You can stack rubbish to the sky, and at the end of the day...you have a very large stack of rubbish. I can see why the theory propounded by the author in this book was popular; it's a very anti-Establishment kind of thing, which mixes in the English royal family, the Masons, the Metropolitan Police and Scotland Yard, and lower-class victims brutally murdered. The only thing is, the theory, even on its face, requires so many "this is probable" type leaps of logic and faith that even before the book is half-way through, the theory collapses under the sheer weight of its absurdity. If you're looking for the origin of certain treatments of Jack the Ripper in fiction and non-fiction, this is the book for you. If you're looking for a serious treatment of the crime, forget it. ( )

If this is the best 'Ripperologists' can do, its no wonder the mystery remains unsolved!

Given Knight could not see through the Bhagwan Shree Rajneesh my hopes were not high, but even I did not expect to see 'The Protocols' cited as evidence of Masonic involvement in the murders.

I don't doubt Knight worked hard on researching a very cold trail, but any idea that this is 'case solved' is delusional.

Still, in naming Walter Sickert as a suspect, Joseph Sickert gave his father's legacy a significant boost, without actually pinning anything other than circumstantial evidence to him. ( )

Ok, so Knight's theory is a complete fable full of flaws. But what a story. You can see through all the gaps in his reasoning and the jumped-on conclusions, but in your guts you'd really like it if it were true. Jack the Ripper's lore would be a lot poorer if "The final solution" had never been written. ( )