Enjoying Cornwell

[Howard Brown]

https://enjoyingsoutheastcornwall.com/2018/08/07/jack-the-ripper-amongst-other-things/

[Anna Morris]

I do think Patricia Cornwell has pretty much proved that Sickert or someone who could get to his writing pad, wrote some of the JtR letters. But I don't think JtR wrote those letters. If Jack wrote ANY of the letters.

Dr. Wynn Weston-Davies who wrote the book about MJK being his aunt, said in a podcast that his family knew Sickert and that Sickert was fascinated with JtR. He said Sickert would talk and talk about JtR but he knew absolutely nothing.

I think Patricia Cornwell has offered some interesting information to Ripperology and I agree with some of her thoughts about Sickert and his interest in JtR. I also believe that Sickert doodled in the Lizard guest book and that those doodles resembled some that were on letters signed JtR.

But I still don't think Sickert was JtR and I also believe there were some major mistakes in the first version of the book, like implying that Sickert went all over England possibly committing other outrages. Some of those crimes were either proven to be committed by others or others were strongly implicated.

[Paul]

Like everyone making a case for someone being Jack the Ripper, Patricia laid out her stall and it’s up to the reader to decide whether it’s convincing or not. What I can say is that Patricia is honest and sincere and was never unwilling to pursue a line of inquiry that could have blown her theory out of the water. For me, what Patricia and Keith Skinner did achieve was to possibly show that Walter was the source of Joseph Sickert’s story. Whether this was the case or not is likely to be beyond proof, and increasingly so as people have died and records been lost or destroyed, but if true then we can say that Joseph did not invent his story from whole cloth and we have to ask on what Walter's story, whatever it was, was based.

[Roy Corduroy]

Hi Paul I read Patricia's book with interest, seeing that she consulted with you and Keith.

The part that disappointed me however, was about Abberline. She had now read his papers, but apparently nothing changed in her characterization that he was the hardworking detective who never spoke of the case again. She used the same sort of literary device in both her books as per Abberline. That he had not a clue. That Sickert slipped beneath his radar.

In other words, Abberline's brief flirtation with Severin Klosowski, (George Chapman) as the Ripper, as expressed in the Pall Mall interviews, which led to a book, then the late Phil Sugden also explored in his book, and now Helena has written her book , all this - its as if reading either of Patricia's two (2) books the reader undergoes a Cornbotomy and none of that ever happened. It's a strange sort of out of body experience.

Roy

[Paul]

Hi Paul I read Patricia's book with interest, seeing that she consulted with you and Keith.

The part that disappointed me however, was about Abberline. She had now read his papers, but apparently nothing changed in her characterization that he was the hardworking detective who never spoke of the case again. She used the same sort of literary device in both her books as per Abberline. That he had not a clue. That Sickert slipped beneath his radar.

In other words, Abberline's brief flirtation with Severin Klosowski, (George Chapman) as the Ripper, as expressed in the Pall Mall interviews, which led to a book, then the late Phil Sugden also explored in his book, and now Helena has written her book , all this - its as if reading either of Patricia's two (2) books the reader undergoes a Cornbotomy and none of that ever happened. It's a strange sort of out of body experience.

Roy

I know what you mean, but Patricia doesn’t touch on the suspects much at all, mainly the Macnaghten three and then only briefly, and in Kosminski’s case because she has an interest in DNA. I think there’s a lot one can criticise in Patricia’s book, and a lot of Patricia-bashing goes on, but Patricia and Keith came up with a lot of good and interesting stuff too, such as the press cutting book which might have belonged to somebody with “inside” information. Hardly anyone ever mentions that. As Anna was talking about Patricia’s work on Walter Sickert, I just wanted to highlight the investigations Patricia undertook with Keith in an effort to establish the source of Joseph Sickert’s story, because if it came in whole or in part from Walter Sickert then one has to wonder from where he got it. I just wanted to point out that there's good stuff in the book that shouldn't be overlooked.

[Anna Morris]

I think it is possible some of Sickert's paintings are JtR based but we have no idea to what information he could have had access.

It would make sense that the Joseph Sickert tale came from Walter but if it did, IMO, it would rather point to Walter's ignorance rather than knowledge. A first inclination with serial killing is to want to link all the victims and make sense of murder. The Joseph Sickert story makes an excellent novel that explains everything. (At this time I really believe the murders were random but it took me a long time to accept that idea.)

