Tony Williams (5) (1961–)

The author and grt grt nephew of Dr. John Williams discovers 2 vague pieces of information and is convinced his Uncle was Jack the Ripper.He then sets out to prove his Uncle was NOT JTR.During the process,he then tries to prove his Uncle was in fact JTR.Mr. Williams tends to pull conclusions out of thin air in MANY instances.I had to re-read sections to see if I missed something.....I did not.He makes his own conclusions without valid documentation.He does find 2 items and 1 police report description that "MIGHT" put his Uncle on the suspect list,but he does not prove his Uncle was the Ripper.
I found the "medical experimentation" theory quite believable as an explanation for JTR (whomever he was).The author more than anything seems to just want to prove his Uncle was in fact JTR,but falls short.
The author also wants it known that his Uncle Jack was NOT a sadistic killer.He makes the claim that "JTR killed his victims BEFORE mutilating them".That statement is either ignorant or arrogant depending on what you derive from the book.To me JTR was a sadistic killer,PERIOD.
If in fact his Uncle was JTR then JTR built a museum memorial to himself in Wales,leaving possible clues behind and also having the last word.If his Uncle is not JTR ( I don't beleive he is) then the nephew is disgracing the reputaiton that his Uncle built.
I give this book 4 stars as it was an interesting read and does give some food for thought,but Mr. Williams evidence & research do NOT prove anything.It may put his Uncle as a "possible" suspect,but that is all.
I only hope the author is not in law enforcement,because he can make any innocent person guilty of a crime in a very few undocumented steps.
Mr. Williams almost seems to get gratifciation in what he feels is proof of his Uncle's crimes.
He appears to be as arrogant as he portrayed his Uncle. Mr. Williams is more magician that author.
… (mais)

I'm something of an amateur Ripperologist and always pick up new books on the subject whenever I see them. This is less a book about Jack the Ripper and more a biography of John Williams. The author spends at least 3/4 of the book talking about and then reiterating Williams' life and then going over it all again. He harps on about a couple of pieces of evidence as if that's all that's needed to prove that Williams was the Ripper. The rest of the 'proof' is circumstantial, at best. When he can't find any the information he needs he makes a lot of suppositions that may or may not be true. I do realize that's a huge part of the whole Ripper thing and I don't 'really' have a problem with that. My complaint is more that this isn't a Ripper book. It's a biography of John Williams with a little bit of Ripper thrown in at the end.… (mais)