Dr. H.H. Holmes and The Whitechapel Ripper

By: Dane Ladwig

Narrated by: Alex Hyde-White Punch Audio

Serial killer doctor Henry Howard "H.H." Holmes was the most viable suspect for the 1888 Whitechapel London murders attributed to the enigma we have come to know as "Jack the Ripper". The research in this nonfiction true crime investigative journal of documents and case file historic accounts reveals startling information that leads the listener to perhaps the most hidden secrets behind the crimes. A "perfect dichotomy" that produces evidence that one man may have been a serial killer on two continents in the 19th century, responsible for the deaths of hundreds, or thousands of innocent victims.

Documentation amassed from the London Metropolitan Police, the British National Archives, the Federal Bureau of Investigations, and the American National Archives, along with many outside sources, bring to light new testimony and eyewitness reports that help to solve these 125-year-old crimes resolving this cold case crime.

©2014 Dane Ladwig (P)2014 Dane Ladwig

The Ripper

Any additional comments?

A very interesting and well researched book. It's a scary thought with the idea that Holmes had been in London during the ripper killings.Very interesting.

Linking Together the Superstars of Serial Murder

Would you listen to Dr. H.H. Holmes and The Whitechapel Ripper again? Why?

Yes. I want to go through it with Whispersync (which the audio version encourages but apparently is not available.

Who was your favorite character and why?

Holmes has to be the star. If we made him up, no one would believe such a monster is plausible.

What about Alex Hyde-White, Punch Audio’s performance did you like?

He managed to pronounce most of the names of people and places, not an easy feat with such a book.

Was this a book you wanted to listen to all in one sitting?

Yes

Any additional comments?

The book doesn't close the case on Jack the Ripper but clearly adds some food for thought by suggesting the documented presence of Dr. H.H. Holmes in Whitechapel contemporary with the murders of Jack the Ripper. Some of the sections were disappointing in their inability to take the presence of Holmes further. The hypothesis of Holmes doing the fifth killing is an interesting one. As a novelist, there is a lot of useful reanalysis of material to fuel imaginative stories, though I think we would all trade our fanciful tales for true closure and enlightenment on this series of crimes.

Not a bad book, but a bad audio book.

Would you say that listening to this book was time well-spent? Why or why not?

it had some good information, but a lot of it will be review for anyone who is familiar with the Holmes case. There is not a lot of information actually connecting him to Jack the Ripper until later on. But the author does make a decent case once he gets to it.

The real problem with this audio book, is that for some reason the audio quality keeps changing, and it is really annoying. Poor production quality to say the least.

Would you recommend Dr. H.H. Holmes and The Whitechapel Ripper to your friends? Why or why not?

Only if they are interested in such things.

What does Alex Hyde-White, Punch Audio bring to the story that you wouldn’t experience if you just read the book?

The narrator is good, and does a great american accent. But again, what is up with the audio? Punch Audio failed big time on the production here.

If this book were a movie would you go see it?

yes

Any additional comments?

Hey Punch Audio, lets make the whole thing high quality audio please.

Wait, Holmes and Mudgett are the same guy, right?

What disappointed you about Dr. H.H. Holmes and The Whitechapel Ripper?

Amateurish production all around. The recording quality, while never completely inaudible, is so poor and uneven, as to make the listener question the legitimacy of the entire project.

What was most disappointing about Dane Ladwig’s story?

The author is clearly motivated to tell this story, however he lacks the rhetorical skill to present information effectively. On no fewer than a dozen occasions, the listener is informed that Herman Mudgett is otherwise known as H.H. Holmes. Once established early on, shouldn't that be a given? Simple mistakes, which proper editing would have sorted, abound. In addition to confusing imply and infer, I believe that the author thinks modus operandi and motive are synonyms.Perhaps most annoyingly, the bulk of the Ripper part of the story involves rather churlish attempts at takedowns of competing Ripper authors, read in an appropriately mocking tone by the narrator. This after a lengthy, condescending diatribe about the importance of methodically assessing evidence. (A process he entirely ignores with his own paper-thin theory.)I don't consider this spoiler, as it's too absurd (but be forewarned, just in case), but the author acknowledges that 6 different conclusions can be considered "plausible" regarding Holmes being the Ripper. These range from no connection at all at one end, to committing all the murders on the other. Thanks for sorting that out.

How did the narrator detract from the book?

The problem isn't that the American accents weren't good (they weren't), but rather that they were unnecessary, and unnecessarily overwrought. The narrator's presentation did reflect the snarky tone of the author, though.

You didn’t love this book... but did it have any redeeming qualities?

There was potential in the depiction of Murder Castle aspect of Holmes, but the Ripper part of the story just fell to pieces.

Any additional comments?

Trust your first instinct and pass on this one.

Wish there had been more...

Would you try another book from Dane Ladwig and/or Alex Hyde-White, Punch Audio?

Since you ask, I'm not sure I would. Dane Ladwig came across as conceited, more interested in talking about the fact that he felt he solved the Jack the Ripper case than actually presenting his evidence for it.

What could Dane Ladwig have done to make this a more enjoyable book for you?

Not stopped to ask me to purchase a hard copy of the book.

Do you think Dr. H.H. Holmes and The Whitechapel Ripper needs a follow-up book? Why or why not?

It's in dire need of a follow-up.

Any additional comments?

As I had never heard this theory before, I was intrigued. I did learn quite a bit about H.H. Holmes, previously I had only read about the Pietzl case. The idea that he could be Jack the Ripper seems plausible, but the author never really presented his evidence for thinking so. I kept waiting for a timeline of events, laying everything out, a clear presentation of the case. Everything was sort of round about and difficult to follow.