Scan barcode
endomental's review
4.0
I don't remember how I stumbled across this one. It may have been a Kindle recommendation. Regardless, I was intrigued by the recommendations from "Ripperologists" about the detail and detection work, so I picked it up.
Author Bruce Paley offers his solution at the beginning, that the Ripper was Joseph Barnett, the estranged common-law husband of the Ripper's final victim, Mary Jane Kelly.
He builds a good case, using relevant facts. Paley has dug into some detail about Barnett's life and the investigation into the Whitechapel murders. Even so, I found myself channeling my inner lawyer as I read. "Assumes facts not in evidence!"
Paley is usually clear when he has no proof of his claims, and uses lots of qualifying words like "must have been," "should have" and "probably." That doesn't make his assumptions facts.
I'm no expert in the crimes by any means. I came away from the book with a suspect I hadn't considered before (not that I spend a lot of time considering suspects in this case). But I'm not convinced.
By the way, I read the Kindle version. It looked like it was badly scraped from a pdf file. Simply awful errors and erroneous text.
Author Bruce Paley offers his solution at the beginning, that the Ripper was Joseph Barnett, the estranged common-law husband of the Ripper's final victim, Mary Jane Kelly.
He builds a good case, using relevant facts. Paley has dug into some detail about Barnett's life and the investigation into the Whitechapel murders. Even so, I found myself channeling my inner lawyer as I read. "Assumes facts not in evidence!"
Paley is usually clear when he has no proof of his claims, and uses lots of qualifying words like "must have been," "should have" and "probably." That doesn't make his assumptions facts.
I'm no expert in the crimes by any means. I came away from the book with a suspect I hadn't considered before (not that I spend a lot of time considering suspects in this case). But I'm not convinced.
By the way, I read the Kindle version. It looked like it was badly scraped from a pdf file. Simply awful errors and erroneous text.
babiafi's review
5.0
One of my favourites. I don't agree with Paley's conclusions but it's very well written and doesn't feel like a simple retelling plus finger pointing, unlike so many suspect books.
caidyn's review
2.0
Mm. I don't know about this one. It was a good recounting of the crimes, but not very persuasive on Barnett. At least, not persuasive to me. Paley laid out the facts, then he slightly applied Barnett to it. Then, at the end, he just kind of insinuated who it was by restating points he should have made earlier on in his argument. All in all, I wasn't persuaded. I'm also a bit biased since I completely buy into what was perpetuated by [b:Naming Jack the Ripper|22608841|Naming Jack the Ripper|Russell Edwards|https://d.gr-assets.com/books/1410124574s/22608841.jpg|42098897].
More...