This was an interesting read and story, but I think I would have preferred it if we're shown how the facts of Maybrick's life lined up with the diary & Jack the Ripper via evidence. Instead, it felt as though we were to take the diary, & it being Maybrick's, as verbatim and we're relayed the story as Harrison believed it to have occurred. 
I think if there was more discussion as to how Harrison knew about Haybrick's life and his movements during the period of murders, it would have held more weight. Unfortunately, we are only given the excerpts of the diary as 'proof' to his misdeeds.
It would have been interesting to read the views of other Ripper enthusiasts on the book rather than them being glossed over. Harrison could then have provided counter-arguments, with evidence, to help validate her beliefs further.
For me, 'the debate' part was quite lacking and mainly concerned the validity of the age of the diary rather than much else.

Overall, I found it an easy read and definitely an interesting premise. However, I feel much more research would need to be done by readers to decide the 'truth' as this book is rather biased towards the diary being the real deal & by Maybrick.