or another. However, I can say if you are a Ripperologist, this is definitely worth a go! (

)

Christilee394 | Jan 31, 2022 |

When I was in London I took the Jack the Ripper tour, led by a retired city detective and presumably the widely regarded foremost living expert on the case, and he regarded this book as execrable. (

)

JoeHamilton | Jul 21, 2020 |

I remember this book, my mother got me the hardback. It was an interesting read if nothing else, and gave me chills for a few days. (

)

AshleighDJCutler | May 12, 2020 |

I really didn't like how cocksure Patricia Cornwell comes off in the book. From my memory of this book, it was an interesting theory, but not one that seemed more legitimate than many other theories before and since. (

)

pathlesstraveled | Oct 31, 2019 |

Review: Portrait of A Killer by Patricia Cornwell. 3* 09/09/2019

Cornwell took a tour of Scotland Yard and that’s what got her interest in the Ripper case.
She used the name of Walter Sickert (1860-1942) because he was renown later in his life. She wrote the book with overstated subject matters that I felt was stretched a little too much to really being a fact or anyway close to the truth. I have read many books on this person and I thought he was a complex person just as I think the case was complex to the public because the investigation and many researchers material wasn’t enough to close the cases. Some of the evidence couldn’t justify if it was connected to the Ripper’s victims but some stated they got the facts and it was true.

Patricia Cornwell released this book even after there were many controversial issues with the Ripper case. Plus, Cornwell provides little evidence towards her theory of who the real “Jack the Ripper” was. Her research sounds convincing but many people doubt seriously that the evidence she had spent so much time and money on would hold up in today’s courtroom. So as far as Patricia Cornwell feels that her research is done, “Case Closed”. (

)

Juan-banjo | Sep 22, 2019 |

I think a compelling case is put forward for who the real killer may have been. A thorough investigation with plenty of detail provided. Also provides a great insight into what life was like for people in London, especially the downtrodden, at that time. (

)

niknar77 | Jul 20, 2018 |

Interesting but laboured exploration of who was Jack the Ripper and how he got away with his crimes and hid his identity from the world including those closest to him. (

)

ElizabethCromb | Feb 13, 2017 |

Cornwell's book purports to definitively name Jack the Ripper as Walter Richard Sickert, an English painter who lived near the East End where the Ripper murders took place. He was known to have a fascination with the poverty-stricken area, and walked its winding unlit streets from midnight to dawn. He was also enamored of the music halls and would spend night after night watching the "loose women" of the era, and young girls, performing.

Cornwell's portrayal of the lives of those living in the tenements is fascinating, and horrifying for its desperate poverty and hopelessness. I came to this book knowing little about Jack the Ripper other than the general story, but even knowing nothing I was struck by the author's leaps that led to the foundation of her story. She takes proven facts and makes suppositions on which she then form the basis for her conjecture that Sickert becomes a psychopath. She makes sweeping psychological assumptions despite the fact that is not her area of expertise. She seems on more solid ground with modern forensic examination of old letters which form a large part of her research. Ultimately, while she paints an interesting "what if," I wasn't convinced. Unlike many of her detractors, it's not that I can't accept that someone gifted and prominent couldn't be a psycopathic killer, but there are simply too many unproven suppositions. Case still open as far as I'm concerned. That said, the book kept my attention. (

)

LeslieHurd | Jan 11, 2017 |

My review will be scattered and short as I read this a long while back, but the aftertaste I got after reading it still lingers today. If I ever re-read this work, I'll update this review as needed.

I am a person who to this day still looks at the ripper case and tries to figure it out and have been for many years.

The book is more or less an interesting theory, but it does not hold up when you look at all of the evidence. Cornwell has convinced herself that her theory is correct and her bias is on every page. After finishing the book, I remember distinctly feeling unsatisfied and blown away by how many people I knew praised the book and considered the ripper case now closed with how much evidence didn't fit. More so, I felt disappointed. I will update this review at a later date to lay down the contradictions between her theory and the evidence.

I will not say it wasn't intriguing, but overall if you are a hard core ripper case follower, you'll likely find the book as "meh" as I did. If you ever watch the documentary that accompanies the release of this book, Cornwell's condescending tone confirms her attitude about the entire case and her approach in her investigation. She believes she is right and I am unsure if any amount of evidence will change her mind. (

)

FairestEve | Jul 22, 2016 |

Case is not closed, but she makes a good argument. (

)

ndpmcIntosh | Mar 21, 2016 |

Cornwell may believe she has solved the mystery of Jack the Ripper's identity, but she falls short of proving her theory. Perhaps my expectations were simply too high, or perhaps even "the rigorous discipline of twenty-first century police investigation" cannot solve this infamous case. (

)

musecure | Feb 28, 2016 |

Cornwell presents an interesting theory that British artist Walter Sickert was Jack the Ripper. She makes a plausible case, but I'm no expert and this is actually the first book I read about the subject, so I have nothing to compare it to. Personally, I don't believe we will ever know for sure who committed those crimes. There is a bibliography at the end, however the absence of any notes means a great deal less credibility for me. (

)

SabinaE | Jan 23, 2016 |

This was a huge waste of time. In the first 20 pages she tells you who did and was supposed to prove it throughout the rest of the book. Everything thing she tries to pass as evidence is mere speculation. I didn't expect her to actually solve a murder from over a hundred years ago, but I didn't expect her to lie about solving it either. (

)

biggs1399 | Jan 19, 2016 |

Patricia Cornwell presents her case for Walter Sickert being Jack the Ripper. The only real "evidence" she has is DNA that can't be tied to anybody specific. The book was poorly organised, randomly switching between various parts of Sickerts life and the details of Jack the Ripper's crimes. Cornwell tries to connect other killings to the ripper but not very convincingly. Overall not a convincing book. (

)

RachelNF | Jan 15, 2016 |

There is nothing conclusive about this book. It's based on so many assumptions and circumstantial evidence that it should not be classified as non-fiction. (

)

GeekGirlM | Dec 8, 2015 |

There is nothing conclusive about this book. It's based on so many assumptions and circumstantial evidence that it should not be classified as non-fiction. (

)

GeekGirlM | Dec 8, 2015 |

date ▼ | votes

Showing 1-25 of 84 (next | show all)