I don't remember from the first book by Cornwell, if Walter had any connection to Cleveland Street? It seems like that would be a perfect venue for him whether or not he participated. There is something in the Joseph Sickert story about Cleveland Street which I do not remember specifically at this time. Something like Annie Crook met the prince because she worked near the house?

[Paul]

I think it is possible some of Sickert's paintings are JtR based but we have no idea to what information he could have had access.

It would make sense that the Joseph Sickert tale came from Walter but if it did, IMO, it would rather point to Walter's ignorance rather than knowledge. A first inclination with serial killing is to want to link all the victims and make sense of murder. The Joseph Sickert story makes an excellent novel that explains everything. (At this time I really believe the murders were random but it took me a long time to accept that idea.)

I don't remember from the first book by Cornwell, if Walter had any connection to Cleveland Street? It seems like that would be a perfect venue for him whether or not he participated. There is something in the Joseph Sickert story about Cleveland Street which I do not remember specifically at this time. Something like Annie Crook met the prince because she worked near the house?

Walter is supposed to have had a studio in or near Cleveland Street and that Mary Kelly, who worked in a shop there, modelled for him. Whether he did or not has not been established, but Walter had a habit of moving studios and having several on the go at the same time, so whether he did or not probably won't ever be discoverable. But Patricia presents some evidence in her book that possibly shows that Joseph and Walter did know each other. This evidence includes the fact that Joseph received the royalties from a book that were due Walter or his next of kin. This leaves open the possibility that Walter was the source of Joseph's information, as Joseph claimed.

[Anna Morris]

Thanks, Paul.

There are also Sickert's paintings of Mrs. Barrett as MJK, one or two of which I used as an avi here for a while.

I have wondered if James Kelly could be tied into Sickert as a furniture improver could have been hired to stretch canvases for artists I think. I was thinking that way back when I thought JtR could be identified and everything could be tied together. Now I think James Kelly was just one on a list the police decided to neutralize after MJK was killed.

I always figured Joseph Sickert had a connection to Walter but the problem with the whole subject is the fantastic tale that resulted. Maybe it is true that Walter was an early Ripperologist. Maybe he should be on a list with Forbes Winslow and Donston.

[Chris G.]

I think it is possible some of Sickert's paintings are JtR based but we have no idea to what information he could have had access.

It would make sense that the Joseph Sickert tale came from Walter but if it did, IMO, it would rather point to Walter's ignorance rather than knowledge. A first inclination with serial killing is to want to link all the victims and make sense of murder. The Joseph Sickert story makes an excellent novel that explains everything. (At this time I really believe the murders were random but it took me a long time to accept that idea.)

I don't remember from the first book by Cornwell, if Walter had any connection to Cleveland Street? It seems like that would be a perfect venue for him whether or not he participated. There is something in the Joseph Sickert story about Cleveland Street which I do not remember specifically at this time. Something like Annie Crook met the prince because she worked near the house?

The thing is that Victorian England, Victorian London was obsessed with the Ripper, Walter Sickert no exception. That doesn't mean that he had any exceptional insight into the murders or was himself the killer. He executed paintings in the style of the day, women on beds and so on, but that doesn't imply that he killed MJK on her bed in Miller's Court, but, more realistically, that he was just one more denizen of the city who was fascinated with the mystery.

[Anna Morris]

The thing is that Victorian England, Victorian London was obsessed with the Ripper, Walter Sickert no exception. That doesn't mean that he had any exceptional insight into the murders or was himself the killer. He executed paintings in the style of the day, women on beds and so on, but that doesn't imply that he killed MJK on her bed in Miller's Court, but, more realistically, that he was just one more denizen of the city who was fascinated with the mystery.

That's what I think. A few of his paintings of women on thin mattresses make it appear like the women are in coffins yet I would suppose the C-5 were more or less buried in plain pine boxes. Or elm or whatever the cheap wood is in England.

We have a number of indications that Sickert was an early Ripperologist, especially considering what Dr. Weston-Davies had to say from personal knowledge.

So an interesting consideration is if Walter is the source of the "Ripper and the Royals" story or of the rumor that Randolph Churchill was involved. If so, what was his purpose?

I have read that George Hutchinson's supposed descendant made the comment that the JtR murders were not so much about the common people but about the wealthy and that Randolph Churchill was involved. What the heck? Did this tale originate with Walter Sickert and if so, what was his relationship, if any, with Churchill? Did he have a purpose to disseminating such rumors, if he did? Or might it all be fantasy? As I recall, Sickert's father had odd political leanings.