In this groundbreaking investigation into the unsolved Whitechapel Murders case of 1888, Tom Slemen uncovers a shocking possibility - that the Jack the Ripper murders were executed by a military-trained assassin hired by the British Intelligence Service.
Revisiting the horrific evidence, intriguing testimonies and official documents from the time, this shocking exposé explores links between the notorious Ripper murders and the relationship each female victim had to an Irish terrorist alliance with the anarchist movement; links that reveal a frightening new possibility - that the most infamous murders ever committed can be traced to the office of the Prime Minister himself. Exhaustively researched, highly controversial in its conclusions, this compelling account has shattered all previous theories about Jack the Ripper and shed new light on the blackest operation of Victorian times.
We've sent an email with your order details. Order ID #:
To access this title, visit your library in the app or on the desktop website.
Farfetched and without evidence
I've read a lot of books about Jack the Ripper and this was one of the worst. Everyone has a theory about who Jack really was and most have some plausibility. This one did not. The author repeatedly says "I believe" this or that, but never really backed it up. He never really made a case for why he believed Jack was a secret service agent killing women whom the author alleges were couriers for anarchists. I'm not sure where the author came up with his theory, but he did not convince me.
Overall the narrator had a pleasant voice and was easy to listen to. He didn't over-dramatize the material.
I couldn't point to a scene I would have cut. I thought overall the author's argument was not convincing.
Good narrator, not a good book. Skip it.
The narrator has a computer voice...
The reader has very weird pauses, which are distracting.
Yes, because I knew almost nothing about Jack the Ripper. The factual part of the story is very complete.
However, the secret military connection is speculative, which the author admits.