So the author spend a bit more than 20 pages on the bare-facts of the Ripper-case...really only the stuff you'd also get from skimming the wiki-page and now he's already talking for almost 50 pages about the most outlandish theory and why they're wrong (and no end in sight...) and I mean really outlandish and easy to disprove:
he talks about a guy who was in jail in the US at the time of the murders which is already a really good reason to rule him out but he goes on and on about him and gives more reasons why it couldn't have been him...you know in case being imprisoned on anther continent isn't enough reason to rule him ou.
And he goes on like this...currently he's explaining how bullshit a claim by a novelist is who often claimed that his stories were based on true events but today it's widely acknowledged that he made everything up (so no, it wasn't a Russian conspiracy on Rasputin's orders either).
Honestly: how stupid do you think your readers are?
Really that's something I often noticed when reading Ripper-books. Most authors tructure them like this:
1) All other theories suck and all other Ripperologists are stupid. Let me show you exactly why.
2) I am awesome. Let me tell you how awesome I am.
3) Here's my theory. I won't bore you with too many facts about it.