What Are You Reading?

  • This message board permanently closed on June 30th, 2020 at 4PM EDT and is no longer accepting new members.

Status
Not open for further replies.

Dana Jean

Dirty Pirate Hooker, The Return
Moderator
Apr 11, 2006
53,634
236,697
The High Seas
I'm sitting on my fanny as we speak! :lol: ( DJ, you ought to know that neither Scott nor I could leave your sentence unscathed, right?) But, (pun intended), what book are you referring to? Is it 'I still Dream About You'? Or does she have another one out?

:tongue-new:It did cross my mind.


The All Girl Filling Station's Last Reunion

 

skimom2

Just moseyin' through...
Oct 9, 2013
15,683
92,168
USA
I read Cornwell's book and I felt that she really did 'crack' the case. DNA is pretty indisputable evidence. Especially when there isn't any way that a crooked cop from that era could plant evidence, since noone knew about any DNA stuff back then. She used millions of her own money to solve the case (which I guess would be all the more reason for her to bend facts her way to support her case) but she also has enough money that she could have just said 'Well, it isn't who I thought it was.' and walked away from it.

I agree, DNA would be pretty conclusive, especially nuclear. Unfortunately, that didn't work out, and the samples they obtained were contaminated. Cornwell was pretty cavalier about dismissing the DNA from his wife on one letter, too. Although it's not likely that the missus was the killer, if his surface DNA (can't remember the proper name for that) is proof he is the killer, why isn't the presence of HER DNA also proof, and so one negates the other? KWIM? Like I said, I liked the book, but more as one more conjecture than as proof positive.
 

Mr Nobody

Well-Known Member
Jul 9, 2008
3,306
9,050
Walsall, England
The other thing about the DNA testing of the letters is that they're bound to be contaminated by others anyway, including (but not limited to) the lead detective on the case. And (iirc) the handwriting on some of the letters is different (and one of them is thought, but not proven, to be the work of a hoaxer).
All in all, it's unlikely that anyone will ever come up with the definitive answer, not when serving and former Scotland Yard detectives - all of whom have cracked tough cases in their careers - as well as forensic scientists with a specific interest in the case have got nowhere near to solving it.
(As for the amateur 'Ripperologists', for every one that's worth listening to there are at least a dozen who aren't, and who have come up with the most far-fetched ideas and 'proofs' to back up their - usually heavily agenda-based - argument. For example, one 'theory' still has it that the Ripper was the-then Crown Prince, who was diseased and blamed prostitutes particularly - and women generally - for his condition; the Yard cleared it up - the case, not his dose of whatever ;) - and identified the killer, but it was hushed up and the detectives on the case, silenced. That one's really popular among Republicans (UK and Commonwealth, not US :D)).
 

skimom2

Just moseyin' through...
Oct 9, 2013
15,683
92,168
USA
The other thing about the DNA testing of the letters is that they're bound to be contaminated by others anyway, including (but not limited to) the lead detective on the case. And (iirc) the handwriting on some of the letters is different (and one of them is thought, but not proven, to be the work of a hoaxer).
All in all, it's unlikely that anyone will ever come up with the definitive answer, not when serving and former Scotland Yard detectives - all of whom have cracked tough cases in their careers - as well as forensic scientists with a specific interest in the case have got nowhere near to solving it.
(As for the amateur 'Ripperologists', for every one that's worth listening to there are at least a dozen who aren't, and who have come up with the most far-fetched ideas and 'proofs' to back up their - usually heavily agenda-based - argument. For example, one 'theory' still has it that the Ripper was the-then Crown Prince, who was diseased and blamed prostitutes particularly - and women generally - for his condition; the Yard cleared it up - the case, not his dose of whatever ;) - and identified the killer, but it was hushed up and the detectives on the case, silenced. That one's really popular among Republicans (UK and Commonwealth, not US :D)).

I actually thought the conclusion the detectives on the TV show WHITECHAPEL came up with was pretty convincing--they decided it was a laborer named George Hutchins (for a variety of reasons). I agree--it will probably never be conclusively solved, but it's so interesting to consider!
 

Anthea M

Well-Known Member
Feb 1, 2014
69
320
61
I am about to start Zero Day by David Baldacci. Have never read any of his novels but he has been recommended to me. Has anyone read any of the Scarecrow novels by Australian writer Michael Reilly? Really good page turner thrillers.
 

Lisey Landon

Well-Known Member
May 20, 2009
754
3,966
Germany
Just finished Neil Gaiman's Stardust, which was an utterly charming book (though it started a bit slow).
I really liked STARDUST! The book was much better than the movie (though it was okay).
I loved this book, too. And the movie was quite good. I loved DeNiro's role most of all, I think.
I just wish they hadn't changed Tristran's name to Tristan in the movie, I love the names Neil Gaiman give to his characters.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.